Revision 2025 - Grow Beyond - April 18th to 21st 2025
category: parties [glöplog]
i agree with the price issue, i know some people who were considering going but stopped as soon as they heard about the ticket price. maybe the option of requesting a substantial discount for people with limited money (obviously many younger ones especially) would be an option? if the money still needed and average ticket price to fund the event would be made transparent some might pay more than they usually would.
Quote:
1. The price of attendance - I'm not sure what can be done about this, but the reality of the matter is that the more the price increases, the more people can't afford attending, somewhat excluding them from the scene. I mean, 115€ was pretty much the price of a supporter ticket not that long ago o_O
we definitely see the issue with higher entrance prices and you can rest assured, that we don't do that easily or just out of nothing.
The only aim we have concerning Revision financials is to be able to cover the costs and if there would be no need to adjust entrance fees we would not do it. Period.
Pretty much most of the drivers of the event's costs are not in our hands.
Also, the current economic situation makes it incredibly more hard to find sponsors that substantially support the event.
Quote:
3. The Entropretty sponsorship - This is probably at odds with the pricing problem, but do we really want a vaguely blockchain-related startup funded by the web3 foundation to sponsor Revision? We know those types of people don't appreciate art as a fundamentally cultural good but only as an asset to extract monetary value from. Also, the guy couldn't even coherently explain his own product to me when I asked (probably because it's nonsense)
We in fact do share a critical view on things that are blockchain/NFT-related and performed a long assessment of the idea and the engagement in general. In the end we decided that the concept of the competition with its procedural graphics idea at the core (and a large part of the engangement was indeed also to support the demoscene) would fit the event without being too tied to those parts of the web3 universe that we absolutely do not endorse (like, NFTs for example, which however luckily also seem to be quite dead these days).
What a party that was! I agree with many here that this was possibly the smoothest Revision Party we ever had.
Particular feedback from my point of view as a visitor:
Food & Drinks:
Party:
Compos:
Overall the party was a blast, and I can't wait for Revision 2026. Thanks to all organizers, past and present, making Revision to what it is today.
Oh, an greetings to @franky--, hope you found some use for the Commodore speakers :)
Particular feedback from my point of view as a visitor:
Food & Drinks:
- The new pizza stand was magnificent - please get them here as well next year
- I also very enjoyed the cocktail bar and I think in the end tried each and every cocktail/longdrink there was :) It was also a very nice touch that we could watch competitions right there at the bar
- Excellent streaming and commentators (for the time when we watched the stream at the cocktail bar)
- The burger stand was great as usual
Party:
- Network & power was as usual stable AF - thank you!
- Projector & sound system was, also as usual, a joy
- Temperature inside the hall was well regulated this year. (a bit chilly on the first day, but that's expected)
- Shoutout to the people who cleaned the toilets regularly. The times I went to the tunnel I never once saw a dirty toilet
- The event with MBR was from another planet. Absolutely amazing.
Compos:
- The long Sunday compo night is still an issue. I really wanted to watch the PC Demo at the end, but constantly kept falling asleep - in the hall! One of my friends who sat next to me experienced the same. And that despite that we slept until 1/2 PM on that day. After such intense days, there is simply no more energy left to last that long (and I'm still in my 30s and generally quite resistant due to family & kids)
- Our group generally did not enjoy the Entropretty competition, despite 2 submissions. When presented, they did not show much variation, and there seemed to be clearly some selected entries that turned out to not generate a unique tattoo (which was the whole point?)
Overall the party was a blast, and I can't wait for Revision 2026. Thanks to all organizers, past and present, making Revision to what it is today.
Oh, an greetings to @franky--, hope you found some use for the Commodore speakers :)
I might be late in the game... But this Revision was - once more - such a good event!
