[Other] [HELP] Change the limit of items in bag

[RuFF]

Is there a way of changing the limit of items in the bag in Gen 3 games (Most probably RUBY)?
Like if the limit of items is 20 you can change it to 50 or 100.

EDIT: What I meant was I'd like to see if we can change the number if different items that can fit in the bag.

 

[robinjea]

I'm not really sure but iirc, all items (as in normal items not key items) can go up to x999 without errors.

 

[BluRose]

I think what they are asking is the amount of different items, right?

 

[RuFF]

I'm not really sure but iirc, all items (as in normal items not key items) can go up to x999 without errors.

Just like what BluRose said, I'm asking if the amount of different items that can fit in the bag to avoid the "too bad the bag is full" message. I might not have said it clear from the first post. Sorry.

I think what they are asking is the amount of different items, right?

Yes that's what I meant. :)

 

[BluRose]

Just like what BluRose said, I'm asking if the amount of different items that can fit in the bag to avoid the "too bad the bag is full" message. I might not have said it clear from the first post. Sorry.


Yes that's what I meant. :)

Well, anyways, I'm no expert on this, but I do think that this would require some (or a lot of) ASM.
I don't know how much different items the Bag currently supports (or could theoretically support with the current data structure).
What this could mean is just changing the value of a limiter somewhere or having to change the whole Bag's routine in order to give it more space to hold items.
I'm willing to bet the latter, though...

 

[Q-orca]

Well, anyways, I'm no expert on this, but I do think that this would require some (or a lot of) ASM.
I don't know how much different items the Bag currently supports (or could theoretically support with the current data structure).
What this could mean is just changing the value of a limiter somewhere or having to change the whole Bag's routine in order to give it more space to hold items.
I'm willing to bet the latter, though...

Assuming Ruby has the same structure as Sapphire, it can hold 166 different items.
IMO, ASM is required only for save / load, if the maximum is more than 166

 

[PokéMew1]

Pretty sure none of this involves ASM, it probably just involves changing a few bytes in a hex editor to make it so that the bag limit is no longer required. Of course, this could be wrong and doing so could cause minor or major problems with the item bag or the items beyond the new limit themselves.. In which case, it would involve ASM.

 

[azurile13]

Assuming Ruby has the same structure as Sapphire, it can hold 166 different items.
IMO, ASM is required only for save / load, if the maximum is more than 166

Uhh. The original post was about increasing the number of items a pocket can hold. Given that they probably don't want to do it at the cost of other pockets or PC space, it can be inferred that they do want a maximum of more than 166. I don't know what you're trying to get at.

Pretty sure none of this involves ASM, it probably just involves changing a few bytes in a hex editor to make it so that the bag limit is no longer required. Of course, this could be wrong and doing so could cause minor or major problems with the item bag or the items beyond the new limit themselves.. In which case, it would involve ASM.

It would be great if I'm wrong on this, but I very much doubt this. Every additional item entry costs 4 bytes (even key items, iirc). That space has to be coming from somewhere, and it seems unlikely that the game would be programmed in a way that changing a few bytes makes it magically know where to store additional items. Even if items are stored in a single static location, I wouldn't be surprised to see them stacked up against each other.

 

[PokéMew1]

It would be great if I'm wrong on this, but I very much doubt this. Every additional item entry costs 4 bytes (even key items, iirc). That space has to be coming from somewhere, and it seems unlikely that the game would be programmed in a way that changing a few bytes makes it magically know where to store additional items. Even if items are stored in a single static location, I wouldn't be surprised to see them stacked up against each other.

Yeah, your absolutely right, I always forget about the ram -_-
In which case... You'd resort to option 2 of my post, asm, because as I said it would probably cause corruption to the item bag or the item's themselves if you didn't. However that doesn't change the fact that the limit itself still exists, in which case i'm 90% sure you would just need to change some hex to remove the limiter. THEN I suppose you would write a routine to let the items go beyond the limit to make it actually work..