Old dog, new tricks?
category: general [glöplog]
Old dog, new tricks?
Warning, possibly controversial material ahead.
First, a bit about me:
I'm an 18 year old self proclaimed nerd who's been interested in the scene for the better part of a year.
Okay, now that you know where this is coming from, the words:
To use a slightly obscure analogy, let's call the demoscene a dog. It's been around for a long time, since the mid-'80s or so, and is now an old dog. Let's travel back in time a bit...
When the scene-dog was a puppy, it was small, but enthusiastic. Always ready to play and have some fun. Sometimes it did some things that not everyone approved of (cracking, etc., let's not get on that topic), but the dog, for the most part, ignored them. Every once in a while it was punished, but very often it got away with whatever it wanted.
As the dog got older, it partially grew out of some of its old habits, and really started to get big. By this time (late-'80s), the scene-dog was mature enough to start learning some tricks. There weren't any other dogs arount to play with, but being very clever and very intelligent, the dog taught itself some astounding tricks. It learned how to make digitized sound without sound hardware, make beautiful 3D graphics and effects without video hardware, and it became very efficient and very good at these tricks. Most, if not all of these tricks were done for self satisfaction, as nobody really paid any attention to the dog. Some of the tricks were considered impossible, but the scene-dog didn't know that. So it did them anyway.
By the mid-'90s, the scene-dog was in its prime. It was big, strong, and knew *all* the tricks. It thought a lot of itself, and rightly so. However, by this time, some other dogs had moved into the neighborhood. These other dogs had owners, money, and lawyers, and they all wanted some of what the scene-dog had. They were corporate-game-dogs. They copied the scene-dog's tricks, and performed them for money. But the scene-dog kept ignoring them.
When the late-'90s rolled around, all of the scene-dog's tricks had been stolen, and it was left with close to nothing. It's wild feeding grounds were being turned into suburbs, and it had almost been hit by several speeding vehicles on the "information superhighway™" (pardon the use of the term). With its food cut short and habitat taken over by companies and wall-eyed AOLers, the scene-dog grew old and frail, and began to shrink. Carefully and discreetly, it bought a small section of territory with some money it had scraped together over the years, and fenced it off.
Whiling away the time in its cozy home, the scene-dog sat and pondered. Every once in a while it would teach itself a new trick, just for old times' sake - but it was never really happy, because it now knew that whatever it did was just going to be imitated, and someone else was going to try to make money off of it. Every once in a while, it would accomplish something noteworthy, but it was mostly just a better presentation of an old trick.
Heading into the 21st century, the future of the scene-dog was looking bleak. Being a dog of action, it could no longer just stand by and watch its life fall apart. It held some reserved feelings that this really was the end, but pushed them aside. "Something must be done! There has to be new tricks to learn out there somewhere..." With this new attitude, the scene-dog put a gate in its fence (but didn't hire any bellhops). If people were smart enough to find their own way in and learn "the way" about, then they were "worthy". The scene-dog began to grow once again, and experienced renewed vigor.
Of course, it's not as big or as strong as it once was, but it's getting there. The pervading feeling is a sense of loss, but not without hope. Hope for the past? In a way. It's more of a hope for the past in the future, where the scene will learn new tricks, and things will be as they used to. It will be a long uphill climb, and everyone knows it. How to get there, nobody really knows. It's a job of teaching an old dog new tricks, tricks that have never before been seen. Sure, now there's dedicated sound and graphics hardware, but there has to be some way to surpass all that. Doesn't there?
What do you think? Does the "impossible feat" still exist? Can the scene learn new tricks? Can the scene even survive in today's world, or is it a thing of the past, like the phonograph? Where are we headed?
Please excuse any errors, and/or feel free to correct them, a lot of this wasn't exactly thoroughly researched. So sue me. No flames either, please. If you don't like it, say why.
-LaserBeams- Michigan, USA
Warning, possibly controversial material ahead.
First, a bit about me:
I'm an 18 year old self proclaimed nerd who's been interested in the scene for the better part of a year.
Okay, now that you know where this is coming from, the words:
To use a slightly obscure analogy, let's call the demoscene a dog. It's been around for a long time, since the mid-'80s or so, and is now an old dog. Let's travel back in time a bit...
When the scene-dog was a puppy, it was small, but enthusiastic. Always ready to play and have some fun. Sometimes it did some things that not everyone approved of (cracking, etc., let's not get on that topic), but the dog, for the most part, ignored them. Every once in a while it was punished, but very often it got away with whatever it wanted.
