ca7dd583d5
For several iterations I said the MISSION-SELECT-versus-top-item ambiguity needed
a screen whose opening item is not its first, and that none was known. The Decoder
found one and reported it had been sitting unconnected in their corpus.
It is in mine too, and I authored it. authored/flow.json under
main_menu/buttons/ptbtn01 has read since eef45ec on 2026-08-29: 'MEASURED
destination (EASY/NORMAL/HARD/BACK, opening on NORMAL, then SELECT DATA)'.
DIFFICULTY opens on the second of four. So 'a screen opens on its first item' is
refuted as a general description of this game, and on EXTRAS, TUTORIAL and OPTIONS
the named item and the top item coincide by accident.
Worse than an index failing to amplify: my extras/initial_focus_why framed the
ambiguity as conditional -- 'it matters IF another screen is ever authored' -- in
the same file that already recorded such a screen. Future tense over a fact twelve
keys away. Corrected to name DIFFICULTY concretely.
MenuFlow.initial_focus's buttons[0] fallback is now documented as a repair for
broken data rather than a default, and that is measured rather than fastidious: if
a screen reaches that line silently the port shows a top-item default for a game
that does not always have one. No authored value moves -- DIFFICULTY is not a
GP_TITLE build and EXTRAS keeps ptbtn11, correct under either reading. Walk re-run
unchanged.
It does not settle the question, which is about reset rather than opening. That
needs the cursor moved inside DIFFICULTY, left and re-entered, and its forward
path crashes the guest at SELECT DATA so the run must go back rather than on.
No checker either of us has built would have caught this. Every instrument here
verifies that a claim matches a value; nothing detects that an answer already
written down is not being connected to the question it answers -- and mine had
both halves in one file.
It also makes the previous iteration's restraint look better: declining to promote
'4/4 submenus reset' to a rule was argued from the principle that a generalisation
should not pre-decide the next screen, and the next screen turns out to be one the
generalisation would have got wrong.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01N7FiFFFwbvG2uxdcEh8HyF
Sylpheed
A clean-room reverse engineering and port project for Project Sylpheed: Arc of Deception (Xbox 360, 2007).
Three things live here, in one repository so that a change spanning them lands as one commit:
| The decoders | crates/sylpheed-formats — the disc's formats, read and verified disc-wide |
| The port | port/ — a Godot 4 project, plus crates/sylpheed-export which converts a disc into the open asset tree it reads |
| The corpus | docs/re/ — what has been reverse engineered, with its evidence, its retractions and its dead ends |
You need your own copy of the game. No game content is in this repository and none ever will be. The exporter reads the disc you supply.
The oracle is the real game
sylpheed-cliand the Explorer are tools for verifying our decoding. They are hypotheses under test and they have been wrong. When something must be checked against the truth, the truth is the game running in Xenia Canary, captured — not any renderer of ours.
This is stated first because getting it backwards is the most expensive mistake this project has made.
Layout
crates/
sylpheed-formats/ the decoders. Disc-wide verified; the corpus is its spec
sylpheed-cli/ headless tools -- render a screen, dump a table, probe audio
sylpheed-viewer/ the Explorer: a human's window onto the disc. STATIC data only
sylpheed-export/ disc -> the open, moddable asset tree
port/ the Godot 4 project. Reads open formats ONLY
authored/ decisions that are NOT on the disc, each with its reason
data/
base/ generated by the exporter. Gitignored, never hand-edited
mods/ drop-in overrides. Yours
docs/
re/ the corpus: findings, refutations, method traps
game/ how the game is navigated -- menus, modals, flight
port/ the port's mission, its handoff contract, modding rules
agents/ how the agent team works together
tools/ capture harnesses, probes, the share tool
exchange/ transient inter-agent files. NOT in git
docker/ the agent containers
Where to start
docs/re/INDEX.md— what is decodeddocs/re/REFUTED.md— what has been tested and dieddocs/re/METHOD.md— traps this project has already paid fordocs/game/navigation.md— how the game is navigateddocs/port/MODDING.md— why the asset tree looks the way it does
Xenia Canary is a separate repository: it is a fork tracking upstream, and it carries our instrumentation.
Conventions
Confidence is per claim, never per document: ✅ CONFIRMED · 🟡 PROBABLE ·
❔ HYPOTHESIS · ❌ REFUTED. A withdrawn result is kept with its reasoning
rather than deleted — that is why the numbers here can be trusted.