On using tools like Notch for making demos...
category: general [glöplog]
Quote:
so we're back to that 'just drag your assets files into notch and press the 'make wannabe fairlight demo'-button and win assembly!'-fallacy!
Just use »Elite Pro Demo Generator 2000«!
https://demozoo.org/music/292402/
Quote:
there's a major flaw in your comparison, though (@rp). The equivalent to removing coders from a demo production (by using a demo maker with premade effects) would be to remove musicians or graphics artists and replace their work with premade assets from a 3rd party library.
How does that remove the coder from a production? A contribution that was made with Notch, Cables, Tixl was implicitly coded by their developers. Everybody understands that.
This is way less transparent in music production. So, what makes using third party resources acceptable in one field, but than another?
Sure, Notch, Unity, Unreal Engine etc were all coded by someone. Just not someone from your group.
A possible solution could be additional compos, e.g. 1MB Classic Demo, 10MB High-End Demo, 1GB AAA Demo.
Regarding music: Not a big fan of MP3s (in demo prods) but that train has left the station a long time ago (but pls, continue to develop your own synths ! :-))
A possible solution could be additional compos, e.g. 1MB Classic Demo, 10MB High-End Demo, 1GB AAA Demo.
Regarding music: Not a big fan of MP3s (in demo prods) but that train has left the station a long time ago (but pls, continue to develop your own synths ! :-))
Quote:
Just not someone from your group.
And then we are at the problem that not anyone has the possibility to be in a group.
Why ? If you don't have a coder, use a demo tool.
And better make that 50MB for the High-End Demo Compo, btw. :-)
And better make that 50MB for the High-End Demo Compo, btw. :-)
I can only make sense of the sentiment against tools through the fear of not being needed anymore.
Predominantly uphold by people who, based upon the behaviour they put on display here, I imagine being an utter pain in the ass to be around.
Predominantly uphold by people who, based upon the behaviour they put on display here, I imagine being an utter pain in the ass to be around.
I think it's the old "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" issue (and well, you know how it was with coders back in the day, some felt like on top of the world because only *they* knew how to render something appealing in realtime).
Some demos may be "coder-pr0n" (e.g. literally comparing who has the biggest (number of) balls, or the tinyiest executable) but there's so much more to a great demo than just code.
The tool situation is not unlike in music, i.e. the "democratization" when big studios could suddenly be replaced by affordable or even free synth / fx plugins running "in the box".
That being said, lumping together ~1GB 3rd-party, professional (game-)engine demos together with e.g. 1MB homemade ones in the same compo just does not make sense, hence the size-category suggestions (not unlike the weight classes in a boxing match).
1MB Classic
- not enough space for prerendered music but plenty for synths + (some) samples
- not enough space for prerendered animations but plenty for procedural graphics generators + (some) assets, or lores pixel graphics
- approximately the size of a disk (somewhere between Amiga and PC, and it's a power-of-two, yay)
- accessible for beginners but still a challenge for the pros
64MB High-End
- enough space for high-quality streaming music, models and textures
- most demos already fit into this category / class
1GB (unlimited?) AAA
- show off your editing skills
- "infinite" freedom, 4k graphics, hires meshes, videos, ..
- most likely for prods done with Notch, Unreal Engine but could still be anything
And for all categories: "tool assisted, hand-coded, everything goes".
Just thinking out loud, of course but it *could* work.
Some demos may be "coder-pr0n" (e.g. literally comparing who has the biggest (number of) balls, or the tinyiest executable) but there's so much more to a great demo than just code.
The tool situation is not unlike in music, i.e. the "democratization" when big studios could suddenly be replaced by affordable or even free synth / fx plugins running "in the box".
That being said, lumping together ~1GB 3rd-party, professional (game-)engine demos together with e.g. 1MB homemade ones in the same compo just does not make sense, hence the size-category suggestions (not unlike the weight classes in a boxing match).