As the dog got older, it partially grew out of some of its old habits, and really started to get big. By this time (late-'80s), the scene-dog was mature enough to start learning some tricks. There weren't any other dogs arount to play with, but being very clever and very intelligent, the dog taught itself some astounding tricks. It learned how to make digitized sound without sound hardware, make beautiful 3D graphics and effects without video hardware, and it became very efficient and very good at these tricks. Most, if not all of these tricks were done for self satisfaction, as nobody really paid any attention to the dog. Some of the tricks were considered impossible, but the scene-dog didn't know that. So it did them anyway.
By the mid-'90s, the scene-dog was in its prime. It was big, strong, and knew *all* the tricks. It thought a lot of itself, and rightly so. However, by this time, some other dogs had moved into the neighborhood. These other dogs had owners, money, and lawyers, and they all wanted some of what the scene-dog had. They were corporate-game-dogs. They copied the scene-dog's tricks, and performed them for money. But the scene-dog kept ignoring them.
When the late-'90s rolled around, all of the scene-dog's tricks had been stolen, and it was left with close to nothing. It's wild feeding grounds were being turned into suburbs, and it had almost been hit by several speeding vehicles on the "information superhighway™" (pardon the use of the term). With its food cut short and habitat taken over by companies and wall-eyed AOLers, the scene-dog grew old and frail, and began to shrink. Carefully and discreetly, it bought a small section of territory with some money it had scraped together over the years, and fenced it off.
Whiling away the time in its cozy home, the scene-dog sat and pondered. Every once in a while it would teach itself a new trick, just for old times' sake - but it was never really happy, because it now knew that whatever it did was just going to be imitated, and someone else was going to try to make money off of it. Every once in a while, it would accomplish something noteworthy, but it was mostly just a better presentation of an old trick.
Heading into the 21st century, the future of the scene-dog was looking bleak. Being a dog of action, it could no longer just stand by and watch its life fall apart. It held some reserved feelings that this really was the end, but pushed them aside. "Something must be done! There has to be new tricks to learn out there somewhere..." With this new attitude, the scene-dog put a gate in its fence (but didn't hire any bellhops). If people were smart enough to find their own way in and learn "the way" about, then they were "worthy". The scene-dog began to grow once again, and experienced renewed vigor.
Of course, it's not as big or as strong as it once was, but it's getting there. The pervading feeling is a sense of loss, but not without hope. Hope for the past? In a way. It's more of a hope for the past in the future, where the scene will learn new tricks, and things will be as they used to. It will be a long uphill climb, and everyone knows it. How to get there, nobody really knows. It's a job of teaching an old dog new tricks, tricks that have never before been seen. Sure, now there's dedicated sound and graphics hardware, but there has to be some way to surpass all that. Doesn't there?
What do you think? Does the "impossible feat" still exist? Can the scene learn new tricks? Can the scene even survive in today's world, or is it a thing of the past, like the phonograph? Where are we headed?
Please excuse any errors, and/or feel free to correct them, a lot of this wasn't exactly thoroughly researched. So sue me. No flames either, please. If you don't like it, say why.
-LaserBeams- Michigan, USA
Just as a start... (I'm not necessarily one to talk, given that I have no productions.. but no one else has replied yet :))
I consider realtime raytracing to be a pretty cool trick that you don't find outside of the demo scene.. and it remains impressive.
For instance, there's of course:
Heaven 7 by Exceed
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=5
and then there's:
Fresnel 2 by Kolor
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=5
.. which seems to do some realtime CSG of sorts (the rendering allows solids to be subtracted from other solids).
I do feel some of what you are saying however. I'm not going to argue about how some effects became commercial.. but the PC scene has had to change ever since a couple of changes in hardware. Since DirectX, the hardware vendors began abandoning hardware-level standards to become reliant on drivers.. and then of course 3D acceleration became the norm. To me, there was a particularly bad time when many people were worrying about whether or not to switch to Win9x, and having to code through DirectX (or through anyone's API for that matter).. and worrying about the issue of 3D acceleration, where you typically must code through OpenGL or D3D (and at first, even Glide :)).