My biggest surprise was MBR, since I did not look up the music-events before the party. Wanted to see them live this year, but could not make it, due to work-related stuff. So indeed, this gave me a big smile, when I recognised who played there. =)
My biggest surprise was MBR, since I did not look up the music-events before the party. Wanted to see them live this year, but could not make it, due to work-related stuff. So indeed, this gave me a big smile, when I recognised who played there. =)
I have a suggestion regarding the €35 entrance fee for remote submissions.
It seems steep. It even sort of leaves a funny aftertaste.
Some people explained to me that this fee serves to reduce the number of low effort entries which is necessary due to the sheer scope of the party.
For good publicity sake, I think it would be wiser to disallow remote entries altogether; in that case the prods could be submitted only by people on-site. If low effort entries reduction is indeed necessary. Remote submissions are relatively new invention, they are corona leftovers afaik.
What I'm trying to say; I think it would be best do either allow or disallow remote submissions. If allowed, let them be free of charge, if not allowed - again all cool. Not this middle "pay to play" ground.
It seems steep. It even sort of leaves a funny aftertaste.
Some people explained to me that this fee serves to reduce the number of low effort entries which is necessary due to the sheer scope of the party.
For good publicity sake, I think it would be wiser to disallow remote entries altogether; in that case the prods could be submitted only by people on-site. If low effort entries reduction is indeed necessary. Remote submissions are relatively new invention, they are corona leftovers afaik.
What I'm trying to say; I think it would be best do either allow or disallow remote submissions. If allowed, let them be free of charge, if not allowed - again all cool. Not this middle "pay to play" ground.
In other news, Revision broke the world record of simultaneous livecoding participants (snatching it from Inércia), the record is now 38. Thank you Lynn for the kickass set and ofcourse everyone who logged in to code a shader, especially our japanese sceners staying up until early in the morning to participate! Scene is global!
lcdz link
youtubes
lcdz link
youtubes
also: my whole body hurts, am too old for this shit :D but party was great! thank you everyone who helped organize and contributed something positive to the event!
Here is my super-long list of everything that was wrong with Revision 2025:
1) The veggie burger at the burger stand used a really cheap supermarket veggie ”steak” instead of mock-meat.
That’s it. That’s the list.
1) The veggie burger at the burger stand used a really cheap supermarket veggie ”steak” instead of mock-meat.
That’s it. That’s the list.
Quote:
Remote submissions are relatively new invention, they are corona leftovers afaik.
They are indeed, and of course this question came up when we returned to doing real-world events. I was one of those fervently in favour of continuing remote submissions, mainly in view of the massive support we had from places like Japan and South America during the online editions - places from where people can't reasonably be expected to make the trip to Germany. (Kudos to those who do anyway :-) ) It would have been such a kick in the teeth to send them the message "thanks for the support but now we're going to go back to doing our old on-site thing, kthxbye".
If there's one positive to come out of covid, it's that it got us to figure out better ways to include people across geographic boundaries. Let's not throw that away.
Remote submissions had been a thing with other parties long before the rona, though.
The ability to present remotely is one of the things that alleviates the most problems these days.
I hope it's not eliminated or hindered, because doing so would be detrimental to the party.
I hope it's not eliminated or hindered, because doing so would be detrimental to the party.
I like the possability of sending in a remote entry.
but maybe when there are preselections. preselect from the remote-contributions first?
Anyway.. AI? no just go away!
but maybe when there are preselections. preselect from the remote-contributions first?
Anyway.. AI? no just go away!
Quote:
Quote:Remote submissions are relatively new invention, they are corona leftovers afaik.
They are indeed, and of course this question came up when we returned to doing real-world events. I was one of those fervently in favour of continuing remote submissions, mainly in view of the massive support we had from places like Japan and South America during the online editions - places from where people can't reasonably be expected to make the trip to Germany. (Kudos to those who do anyway :-) ) It would have been such a kick in the teeth to send them the message "thanks for the support but now we're going to go back to doing our old on-site thing, kthxbye".
If there's one positive to come out of covid, it's that it got us to figure out better ways to include people across geographic boundaries. Let's not throw that away.
