Why demo and not game?

[Qwe]

Here there are very experienced programmers; in the scene why do they use their skills to make demos and not games?
It is easier to do demo?

[Heaven/TQA]

because we can...

[R0ger]

It's lot easier to make demo .. demo only has to look good. You stop at any time. Basically demo can't be incomplete. Game needs to be fun. It can be incomplete. You can make demo on impulse, prove of concept. Game needs lot more planing.

Also making demos and making games are different skills. You can do great game in game maker, with no advanced coding skills. You can do demo which will create cool wave-like fractal effect, which would have absolutely no use in any game. Most of the time, demos and games are just unrelated.

[snicklin]

Weren't "Team 17" a demo group initially?

[Heaven/TQA]

Thalion on ST/Amiga were mostly recruited by sceners (TCB,TEX, TLB etc).

 

I personally need to be in game or demo mode... both genres are similar using skills but game making is much harder (how to code "fun"?).

 

I would not call making demo easier to be honest... as most demos max out the machine capabilities and RAM... which might sometimes even being very hard

Edited November 29, 2014 by Heaven/TQA

[Keatah]

Demo programming is easy compared to game development.

[sack-c0s]

It's not exactly easier - just s different skillset.

 

A lot of demo coding works because you have precise control over what is shown, when and how and you can exploit that. In a game you just can't restrict people enough to make everything work, otherwise the player would be on rails.

That isn't to say that there aren't a lot of transferable skills though - The more you can optimise and creatively cut corners the more you can throw into the game, but they do have to be more general purpose than a demo.

Edited November 29, 2014 by sack-c0s

[Rybags]

This subject has come up before, probably >5 years ago and I was one of the ones advocating more effort towards games.

 

The last few years I think we've had a healthy balance with at least 1 or 2 "epic" games per year and overall probably more "complex" games than demos.

 

The thing with a game is you can have the polishing and fine-tuning of gameplay elements that might take near half the development time. With a demo, since it's a scripted type thing with little or no participation from the outside it can be a much quicker process doing those things.

[Qwe]

There is a case of demo coders that when they decided to coding a game they made one of the best game for Atari (see Yoomp).

[emkay]

There is a case of demo coders that when they decided to coding a game they made one of the best game for Atari (see Yoomp).

When coding demos, you get a better imagination of what the machine can do. After that, the "resulting game" simply will get more polished. Otherwise, a game coder might not become a demo coder automatically...

[Heaven/TQA]

you can not learn one thing... "fun".... that's why some people can do games... some not...

 

I would see as one of the mentioned "demo coders"... following games which are as well outstanding from coding point of view:

 

- Dropzone (fast pace, explosions, clever using Atari hardware)

- International Karate (Atari hardware to the max)

- Pole Position (fast road animation via DLIs)

- 7 Citis of Gold (streaming system, soft sprites, world creation)

- Rainbow Walker (DLIs generating rainbow)

- Rescue on Fractalus (nothing to say... everything here, sound, mixed modes, speed, loading sequence etc)

- Koronis Rift (same like RoF)

- Ballblazer (Eidolon not...as for me there is "no technical feature which got my attention... maybe the SIO loading music)

- Elektra Glide (and not Chop Shuey) (Fast using Mode10 and mode9)

- Joust (sprite multiplexor)

- Gremlins (soft sprite engine)

- Dimension X (checkboard scrolling, title screen with raster fx, music)

- Henries House (soft sprites plus players, DLIs in status screen)

- Draconus/Zybex for mode7 soft sprites

- Star Raiders 2 (Star Raiders 1 not... but that's just me )

- Alternate Realtiy 1 (and not 2) for DLI, disc system, world

- ...

[emkay]

you can not learn one thing... "fun".... that's why some people can do games... some not...

 

I would see as one of the mentioned "demo coders"... following games which are as well outstanding from coding point of view:

 

- Dropzone (fast pace, explosions, clever using Atari hardware)

- International Karate (Atari hardware to the max)

Those are real exceptions. Everything seems perfect in those games, done by a real genious

 

 

 

- Pole Position (fast road animation via DLIs)

 

- 7 Citis of Gold (streaming system, soft sprites, world creation)

- Rainbow Walker (DLIs generating rainbow)

 

 

Three good games, even if Pole Position has some probs with PAL and the Cars, well for the year, the game has been done.

