pouët.net

The future of demoscene lies in Youtube (and simlar services). HW requirements are getting way too high these days to enjoy demos in real time. Mark my words.

I think webgl / javascript is a good plan too. We're talking about the next 10 years, not last decade.

And I think c++/ogl/dx isn't a good place to start too. Some people will take to it, most will spend a few hours looking at the docs and the syntax and decide that demo coding isn't fun at all and walk away. Javascript, processing, whatever so long as it's easy to get into, teaches you some of the important basics, and leads you on to the next level.

I'd say c is ok, not great personally.. probably a starting point for some, step 2 for others.

And an oldschool (or somehow restricted) platform? Probably not as a starting point, but it's probably a good idea for all of us to do it at some point, if only as a good learning exercise.

Oh, and good article viznut, it's an interesting read. I was a bit disappointed at the lack of future demo screenshots mind ;)

Navis: Then that's yet another problem. Demoscene coders tend to use the newest and greatest Graphics Card, as if the limit was the most powerful card being available for purchase. What about setting a common graphics card as the limit instead? What about doing amazing things with not so newest graphics card so more people can enjoy them? Otherwise... yes, Youtube will be the only way your work will be seen.

Javascript also has the added benefit of (possibly) being very close to what people want to work with later on. If you're into making jQuery animations, then taking the step into Unity3D or WebGL or whatever becomes that much easier.

sky is the limit, always. I can't see how one could convince the front-runners to tone it down a bit so that their demos would run, in real-time, on firefox (try telling that to smash...).

Probably not smash, but Iq has already tried out WebGL...

http://www.iquilezles.org/apps/shadertoy/

Anyway, I think doing demos for the newest graphics card is starting to be like doing demos for Amiga; it's amazing what you guys do on that platform, but there is no way I'll see it realtime.

And, as I said on the presentation, your (our) work is not that amazing if we compare it with other youtube videos. With (thankfully) some exceptions.

By the way, I can't run actual demoscene releases because my PC is too weak.

@aMUSiC: Yes, I think I have the tendency of trying to understand almost anything by first building some kind of a theory about it, and that shows in my writing. However, I've been trying to base my predictions primarily on objective observations: comparing today's demoscene with several points in the past, noticing long-term trends and assuming that the trends continue without abrupt changes. The trends include stuff like increasing average age, increasing acceptance of diverse platforms, increasing outreach, etc.

On the other hand, when expressing my own ideas about how demoscene "should" continue, I admit that I have been quite theoretical. As this is the way how I approach almost anything in the first place, I think it was important to deliver these theories in order to get understood well enough. I know there are some risks in this as well, and when defining "core demoscene activity", I attempted to not sound like some kind of a prophet who brings down undisputable divine dogma. Surprisingly, I didn't receive as many criticisms about this definition as I expected, so I guess most people actually liked it.

Regarding the "path of initiation", I'm definitely not suggesting that newcomers should be enforced to go thru a "seemingly boring path". Everyone has the right of choosing any path they like, even one that they will regret in the future. Instead, I have been suggesting that some of the paths that are more "pedagogically sensible" are made easier and more appealing. That's also why I have been advocating an "educational demoscene platform" that is a bit like a classical 8-bit platform but removes the historical quirks and emphasizes the rewarding and fun aspects of "Lego-block programming".

NEWSFLASH: During the summer, I did some initial work on a tiny Flash-based game whose work title is "Coder Hero". The game will be an attempt to replicate certain fun aspects of a certain form of demoscene-related hard-core programming in a way that is accessible to casual players and total non-programmers. I have no idea yet whether the idea will work at all, but if it will, then we will have some proof that people can be brought to a "machine code bliss" in an easy and non-boring way.

I actually haven't seen *any* fairlight demos realtime for a few years now. Which is a real shame :(

But then I have zero complaint there really: I don't want to piss about upgrading PCs every 6 months any more, and I want to see what smash can squeeze from the most high end PC available too. Sure, I'd love to see what he could get out of a gf3, but I'd way prefer something high end.