Luckily, people held on and eventually pulled through.. and it seems now that the focus has moved towards art, message, uniqueness, etc.. and is generally less about pushing the hardware to the limit and/or proving that you are able to write the large amounts of asm code that were required just to get something half decent up and running at all... but there are still people doing this sort of thing occasionally, and that's cool :)
So.. I don't really have anything in particular to say.. but I don't think things are in too bad shape, even code-wise.
Then of course there's gfx, music, and now wild's, which are all cool.. and generally evolving over time, while never quite losing what's been done before.
I consider realtime raytracing to be a pretty cool trick that you don't find outside of the demo scene.. and it remains impressive.
For instance, there's of course:
Heaven 7 by Exceed
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=5
and then there's:
Fresnel 2 by Kolor
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=5
.. which seems to do some realtime CSG of sorts (the rendering allows solids to be subtracted from other solids).
I do feel some of what you are saying however. I'm not going to argue about how some effects became commercial.. but the PC scene has had to change ever since a couple of changes in hardware. Since DirectX, the hardware vendors began abandoning hardware-level standards to become reliant on drivers.. and then of course 3D acceleration became the norm. To me, there was a particularly bad time when many people were worrying about whether or not to switch to Win9x, and having to code through DirectX (or through anyone's API for that matter).. and worrying about the issue of 3D acceleration, where you typically must code through OpenGL or D3D (and at first, even Glide :)).
Luckily, people held on and eventually pulled through.. and it seems now that the focus has moved towards art, message, uniqueness, etc.. and is generally less about pushing the hardware to the limit and/or proving that you are able to write the large amounts of asm code that were required just to get something half decent up and running at all... but there are still people doing this sort of thing occasionally, and that's cool :)
So.. I don't really have anything in particular to say.. but I don't think things are in too bad shape, even code-wise.
Then of course there's gfx, music, and now wild's, which are all cool.. and generally evolving over time, while never quite losing what's been done before.
whoops
fresnel 2 by kolor is:
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=1324
fresnel 2 by kolor is:
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=1324
aye, another whining about the good old days. i honestly doubt the good old days were that much better. the tricks that were so amazing back then are technicaly incredible simple compared to any decent 3d engine seen in nowadays demos. you need a lot more algorithmic and mathematical knowledge nowadays for even the simplest of demos than you needed to figure a few cute tricks back then. (note also: the average age of a scenere has increased a lot!)
i actually believe the scene is in a much better state now then it was back then, and all that old-skool mourning is mostly for the people who can not do new stuff.
the scene has matured. while code has become much more difficult it at the same time has become less of a focus of attention, especially because of its complexity. that's bad for the coders (including me, i was mourning about that in some other post - and btw thnx for the fresnel2 link, yes it does full csg) but great for the scene in general. code is basically boring, nerdy stuff. go fuck a penguin i could say.:) going towards a more artistic scene means going to a more interesting scene. i only liked the old scene days because i was a young coder, and amazed about how one codes, how one can code, how to make stuff fast. the design of the early days was, face it, ridiculous bad. starting from the mid 90s we start to get some real masterpieces, and none of those demos i really love takes its strength from code.
i actually believe the scene is in a much better state now then it was back then, and all that old-skool mourning is mostly for the people who can not do new stuff.
the scene has matured. while code has become much more difficult it at the same time has become less of a focus of attention, especially because of its complexity. that's bad for the coders (including me, i was mourning about that in some other post - and btw thnx for the fresnel2 link, yes it does full csg) but great for the scene in general. code is basically boring, nerdy stuff. go fuck a penguin i could say.:) going towards a more artistic scene means going to a more interesting scene. i only liked the old scene days because i was a young coder, and amazed about how one codes, how one can code, how to make stuff fast. the design of the early days was, face it, ridiculous bad. starting from the mid 90s we start to get some real masterpieces, and none of those demos i really love takes its strength from code.
i agree with shiva!
come on... what have you learnt from demos pushing the limits of hardware ?
i learnt that good code is the one who gives life to design, nothing more
come on... what have you learnt from demos pushing the limits of hardware ?
i learnt that good code is the one who gives life to design, nothing more
_I believe there is still something inherent in the fibre of the scene worth saving, and that the fortunes of the entire scene may well ride on the ability of young sceners to face the responsibilities of an oldskool-scene gone mad!
(phil ochs)
Slightly altered for this particular situation by your beloved:
_bizk_/*Alienprophets/damage
(phil ochs)
Slightly altered for this particular situation by your beloved:
_bizk_/*Alienprophets/damage
If I would belive that there is nothing more out there to be discovered I would leave the scene. But actually I think there still is a LOT to find.
