Are coders becoming obselete in the demoscene?
category: general [glöplog]
coders ARE needed - i've seen flash demos with cool stuff
(just imagine how cool that demo could have been if the artist had a coder at his side)
(just imagine how cool that demo could have been if the artist had a coder at his side)
without tools, every artist needs a coder to do a demo.
with public tools, an artist can choose between his favorite coder and a tool. this is a hard competition for that coder, especially if he is lasy, a bad teamworker, a newbe or simply incompetent.
but most artists will prefer working with thier own coders, because the power of code can not be harnissed in a tool.
coders that write plugins to demo tools may be an optimal solution, because you get back that power, have all advantages of the tool and the coder does not need to start from scratch.
(please do not expect a plugin-interface for the .werkkzeug1)
with public tools, an artist can choose between his favorite coder and a tool. this is a hard competition for that coder, especially if he is lasy, a bad teamworker, a newbe or simply incompetent.
but most artists will prefer working with thier own coders, because the power of code can not be harnissed in a tool.
coders that write plugins to demo tools may be an optimal solution, because you get back that power, have all advantages of the tool and the coder does not need to start from scratch.
(please do not expect a plugin-interface for the .werkkzeug1)
Starting from scratch is the real bitch..
In my opinion many groups still believe in the value of self written code and thus prefer coding their own demos or demomaking solutions as it's simply more honest and more pleasing to say: this demo has been made by coders,graphicians and musicians from our group and each and everybody can be proud of the accomplishment. Perhaps this opinion is outdated but I really appreciate the value of a 100% self produced demo.
I'm personally connecting this to my definition of demoscene spirit.
I'm personally connecting this to my definition of demoscene spirit.
Paralax: you sound as if you defend "selfcoding" although you feel that it's outdated and stupid.
but you are wrong: you should defend "selfcoding" because you belief in it's possibilities.
i thing many of the bestl demos were only feasable because of unique code.
but you are wrong: you should defend "selfcoding" because you belief in it's possibilities.
i thing many of the bestl demos were only feasable because of unique code.
You're absolutely right on that Chaos. I feel like that too. But the same goes for 'unique' usage of existent possibilities.. I see little miracles happening both at work (artists pulling really cool stuff out of pretty basic rendering engine features) and in this scene. As with everything, it's not as simple as most would like to put it.
I don't know about you guys, but spending time making demos on your own, alone with your tools, it's simply boring.
Demos rule because of the fun you have making them with your groupmates, talking a sea of bullshits that might eventually become "design" and effects ideas.
Demos rule because of the fun you have making them with your groupmates, talking a sea of bullshits that might eventually become "design" and effects ideas.
I remember that from TPB-02 (oh my, am I sorry that I finally fucked up that project *too*). We'd spend hours drinking beer and nodding our heads to the same fucking lame effect with overlay synchronized to a beat.. Now that was nice.
plek: the real fun thing to do is first optimaze it on high level language like c++ and then make a assembler version out of it. U get the best from both worlds :))
for a 4k at least.
Well as for size, yes indeed. I've seen intrinsics and smart C coding doing more good for the speed-part lately. Exceptions where due ofcourse..
...
coders are so 1990s...
(turning to play ut2004)
coders are so 1990s...
(turning to play ut2004)
chaos: I guess I wasn't completely clear in that respect (I'm agreeing with your statement on 'selfcoding' though)
The scene is full of coders wanting to accomplish their goals of providing means to create cool demos. Although not everybody of these coders may posess the skills to create such good demotools or simply code astounding releases, I appreciate the effort put into creating the release all by oneself instead of using an 'alien' demotool. Of course groups could evolve just based on those available demotools but I feel, coders just make the group complete. In the end I'm working on code for releases myself and I like the idea that anybody watching a release will see nothing but the effort put into, by members of the group only. (Naturally you could argue that most likely we're using tools not produced by ourselves such as compilers or trackers but just let's say that I'm fine with that though)
The scene is full of coders wanting to accomplish their goals of providing means to create cool demos. Although not everybody of these coders may posess the skills to create such good demotools or simply code astounding releases, I appreciate the effort put into creating the release all by oneself instead of using an 'alien' demotool. Of course groups could evolve just based on those available demotools but I feel, coders just make the group complete. In the end I'm working on code for releases myself and I like the idea that anybody watching a release will see nothing but the effort put into, by members of the group only. (Naturally you could argue that most likely we're using tools not produced by ourselves such as compilers or trackers but just let's say that I'm fine with that though)
[B]ALIEN DEMOTOOOOL[/[B]
Ryg: UT2004 completely sucks :) You should try something else.