+1 to keep the remote option.
We get feedback, that the remote option helps people from far away to get access to Revision. (Not only the people who contribute!) My personal view is, that we keep it... Revision is international from being near and far away.
And we remain confident.
Keep in mind that the remote ticket allows you to submit entries in any and all compos AND gives you full voting powers.
I'd find that a fair deal, next best thing after free submissions without any voting powers.
And really, there are so many other parties to release stuff, for every budget.
Can't expect the most prestigious one to cater to sofasceners' needs more than is fair to people at the venue.
I'd find that a fair deal, next best thing after free submissions without any voting powers.
And really, there are so many other parties to release stuff, for every budget.
Can't expect the most prestigious one to cater to sofasceners' needs more than is fair to people at the venue.
Also, we are of course conscious about the fact that 35 Euro can mean something really different from one country to the next.
We are rather grateful for our satellite events, who are also able to hand out access keys to the people visiting them locally, for a price more applicable to the respective country's economic realities.
Financial barriers to participation always suck balls, but please appreciate the fact that we're trying to find solutions wherever we can, while at the same time still being able to pay our bills for the party. The social discount is there for a reason. And otherwise: Hey, smaller parties would love to get your releases, Revision is happy to "share the glory", and they even usually don't charge for remote participation at all!
Without hopefully sharing sensitive internals, I'm probably okay to tell you that the ticket price is always a rather serious discussion in the team, shifting the numbers back and forth and trying to somehow make it at least somewhat fit with the increased cost the mains have to deal with running this event.
Telling you this as a cost-cutter by trade: Revision already gets incredible cuts from partners, and that's only thanks to long-standing relationships and a lot of our vendors caring deeply for what we do here.
But it is and remains something the team is extremely conscious about finding a somewhat okay-ish balance, and puts a lot of effort into this.
We are rather grateful for our satellite events, who are also able to hand out access keys to the people visiting them locally, for a price more applicable to the respective country's economic realities.
Financial barriers to participation always suck balls, but please appreciate the fact that we're trying to find solutions wherever we can, while at the same time still being able to pay our bills for the party. The social discount is there for a reason. And otherwise: Hey, smaller parties would love to get your releases, Revision is happy to "share the glory", and they even usually don't charge for remote participation at all!
Without hopefully sharing sensitive internals, I'm probably okay to tell you that the ticket price is always a rather serious discussion in the team, shifting the numbers back and forth and trying to somehow make it at least somewhat fit with the increased cost the mains have to deal with running this event.
Telling you this as a cost-cutter by trade: Revision already gets incredible cuts from partners, and that's only thanks to long-standing relationships and a lot of our vendors caring deeply for what we do here.
But it is and remains something the team is extremely conscious about finding a somewhat okay-ish balance, and puts a lot of effort into this.
Then I suggest: Keep the remote submissions, make them free, remove voting powers from them. If someone wants voting powers, THEN charge him/her "remote entrance" fee. Problem solved, right? ;-)
Because this way, you include people that live far away or are disabled/unable to travel, but you exclude the poor. We EU old farts seem to be so stuffed with money that it's the thing we overlook when going for inclusiveness.
Because this way, you include people that live far away or are disabled/unable to travel, but you exclude the poor. We EU old farts seem to be so stuffed with money that it's the thing we overlook when going for inclusiveness.
@Shana
Thank you! <3
Thank you! <3
Quote:
Then I suggest: Keep the remote submissions, make them free, remove voting powers from them. If someone wants voting powers, THEN charge him/her "remote entrance" fee. Problem solved, right? ;-)
Because this way, you include people that live far away or are disabled/unable to travel, but you exclude the poor. We EU old farts seem to be so stuffed with money that it's the thing we overlook when going for inclusiveness.
@4gentE As a new person and with a post COVID parttime-brain I have a question...