Hardware accel and APIs need some rethinking from the "old style of democoding", but on the other hand - It took away the focus from "building own engines that work on most pcs" to "actually DO weird things with that given one".
If you want to put it this way: OGL and DX are limitations and they're all the same for everybody - let's pull out the most of it. I don't see any evil in this..
Hardware accel and APIs need some rethinking from the "old style of democoding", but on the other hand - It took away the focus from "building own engines that work on most pcs" to "actually DO weird things with that given one".
If you want to put it this way: OGL and DX are limitations and they're all the same for everybody - let's pull out the most of it. I don't see any evil in this..
The scene was always Dead..
The old dog is not so old. I still have to see a full scene anti-aliased, multi-effect, choreographed, meaningfull demo with dynamic model creation, AI, network multi-user interaction, clustered demo. Until the perfect demo has been created, there is no old dog.
Yey! And because Perfection means to be far away from it, I think there will be no old dog till the end of the world :)
"I still have to see a full scene anti-aliased, multi-effect, choreographed, meaningfull demo with dynamic model creation, AI, network multi-user interaction, clustered demo."
1) Full-scene anti-aliased: Just activate the checkbox in your display control panel and enjoy.
2) Multi-effect: Well. Just about any demo.
3) Choreographed: Uh.
4) Meaningfull: Tons of demos. I thought 'De Profundis' was pretty meaningful for instance.
5) Dynamic model creation: In case you're referring to 'Procedural' instead of 'Dynamic' I refer you to many 64k intros. If you were not then I have no clue as to what you mean.
6) AI: Why?
7) Network multi-user interaction: There's no point in interactivity in a demo.
8) Clustered: Why?
Anyway.
1) Full-scene anti-aliased: Just activate the checkbox in your display control panel and enjoy.
2) Multi-effect: Well. Just about any demo.
3) Choreographed: Uh.
4) Meaningfull: Tons of demos. I thought 'De Profundis' was pretty meaningful for instance.
5) Dynamic model creation: In case you're referring to 'Procedural' instead of 'Dynamic' I refer you to many 64k intros. If you were not then I have no clue as to what you mean.
6) AI: Why?
7) Network multi-user interaction: There's no point in interactivity in a demo.
8) Clustered: Why?
Anyway.
To cover a part of the story that noone commented on, regadning the scene and the game companies, I'll use a sentence from the movie Colombus 1492:
"Always remember: I did it. You didn't"
Money people (yes, those filthy bastards with suits and ties) can only go so far. Enthousiasts (like us) are the ones that have the insentive and knowledge to do new and impressive stuff. We are the creators, money people are just recycling, packaging and selling stuff. And I personally am happy with that.
"Always remember: I did it. You didn't"
Money people (yes, those filthy bastards with suits and ties) can only go so far. Enthousiasts (like us) are the ones that have the insentive and knowledge to do new and impressive stuff. We are the creators, money people are just recycling, packaging and selling stuff. And I personally am happy with that.
Yes! If nobody has done it before, then me(you) should do it! :)
I not me :-P
Ideas are way more powerful than 3dscenes, we dont allow enemies to make 3d scenes,so why should we allow them to have ideas
joseph stalin-
(again, slightly modified for this particular situation by Bizk)
joseph stalin-
(again, slightly modified for this particular situation by Bizk)
"Whenever I climb I am followed by a dog called 'Mega ORA-DYCP'."
- Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
- Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
Interesting responses... I didn't know what to expect as replies to this, but I like what I see. Thanks for clarifying some of my points, and disregarding the pointless ones.
I guess I just wanted to stir up some discussion.
The "impossible trick" is, I think, the clincher.
Any other thoughts?
I guess I just wanted to stir up some discussion.
The "impossible trick" is, I think, the clincher.
Any other thoughts?
MoT: you will probably be a "money people" in a few years... do you really think that you will then suddenly lose your creativity ?
In reply to Optimus:
I have seen bits and peices in many demos, but I have yet to see it all. As for the few additional ideas on the end that you asked "why?", well, why not? A demo that can be run on 2 or more networked computers to increase the effect, and use the network traffic as part of the demo would be creative. Needless to say, this is only one of many ideas that have not been implemented yet, and may never be, so I think there is always a new trick to be done.