Ryg: UT2004 completely sucks :) You should try something else.
:(( I want an 'edit post' button :(
I hope that much more demotools will be released by great groups. If there are tons of great tools out there, coders will have to find other ways to be usefull in the group, than just writing yet another buggy 3D flyby engine. Maybe we'll get a hole lot of new interesting effects now, because coders want to show off that they are still needed.
There was a time when using trackers or mod-players by other groups was lame. Things changed, and I think it was good for the quality of the demos. I really think demos will become much better in the future through those tools releases. But not because coders won't be needed no more, but rather because coders will have to become more creative to be worthy.
There was a time when using trackers or mod-players by other groups was lame. Things changed, and I think it was good for the quality of the demos. I really think demos will become much better in the future through those tools releases. But not because coders won't be needed no more, but rather because coders will have to become more creative to be worthy.
First of all: this whole thread is meaningless because, as chaos said, a tool can never achieve the same result that unique code (which is written for the one thing only, the effect seen on the screen) can.
Then think about it, *IF* the graphicians and musicians turned their backs on coders and used *ONLY* demotools (and refused to work on any demo that is actually coded), would the coders start to cry, go home and stop making demos? Hell no, it would prolly mean that we would once again see more coder-demos :D
Fucking idiot...
Then think about it, *IF* the graphicians and musicians turned their backs on coders and used *ONLY* demotools (and refused to work on any demo that is actually coded), would the coders start to cry, go home and stop making demos? Hell no, it would prolly mean that we would once again see more coder-demos :D
Fucking idiot...
\o/ more copperbars!
Quote:
Hell no, it would prolly mean that we would once again see more coder-demos :D
I WANT THAT
I WANT THAT
Really! :)
make one!
To Stelthz only (i did not read the other's comments) :
I answer you as a Demopaja user since 3 years now
About the progression of the coder in our artform:
What is the level the coder must enter to be a real coder ? that's the question!
some say true coders makes their own hardware libs and do not use generic libs
some say a true coders use software and not hardware
some say a true coders use assembler and not C++
some say a true coders use pure memory adress signals and not assembler
some say true coders create their own program language and compiler
some say true coders makes their own drivers and own chips
what is the limit ? is it a limit ? no a coder code and thats all
in the old days, 1 coder can in few years, learn how to use a specific hardware (remember how many games what done by only 1 man! including music and gfxs)
now, due to the complexity of the hardware and the number of versions, it is not possible
The true is: now an army of coders is needed! Perhaps demotools is our solution to sharing our brains, and now each coder can concentrate his brain just on one part of the whole project
And our demos can concentrate more on effects now. Yes, with demopaja, a coder can work on an effect, and did not loose his time with design or music player for example
Effects can be simply "display shaders" for example, and it is a huge work to make the rendering quality of pro tools, in real time
Pro tools needed 1 night to compute a picture, and now we are able to do 32 pictures in 1 second!
Next step will be the Pixel and Vertex Shaders v3 wich exist since months but are expensive for the moment (nvidia quadro fx 4000)
And you'll see in real time quality rendering like Brazil tool can do for prerendered movie
you said :
"In the old days, demos meant impressive code."
Today too, you can see impressive code when you analyse a demo, just try to remake an effect you like and you'll see there is impressive code behind it
The problem today is too much people are not able to understand where is the impressive code behind an effect/scene
you said :
"In my opinion the whole tool issue is a natural progression of the demo scene. However, I believe the tools should be openened so that people can add their own extensions and help improving them."
yes, it's true. Demopaja is opened to add modules, plugins, libraries but the main engine stay closed. I hope one day this fabulous tool will be opened (for demomakers only).
you said :
"The tool creators may realize a commercial potential in their creations"
Rsi demomaker was solded in the 90's, some of us (including me) had buy it to make demos, but a great frustration had come, it was closed and too much limited.
