Usage of other peoples tools
category: general [glöplog]
I was just wondering what people think about the usage of other peoples/groups tools. Personally, I use my own tool because I feel that the production is more "mine" when all the stuff used to create it is written by me. I think it's good that some groups release their tool though, so that other people may learn from them, and so that non-coders can create a good production.
Oh, and I actually planned on posting this before the release of .werkkzeug1 (no, really! ;), so I'm not refering to a particular tool.
Oh, and I actually planned on posting this before the release of .werkkzeug1 (no, really! ;), so I'm not refering to a particular tool.
As much fun as toying around with werkkzeug1 will probably be, I'm going to release only stuff made with my own tools and code. What's the point of doing otherwise?
(I don't mind it people use other people's tools, however. As long as I enjoy the result. And how many of us have coded our own music players anyway?)
(I don't mind it people use other people's tools, however. As long as I enjoy the result. And how many of us have coded our own music players anyway?)
Do you use photoshop?
Do you use Maya?
Do you use 3DSMax?
Do you use NASM?
Do you use gcc/VC++/BCB?
Do you use emacs/vi/VS.NET?
Ultimately you use someone else's tool to help you get your creative vision realized.
As long as the vision is distinctive, memorable, and/or pleasurable, noone will care what tool you used to make it.
Do you use Maya?
Do you use 3DSMax?
Do you use NASM?
Do you use gcc/VC++/BCB?
Do you use emacs/vi/VS.NET?
Ultimately you use someone else's tool to help you get your creative vision realized.
As long as the vision is distinctive, memorable, and/or pleasurable, noone will care what tool you used to make it.
http://conspiracy.intro.hu/temp/toolcollection.JPG
;)))))
Btw I released an older addict version after breakpoint to show our solution, maybe someone could make good use of some ideas.
And to anwser the original question: I prefer using my own tools.
;)))))
Btw I released an older addict version after breakpoint to show our solution, maybe someone could make good use of some ideas.
And to anwser the original question: I prefer using my own tools.
Quote:
As long as the vision is distinctive, memorable, and/or pleasurable, noone will care what tool you used to make it.
Sir, I'll drink to that!
the difference between commercial soft and demo tools is that the 1st one was simply meant for the masses and THAT was the idea/purpose of makin it.situation when a demogroup is makin its own tool system,uses it and after some time - release it for the public,is totally different.using it its like eating whats left on the table.nothing wrong with playin with it,gettin some ideas etc,releasin a prod which base on it - hell no. it simply kills the competition spirit in the demoscene.
my point of view.
my point of view.
Basically I agree with what mrwb and legalize pointed out.
The important points about a product are:
1 How much fun did you have making it?
2 How much satisfaction did you feel when you finished and presented it?
3 How much pleasures do others have watching it?
For all points tools help a lot since you have more time concentrating on what you really want and do not have to spend time on writing code for lots of little annoying things... time you can spend on creating a good design.
Since most people probably get more satisfaction if what they created is to a greater extend really theirs (I have to slightly disagree with legalize here), tools can reduce the fun, but you always have the choice of NOT using it, so I do not see how tools could harm fulfilling point one or two. And I am sorry for those that think tools could harm point three...
All in all the scene can only benefit from this release. A better potential for good releases will result in more good releases.
And those that can write their own tools, will still do it, because they can!
The important points about a product are:
1 How much fun did you have making it?
2 How much satisfaction did you feel when you finished and presented it?
3 How much pleasures do others have watching it?
For all points tools help a lot since you have more time concentrating on what you really want and do not have to spend time on writing code for lots of little annoying things... time you can spend on creating a good design.
Since most people probably get more satisfaction if what they created is to a greater extend really theirs (I have to slightly disagree with legalize here), tools can reduce the fun, but you always have the choice of NOT using it, so I do not see how tools could harm fulfilling point one or two. And I am sorry for those that think tools could harm point three...
All in all the scene can only benefit from this release. A better potential for good releases will result in more good releases.