1MB Classic
- not enough space for prerendered music but plenty for synths + (some) samples
- not enough space for prerendered animations but plenty for procedural graphics generators + (some) assets, or lores pixel graphics
- approximately the size of a disk (somewhere between Amiga and PC, and it's a power-of-two, yay)
- accessible for beginners but still a challenge for the pros
64MB High-End
- enough space for high-quality streaming music, models and textures
- most demos already fit into this category / class
1GB (unlimited?) AAA
- show off your editing skills
- "infinite" freedom, 4k graphics, hires meshes, videos, ..
- most likely for prods done with Notch, Unreal Engine but could still be anything
And for all categories: "tool assisted, hand-coded, everything goes".
Just thinking out loud, of course but it *could* work.
We can all say this was a very useful convo can’t we?
no tool will make a demo for you (except maybe färjanmaker), all those tools involve some amount of code in some form to achieve an actual demo.
if your standards for "real demos" are "coder must have memorized the windows api for opening a window and creating an opengl context" then i don't honestly think those standards are needed in the scene.
but on the other hand if your standards are "coder should make some personal creative application of the resources and tools provided by their hardware" then that is also true for demos made with notch, cables, and other such tools.
if your standards for "real demos" are "coder must have memorized the windows api for opening a window and creating an opengl context" then i don't honestly think those standards are needed in the scene.
but on the other hand if your standards are "coder should make some personal creative application of the resources and tools provided by their hardware" then that is also true for demos made with notch, cables, and other such tools.
Maybe we should take one from the ai-bro playbook:
You aren’t allowed to criticize demotools like cables or notch unless you’ve used them for at least 3 months on a daily basis and even after that your critique must be limited only to the technical merits of the various demotools.
Also talk of the ethics and societal impact of demotools is strictly out of the question. Who cares if some tools used for making demos are owned by huge corporations, and who cares if demotools allow someone who isn’t a programmer wizard to make a demo? Why are you gatekeeping creativity? Are you a luddite? A commie?
You aren’t allowed to criticize demotools like cables or notch unless you’ve used them for at least 3 months on a daily basis and even after that your critique must be limited only to the technical merits of the various demotools.
Also talk of the ethics and societal impact of demotools is strictly out of the question. Who cares if some tools used for making demos are owned by huge corporations, and who cares if demotools allow someone who isn’t a programmer wizard to make a demo? Why are you gatekeeping creativity? Are you a luddite? A commie?
it would kindof help if more people here knew more about these tools - what you get "for free" and what you don't. it's this understanding and pushing of limits which (supposedly) runs through the demoscene for the last 40 years. what's hard on the platform and where limits are pushed, what's standard and what's trivial, it's different on every platform we deal with right?
and if a demo looks like a regurgitated notch sample, UE template, shadertoy shader.. by all means - please - call it out and thumb it down.
and if a demo looks like a regurgitated notch sample, UE template, shadertoy shader.. by all means - please - call it out and thumb it down.
But that would take actual effort and it's easier to just post in the same threads over and over and over.
Comrades, fellow luddites. As stated earlier, a bit of your whataboutism shall be in order. I'd call "Microsoft Windows" and "Apple macOS" the biggest and worst of all demotools, driven by billionaires in the board of directors since decades. How can you utter noble words like "ethics" and "societal impact" as long as this Notch does not allow your fellow comrades to run your fine pieces of art on computers which are fine by anti-capitalist standards?
deja-vu!
@bifat: That's actually an interesting thought. I'm literally looking at Linux notebooks right now...
But I'm with uncle-x: Whatever helps people to make a release and express their (not the AI's!) creativity I'm fine with that. I think you can always see how much they invested.
But I'm with uncle-x: Whatever helps people to make a release and express their (not the AI's!) creativity I'm fine with that. I think you can always see how much they invested.
Democompos historically were about "pulling off technical feats, one-upping each other".
Nowadays scene has become "let anyone create, no matter the skills, everyone creating anything is a hero".