Anyway, the scene is wide, not narrow: we have limited platforms, high end, oldschool, size coding... if you want something that runs on low end hardware don't look at the high end demos. If you're missing a category, go make a demo about it and start a new one :)

Navis said:


That's EXACTLY what I am doing, playing with my little Visual C++ 6.0/OpenGL 1.1 framework :)

YES, I can't do shaders, YES I can't load png, YES I can't play mp3, but since I can display cute flat-shaded cubes and glenz-vectors and there's a (small) audience for that, I'm happy :)

YES REZ CAN

This may just be some rambling that missed the crucial points and goes waaaay sidetrack, narrowing the discussion in an irrelevant path, but...

I understand it's easy to underestimate the importance of the "historical quirks" in making demos for technically restricted platforms if you're a programmer. But from a non-programmer's perspective I'm a bit skeptical about the idea of fully virtual non-historic platforms finding a cozy place in the demoscene.

To me it seems crucial that a lot of the charm in doing demos for "old school" restriction-ridden platforms (C64, Atari ST, Spectrum, NES etc) that are now being explored in the demoscene mainly through emulators is that they do have real history, they do have real and not just made-up restrictions, and emulators, their virtual versions, will have to emulate them as accurately as possible. And the platforms do have have a history of people going around these restrictions. Then there's nostalgia, which is just a more personal form of history. C64 being a popular demo platform is not because a lot of people have it in their home, but because they used to have it. This is the main reason why many people are playing games or watching demos in VICE. To younger enthusiasts, who never experienced the C64 at first hand, the reputation of the machine and the history of the demoscene might be the most importants factors to spark the interest towards making something creative for the C64, and not just the plain challenge of doing something that is technically restricted in a certain way. There's also a scene with more than 20 years of history waiting for them.

Why are NES and Gameboy so popular in the chiptune scene? Because they the sound they produce is so pleasing? I personally find their signature sound very bland and crude, but that's just me - I've never owned neither of them, never accustumed (or spoiled) my ears to them. But a huge number of people have. Once your "perfect soundchip" astrays too much from the soundchips it's trying to emulate, it loses it's appeal and gets out of context. Few years ago SounDemoN cleverly developed a way to produce new kind of soundwaves from the SID chip, but how many tunes have been made using his inventions? The overall interest towards it and the other recent SID developements (eg. the new digi routines by Aleksi Eeben + SounDemoN and THCM) has been very low. It's not that they're not technically interesting, it's because they fall out of certain charasteristics that we associate with C64, that have been developing through time, they're "not C64 enough."

It's hard to impress non-coders with your fully virtual platform demo when they don't know what they're watching. Tell them your demo is running on the same pile of junk they used to play Boulder Dash with and they will have some perspective.

What I'm trying to say here is that if your (technically restricted) virtual demo platform has no history, it doesn't have much collective potential - atleast in the demoscene. If the platform tries to take most of your hardware, and not limit it, then it's a totally different scenario.

But in 2020 we don't make demos anymore, because we're too busy flying to the moon and back with our jet backs.

Because of filthy americans doing filthy poprock (cockrock?) music live :(((((

(sorry but someone had to put it)

Trace has the leading.

The fact that there are several comments on this and other threads that the best way to watch demos is Capped.tv or Youtube are an incredible testament to that even among the hardest of the hardcore we are the risk of losing what is core: realtime.

For the scene matter beyond "you make it, you watch it (on youtube)", it needs reclaim what it used to have
- technical brilliance in a way anyone who sees it can appreciate immediately
- be better than anything else in that platform/genre
- ability to bring in new blood (what can I learn here, what can I apply here?)
- be to get in, but with skills still making the difference
- accessibility to large audiences

The web browser is our best hope. Everything we know about making graphics scream is being redone on the browser. The talent and knowledge of scene coders can make huge impact. SKILLS MATTER (where as competing against visual benchmarks from games is damn hard). We can put amazing realtime creations in front of 1M x current demoscene audience, and the skills learned are in huge demand.

