pouët.net

Edge of Disgrace for all time Tops?

category: general [glöplog]
[img]http://www.student.dtu.dk/~s072421/eod.png[img]
ARGH
BB Image
@trace
The thing is, rotozoomers are fucking hard on C64, let alone ones as good as in this demo.

Fast, decent rotozoomers are tricky on an unexpanded A500, let alone C64..
added on the 2008-10-29 13:34:37 by xeron xeron
what is the typical resolution of those c64-rotozoomers?
added on the 2008-10-29 13:37:03 by Hyde Hyde
In case you're interested in production informations, technical datas and trivias, but somehow missed the note on disk 0:

http://www.boozedesign.com/pub/eod_note.html
added on the 2008-10-29 13:38:29 by Jailbird Jailbird
@xeron
Yeah, I can see that, otherwise that reaction won't have had any logic.
added on the 2008-10-29 13:39:33 by mrdoob mrdoob
How can it be that the demo starts without the credits here? (VICE emu thingie)
added on the 2008-10-29 13:39:38 by okkie okkie
@hyde: most popular mode is 4x4 FLI mode (thats 80x25).

The rotozoomers used in EoD are in multi-color char-mode (160x200).
Ofcourse a charmatrix is used so 160x200 can't be accomplished (and technically not possible)
added on the 2008-10-29 13:41:23 by scoutski scoutski
4x4 FLI = 80x50 btw
added on the 2008-10-29 13:42:07 by scoutski scoutski
Teletext!
added on the 2008-10-29 13:47:32 by Shifter Shifter
So in fact the Limp Ninja teletext hack from a few years ago can be converted to to the C64!

Weee! :)
added on the 2008-10-29 13:49:21 by scoutski scoutski
scout: thanks. it occurs to me that using charmatrices has some obvious speed benefits, but at the added cost of coder-PAAAIN. at least that's what I learned from reading a crappy vic-tutorial :)

I envy you c64-guys not the pain, but it's easy to respect the effort.
added on the 2008-10-29 13:52:32 by Hyde Hyde
errr, and the point was that it's not obvious how to compare this with similar a500-effects, from a techincal side.
added on the 2008-10-29 13:55:09 by Hyde Hyde
160x100 rotozoomer in a reasonable speed (for c64) iis possible tho :)

http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/?id=8615
added on the 2008-10-29 14:05:48 by Oswald Oswald
Watched the #2 and #3 ranked demos from X, thinking that these feel much more impressive, as it's easier to "get" what's cool. Then I checked disgrace again, and.. well.. I'm starting to see the point.

Still, I wouldn't say it's teh b3st d3m0 3v4.. if it were shorter, it might be =)
added on the 2008-10-29 14:08:25 by sol_hsa sol_hsa
Oh, and btw, for those who say "perfect flow". I think it's way far from that, I got bored visually a lot of times. Even if I understood the technical part of it I don't think I need to see the same effect for 15 seconds. Seems like the people didn't understood ABCdemo.
added on the 2008-10-29 14:19:57 by mrdoob mrdoob
okay trace, you've made your point: you don't like it. and that's okay.
now fuck off.
added on the 2008-10-29 14:23:09 by scoutski scoutski
I didn't say I don't like it. I guess I didn't made my point yet, let me spam you for 10 pages more until you get it.
added on the 2008-10-29 14:27:38 by mrdoob mrdoob
But I agree with trace in that aspect even though I really like the demo.

When they say rotozoomer about this demo, most people mean the various zoomers I think? (without the roto)

There was also one really cool rotozoomer and I liked the fact that it coppied itself numerous times around like it was a brush or something, that one was original and cool (do they just copy chars of the effect buffer or do they move/create unroll codes for the pixels of the new sections?)
added on the 2008-10-29 14:29:28 by Optimus Optimus
Okkie: Boot from image 0, not 1a
added on the 2008-10-29 14:48:02 by break break
Trace: The flow is definitely the best on C64 yet. This is hard to do because of slow floppy drive, and because most normal effects run out of memory before you have even thought about having space for additional transitional effects/gfx. That's why most other C64 trackmos have much longer breaks between effects. No wonder HCL had to use a year just on linking the parts together.

Guess we need to find another storage medium than 5'25'' disks if we want a faster pace, but in my opinion it's perfect in EoD, so this is also a proof of concept that we can keep sticking with the good old 1541.
added on the 2008-10-29 15:01:29 by cruzer cruzer
I've recently been to a wine tasting event. The man who ran the show (almost 30 years in the profession) told us at the beginning that there's no such thing as good and bad wine but only wine which we like or not.

I like EoD a lot because it's well made, its creators have put much effort in it and it pays off. It reminds me of old style Amiga demos like Roots2 and Technological Death. I don't know much about C64 coding but it seems like a hell of skill was needed to code those effects, really impressive.

Comparing different platforms is pointless, even in terms of viewer's impression. The atmosphere at the compo, live participation and being a little (or more ;) boozed also count, don't forget about that. And no, it's not bad. We're sceners anyway, aren't we?
added on the 2008-10-29 15:01:52 by Fei Fei
It still needs 150 thumbs to knock down candytron.
added on the 2008-10-29 20:24:12 by El Topo El Topo
what trace said, and what scoutski didn't get.
added on the 2008-10-29 20:33:46 by skrebbel skrebbel
Maybe that is the problem. Maybe it's hard to judge it as a c64 prod. =)
added on the 2008-10-29 20:55:31 by sol_hsa sol_hsa

login