I have seen bits and peices in many demos, but I have yet to see it all. As for the few additional ideas on the end that you asked "why?", well, why not? A demo that can be run on 2 or more networked computers to increase the effect, and use the network traffic as part of the demo would be creative. Needless to say, this is only one of many ideas that have not been implemented yet, and may never be, so I think there is always a new trick to be done.
Some people might be interested to know that after Heaven 7 came out, a link was emailed out to everyone in a large development studio (with a comment along the lines of "check out what the kids are doing nowadays") and it got people dreaming of such things. You can take from this what you will.. but one good thing is that there may be more people watching than you realize.
the only thing about the "old" scene i found really impressive was the vibe at party's...ill enver get over TP3 that was just the ultimate scene experiance for me, but that may have more to do with ym crew and the people at the tables around us (big ups you know who you are fellow ambrosia's, supporters etc). there was this "wil new technology" called AGA and people was going bonkers about the options AGA brought with it...well...that was then. The scenspirit WAS very enjoyable, and you know what...i think it still is, its just a matter of a personal "best moment" in ones scene career that makes "hte old days" stand out.
Its like people who come back from the army....after a while they start blabbering about the freindship, fun etc etc..and suddenly forgot they had to crawl thru shit, mud and water in ZERO degrees celcius, freeze their arses off, get sick, sleep bad, smell bad (well the 2 last goes for sceners at a party aswell ;)) ...if you know what im getting at
Its like people who come back from the army....after a while they start blabbering about the freindship, fun etc etc..and suddenly forgot they had to crawl thru shit, mud and water in ZERO degrees celcius, freeze their arses off, get sick, sleep bad, smell bad (well the 2 last goes for sceners at a party aswell ;)) ...if you know what im getting at
I think I ought to go to a party sometime :) Pity I'm here in the US...
Here's how I perceive the difference between the old and new "dogs":
The old dog "touched the metal". This is a "nerd" term for programs that directly interact with the hardware. i.e. "poking" values into raw hardware registers. The new dog never gets near the metal - the bitch (pun intended) is insulated by the OS and its components (such as DirectX or OpenGL). This has ramification:
- The old dog would have to know his shit.
- The new dog can pull shit off he doesn't really understand. i.e. If DirectX supports a feature the new dog just uses it and considers it magic.
I think that the demos that the old dog produces were best appreciated by fellow demo makers who know the hardware; "How the hell did he do that? It looks like an expanded sprite but its resolution is not supported by the hardware". The new dog tends to produce visually impressive stuff but it is less likely to spin the head of their programming piers.
Also the gap between the effects in commercially available products and demo's is smaller. In the old dogs time the effects in the demos eclipsed the effects in commercial software releases. This is less often the case with the new dog ; he is using the same technology, API's and such - he's going about things in the same way but he's only one not many.
In short:
The old dog touches metal.
The new dog uses API's.
The old dog "touched the metal". This is a "nerd" term for programs that directly interact with the hardware. i.e. "poking" values into raw hardware registers. The new dog never gets near the metal - the bitch (pun intended) is insulated by the OS and its components (such as DirectX or OpenGL). This has ramification:
- The old dog would have to know his shit.
- The new dog can pull shit off he doesn't really understand. i.e. If DirectX supports a feature the new dog just uses it and considers it magic.
I think that the demos that the old dog produces were best appreciated by fellow demo makers who know the hardware; "How the hell did he do that? It looks like an expanded sprite but its resolution is not supported by the hardware". The new dog tends to produce visually impressive stuff but it is less likely to spin the head of their programming piers.
Also the gap between the effects in commercially available products and demo's is smaller. In the old dogs time the effects in the demos eclipsed the effects in commercial software releases. This is less often the case with the new dog ; he is using the same technology, API's and such - he's going about things in the same way but he's only one not many.
In short:
The old dog touches metal.
The new dog uses API's.
what make us sceners are the ideas we have, not the coding tricks in demos found before gamecoders, nor the design of the demos.
you can allways find better engines in games. the same applies for design, don't dare to compare demos to contemporary art.
but what've got unique in the scene are ideas we have to make attractive(visually&auditary) such stupid useless non-interactive shows.
and i must say that demos are more and more interesting on that point.
you can allways find better engines in games. the same applies for design, don't dare to compare demos to contemporary art.
but what've got unique in the scene are ideas we have to make attractive(visually&auditary) such stupid useless non-interactive shows.
and i must say that demos are more and more interesting on that point.
lets make something when we feel like it and shut this silly "discussion"
