3D acceleration kills the demoscene
category: offtopic [glöplog]
To say that "3D acceleration does kill the scene" is like saying "Say NO to progress"... and i don't think that scene is the right place for conservative thoughts. I would maybe say "releasing demos only on parties does kill the scene", or "no scrolltexts and messages in demos does kill the scene", but i'm from the 80s scene so it is maybe just my opinion.
Btw, there's another important point : 3D acceleration does LOOK better! Sorry, i don't buy a GeForce3 and then watch old DOS-demos with it (beside of those "nostalgic moments"), that's nonsene.
Btw, there's another important point : 3D acceleration does LOOK better! Sorry, i don't buy a GeForce3 and then watch old DOS-demos with it (beside of those "nostalgic moments"), that's nonsene.
ryg: drawing n*10000 polys with all fx there are probably makes you sexy.
macaw: alcohol is forbidden at ms anyways ;)
blabla.
why don't people just do what they like and always say "this sucks" and "this kills the scene" blabla.
if skarab wants to do dos demos, why shouldn't he ? as long as he doesn't start a crusade against all win coders I don't care.
some time ago I was in the same mood, I also thought that 3d cards are the roots of all evil and shit. finally I moved to win because not using 3d cards means denying some great possibilities. that doesn't mean I flame dos coders or dos demos, when I'm in the mood to dig out my old mode13 stuff and code some shadebobs I do so (after all there are some parties with oldskool demo compos which is quite some fun)
uh, what did I want to say with that ? argh.
anyways.
nothing kills the scene except making stupid comments that hinders you and others from finally doing something (like I should code now, huh). anything else, coding win or dos or linux or your toaster or tv does NOT kill the scene, hell.
I guess 9 years ago people also believed that using 486 asm kills the scene because noone was owning a 486. believing that you still use your PIII 700 (or whatever) in 3 years is somewhat crap, at least it won't be your main machine anymore.
and so on and so on...I will return now to my VC++ and kill the scene a little bit.
after all it's dead anyways, or what do they tell at ojucie oneliner ?
macaw: alcohol is forbidden at ms anyways ;)
blabla.
why don't people just do what they like and always say "this sucks" and "this kills the scene" blabla.
if skarab wants to do dos demos, why shouldn't he ? as long as he doesn't start a crusade against all win coders I don't care.
some time ago I was in the same mood, I also thought that 3d cards are the roots of all evil and shit. finally I moved to win because not using 3d cards means denying some great possibilities. that doesn't mean I flame dos coders or dos demos, when I'm in the mood to dig out my old mode13 stuff and code some shadebobs I do so (after all there are some parties with oldskool demo compos which is quite some fun)
uh, what did I want to say with that ? argh.
anyways.
nothing kills the scene except making stupid comments that hinders you and others from finally doing something (like I should code now, huh). anything else, coding win or dos or linux or your toaster or tv does NOT kill the scene, hell.
I guess 9 years ago people also believed that using 486 asm kills the scene because noone was owning a 486. believing that you still use your PIII 700 (or whatever) in 3 years is somewhat crap, at least it won't be your main machine anymore.
and so on and so on...I will return now to my VC++ and kill the scene a little bit.
after all it's dead anyways, or what do they tell at ojucie oneliner ?
Ok,. but just don't say that we shouldn't do demo in DOS cause you can't watch it. There are already smaller minimalistic scenes, nobody says "Hey I don't have a C64, you shouldn't do a C64 demo" (Ok,. a bit exagerated example) because it's just a diferrent scene. In the same way, we could think of a splitted scene on PC, PC-Dos scene, Windows-scene like 2 diferrent things. Because some people still love to code in an old environment like DOS. Perhaps we should think these like two diferrent scenes and move on. Demos from DOS will get appreciation from the DOS sceners, e.t.c...
At least I like to think of it like this now. If I think it as one and only PC scene, then I would have possibly to follow the windows root, since PC=Wintel today. I prefer a split. At least in my mind..
macaw: 12 :)
ho, and this thread sucks a lot.
(anyway, it's right that I give less attention to threads starting with some fabulous:
"I think if John Carmack was borned later, he'll began DOS programming instead of OpenGl : Coders must know what they are coding before using hardware" )
ho my god.
ho, and this thread sucks a lot.