And those that can write their own tools, will still do it, because they can!
boyc: i like this sütürÿ-thingie, it has a fancy international look and feel!
actually i dislike tools, but i guess it's the only way to make a designer/graphician work optimal.
in some cases i find it nice when people use other peoples tools, like demopaja, and in other cases i don't. there's no fun watching a 3d-flyby demo synchronized with demopaja, but on the otherhand a demo using customized plugins, filters, effects, whatever is refreshing :-)
actually i dislike tools, but i guess it's the only way to make a designer/graphician work optimal.
in some cases i find it nice when people use other peoples tools, like demopaja, and in other cases i don't. there's no fun watching a 3d-flyby demo synchronized with demopaja, but on the otherhand a demo using customized plugins, filters, effects, whatever is refreshing :-)
I would if there would be any tool i would love to use :D
If you can, write your own tool, otherwise use anyone's but _credit it_ ! Not in the last row of the readme but in the demo ! I don't know how people feels, but I see different to a selmaded demo and don't like if anybody use moppi's tool for example... Really not a hard thing to do an acceptable engine/tool nowadays. I don't talk about an extremly high level engine but something what can represent a great idea or design... But this is only my opinion ... poor abcug :)
I think it's excellent! I will certainly be using Werkkzeug in my spare time. Fun!
i think that releasing stuff made in other people's demo tools will only kill the spirit of competition off if people start releasing the current versions of their tools. The only way stuff made with an older tool will compete is if it's either a work of genius or the competition sucks.. and i think that's fair either way :)
But yeah... stuff should surely be credited... same with ripped tunes btw ;)
But yeah... stuff should surely be credited... same with ripped tunes btw ;)
however it could be possible to create something that looks cool, even though it's technically backward, with older versions of such tools.
which is, naturally, a good thing.
which is, naturally, a good thing.
*gäsp*
YAY!
Bad news for coders or maybe inspiration to do something NEW (something that can't be done in these demo tools).
Great news for designers! Finally they can design demos themselves without relying on coders.
Great news for musicians. More demos = more need for music.
Great news for the scene. Maybe now we'll have fewer stale periods and more non-party releases.
Great news for Chaos. His legend will continue long after he has quit scening.
Bad news for me. I can't figure out these new demo tools. :( But I swear to God I will go crazy trying!
Bad news for coders or maybe inspiration to do something NEW (something that can't be done in these demo tools).
Great news for designers! Finally they can design demos themselves without relying on coders.
Great news for musicians. More demos = more need for music.
Great news for the scene. Maybe now we'll have fewer stale periods and more non-party releases.
Great news for Chaos. His legend will continue long after he has quit scening.
Bad news for me. I can't figure out these new demo tools. :( But I swear to God I will go crazy trying!
The bar will go up after these releases...
There are a lot of groups who have the artistic talent but no decent engine/tool.
Now they can make oblitirating 3d and cool designs...
Or offcourse this tool will be used for crappy 3d shit :P
There are a lot of groups who have the artistic talent but no decent engine/tool.
Now they can make oblitirating 3d and cool designs...
Or offcourse this tool will be used for crappy 3d shit :P
I think this is a good idea. It should make the bloody graphicians stop whining... Uhuuhh.. mr coder.. do this.. make "Diana Ross sit on the back of a dinosaur and ride into the sunset effect".. that should be easy-.. now you can say.. do it with chaos' tool yourself!
as long as you will CREDIT that you used a tool fron another group, it's ok for me
I suppose this thread highlights two different views of demos.
One view looks at a demo as a demonstration of some technical ability and viewed purely on the merit of the technical ability alone. This tends to be the view of a coder. Personally, I feel that this is the realm of the 256b, 4K, 16K, etc., demos. Its hard to appreciate a 256b demo unless you know its 256 bytes.
Another view looks at a demo as a demonstration of creative vision. This tends to be the view of a graphic artist or musician or designer.
Now that .werkkzeug1 has been released, I suppose there will be more 64K demos that have to be judged on the creative vision and not the technical merits. This is already the case for demos made with the moppi tools or demos made with Flash or other authoring technologies. There's nothing wrong with this and its not "against the scene tradition", it just means that you have to work more on your creative vision than just slapping some effects together.
This is just a natural evolution of the scene. In motion pictures, people early on were fascinated just by the idea of depicting movement and would pay money just to watch the movement alone. As time evolved, the novelty of the movement wore off and film evolved to the point where they had to tell stories. Early talkies also had the novelty of sound, but soon evolved to where you had to get beyond the novelty and tell a story in a compelling way.
The release of .werkkzeug1 is just another point in the evolution of the scene where the novelty of a 64K demo is worn down just a little bit more and the audience will now expect more from the designer to provide a consistent and compelling creative vision beyond the technical packaging.