The problem in my opinion can be, (if the tool is opened), some fucking capitalists will try to stole the code and will recreate commercial tools with it, it's a danger to open a source code for everybody on windows (on linux it's not a problem, few users, no market)
But it becomes quickly obsolete because of the new HW
you said :
"Coding a demo today does not mean anymore that you need mad optimization skills to keep up with your peers"
False! We need optimizations too, because designers wants allways more and more possibilities to do their brain's ideas (i speak for me here ;])
Yes, optimization is usefull today too, as a designer i need allways more triangles, more effects, more lights, better rendering, more screen resolutions, more effects .... i want to create impossible renderings in real time, to break the 'pre-rendered videos' with real-time!
We will allways need a coder, because the hardware,software and imagination's ideas are updated all the time!!!
I answer you as a Demopaja user since 3 years now
About the progression of the coder in our artform:
What is the level the coder must enter to be a real coder ? that's the question!
some say true coders makes their own hardware libs and do not use generic libs
some say a true coders use software and not hardware
some say a true coders use assembler and not C++
some say a true coders use pure memory adress signals and not assembler
some say true coders create their own program language and compiler
some say true coders makes their own drivers and own chips
what is the limit ? is it a limit ? no a coder code and thats all
in the old days, 1 coder can in few years, learn how to use a specific hardware (remember how many games what done by only 1 man! including music and gfxs)
now, due to the complexity of the hardware and the number of versions, it is not possible
The true is: now an army of coders is needed! Perhaps demotools is our solution to sharing our brains, and now each coder can concentrate his brain just on one part of the whole project
And our demos can concentrate more on effects now. Yes, with demopaja, a coder can work on an effect, and did not loose his time with design or music player for example
Effects can be simply "display shaders" for example, and it is a huge work to make the rendering quality of pro tools, in real time
Pro tools needed 1 night to compute a picture, and now we are able to do 32 pictures in 1 second!
Next step will be the Pixel and Vertex Shaders v3 wich exist since months but are expensive for the moment (nvidia quadro fx 4000)
And you'll see in real time quality rendering like Brazil tool can do for prerendered movie
you said :
"In the old days, demos meant impressive code."
Today too, you can see impressive code when you analyse a demo, just try to remake an effect you like and you'll see there is impressive code behind it
The problem today is too much people are not able to understand where is the impressive code behind an effect/scene
you said :
"In my opinion the whole tool issue is a natural progression of the demo scene. However, I believe the tools should be openened so that people can add their own extensions and help improving them."
yes, it's true. Demopaja is opened to add modules, plugins, libraries but the main engine stay closed. I hope one day this fabulous tool will be opened (for demomakers only).
you said :
"The tool creators may realize a commercial potential in their creations"
Rsi demomaker was solded in the 90's, some of us (including me) had buy it to make demos, but a great frustration had come, it was closed and too much limited.
The problem in my opinion can be, (if the tool is opened), some fucking capitalists will try to stole the code and will recreate commercial tools with it, it's a danger to open a source code for everybody on windows (on linux it's not a problem, few users, no market)
But it becomes quickly obsolete because of the new HW
you said :
"Coding a demo today does not mean anymore that you need mad optimization skills to keep up with your peers"
False! We need optimizations too, because designers wants allways more and more possibilities to do their brain's ideas (i speak for me here ;])
Yes, optimization is usefull today too, as a designer i need allways more triangles, more effects, more lights, better rendering, more screen resolutions, more effects .... i want to create impossible renderings in real time, to break the 'pre-rendered videos' with real-time!
We will allways need a coder, because the hardware,software and imagination's ideas are updated all the time!!!
..a tool can never achieve the same result that unique code (which is written for the one thing only, the effect seen on the screen) can.
Seriously, I challenge you to give an example of your claim. And it has to be a recent demo. I believe the effects you are referring to are mainly "coder-effects" which are not really appreciated anymore.
In addition, adding any kind of special case effects to a demotool would invalidate the idea of having a versatile tool somewhat. Any self respecting demo-tool-coder would try to find a way to generalize this special case effect so it can be used in a more flexible way.
What chaos really said is that the optimal way would be to have an expandable "general purpose" demo tool. And I agree with him in that point. You may note that none of the public demotools allows to add your own effects, with the exception of demopaja. This is obviously the way of the creators to keep an edge over the others.
Seriously, I challenge you to give an example of your claim. And it has to be a recent demo. I believe the effects you are referring to are mainly "coder-effects" which are not really appreciated anymore.