(anyway, it's right that I give less attention to threads starting with some fabulous:
"I think if John Carmack was borned later, he'll began DOS programming instead of OpenGl : Coders must know what they are coding before using hardware" )
ho my god.
stupid thread
every year, a newbie launch this kind of question, some examples from the old days of all the things wich 'killed' the scene:
16 bits processors VS 8 bits Z80
32 bits processors VS 16/32 bits
Motorola 680x0 VS Intel X86
4Mb of fast ram on Amiga VS zero Mb of fast ram
32 Mb of ram on PC VS 128 Mb of ram (remember Shad2)
Falcon Atari VS the ST Atari
68030 VS standard Amiga
4ch music VS mp3 music
16 colors gfxs VS 24 bits for gfxs
486 dx2 66 VS pentium
Snail mail VS Internet
BBS VS WebSiteHTTP VS FTP
openGL VS directX
64 Kb intros VS 40Kb intros
linux VS windows
windows VS MSDOS
MSDOS VS Amiga VS Atari
1 floppy diskmag VS 10 Mb diskmag (;] )
PSX VS DC VS GBA :)
.....
If you want to share your art with 10 people, use 10% used platform, if you want to share it with 80% of the demoscene audience, use nowadays platform.
(and IMHO, MSDOS suck a lot, the best OS ever is AmigaOS)
every year, a newbie launch this kind of question, some examples from the old days of all the things wich 'killed' the scene:
16 bits processors VS 8 bits Z80
32 bits processors VS 16/32 bits
Motorola 680x0 VS Intel X86
4Mb of fast ram on Amiga VS zero Mb of fast ram
32 Mb of ram on PC VS 128 Mb of ram (remember Shad2)
Falcon Atari VS the ST Atari
68030 VS standard Amiga
4ch music VS mp3 music
16 colors gfxs VS 24 bits for gfxs
486 dx2 66 VS pentium
Snail mail VS Internet
BBS VS WebSiteHTTP VS FTP
openGL VS directX
64 Kb intros VS 40Kb intros
linux VS windows
windows VS MSDOS
MSDOS VS Amiga VS Atari
1 floppy diskmag VS 10 Mb diskmag (;] )
PSX VS DC VS GBA :)
.....
If you want to share your art with 10 people, use 10% used platform, if you want to share it with 80% of the demoscene audience, use nowadays platform.
(and IMHO, MSDOS suck a lot, the best OS ever is AmigaOS)
ryg,
I disagree with shadebobs == 2d metaballs.
shadebobs are bobs that are drawn with xorpaint or additive paint...
2d metaballs use a distance function to determine the colour for each pixel.
That's the same as what you do in 3d, except in 3d you use MC to tesselate the volume.
I do agree that with shadebobs you can 'emulate' one particular distance function, but it's not entirely the same technique.
I disagree with shadebobs == 2d metaballs.
shadebobs are bobs that are drawn with xorpaint or additive paint...
2d metaballs use a distance function to determine the colour for each pixel.
That's the same as what you do in 3d, except in 3d you use MC to tesselate the volume.
I do agree that with shadebobs you can 'emulate' one particular distance function, but it's not entirely the same technique.
Let me clarify.
Remember, I meant to say that you try the effect out in 2d before you go 3d...
So using shadebobs does not make sense, you don't do it in 3d by precalcing the distance functions in a '3d bob'.
So it wouldn't make sense, not in the way that I meant it.
Remember, I meant to say that you try the effect out in 2d before you go 3d...
So using shadebobs does not make sense, you don't do it in 3d by precalcing the distance functions in a '3d bob'.
So it wouldn't make sense, not in the way that I meant it.
2d-metaballs with a grid? now what kind of an idiot would do such a thing?
Scali, you've obviously never coded 2d metaballs. Pity on you, maybe you'll understand it sometime :)
216, think of the possibilities :)
please the cookie thing had 2D 'marching squares' :P
isn't the big difference between shadebobs and 2d-metaballs is that you don't erase the previous frame for shadebobs.
?
whatever shadebobs kill the demoscene ^___^
A crazed madman with a fully automatic loaded assault rifle killed the demoscene.
ryg, you misunderstood me...
Re-read... I gave an example to try out a 3d effect in 2d.
Not to optimize a 2d effect.
That's not the same thing.
No need to insult me.
I didn't say that the method you explained was not good.
I just said that it was not what I meant, because it wouldn't make sense in the way that I meant it.
Re-read... I gave an example to try out a 3d effect in 2d.
Not to optimize a 2d effect.
