Commercial/game-engine demos

category: general [glöplog]
What I mean is that I don't see a reason to ban commercial and free for personal use 3d engine's because they are not any unfair advantage unless you're doing a 3d flyby compo.
added on the 2009-11-08 18:28:20 by masterm masterm
kusma: or this: http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=21325

new school plasma demo remix!
added on the 2009-11-08 18:29:17 by quisten quisten
as a compo organizer at altparty, i didn't see any problem with the prod in question.

added on the 2009-11-08 18:29:41 by nosfe nosfe
True, commercial engines don't support spike-balls and glow.
added on the 2009-11-08 18:30:03 by kusma kusma
quisten: indeed, but that's not funny since plek didn't do it :(
added on the 2009-11-08 18:31:04 by kusma kusma
Personally, I believe that the 'correct' way to win a demo compo is to make better use of the available tools than your competitors, and that's true whether the tools in question are Unity3D, Werkkzeug, your own group's super-secret demo tool, Crinkler, a 4K framework someone posted on in4k, Haskell, Python, Lua, D3DX, aalib, a code snippet you borrowed from the NeHe tutorials, or OSDM.

If someone has managed to single-handedly recreate 90% of the Unreal engine in their spare time, then I admire the achievement, but I don't feel that they're automatically entitled to greater scene respect than someone who's used an off-the-shelf engine to create something better. Except, in practice, the coders who actually Know Their Shit in the demoscene are not spending their time reinventing the wheel, but innovating in their own ways (case in point: Smash's blog post about the particle system in Blunderbuss). If we see talented non-coders creating kick-ass demos with ready-made engines, then that's a win for the scene; conversely, if the demoscene ever reaches a point where the art of the coder can instantly be outdone by some random nerd with a level designer, then quite frankly the craft of demo coding deserves to die. But that isn't going to happen.
added on the 2009-11-08 18:37:07 by gasman gasman
Who cares how people do it, be happy people still make demos.
added on the 2009-11-08 18:37:30 by okkie okkie
what a horrible person I must be. :)

you can always check your own "demoblog" in case of doubt :)

I suggest we just stop and discuss the point of the thread, like all the others others are doing.

since everything was said about the original topic multiple times already, i felt it is not necessary to repeat. (oh and if you are not happy with not-strictly-ontopic stuff on pouet among all places, please wait for the pouet-v2.0-elite-invited-only-section before posting, kthxbye).

But since you asked for: Regardless of one's personal dislike of demos-made-with-commercial-engines, it would make no sense to disallow unity3d and the likes while allowing werkkzeug and the others. These are pretty much the same thing, except that unity was (probably) not made by sceners. It wouldn't make any sense to disallow $1000 paid-for engines either (unity is free), since using 3ds max, maya, photoshop, various musical software etc is widely accepted, and those are commercial tools too. Don't tell me you only use free and opensource software to make your tracks :) I have no love for these game-engine demos either, but you cannot ban them without banning basically everything else out there, too.

(oh, and the comment I was talking about is right there in the first post in this thread, but hey, if your first instinct is just to ignore what I write and hit the slander-button, that's on you :)

well, i was looking for comments in this thread, the quotation was overlooked. Believe me, if i was hitting the button without thinking, you would receive pretty vulgar stuff :)
added on the 2009-11-08 18:49:08 by blala blala
just to be sure, it would be best to ban everyone who ever worked in any commercial project which had something to do with graphics programming. be it a game or what ever, just so that people can't use any of their commercial knowledge for demoscene.
added on the 2009-11-08 18:55:01 by nosfe nosfe
Haha, compos would be eerily empty then :D
added on the 2009-11-08 18:56:01 by okkie okkie
so that people can't use any of their commercial knowledge for demoscene

yeah that's intolerable. that's why some people do it the other way around. :P
added on the 2009-11-08 18:56:20 by Gargaj Gargaj
I'm all in favour of it and think it could be very positive for the scene. Afterall, if it's a choice between a demo made on a game engine and no demo at all, it's pretty clear what's best for the scene.

I know that some fear it will give some people an unfair advantage, but the demoscene really should be more about the creativity and fun rather than the competition.

It's also a chance to see the work of non-coders. Coders aren't always good with direction or polishing touches, so it's good to be able to hand that over to someone more talented in those areas.
added on the 2009-11-08 19:29:32 by Wade Wade
most scene coders today are failed musicians/graphicsppl anyway
added on the 2009-11-08 19:32:12 by havoc havoc
My point of view:

It is more satisfying to :

1) Create your own GFX engine.
1) Create your own SFX engine.
2) Design your own demo with them.
3) Nominate and see the demo emerging victorious in a compo.

What do you think?
added on the 2009-11-08 20:06:20 by Defiance Defiance
added on the 2009-11-08 20:08:25 by Szczupaq Szczupaq
3) do crack in a hotel room with your sister
added on the 2009-11-08 20:08:49 by okkie okkie
6) ???? Profit!
added on the 2009-11-08 20:09:23 by Puryx Puryx
5) you are not my dad?
added on the 2009-11-08 20:09:54 by okkie okkie
I really don't see the problem in using commercial engines for demos, but I can understand why some people have problem with it.

Xenusion: Using engines like Unity have nothing to do with machimina. It's not a game you are modifying, but more like editor you are using for making a demo and I don't see people judging demomakers who just export their scenes from 3ds max to a self made 3ds player and just press enter.

Another thing - Unity actually is demoscene-related since couple of Nesnausk!-guys are working for the company which made it :)
added on the 2009-11-08 20:11:09 by sauli sauli
kusma hey! it took us like a full day to sync that. true, you can't see that off it, but it really did!

and, remember that beer i bought you at scene event? that's right, that was a payment for last_engine_ever.exe. so it's a commercial engine! we just used the sample demo that came with it, a bit like musicians who use synth presents. and everybody knows all of them do that.
added on the 2009-11-08 20:18:07 by skrebbel skrebbel
@ Avseq01: I do not have one and no I'm not, just presenting the dry facts (although I am a bit lazy for copy-pasting the first point and forgetting to count the next one ;-) ).

@ Puryx: Isn't the satisfaction, the recognition, and respect a great profit?
added on the 2009-11-08 20:18:54 by Defiance Defiance
a bit like musicians who use synth presents. and everybody knows all of them do that.

Hey you! :D
added on the 2009-11-08 20:19:37 by Puryx Puryx
Defiance: indeed, I guess I was just trying to be funny...
added on the 2009-11-08 20:20:23 by Puryx Puryx
what a horrible person I must be. :)

you can always check your own "demoblog" in case of doubt :)

You have me at a complete loss there, but I don't expect to get your point with vague hints, so feel free to mail me at gloom@scene.org if you want to be more specific as to what it is exactly I have done to you or your sister. :)

I think a lot of the answers in this thread are really interesting, and engine-specific or not, it was good to get it cleared up what people think about it.
added on the 2009-11-08 20:23:42 by gloom gloom