It would mean forsaking a huge amount of high end techniques and going back to middleages (or middle/late 90s?). That would on the positive note make it much easier for new folks to come in.

Is it time to reset the clock? I honestly do not know, but we are at risk of losing something very fundamental.

Realtime should matter.

I agree with trace.

HOWEVER, demos have always been made FOR the demoscene, who can actually understand what's behind making a demo (even if you are showing it on youtube)... the problem here is that if no new blood comes in, in some years there just won't be a demoscene that can actually appreciate your work.

The way trace explains it (and very well explained, may I ask), it actually makes sense for a broader audience who can just get new blood on the demoscene, and eventually they might try to do some more advanced things that just can't be done on firefox today, like Navis said.

I think the best way for one to start coding with realtime graphics with modern tools would be with a tool similar to vvvv:



The benefit here is that the level of abstraction is quite high but the program flow and the IO chain are perfectly visualized, and you get instant feedback with every action you make.

Then, when one has learned to build upon this abstraction that everything is an IO module it's surprisingly natural to start developing your own modules as well; you just need to design what's coming in and what you want to come out and the level of control you want to reveal to the programming interface.

*may I say (not ask)

my question is:

since, lets say, 2005. How many new groups have started on the modern accelerated application platform and how many on the flash/js ?

Well viznut probably has a polar opposite viewpoint to me about the future of the scene, although i do agree with a lot of his summary and points. but here goes..

the most important thing for new people is fast results - getting something cool out. the other important thing is that the scene will always live strongest on the platform that people actually use - day in day out. partly cos its easier to work on whenever you feel like it, and partly because it makes it easier to show off the results to your mates. now that platform is currently windows pcs, but it could easily become iphones or something. why you would send these people back to c64 or msdos i have no idea.

the growth of entry into the scene is probably going to come from people playing with processing, openframeworks etc who want more power and flexibility - "artists" becoming coders - and people coming from gamedev (either newbie or pro) who want more freedom - the ones who think (as i do) "i like making graphics but the game gets in the way". The days of kids finding and coming straight into the scene is probably numbered - it's far easier to find information about gamedev or ofx/processing, and they suck up the types of people who are interested in the idea.

the interesting thing about the future of the scene is that there are probably more interested people in theory than ever. the problem is they all disappear into other routes - particularly processing and flash and the like - "generative art", interactive stuff and all that jazz. the way for the scene in future is to tap those scenes. show them what the scene has to offer above and beyond what they're doing now. however, as more of these types get involved in the scene im sure interactivity is surely going to become a bigger element.

i can also see the scene splitting increasingly into 2 camps - the deeply underground oldschool scene, and the much more visible newschool scene which appeals to those interested in art, graphics in general and so on. the latter will be the main entrypoint with a few moving to the former if they get sucked in.

The demoscene in the 2010s does sound like serious business :)

Then I say something.

Btw, there's an alternative to going a bit 'low end' with browser demos. We keep the ultra-high-end we love, and it'll still play in a browser. Yeah, I'm talking about videos, but not capturing a demo and uploading to youtube. We could start writing non-realtime demos, that write out to disk instead of to screen, then can be watched as a regular video.

Not everyone's taste of course, but I think a lot of the reason we do things realtime have long since stopped being reasons. If most people can't watch the latest demos cause they lack the hardware, they'll watch the video, then we're competing with after fx and maya. Going non-realtime we could produce some pretty amazing stuff that the maya and afterfx artists can't come close to.

A little bit too much serious :(

psonice: it would still need the hardware (or a reference rasterizer which is fast enough, which probably doesn't exist) if you want your exe to output the video... either that, or just have the video stored within the EXE, which then invalidates the point of "not uploading the video somewhere".

what next, a "beginner demo compo"? ... ... oh wa--