That's not the same thing.
No need to insult me.
I didn't say that the method you explained was not good.
I just said that it was not what I meant, because it wouldn't make sense in the way that I meant it.
When I first coded 2d blobs, I used the distance algorithm. Then to optimise, I put distances of a blob in a buffer as integers and did simple additions of the distances(color) of the pixels of each blob to the others (additive blending). Now it's fucking easy and fast, I could even think of pass the algorithm on CPC :)
It's just that there needed to make a special pallete or it depends in some other things, so that this method works appropriatelly and not beeing buggy..
But the distance algorithm may be still applicable on 3d blobs, I have hardly worked 3d (Only some 3d dots) yet to know..
Oh,. btw, it's not exactly shadebobs, but additive blending (Adding the color value of the blob to the other. Actually you add the color values in a screen buffer (If your color of a pixel goes over 256 by multiple additions, you keep it 256 (Ok,. talking about 8bpp ;)), and after you fill all the buffer, and after you output the buffer, you erase it and start again for the next frame. So shadebob is not the appropriate word, where you don't need to erase any buffer.. but anyways, I think people got the clue, I don't need to talk more :)
Returning to initial question "3D HAL kill the demoscene"...
I have read sometimes "DOS demos and MS-DOS is DEAD" but i
don't think that.
The eternal discusion about this is the same, dead or not,
hal or software rendering. I think demoscene make a change
from old times and change from "Code demostration without anymore" to "Art beyond code". I sure you don't think the
same but it's realy.
Simply watch for example Elements/Haujobb, this is one of
my favourite demos but if you watch this from a "coder-eyes"
only you have a powerfull 3D engine HAL (wow cynic, you rocks! :D) and realy realy cool tune. But watch matching
the feeling of this prod, and you apreciate, sure.
This is one of lot of more acc demos that you can apreciate
it only for visual and tune. If you find code-impressive
demo, you can found a lot, accelerated or not, windows
AND of course MS-DOS demo.
Now am questioning this topic... think, if this is real:
Have killed demoscene The.Product/Farbrausch ?
What do you think about Vivid2/Doomsday ?
The first is Win/64kb accelerated and sure very impressive.
The last is pure MS-DOS demo and i think realy impresive
and cool/fast code...
Is "dos-demo" dead? Okay, find only win-demos/intros, is
your chose.
Im signing off now. This is a large discussion and i think
never ended...
The appropriate SO and metod to rendering is in your hands.
This is your chose.
(Sorry for my CRAP english)
Respects.
http://solstice.detranquis.com
I have read sometimes "DOS demos and MS-DOS is DEAD" but i
don't think that.
The eternal discusion about this is the same, dead or not,
hal or software rendering. I think demoscene make a change
from old times and change from "Code demostration without anymore" to "Art beyond code". I sure you don't think the
same but it's realy.
Simply watch for example Elements/Haujobb, this is one of
my favourite demos but if you watch this from a "coder-eyes"
only you have a powerfull 3D engine HAL (wow cynic, you rocks! :D) and realy realy cool tune. But watch matching
the feeling of this prod, and you apreciate, sure.
This is one of lot of more acc demos that you can apreciate
it only for visual and tune. If you find code-impressive
demo, you can found a lot, accelerated or not, windows
AND of course MS-DOS demo.
Now am questioning this topic... think, if this is real:
Have killed demoscene The.Product/Farbrausch ?
What do you think about Vivid2/Doomsday ?
The first is Win/64kb accelerated and sure very impressive.
The last is pure MS-DOS demo and i think realy impresive
and cool/fast code...
Is "dos-demo" dead? Okay, find only win-demos/intros, is
your chose.
Im signing off now. This is a large discussion and i think
never ended...
The appropriate SO and metod to rendering is in your hands.
This is your chose.
(Sorry for my CRAP english)
Respects.
http://solstice.detranquis.com
the demoscene certainly didn't use to be about doing something obvious using a commercial high-level api.
but who cares? the demoscene has died before and it will do it again when you least expect it.
just as you now say that it used to be about code but is now about art,
tomorrow it'll be said the it used to be about art but is now about whacking off in front of pretty pictures.
but who cares? the demoscene has died before and it will do it again when you least expect it.
just as you now say that it used to be about code but is now about art,
tomorrow it'll be said the it used to be about art but is now about whacking off in front of pretty pictures.
