Files
Syplheed-Reborn/docs/re/structures
Claude (auto-RE) 90e0e66c7b re(achievements): earned state comes from XAM, and my bit numbering was wrong
Two findings, one of them a correction to the previous commit.

FOUND: GamePart_Debriefing enumerates XACHIEVEMENT_DETAILS from XAM
(0x8218F888). The records are 36 bytes -- confirmed by the arithmetic, not by
eye: the count is a byte count divided by 36 through the 0x38E38E39 multiply-high
magic plus srawi 3. Field +0 is used as a shift amount, field +32 is tested for
0x00020000, and the buffer sits behind a handle that is waited on (0x824AA330
with -1) then closed (0x824AA3E0). That is the XDK struct exactly, with
XACHIEVEMENT_DETAILS_ACHIEVED == 0x20000, via the
XamUserCreateAchievementEnumerator / XEnumerate pattern.

So the title does NOT persist earned achievements itself -- it asks the console.
The lever for achievement-gated content is the emulator's PROFILE data, not the
savegame. Independently, the singleton the challenge gate reads is not the object
holding the save block: re-scanning all 202 accessor call sites WITH function-
boundary stops touches only +80/+1956/+1960/+1964 and none of the known save
offsets (+304/+316/+320/+336/+380/+440). The earlier scan that seemed to find
them had register tracking bleeding into the next function -- a false positive I
am recording rather than quietly dropping.

CORRECTED: the previous commit claimed "bit n <-> achievement n+1" and treated
the Debriefing award pass and the challenge gate as the same bit space, both as
confirmed. Neither holds up:

- the only place the image is observed turning an achievement into a bit does
  1 << dwId with 1-based ids, so bit = the id and bit 0 is unused;
- the "list index is the bit index" step assumed 0x82448338's out-parameter is
  the loop ordinal. It is the child entry's first word out of a 12-byte array,
  and whether that is an ordinal, an id or a name hash is not pinned;
- the Debriefing's masks are its own fields (+208/+736/+740). Nothing observed
  copies them into the singleton's +80, and no writer of that bitmask has been
  found at all.

The requirement-type/id agreement still stands, but it confirms the LIST ORDER,
not the bit numbering. Consequence: if the join holds, TimeAttack's REQUIREMENT
16 is achievement 16 (Night Ravens Patch), not 17 (Solar System Defense Award).
Both read plausibly as a first-challenge gate, which is exactly why it needs
evidence and not the better story.

Also noted: +1960 is a third bitfield on the same singleton, and a what-changed
pass at 0x8219F3A4 diffs it and reports each newly set bit as bit + 64 -- so
there is a wider flag-id space whose bases are not yet worked out.
2026-08-13 19:43:35 +00:00
..