 

 

 

 

- Rescue on Fractalus (nothing to say... everything here, sound, mixed modes, speed, loading sequence etc)

- Koronis Rift (same like RoF)

- Ballblazer (Eidolon not...as for me there is "no technical feature which got my attention... maybe the SIO loading music)

 

 

Rescue on Fractalus is to slow for the A8, particular on PAL systems. Koronis Rift has bugs .... So they better had a closer look at the machine's specs.

Ballblazer seems advanced in ANTIC usage, but the "game" is missing, just like in RoF.

The Eidolon offers a lot of fun, but is also too slow on the A8, compared to the given specs.

 

 

 

 

- Elektra Glide (and not Chop Shuey) (Fast using Mode10 and mode9)

 

 

 

Elektra Glide, actually uses just some nice GTIA , but also , the game is missing.

 

- Joust (sprite multiplexor)

- Gremlins (soft sprite engine)

- Dimension X (checkboard scrolling, title screen with raster fx, music)

- Henries House (soft sprites plus players, DLIs in status screen)

Another bunch of nice coded and fun games.

 

 

 

- Draconus/Zybex for mode7 soft sprites

 

Too buggy ...

 

 

 

- Star Raiders 2 (Star Raiders 1 not... but that's just me )

 

 

Great gaming experience. I wonder what they could have done with a "3D fighter simulation" (sneaking towards Space Harrier.

 

 

 

- Alternate Realtiy 1 (and not 2) for DLI, disc system, world

 

 

No.

 

But Wayout or 2 player games like Capture the Flag hit the hardware specs in a good way and offer a lot of gaming fun.

Also Encounter...

 

 

Most Game-Designers wonder why their game has become a fun game and why some won't. Reminding "Flappy Bird" ...

 

btw.

 

A 3D Crawler game to collect items and keys for opening the needed doors is much more fun than to run over illogically placed plates.

The game design will be always needed. The fun is in the eye of the player. If you want to attract players for your game, you have to find the right way of attraction creation

Edited November 29, 2014 by emkay

[Bryan]

A lot of demo coding works because you have precise control over what is shown, when and how and you can exploit that. In a game you just can't restrict people enough to make everything work, otherwise the player would be on rails.

The middle ground on the Atari seems to be puzzle games. The motion is generally limited allowing for more control over the display. They usually don't hold my attention for long, though.

[Heaven/TQA]

Mario... I meant from me as demo coder my list not as "games"... And what I see special from demo coders eye

 

But yeah good you mentioned

 

- encounter (fast 3d esp the warp sequence)

- capture the flag... Fast 3d in split mode plus nice Activision like background

- mercenary for vector gfx

[TMR]

Here there are very experienced programmers; in the scene why do they use their skills to make demos and not games?

Because they want to. It's the same reason that people code certain genres of game, that's the kind of game they want to play so that's what they aim for.

 

It is easier to do demo?

That depends on the kind of demo we're talking about; it's easy to shove a picture up, throw some colour bars around, run a scroll through and play a bit of music just as it's easy to put a few hardware sprites over a character-based screen and make a simple game but a big, involved demo with a series of effects and transitions is a very different beast that takes time, effort and talent to create.

 

And games live or die on their playability so good technical code isn't a necessity for a decent experience, but it can be really difficult to fully appreciate demos unless you've got a rough idea of what's going on "under the hood" to see where they're deviating from what the programming manuals say should be possible.

[emkay]

Mario... I meant from me as demo coder my list not as "games"... And what I see special from demo coders eye

Ofcourse. But it has been shown, things weren't technically at the machine's level. Particular AR: City. It's full of misdesign extenses. The Dungeon has been quite better.

Btw: You know in German Gaming Magazins, The A8 version of City, has been savaged in the air.

 

 

But yeah good you mentioned

 

- encounter (fast 3d esp the warp sequence)

- capture the flag... Fast 3d in split mode plus nice Activision like background

- mercenary for vector gfx

Could you imagine "Driller" or "Sentinel" on the A8?

[Heaven/TQA]

AR:City... well... Love it or hate it I guess... but remember how it was coded in a shack in Hawaii.... and it is cool anyway....

AR:Dungeon played it through and love it as it had "quests"... and the 3d is better plus overall... but that's personal taste... look Ultima 4 is technicly on A8....well... not even using ANY hardware feature (I don't call NTSC artefacts features )

 

Sentinel... well... heard that some days ago somewhere...