MSDOS was created in 1980 (a time where multitasking was a *dream*) to provide an operating system for puny x86 PCs of the same time (8086, 640KB RAM, no harddrive, no networking, no gfx). That time has passed a long time ago. Today, we have a great variety of OSes to run, with different pros and cons.
All I am saying is that you can code on Linux, Windows, BeOS, MacOS, Symbian, GBA whatever. You can also code with or without 3D acceleration, on Java, on C++, Delphi. You are free to do whatever you want. But, please, no more MSDOS. It's a bitch to run, it's not modular, modern hardware (like soundcards) is not supported, basically it's DEAD. I have an old machine to run old demos on, but I refuse to run new demos on it. Simple as that.
And, since I heard someone talking about John Carmack, I am sure he'd laugh if he heard that 'he likes DOS'. John has proved to be visionary enough to like free and powerfull platforms like Linux. Hell, I dig your dislike about Windows and partially understand it as well. Do what Carmack did: Code on Linux! DOS is a sorry excuse for a 'friendly' unix-like system which was cut down in order to run with small memory.
As for the hardware acceleration, There are cool 3D demos and there are lame ones, but the same happens for 2D demos as well. Do what you like and be happy. That's what I do.
All I am saying is that you can code on Linux, Windows, BeOS, MacOS, Symbian, GBA whatever. You can also code with or without 3D acceleration, on Java, on C++, Delphi. You are free to do whatever you want. But, please, no more MSDOS. It's a bitch to run, it's not modular, modern hardware (like soundcards) is not supported, basically it's DEAD. I have an old machine to run old demos on, but I refuse to run new demos on it. Simple as that.
And, since I heard someone talking about John Carmack, I am sure he'd laugh if he heard that 'he likes DOS'. John has proved to be visionary enough to like free and powerfull platforms like Linux. Hell, I dig your dislike about Windows and partially understand it as well. Do what Carmack did: Code on Linux! DOS is a sorry excuse for a 'friendly' unix-like system which was cut down in order to run with small memory.
As for the hardware acceleration, There are cool 3D demos and there are lame ones, but the same happens for 2D demos as well. Do what you like and be happy. That's what I do.
who cares what you use as long as you can make something interesting with it.. use a washingmachine with some multicolored clothes in it to create a texturemapped wormhole or whatever..
instad of bitching about who's right/wrong you could all help each other out instead and perhaps we would see some more nice demos out there..
instad of bitching about who's right/wrong you could all help each other out instead and perhaps we would see some more nice demos out there..
Go to see my new demo : Death's World (Soft demo for DOS, can run under win9x) by Kstorm
Ah, it becomes clear to me now...
Start a thread, that is sure to attract attention (read: flames :), then use it to plug your own productions.
Ever considered a job in advertising, Skarab? :)
(just joking around here :)
Start a thread, that is sure to attract attention (read: flames :), then use it to plug your own productions.
Ever considered a job in advertising, Skarab? :)
(just joking around here :)
Yes, you have found why I start this thread !
I don't want to post a message with ojuice because I don't want to be on the first page of pouet, now.
And I think I'll install visual c++ 6 !
But I have a big problem : my cdrom drive can't read the 4 install cds (but it can read all my other cds), why ?
It find the use space, but not the files. I think maybe aliens don't want I exit Dos programming, fuck aliens !
So, I want to know if somebody had the same problem, and how he had do after. (yes, my english is very bad)
I don't want to post a message with ojuice because I don't want to be on the first page of pouet, now.
And I think I'll install visual c++ 6 !
But I have a big problem : my cdrom drive can't read the 4 install cds (but it can read all my other cds), why ?
It find the use space, but not the files. I think maybe aliens don't want I exit Dos programming, fuck aliens !
So, I want to know if somebody had the same problem, and how he had do after. (yes, my english is very bad)
moT: DOS is not dead... see FreeDOS - http://www.freedos.org/
Skarab: (a bit late about this) DJGPP is still alive and actually there is a new version of it which supports Win2K.
To anyone who says that (s)he cannot run DOS demos under windows:
if you have Win9x/ME and a SBLive/SB128 card, then you can found in CD some SB drivers for DOS. I think, anyway, that in newer SBLives those drivers doesn't exist. If so try to find them in internet.
if you have WinNT/2K/XP, you'll not be able to install those drivers. Instead, you can use VDMSound (found at http://vdmsound.cjb.net/) which emulates not only Adlib and SB16 using DirectSound but also emulates VESA calls and is able to slowdown the CPU for a program if runs fast. With this program, now, i'm able to run almost anything DOS-based from my Win2K, but i think that under XP will run better.
