Only 48 windows 64kb intros were released in 2007!

category: general [glöplog]
the problem is that in the scene, unlike other places, things are only worth doing if you can do it better than what was already done. just as good is not worth the effort. this difference is significant now that "pushing the limits" means making enormous tools and super advance algorithms (rather than hacking some registers around so you can draw in the borders).

Seldom a wiser word was said on pouet.
I mean... what skrebbel said.
added on the 2008-04-01 13:03:44 by auld auld
btw i'm very thrilled by this idea of outsourcing democode to india
added on the 2008-04-01 13:05:44 by superplek superplek
Why create all the elaborate 64k tools when you can use Lightwave and a few simple lscripts to export all the data needed.
It's a lot better than using x months/years creating a mediocre tool that your gfx dude hate using.
added on the 2008-04-01 13:12:41 by datsua datsua
I agree that the whole tool-idea kinda made people frown over 64k because nowadays everyone thinks you need a full blown package to go anywhere - but that said, I think that thinking also leaves a shitload of room for new ideas because noone's thinking outside the box anymore.

I'd say the 64k category will be "reinvented" in the course of 2 years at most. (And I actually have a wild guess on who will do that. (Not us, no.))
added on the 2008-04-01 13:56:57 by Gargaj Gargaj
(who, then?)
added on the 2008-04-01 13:58:49 by skrebbel skrebbel
as soon as ryg manages to pack debris in under 64k :D
added on the 2008-04-01 14:42:33 by Maali Maali
added on the 2008-04-01 14:48:59 by Navis Navis
hehehe i have to second gargaj's guess ;)
added on the 2008-04-01 15:00:37 by nystep nystep
i blame farbrausch. they claimed they just "made a tool", whereas in fact they had a brilliant artist on the end using it. they sold us all down the river, bastards!

so we can conlude farbrausch killed 64k by not supplying an artist packaged with their tools, yes? selfish bastards. ;-)

btw very interesting discussion about formats and such, even for such a n00b like me, thx a lot for the insight. :)
added on the 2008-04-01 15:06:41 by Grathak Grathak
maybe we need to begin writing 16ks or something to make it popular (like 1ks are getting)
added on the 2008-04-01 15:56:29 by auld auld
Real man do it without tools ;)
40kb like in the good old days?
added on the 2008-04-01 16:00:25 by xernobyl xernobyl
load3ds() and hardcoding, that's how my toolchain will probably still look like within the next time :)
although I thought about using collada as well, but only if it's really necessary, not just for the sake of it.
added on the 2008-04-01 18:19:55 by styx^hcr styx^hcr
the real question is, how many of those 64K intros are real 64K ?...
added on the 2008-04-01 18:24:30 by [EviL] [EviL]
Even the DOS-age 64k intros used BIOS routines...
added on the 2008-04-01 18:27:27 by Preacher Preacher
Did anyone count the released 64k intro from 2006 and 2005 ? :)
added on the 2008-04-01 18:31:00 by magic magic
you mean, its ok as long as you don't install an OS, get that floppy on and boot ?
added on the 2008-04-01 18:31:54 by [EviL] [EviL]
actually in general the # of releases are stagnating and the scene will die in 2017 if the current trend will lineary continue!
added on the 2008-04-01 18:33:57 by Maali Maali
But what if its gona be logarithmic :(
Today i made my first 64k tool. But don't worry, it's not for pc, so it won't affect the decline :)
added on the 2008-04-01 18:37:26 by psonice psonice
I mean that as long as it's not 64k flashed on an EPROM chip running on custom hardware, discussing what exactly constitutes a 64k intro is bound to not be fruitful, since different operating systems and APIs have different ways of doing things (you don't have SDL on Windows or D3DX on Linux and so forth..)
added on the 2008-04-01 18:37:47 by Preacher Preacher
added on the 2008-04-01 18:39:18 by xernobyl xernobyl
still even if you have a 64k eprom, are you allowed to use the custom hardware? after all, you could save on code by having custom chips+microcode!?!
added on the 2008-04-01 19:07:42 by _-_-__ _-_-__