pouët.net

Baudsurfer information 713 glöps

• general:
• level: user
• personal:
• first name: Christian
• last name: Vincent
• portals:
• demozoo: profile

• demo Oric Zerofx by Defence Force [web]
• Yup !
• rulezadded on the 2014-11-09 23:31:15
• demo Commodore 64 Comaland by Censor Design [web] & Oxyron [web]
• Too strong.
• rulezadded on the 2014-11-01 09:43:11
• 256b MS-Dos Abductee by Red Sector Inc. [web]
• Well, Photon is cool and so is Scoopex.
  Brain Killingly Innovative Lead : I like your style.
• isokadded on the 2014-10-31 19:20:35
• 256b MS-Dos Abductee by Red Sector Inc. [web]
• Dear Photon, here are the unfair/wrongful sub-components in your replies :
  
  1) you state the subjects you bring up should/"would be a topic separate from your prod, and best discussed in the "bbs"", yet you make such statement on this production's comment page and not in a bbs post yourself.
  
  2) you hint (cf. "MIDI sound...are no points for a PC(VM) intro", "...in a range of VMs that you choose", "...instead of "just PC"), at the fact that I or other "Dos sizecode" programmers inherently/deceitfully benefit from a loose definition of "MS-Dos" platform to our own adavantage. It is uncalled for in the sense that I personally have attempted several times during last years to clarify the x86/dos/ntvdm/vm imbroglio (see bbs post http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=9322&page=2 for an example), alas to no avail but always without reading a single contribution on your part on this matter in purposeful thread(s).
  
  3) you pretend to act surprised when I see a "...reason to "address" 3 piggy votes vs. 40 thumbs". I initially indeed adressed indirectly your "too shaky & rough for me" comment, but solely to point out the difference in rendering techniques between raycasting and inherently rougher raymarching in lowres. My remark wasn't intended at you or for you, explictely or implicitely (please see my wording above again), but rather to inform others that would inevitably stumble upon your comment notably of my pondered choice (although initial choice questionable) to fit in more features in the limited size and hence did not necessarily represent either a faulty algorithm implementation nor necessarily bad coding.
  But now that I look into your behaviour in more details, it is a fact that out of the last 13 (http://www.pouet.net/groups.php?which=992&order=release) Red Sector Inc. productions, you rated 1 thumb-up and 2 piggies, systematically spreading negativity through your comments in every one of these 3 cases ("p.s. I hear a high pitched whirr with frequency drops.", "OK, so it's supposed to glitch. 256b with clip (or whatever) fix possible?", "Too shaky & rough for me."), while incidently during that exact same period you also refrained from commenting on any of our top 3 thumbed productions this year (wolf128 w/74 thumbs, Mayan /w 63 thumbs and Orbit /w 51 thumbs). The latter discrepancies, along with your choice of words ("truth", "allegations", "harsh") explain in turn to some extent why I have becomed logically slightly wary of your objectivity regardless the seemingly genuinely innocent fast "fly-by" commenting.
  
  4) you refute the fact that providing sourcecode ought could be taken in account in voting to some extent ("...source available are not points in favor for a PC(VM) intro."). I obviously think differently : it helps other programmers to progress and neophytes to "jump in" the otherwise intimidating demoscene wagon. Must I remind you how you contradictorily value sourcecode in other similar contexts such as when you proudly announced "Amiga democoding site launched" (http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=9933) in the bbs section focusing on the "learning" advantages.
  
  5) you state that Abductee is too slow to be anywhere enjoyable to watch ("When does a sizecoding intro cease being enjoyable? At .1 fps? When a coordinate-step is half a screen?"). Apart from the fact that Youtube and emulators seem to accepted nowadays - having a non-accelerated computer has not thereby withheld me from up-thumbing accelerated prods - it is really exaggerated in the way you formulated your sentence. When you read the associated .nfo you can read "a DOS 256 byte intro tested on xpsp3 ntvdm and DOSBox-0.74" and my first comment on this page states "B)always works on : vmware (proper speed), virtualpc (75% speed) and dosbox(slowest)". It runs easily 40 fps in xp3 ntvdm on a thirteen year-old (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2) non-accelerated laptop that could not run any of the latest games, and I invite you to verify it. But since it was developped for a competition mentionning "real dos", it was also crafted to work at same speed in Win95 MS-Dos (under XP type command.com and launch intro) which by Wikipedia's standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS) is defined as being one of the only 2 "real Dos" amongst other 42 Dos-like clones (including the Dos flavour the organizers thought to be "real Dos" incidently).
  Bottom line is : the only case where Abductee is close to .1 fps (actually frameskip=4 in provided dosbox-O.74.conf - yet another exaggeration of yours) is when ran in DosBox which is known not to be cycle-correct and uncomprehensively slow : it's not even an emulator (the lower 128 characters in cp437 bios font fixed-area ROM memory differs for copyright reasons for example) and its original authors' purpose is old 2D Sierra Leisure Suit Larry games retrogaming. So as someone of rzr1911 stated elsewhere on this site, if you are anywhere serious about sizecoding, get vmware or remain on a 16-bit platform. I assume your "When a coordinate-step is half a screen?" remark also comes from the DosBox version since the associated "frameskip=4" specification has sadly indeed the verified described behaviour.
  
