The demoscene in the 2010s
category: general [glöplog]
Thanks for the great article viznut, it has inspired me to continue my pursuit to code demos for the c64.
On a related note, prior to finding "Machine Language for Beginners" by Mansfield and the c64 coding wiki, my biggest difficulty was finding good material that introduced low level concepts in a realtively structured manner.
On a related note, prior to finding "Machine Language for Beginners" by Mansfield and the c64 coding wiki, my biggest difficulty was finding good material that introduced low level concepts in a realtively structured manner.
Oh don't get me wrong there Viznut. Certainly there are heaps of theoretical, philosophical an more mental processes that precede the actual creation process and IMHO it's imperative that these processes get shared with the general scene populi, and especially with the younger sceners. This is why we (ASD) and most meticulously Navis, write detailed articles about the creative process of our productions. Not just the techniques and the code, but the concepts, the ideas, the sources of inspiration which are integral parts of the creative process.
What I'm trying to point out is that since either way the demoscene is advancing through "hands-on" examples, coupled with the general tendency of our era driven by momentary information (hello facebook), it is rather futile (again IMHO) to try and predict where the demoscene will go and where the demoscene should go in the next decade on the basis of theoretical and philosophical analysis.
Based on the same reasoning above, I'll have to disagree with you on the selection of platforms as a begginer's playground. Yes, having to deal with "simpler" constructs and more restricted environments would lead the programmer to a better understanding of how things work and what the core really is, but the bitter truth is that in comparison with what is already being produced, the end result is going to prove very unappealing to the average Joe scene newcomer who driven by the end result he's used to experiencing through both demoscene and other channels (3d animations, machinima, games) will mostly want to achieve a similarly aesthetically pleasing result, in a relatively small period of time.
Sure, the said person will reach a dead end or hit a wall at some point, however that point is what will lead him to check out the building blocks, and investigate how things work in order to further advance his abilities. The difference here is that he will actively seek the knowledge through sheer curiosity and necessity, rather than unwanted labor/initiation rights into the demoscene on his very first steps.
Sadly, the demoscene is bleeding and getting old. The influx of new blood is limited and the last thing we'd want is to drive whatever new blood is being injected to the "gene pool" away, by submitting it to a seemingly boring path.
What I'm trying to point out is that since either way the demoscene is advancing through "hands-on" examples, coupled with the general tendency of our era driven by momentary information (hello facebook), it is rather futile (again IMHO) to try and predict where the demoscene will go and where the demoscene should go in the next decade on the basis of theoretical and philosophical analysis.
Based on the same reasoning above, I'll have to disagree with you on the selection of platforms as a begginer's playground. Yes, having to deal with "simpler" constructs and more restricted environments would lead the programmer to a better understanding of how things work and what the core really is, but the bitter truth is that in comparison with what is already being produced, the end result is going to prove very unappealing to the average Joe scene newcomer who driven by the end result he's used to experiencing through both demoscene and other channels (3d animations, machinima, games) will mostly want to achieve a similarly aesthetically pleasing result, in a relatively small period of time.
Sure, the said person will reach a dead end or hit a wall at some point, however that point is what will lead him to check out the building blocks, and investigate how things work in order to further advance his abilities. The difference here is that he will actively seek the knowledge through sheer curiosity and necessity, rather than unwanted labor/initiation rights into the demoscene on his very first steps.
Sadly, the demoscene is bleeding and getting old. The influx of new blood is limited and the last thing we'd want is to drive whatever new blood is being injected to the "gene pool" away, by submitting it to a seemingly boring path.
While the article has several well-thought through points, and most certainly is a solid read, I'll give the lead to Amusic for his last point there.
Quote:
Sadly, the demoscene is bleeding and getting old. The influx of new blood is limited and the last thing we'd want is to drive whatever new blood is being injected to the "gene pool" away, by submitting it to a seemingly boring path.
That's why old fart like keops, 4mat and some others old demoscene glory are still active :)
I think demosceners are growing WITH the demoscene, some of them leaved the train, some rare young joined, but I think the "main" basis is still here since the beginning :)
Ho, and for info, I started democode with win32/C++/OpenGL, I'm really lame at coding (compared to your high standard) but since it's sufficient to display what I want and I'm able to release prod, I'm happy with that.
I will never be good at coding lika Keops, or Navis, or Chaos but I think you can have pleasure in demoscene without being an "hardcore"-coder :)
Quote:
Yes, having to deal with "simpler" constructs and more restricted environments would lead the programmer to a better understanding of how things work and what the core really is, but the bitter truth is that in comparison with what is already being produced, the end result is going to prove very unappealing to the average Joe scene newcomer who driven by the end result he's used to experiencing through both demoscene and other channels
A lot of coders have learnt [in their teens] their art by mastering restricted languages (often BASIC) which were specially designed for easy learning.
Any modern language inevitably has too much information to be enjoyable.
It's all about not being overwhelmed with information.
Learning with a OO language is a wrong path, remember the time it takes to grok it ?
It's all about not being overwhelmed with information.
That's why I cringe when I see a complete beginner being told "just get yourself a C++ compiler". Anyone here learned C++ as a first language?
That's why I cringe when I see a complete beginner being told "just get yourself a C++ compiler". Anyone here learned C++ as a first language?
you can learn C and the basic principles of encapsulation (in C++), without even touching inheritance, templates, polymorphism, STL.
Much better than any old *crap* like BASIC. In 2010.
I still believe that the best way for a total beginner to start is through "simplified" C++ and something like Glut. There, I said it.
I'm starting on c++...