One view looks at a demo as a demonstration of some technical ability and viewed purely on the merit of the technical ability alone. This tends to be the view of a coder. Personally, I feel that this is the realm of the 256b, 4K, 16K, etc., demos. Its hard to appreciate a 256b demo unless you know its 256 bytes.
Another view looks at a demo as a demonstration of creative vision. This tends to be the view of a graphic artist or musician or designer.
Now that .werkkzeug1 has been released, I suppose there will be more 64K demos that have to be judged on the creative vision and not the technical merits. This is already the case for demos made with the moppi tools or demos made with Flash or other authoring technologies. There's nothing wrong with this and its not "against the scene tradition", it just means that you have to work more on your creative vision than just slapping some effects together.
This is just a natural evolution of the scene. In motion pictures, people early on were fascinated just by the idea of depicting movement and would pay money just to watch the movement alone. As time evolved, the novelty of the movement wore off and film evolved to the point where they had to tell stories. Early talkies also had the novelty of sound, but soon evolved to where you had to get beyond the novelty and tell a story in a compelling way.
The release of .werkkzeug1 is just another point in the evolution of the scene where the novelty of a 64K demo is worn down just a little bit more and the audience will now expect more from the designer to provide a consistent and compelling creative vision beyond the technical packaging.
AFAIK (haven't really checked in depth), werkkzeug1 doesn't come with the player code/tool, so it's kinda useless for making anything else than videos.
Forgive me if i'm wrong on this, should really check before posting :-D
Forgive me if i'm wrong on this, should really check before posting :-D
Now that it's more acceptable to use these tools, how about you artists and musicians start working on some slideshows and musicdisks of your own!!!!
Get your work released and promote yourself! There are so many damn good artists and musicians wasting their work on the web, but now let the scene see it in the style of a offline release with some presentation.
Anyone out there got a diskmag engine to spare?
Get your work released and promote yourself! There are so many damn good artists and musicians wasting their work on the web, but now let the scene see it in the style of a offline release with some presentation.
Anyone out there got a diskmag engine to spare?
Oh, it exports directly, or so it seems... forgive me then :)
I mostly agree with legalize's post, except that i don't think people will be able to do farbrausch's like 64k intros with that werkkzeug tool (mainly due to the absence of the softsynth and the presence of embedded support for other music formats) but only demos (that's already good).
As for the credits due to these tools, unless ones modify the runtimes and remove/modify the setup dialogs (and the final files generated by werkkzeug contain a very farbrausch's specific pe structure), i think it will be quite obvious.
And if some people start creating bad shit with such engines (and that may happend) the result could easily be compared/judged to what's already been done with the same tools.
As for the credits due to these tools, unless ones modify the runtimes and remove/modify the setup dialogs (and the final files generated by werkkzeug contain a very farbrausch's specific pe structure), i think it will be quite obvious.
And if some people start creating bad shit with such engines (and that may happend) the result could easily be compared/judged to what's already been done with the same tools.
shane: panorama (hugi/savage etc.) is freely available.
Actually, it seems that some people tend to overrate the release of werkkzeug1 a fair bit. I predict that not many people will use it for real. First of all, it's NOT an easy-to-use, ergonomic-to-the-fullest killer application that will instantly convert all demosceners (or 'demo fans') to wz users. It's not intuitive, it's not expandable (in contrast to demopaja), fixes and updates might come, but I wouldn't count on that. It's surely powerful enough and neat for a free-be, but it's not the end of the road when it comes to demo-tools.
Secondly, releases made with wz will be stigmatized, way more than demopaja demos, like it or not. Alone for that reason most will refrain from seriously using it.
Still, I agree that the shift from tech-geeks-only code fetishism to more-elaborated-design that can be enjoyed by a mainstream level audience without whatsoever background is still happening and eventually lead to a scene that is quite different to what we know today. It already IS quite different to what it was five years ago.
Secondly, releases made with wz will be stigmatized, way more than demopaja demos, like it or not. Alone for that reason most will refrain from seriously using it.
Still, I agree that the shift from tech-geeks-only code fetishism to more-elaborated-design that can be enjoyed by a mainstream level audience without whatsoever background is still happening and eventually lead to a scene that is quite different to what we know today. It already IS quite different to what it was five years ago.
