pouët.net

no

Interesting point of discussion. There's the whole can of worms of personal taste and what exactly would classify as a bad demo.

So far, 90% of their output has been at least watchable with some real masterpieces included , and the remaining 10% is mostly forgettable or really generic demo stuff. But bad, never.

There's not a lot of groups where you can take a hard look at their body of works and nothing that's just _bad_ would crop up.

Granted for a 'bad' demo it turned out kind of awesome, but I don't think it can be described as 'good.' I still like it. :D

Eh, that's p much the best demo Still ever did actually.

i don't recall seeing any still demos. aren't those called pictures.

Who is still capable of making a bad demo?

Isn't BITS the label under which Still releases their bad demos?

did a quick search on the internet and yes, i think their stuff is very classic..

they've done several!

I'm sure they could if they tried.

what marq said :)

who knows

does someone have their email(s)?

lets take this to the next level and ask them directly

I can't stand watching any of their demos. So the question should be: will they ever make a really good one.

I genuinely disliked this one, the joke was just probably lost on me. The others vary from cool to amazing.

Keep trying mate, you'll get there one day ;)

Oh yea well I don't see YOU doing anything better!

demos about exploding polygons and cities just can't go bad!

A little bit OT, but it makes me think about "plot" of the demo.
This is somehow less discussed topic, as traditionally (era culminated with Second Reality) plot was obvious: show impressive effects, nice pixel art, effect, pixel art, effect, ..., greetings, more effects and pixel art, credits/funny remarks/end scroll.
And obviously effect supposed to be something new or at least more optimized (more polys, phong plus texture at once,yay! two morphing tunnels, more blobs, recently - more particles, complex distance-field scene, complex fractal etc...).
Now, if many groups just use tools and go for the design (Still is among them), effects are still there, but in a kind of game engine way (they are let say "supported"). Of course you can add new effect to the tool and use it, but I have impression that especially Still is heading into a different direction, for example: beautiful/monumental/memorable scenes, not so much showing off code-wise. There are other groups that show off code-wise more, like Smash is trying (with particles, real-time global illumination or "uncovering static"), or ASD showing off on both code side (Navis coding still most things "by hand") and let say "plot"/message side. Not that I have any point, just few thoughts out of boredom :P
Also I know I have commented harshly once on Still prod, regarding the pre-baked content, but it was more that I was probably not "getting it" what Still demos are all about.

So yeah, I am bored, this is boredom topic, so I don't feel like formulating any point, just thinking what a modern demo plot could (not should) be about.

demoscene is competetive. so bitching is natural part of it.
but to grow out of bitching into accepting is a process..more inner than else..

so the question becomes several:

are you capable of doing a bad demo?
what is bad for you?
is still a metaphor of your own stillness?
exploding cities?
is externalizing your own feelings really working for you?

1x for Weltherrschaft.

Seriously, try putting some effort into making a bad demo for once. It's seriously refreshing, and allows you to recognize what things you do right by accident. Because that is a surprising amount of things.