  6) You state Abductee isn't oldschool enough ("...of VMs that you choose to code for instead of "just PC"). Besides the fact that the only "PC" category existing on this site is "MS-Dos 256b" - see point 1) thus making any truly x86 only production meaningless, if you look at the associated sourcecode, you will notice there are absolutely no calls tying Abductee to "Dos" whatsoever : it runs on barebone x86 architecture, meaning these 256 bytes could be injected "as is" in a 512 bytes Master boot record (MBR) common to Windows, Linux and Apple OS X. Furthermore there are no new era opcodes (486+) present, meaning it would also run "as is" in 1989. The 1-byte ocopdes you refer to ("You already get byte-instructions [...] for free") actually date back to the 8080 days introduced in 1974 (where you even born then ?). In the light of this and aforementionned dates ("You already get [...] a screen buffer basically for free"), is Advanced graphics architecture (AGA) where functions such as drawline are also "free" really that more oldschool worthy ? I think not.
• isokadded on the 2014-10-25 13:24:40
• 64b Amiga OCS/ECS Radio Gar Gaj by Scoopex [web]
• I don't understand this, sorry. This is what you can do in 64 bytes.
• isokadded on the 2014-10-25 01:08:58
• 256b MS-Dos Abductee by Red Sector Inc. [web]
• Tigrou : thank you for confirmation and extra information.
  Photon : No I don't think this is the truth. It is solely obviously yours. There are too many errors in your above statement to address them all here : I understand you feel PC sizetros have an unfair advantage over Amiga sizetros.
• isokadded on the 2014-10-25 01:03:33
• 128b procedural graphics MS-Dos revenge by Sensenstahl
• Weird stuff thumb. Because a black and white design airport waiting room with different pixel colors attributed to girls and boys, is bound to be forever poetic.
• rulezadded on the 2014-10-22 07:14:33
• 256b MS-Dos Abductee by Red Sector Inc. [web]
• Also the core rendering technique (ie: engine) for Abductee, Neon Station and Phobia are different : while Abductee uses raymarching (aka volume ray casting), Neon Station and Phobia use standard ray casting. The gained bytes of Abductee using this different technique over an already optimal implementation like Neon Station, and used to add dynamic lighting, ambient sound and gradient textures, also partly explains the smoother camera path of Neon Station and AntDude and Photon's "Choppy" or "Too shaky & rough for me" piggy comments above. If this was not the case (rough vs. smooth, raymarching vs. raycasting) however, than probably no additional features could have been added.
• isokadded on the 2014-10-22 07:06:04
• 256b MS-Dos Abductee by Red Sector Inc. [web]
• Thank you for (mostly) kind words, although I have to say that I am not too comfortable with a minoirity comparing pears with apples and not doing their mouse-clicking homework right.
  
  1)Abductee clearly cannot be compared with Phobia because the latter has no camera path nor 2.2) 2.3) and 2.4) below.
  
  2)Abductee could be compared with Neon Station because the latter has a camera path, although the 3d Lissajous curve scalars as well as the textures are different :
  2.1) Neon Station has smoother camera path than Abductee ;
  2.2) Abductee has sound contrary to Neon Station ;
  2.3) Abductee has dynamic lighting contrary to Neon Station ;
  2.4) Abductee has sourcecode provided contrary to Neon Station.
  
  All three aforementioned prods Abductee 2014 (38 votes), Neon Station 2008 (199 votes) and Phobia 2007 (88 votes) are worthy but comparing them makes little sense to me.
• isokadded on the 2014-10-22 01:51:14
• intro Windows HB, Ton^t-rex! by T-Rex [web] & SandS [web] & 7dUMP
• bad
• sucksadded on the 2014-10-15 16:53:25