Writing some glsl or noodling together some nodes is not coding. You don't care - fine. But for me the line is drawn once we also don't care about pulling of technical feats anymore.
Would "Second Reality" still be nice if it was an animation done with Autodesk Animator or DPaint back in the days? Probably yes.
Would it have the same wow factor, influence and cultural meaning? No.
problem is: I guess most of the current sceners (including myself) aren't able to judge that anymore: Is it just rehashing some example? Does it have cool custom tech?
If you need to use demotools, please have enough balls to hack and abuse the shit out of these things to push technical limits. Preferably by hacking some C++ (or hipster language of your choice) into it.
But as it stands I have the feeling we just are seeing some designers playing around with tools and maybe writing the odd shader here and there.
At least that's the impression I get - if this is not the case then I think we have a major problem there: Seems you are not being able to get across how awesome your custom tech contribution is..
Nowadays scene has become "let anyone create, no matter the skills, everyone creating anything is a hero".
Writing some glsl or noodling together some nodes is not coding. You don't care - fine. But for me the line is drawn once we also don't care about pulling of technical feats anymore.
Would "Second Reality" still be nice if it was an animation done with Autodesk Animator or DPaint back in the days? Probably yes.
Would it have the same wow factor, influence and cultural meaning? No.
Quote:
and if a demo looks like a regurgitated notch sample, UE template, shadertoy shader.. by all means - please - call it out and thumb it down.
problem is: I guess most of the current sceners (including myself) aren't able to judge that anymore: Is it just rehashing some example? Does it have cool custom tech?
If you need to use demotools, please have enough balls to hack and abuse the shit out of these things to push technical limits. Preferably by hacking some C++ (or hipster language of your choice) into it.
But as it stands I have the feeling we just are seeing some designers playing around with tools and maybe writing the odd shader here and there.
At least that's the impression I get - if this is not the case then I think we have a major problem there: Seems you are not being able to get across how awesome your custom tech contribution is..
Quote:
please have enough balls
Also: Why not both. There's enough space in the scene for artists/designers exploring realtime rendering with "some nodes" _and_ whiz kid rockstar programmers in their 50s who pull off impossible technical feats that look like ass. And everyone in between. :)
besides i much much much rather watch a cool designer-centric demo with cool looking visuals than a dorky c64 techdemo that renders one shadebob more than apparently possible. probably well done, but who cares?!
Perhaps the designer stuff could be placed in the entrance area as some kind of exhibition, so the audiences don't get annoyed too much from each other. This could also attract new audiences which have had no exposure to demoscene so far. Or run the demomaker material in Wild where it belongs IMO...
Or we put the oldschool/technical stuff with original hardware and CRTs on some tables at the back of the hall where interested people have all the time in the world to appreciate it, and we leave the big screen and good PA to people who can actually produce good stuff for those, shall we?
(two can play this game)
(nobody should)
(nobody should)
Why not have both - as you already suggested. If the compos are separated in technical and designer, the other fraction can go outside when the annoying stuff is running...
Quote:
Democompos historically were about "pulling off technical feats, one-upping each other".
No, they weren’t. Sure that was a part of it (and still is), but it was never the main attraction except for a minority of coders.
Also: KB & Maali win.
Or we do the simplest thing:
Step 1: If something annoys you, don't watch it (or just play with your phone for five minutes).
Step 2: After that, don't complain online that something was not to your taste and that inevitably means the scene is dying or kids nowadays aren't hardcore enough or whatever.
(Step 2b: Instead, try to lift up the stuff/people you _do_ like without putting down anyone else)
Step 1: If something annoys you, don't watch it (or just play with your phone for five minutes).
Step 2: After that, don't complain online that something was not to your taste and that inevitably means the scene is dying or kids nowadays aren't hardcore enough or whatever.
(Step 2b: Instead, try to lift up the stuff/people you _do_ like without putting down anyone else)