Nectarine

What is your opinion about demos that are made with ready-made 3D engines (often commercial) and contain such a little amount of code that coder credits are not given.

Examples include "Number one / Another one" by CNCD/Fairlight and "Dying Stars" by Orange

Do you approve this development or do you think that demos should be about coding ...or do you think something else?

For me, as long as it is pleasing for both eyes and ears, I do not mind what platform they use to achieve it imho.

I guess something else: I look at modern (big) PC demos differently than more restricted platforms anyway (which i in general also like more (the more restricted ones)) so it's not a big issue. But it's still good to have it clearly stated somewhere, how particular production was made.

If i had to choose however, do i approve the development or should demos be about coding, i would lean towards they should be about coding.

Hello old thread!

Demos are about pleasing the viewing audience. I bet many times some "AMIGGAAAAA!" reference, or in-joke, has bumped up a compo entry by a significant number of points, because it made people laugh or smile.

I don't think you can say "it has to be about the coding". That is a bit like saying "games done in Unity are automatically bad, because they didn't roll their own engine" -- but obviously it's perfectly possible to create an amazingly fun and enjoyable game in Unity, and it's also possible to create the most boring, tedious (but TECHNICALLY AMAZING) game that you built from the ground up.

It does (should?) affect how the creators will be seen, though. Something like "Hello Kevin" might win a compo because it's genuinely funny and enjoyable, but I don't think anyone is really going to be comparing it to "Second Reality" or whatever. So, ability to entertain isn't the same thing as skill.

Pop music industry will explain the rest...

I think you can (without implying that you must say so). The question is what the demoscene and demos are about. DIY has traditionally been one of the most important values in the demoscene. Though its exact meaning and significance has probably not been defined. In the game industry the goal is just to make good games. Whether the engine is made by the game developer team themselves is merely a practical issue. But in the demoscene there are other values such as DIY and technical competence. And compos have often many kind of rules concerning what should be made and how. Some compos are explicitly about coding.

These arguments/controversies are old, and we're old. Lets go!

The controversy over Dying Stars was multipart:

1. It was not in the "wild" compo.
2. The engine is a ready-made, "commercial" product.
3. The engine was not disclosed upfront in the nfo file (but mentioned later at the party).

My opinions: (Sorry if these have all been said before, my virgin eyes must not look upon the sins of pouet)

1. Wild

At first I was surprised it was not considered "wild". I quickly reconsidered given that it is indeed realtime PC, and there must be plenty of shadercoding and impressive work involved despite the ready-made engine. Definitely demo in this regard. Then again, even with some serious code and realtime you can still end up in the wild category if it doesn't run entirely on something that resembles a recognizable platform, but this realtime, PC demo checks out. There is enough slop (as in low precision) in categorizing demos to "get it wrong", but this seems acceptable to me. Leave making more compo subcategories up to the particular party to decide.

2. Ready-made tools

A demo requiring no coding, merely _sequenced_ using demotools (via patterns, parameter sliders, and routed between modular functions), could be one of many well known and respected demoscene productions. However, in those cases, those tools were created by/of/for the demoscene. Demotools are impressive technical achievements in their own right, and can help bridge a gap between different types of creators within a demogroup.

Historically, similar arguments have been brought against using non-commercial tools, but I was never in that camp even 20+ years ago. Perhaps we are getting to a point that DIY demotools are passe _enough_ that people are wanting for more --- another level of abstraction, if you will. Ready-made tools might bring something new and bigger to productions --- especially considering the scaling returns of crowdsourced works. A more powerful tool yields a greater variety of outcome. Culture changes fast and this will become acceptable.

Using a commercial product seems problematic to me since I'm a FOSS zealot, but then again, the word "commercial" isn't quite right given these projects are mostly open source and free to use in this particular context. I don't mean to say that it is acceptable since many demosceners have worked on these commercial-like tools, I'm just saying that this is a step toward new normal which FOSS zealots have been advocating for. So that's cool.

Regardless, respect to Orange for wrangling a ready-made tool into a very cool prod, and respect for making several bold statement in doing so...

3. Okay, wait a minute. This is where it I need to tread softly. People are going to take issue with centipedes in my demoscene. It's more likely than you think. Orange did not make a bold statement; in fact, they did not immediately disclose their tech. You definitely want to be disclosing libraries and automation tools at a party. While, you may lose some respect from us olds, you gain some back for honesty and integrity because the bar is set. Expectations are set for a particular platform and toolset. Tools can streamline to a point which allows someone with artistic vision and a sense for aesthetic (not me, lol) to spend more time honing their prod to something visually appealing, which could take a lone coder with linker and compiler a much longer time to achieve. Envy aside, there's more reason to disclose this sort of thing; scoring at demoparties must be informed. We need :all the opinions: including those of bittervets and their ROM chips. The main democompo at Assembly 2018 did not mention important details for Orange on the big screen, but Notch was mentioned for CNSD and Fairlight (and even had it in the loading screen). Whether or not this was included in the voteforms, I don't know, and I don't know when exactly it was disclosed, but it's something people are going to have opinions about. Right or wrong, good or bad: Culture decides.

That's enough ranting. I don't exactly have a horse in this race.