You suggest, that people, who want to hand in remote entries, shall do it without paying a fee?
If they want to have voting-rights, there shall be a fee for them (as we have) already...?
I don't know how many people affects this... (I don't know figueres). A few years ago, I could watch the stream, (had no voting rights) and did not pay an entrance fee... I think that is exactly the situation you would like to have?
Or did I missunderstand your request?
Usually in the past parties have allowed remote submissions for free. But it went without voting rights of course, although I think that mostly for convenience reasons.
I think I even got trophies and prizes for my remote entries at some point.
I think I even got trophies and prizes for my remote entries at some point.
I think paying for remote sub _with_ voting power included is totally fair.
(as long as just watching the stream stays free, that it)
As someone that had paid for the remote ticket few times, I think it's a very fair price and does make sure that you'll 'commit'.
I'd say that everything on site was excellent and I had great fun, except one problem and this isn't on orgas. The shuttles on Friday were absolutely abhorrent (the one from the hotel didn't arrive, and the ones going from the event didn't arrive either), Saturday wasn't exactly better (If I recall one of them didn't arrive). But that's not on the orgas, that's on the shuttle company and I hope Revision folks can get their money back.
Oh and +1 for AI ban or tighter AI restrictions/preselection in the demo compos. Truth be told the revised rules for the GFX compos has lead to amazing quality this year and the usual suspects instead have lent their 'skills' to providing GFX to the demos to dodge the ban. So I hope other parties will follow suit.
I'd say that everything on site was excellent and I had great fun, except one problem and this isn't on orgas. The shuttles on Friday were absolutely abhorrent (the one from the hotel didn't arrive, and the ones going from the event didn't arrive either), Saturday wasn't exactly better (If I recall one of them didn't arrive). But that's not on the orgas, that's on the shuttle company and I hope Revision folks can get their money back.
Oh and +1 for AI ban or tighter AI restrictions/preselection in the demo compos. Truth be told the revised rules for the GFX compos has lead to amazing quality this year and the usual suspects instead have lent their 'skills' to providing GFX to the demos to dodge the ban. So I hope other parties will follow suit.
@ilucency:
Exactly. Imperative is to attract people to come to the party in person. They come, they submit entries and vote to their heart’s content. If you’re staying home, you should only be forced to “Pay to vote” as opposed to “Pay to play”. “Play” should be free because it provides the content that feeds the paying audience and ups the quality of the party.
I personally submitted a remote entry during corona, because there was an option to buy a ticket with price €0.
Whether someone thinks the “pay to play” price is fair or not is irrelevant because it’s: (A) very subjective and (B) a matter of principle to some.
I’ve talked about this to ten or so C64 sceners. Half was OK with the “pay to play” fee, the other half was not OK with it. Additionally, those who were OK with the fee were mostly OK-ish, while those that were against the fee mostly thought it was preposterous.
Exactly. Imperative is to attract people to come to the party in person. They come, they submit entries and vote to their heart’s content. If you’re staying home, you should only be forced to “Pay to vote” as opposed to “Pay to play”. “Play” should be free because it provides the content that feeds the paying audience and ups the quality of the party.
I personally submitted a remote entry during corona, because there was an option to buy a ticket with price €0.
Whether someone thinks the “pay to play” price is fair or not is irrelevant because it’s: (A) very subjective and (B) a matter of principle to some.
I’ve talked about this to ten or so C64 sceners. Half was OK with the “pay to play” fee, the other half was not OK with it. Additionally, those who were OK with the fee were mostly OK-ish, while those that were against the fee mostly thought it was preposterous.
Quote:
How is "Pay to vote" not the same as "Pay to win" with vote-only remote tickets?If you’re staying home, you should only be forced to “Pay to vote” as opposed to “Pay to play”. “Play” should be free because it provides the content that feeds the paying audience and ups the quality of the party.
what happened to the "picture wall" photo booth thingie that was on your left as you enter the building. Is it online somehwere ?