[roland p]

I find many demo's very boring. Just a few entertain me. So I think it takes a lot of skill/talent/creativity to create a demo that is more than just showing a few effects and that looks more like a videoclip. drunken chessboard comes to mind, but I guess everyone has their favorites.

[Creature XL]

The middle ground on the Atari seems to be puzzle games. The motion is generally limited allowing for more control over the display. They usually don't hold my attention for long, though.

 

Yeah, Puzzlers are good for the A8. At once "Marbled" springs to mind. You can do much with DLIs and other techniques to make it look awesome.

And it seems there are a lot of players who like puzzlers. So that is good However, I really do not like puzzle games.

 

 

 

As a coder, coming from a Demoscene background, I like doing games for one reason. The feedback you get when users actually play the game and write (personal or in a forum) they like to play the game (for example MJO). The demo I took (a small) part in ("Beams" for the Atari Falcon) you get: "looks nice". Although, maybe the main coder got probably cooler feedback then I did

 

The problem with coding games is, that it is harder as was said before. BUT no one sees it! There are so many things you have to consider when you do not want to "set the player on rails". In a demo you can always change the effect or just fake it (in another way). Not sure how many people here know that most demo efx are just fakes or only work because everything is predetermined (and therefore easy to pre-calc) and wouldn't be possible if a player could interact (freely) with it.

 

When I said, game making is harder I think I need to clarify (to avoid the pitch forks) that I didn't mean from a technical point of view.

There are lots of demos where I am certain that I wouldn't be able to "copy" them. And some where I do not even have a clue how things are done

It's really the fact that you have to deal with so much possibilities. As mentioned before, if you haven't coded a game (maybe except puzzlers) you aren't aware of these facts.

[kiwilove]

When I start looking through demos - I find only about ! to 5 % are interesting, whereas most tend to be boring.

I can appreciate the difficulty/complexity in the coding - but if it isn't visually interesting - it is not successful.

 

Just like games which are just boring to play.

 

Games can be said to be like writing a book, whereas a demo is more like a short story.

 

Just like as in sports, hobbies or any other interest ---- the more time you spend at doing it, the better you get at it - over time.

And there are people who are simply good at it - that their first game stands out - whereas other first games probably don't.

But their second and third games,etc etc keeps on getting better and better...

 

But I'm not a coder/programmer - so what do I know?

I do like working on the graphics for games...

 

Harvey

[TMR]

When I start looking through demos - I find only about ! to 5 % are interesting, whereas most tend to be boring.

I can appreciate the difficulty/complexity in the coding - but if it isn't visually interesting - it is not successful.

To demo coders even something (relatively) simple like a screen full of moving rasterbars is visually interesting because keeping everything shifting at full framerate can be extremely challenging and it can still be very hard to understand just how difficult these things can be for a programmer unless you've actually tried coding something similar.

 

Games can be said to be like writing a book, whereas a demo is more like a short story.

Games might be akin to writing a book (but which kind of book depends on the game, some are paperbacks whilst others are novels) but demos are more like writing a technical manual in that it's also hard to do but is meant for a different audience.

[Lazarus]

Here there are very experienced programmers; in the scene why do they use their skills to make demos and not games?

It is easier to do demo?

Demos are just fun to code and you are not bound to anything, Games are usually "easier" since they don't need as much programming trickery, but they are a lot of boring work. So it's like this:

 

Demos = fun and competition, like sports

Games = work, I'll do it if somebody pays me.

 

And since only PC or recent console games are being paid, this will result in most capable programmers doing games on PC or consoles.

[Heaven/TQA]

when I was coding activly Beyond Evil I could use my demo skills but there were so much more to do in that game like keyboard input controlls, inventory, room generation, item generator etc... which normally you don't need in a demo... but on demo side you always try different things, too... so both are comparable only different skill sets to use...

 

and TMR once told me the truth... you have to be in "game mode" or in "demo mode".... right now I am in demo mode...

[Qwe]

When the Atari 800 was programmed very well it gave excellent results.
In the comparison of the game Ballblazer, the Atari 800 wins between the 8-bit computers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=larhB9OAdz4

Unfortunately it was more profitable implement video games for the C64, so many titles were missing for Atari 8-bit.
Are there some games for C64 that are not convertible because the atari hardware have limitations?

[Irgendwer]

Are there some games for C64 that are not convertible because the atari hardware have limitations?

 

Please read this thread

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/134852-atari-v-commodore/

and come back if questions are left over...

Edited December 1, 2014 by Irgendwer