SDL + NEHE is the way of the future!
yes, it is crap in 2010.
I suppose it was just about ok when we started in 1985 on CBM Basic V2.0 (worst basic ever?). But I don't think there would be any gain in starting learning programming (let alone making demos) in Basic in today's environment.
By the way, is there any higher education institution in the world teaching Basic today?
I suppose it was just about ok when we started in 1985 on CBM Basic V2.0 (worst basic ever?). But I don't think there would be any gain in starting learning programming (let alone making demos) in Basic in today's environment.
By the way, is there any higher education institution in the world teaching Basic today?
contrary, i think a problem for a lot of new people is being over-influenced. they read that yes, C++, no, Amiga, yes, Haskell, no, OpenGL, and even when they manage to get a start and eventually reach a hurdle they're bound to run into someone who points out that coding in Pascal was a horrible idea and they should've chosen C# because that certain problem has a really elegant solution there. it's the yahtzee-sandbox-problem: too many options sometimes just leave a person confused and unmotivated.
Probably not. MIT switched from Scheme to Python. I think popular choices in universities are Java, Python, plain C, Ada, and functional languages.
Then, not all democoders were formally trained.
Then, not all democoders were formally trained.
Javascript/WebGL
I'm with trace on this one.
but why?
Because it runs (it will run) directly in the browser in Windows/MacOS/Linux. No need to download a zip, unzip, execute and get an error saying your gfx is crap.
Some more thoughts about it.... http://vimeo.com/14457835
Some more thoughts about it.... http://vimeo.com/14457835
It *will* run, maybe, in the future. Because for the time being I still see people struggling just because they have the wrong version of firefox or didn't install a plug-in.
The download of something (resources/music) is still needed, isn't it?
Unzip/execute delay with a normal application is not a problem with (for example) winrar. As for crap gfx cards... well, it won't solve that problem either. If your demo needs xyz shaders or memory which you don't have, it won't magically run just because it is in Javascript/WebGL.
The download of something (resources/music) is still needed, isn't it?
Unzip/execute delay with a normal application is not a problem with (for example) winrar. As for crap gfx cards... well, it won't solve that problem either. If your demo needs xyz shaders or memory which you don't have, it won't magically run just because it is in Javascript/WebGL.
@Navis (don't know if your "why?" was for me)
The academic world is a longtime opponent to BASIC (cf Dijkstra), and biased toward functional languages.
At least here, the first langage taught to students is biased by politics ("it should be Ada because we work on it").
Overall, often no pointer or OOP understanding is required in this first language.
I agree that C is a solid first language and BASIC sucks objectively. It's just that it's harder to start enjoy programming with C imho, especially for the youth.
PS: HTML5 sucks atm.
The academic world is a longtime opponent to BASIC (cf Dijkstra), and biased toward functional languages.
At least here, the first langage taught to students is biased by politics ("it should be Ada because we work on it").
Overall, often no pointer or OOP understanding is required in this first language.
I agree that C is a solid first language and BASIC sucks objectively. It's just that it's harder to start enjoy programming with C imho, especially for the youth.
PS: HTML5 sucks atm.
no no, the "why" is for WebGL and all web things. I just don't get it at the moment.
I think with regards to first language and "what should the newbies learn" that the element of nostalgia is quite strong. I can sense that in viznut's post.
Huh, I haven't been a young person for a long time, so I really can't tell ! :-)
I think with regards to first language and "what should the newbies learn" that the element of nostalgia is quite strong. I can sense that in viznut's post.
Quote:
It's just that it's harder to start enjoy programming with C imho, especially for the youth.
Huh, I haven't been a young person for a long time, so I really can't tell ! :-)
_why the lucky stiff once said javascript was the basic of our age. Or maybe he hasn't, in which case he would've probably said it.
It's there, on everybody's computer. You just need a text editor, and start an html page.
It's probably very easy to get a kid excited in doing fun graphic animations and let sailors curse at each others with it.
It's there, on everybody's computer. You just need a text editor, and start an html page.
It's probably very easy to get a kid excited in doing fun graphic animations and let sailors curse at each others with it.
Navis: Yeah for sure, it's not ready yet. But I bet major browsers will have proper WebGL support in less than a year.
Downloading resources/music? Yes, but it doesn't need the user to do that by hand, neither look for the location where it got downloaded, neither unzip the file. It's all clicks.
It just breaks the browsing flow. If the user is navigating the internet, and suddenly finds a demo that is already loading and about to start, chances are it's going to watch it. In the other hand, if it's a windows zip file to download and making him get away of the browser, chances are he is not going to care.
Of course, the gfxcard issue is going to still be there, but if the result of downloading the zip to the disk is getting an error message like that, he's probably not going to "risk" doing all that "work" the next time.
Downloading resources/music? Yes, but it doesn't need the user to do that by hand, neither look for the location where it got downloaded, neither unzip the file. It's all clicks.
It just breaks the browsing flow. If the user is navigating the internet, and suddenly finds a demo that is already loading and about to start, chances are it's going to watch it. In the other hand, if it's a windows zip file to download and making him get away of the browser, chances are he is not going to care.
Of course, the gfxcard issue is going to still be there, but if the result of downloading the zip to the disk is getting an error message like that, he's probably not going to "risk" doing all that "work" the next time.
Sorry for using the "user" term.
I still wonder how long it would take for technology to catch up with this:
A webgl application that would run a heavy demo like agenda circling forth on firefox.
BANG click BANG play.
2-3 years?
A webgl application that would run a heavy demo like agenda circling forth on firefox.
BANG click BANG play.
2-3 years?