In addition, adding any kind of special case effects to a demotool would invalidate the idea of having a versatile tool somewhat. Any self respecting demo-tool-coder would try to find a way to generalize this special case effect so it can be used in a more flexible way.
What chaos really said is that the optimal way would be to have an expandable "general purpose" demo tool. And I agree with him in that point. You may note that none of the public demotools allows to add your own effects, with the exception of demopaja. This is obviously the way of the creators to keep an edge over the others.
zone:
Today too, you can see impressive code when you analyse a demo, just try to remake an effect you like and you'll see there is impressive code behind it
I do not doubt that, but the reverse is not true. A good looking effect must not neccessarily have good code behind it. And as you mentioned, less and less people are capable of judging the quality of code from the looks of its results.
The true is: now an army of coders is needed! Perhaps demotools is our solution to sharing our brains, and now each coder can concentrate his brain just on one part of the whole project
You definitly got a point there - and a possible solution would be an open demo tool, a joint creation by coders of many groups. It would have to be open-sourced, so everybody can add his own extensions and expand the capabilities where required.
I think if this would happen it would only be for the benefit of the demoscene. But I am afraid that too many people here are opposed to open source and stuff like that.
Today too, you can see impressive code when you analyse a demo, just try to remake an effect you like and you'll see there is impressive code behind it
I do not doubt that, but the reverse is not true. A good looking effect must not neccessarily have good code behind it. And as you mentioned, less and less people are capable of judging the quality of code from the looks of its results.
The true is: now an army of coders is needed! Perhaps demotools is our solution to sharing our brains, and now each coder can concentrate his brain just on one part of the whole project
You definitly got a point there - and a possible solution would be an open demo tool, a joint creation by coders of many groups. It would have to be open-sourced, so everybody can add his own extensions and expand the capabilities where required.
I think if this would happen it would only be for the benefit of the demoscene. But I am afraid that too many people here are opposed to open source and stuff like that.
eye:
you got good points there, I agree on most of them.
Commercialization? Haha! You forgot the rules! Many demoscene graphicians use Photoshop or Painter. Do you know many which actually own the tool? Similar with musicians, and even coders
You forget that there is an audience outside the demoscene. For example more than 250000 downloads of fr-025 tell a lot. Some of these people may be willing to pay money to attempt to create their own "graficsandsounddemonstration".
It all goes in rounds. I bet pure coderdemos will come back out large someday.
Well, I wonder what these would look like. :) "Look - I can do 1 million polys on a TNT".
you got good points there, I agree on most of them.
Commercialization? Haha! You forgot the rules! Many demoscene graphicians use Photoshop or Painter. Do you know many which actually own the tool? Similar with musicians, and even coders
You forget that there is an audience outside the demoscene. For example more than 250000 downloads of fr-025 tell a lot. Some of these people may be willing to pay money to attempt to create their own "graficsandsounddemonstration".
It all goes in rounds. I bet pure coderdemos will come back out large someday.
Well, I wonder what these would look like. :) "Look - I can do 1 million polys on a TNT".
Yeah, that (1 million poly on a tnt) is great idea :)))
Hmmm. This tool misery is obsolete. A demotool nothing else just a 'helper function' for a coder to pack together his work/effect/ideas.
I think this is the only way for a coder if he build his own tool where the whole knownledge meet of the designer's ideas. The easyest way, than build script files with notepad or recompile the whole thing just because of a little modifycation...
Otherwise...
Fr should _NOT_ release werkkzeug1 if they don't have a better one. Conspiracy do the same with addict1 because they have the second genetation of their tool. Btw. every released demotool is obsolete then... :)))
...also: everything still in their way just we waste the time here :)))
Hmmm. This tool misery is obsolete. A demotool nothing else just a 'helper function' for a coder to pack together his work/effect/ideas.
I think this is the only way for a coder if he build his own tool where the whole knownledge meet of the designer's ideas. The easyest way, than build script files with notepad or recompile the whole thing just because of a little modifycation...
Otherwise...
Fr should _NOT_ release werkkzeug1 if they don't have a better one. Conspiracy do the same with addict1 because they have the second genetation of their tool. Btw. every released demotool is obsolete then... :)))
...also: everything still in their way just we waste the time here :)))