Now about DOS/Win... i think that DOS is simpler to program it and you have nothing to care about other things running on the system etc. Also you have the full power of the machine on your feets, easylly. DOS is sometimes and under some situasions faster than Windows. But there are cases that there is a need for Windows, like the sound. If you make a DOS application you have to code drivers for every soundcard is around. Yes, you can use this VDMSound driver, but tell me... what's the point in making a DOS program if is going to be run under Windows? DOS is usually faster than windows, but today most DOS programs are been run under Windows, which makes it slower. In this case, the best solution is to make a program to run under Windows. So, i think that Windows wins here. If you make a demo/intro, i think the best solution is called "Windows". Except if you're going to make your demo to boot from a diskette. In this case, the demo will run in almost every computer, but you'll face two problems: a) you have to code an OS by yourself and b) you have to code drivers for everything around. So, this is not a good solution.
and lastly about that HW/SW thing. Every kind of graphics (HW/SW) is different. I like both of them, but for different reasons. I like HW demos because they are (usually) faster (on fast machines...) and they (usually) look nicer. But i like SW demos too because i believe that it's better to code the entire thing by yourself than let the hardware do it. Also i like SW demos because they look all the same in different video cards. Lastly i like SW demos (when running under Windows) because i only need a good fast 2D card with DirectDraw inside and not a strong 3D accelerator with the latest Direct3D/OpenGl... which -if i don't have internet- i can't get.
Which is better? DOS or Windows? SW or HW? None. Every kind has it's good and it's bad things. The best is before you decide where your demo will run, to think how it will be and what it will need and after that decide where it will run in how (SW/HW). I don't think that is a good tactic to think that only DOS or Windows or SW or HW demos are good.
Am i wrong?
Skarab: (a bit late about this) DJGPP is still alive and actually there is a new version of it which supports Win2K.
To anyone who says that (s)he cannot run DOS demos under windows:
if you have Win9x/ME and a SBLive/SB128 card, then you can found in CD some SB drivers for DOS. I think, anyway, that in newer SBLives those drivers doesn't exist. If so try to find them in internet.
if you have WinNT/2K/XP, you'll not be able to install those drivers. Instead, you can use VDMSound (found at http://vdmsound.cjb.net/) which emulates not only Adlib and SB16 using DirectSound but also emulates VESA calls and is able to slowdown the CPU for a program if runs fast. With this program, now, i'm able to run almost anything DOS-based from my Win2K, but i think that under XP will run better.
Now about DOS/Win... i think that DOS is simpler to program it and you have nothing to care about other things running on the system etc. Also you have the full power of the machine on your feets, easylly. DOS is sometimes and under some situasions faster than Windows. But there are cases that there is a need for Windows, like the sound. If you make a DOS application you have to code drivers for every soundcard is around. Yes, you can use this VDMSound driver, but tell me... what's the point in making a DOS program if is going to be run under Windows? DOS is usually faster than windows, but today most DOS programs are been run under Windows, which makes it slower. In this case, the best solution is to make a program to run under Windows. So, i think that Windows wins here. If you make a demo/intro, i think the best solution is called "Windows". Except if you're going to make your demo to boot from a diskette. In this case, the demo will run in almost every computer, but you'll face two problems: a) you have to code an OS by yourself and b) you have to code drivers for everything around. So, this is not a good solution.
and lastly about that HW/SW thing. Every kind of graphics (HW/SW) is different. I like both of them, but for different reasons. I like HW demos because they are (usually) faster (on fast machines...) and they (usually) look nicer. But i like SW demos too because i believe that it's better to code the entire thing by yourself than let the hardware do it. Also i like SW demos because they look all the same in different video cards. Lastly i like SW demos (when running under Windows) because i only need a good fast 2D card with DirectDraw inside and not a strong 3D accelerator with the latest Direct3D/OpenGl... which -if i don't have internet- i can't get.
Which is better? DOS or Windows? SW or HW? None. Every kind has it's good and it's bad things. The best is before you decide where your demo will run, to think how it will be and what it will need and after that decide where it will run in how (SW/HW). I don't think that is a good tactic to think that only DOS or Windows or SW or HW demos are good.
Am i wrong?
