[CSDb] - User Forums - The Art of the Demo Review

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > CSDb Discussions > The Art of the Demo Review

2002-12-31 07:07

Eyeth
Account closed

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 98

The Art of the Demo Review

Hello.

I hope to initiate semiregular demo reviews and articles about demos on the cbm 8-bit scene for a U.S. based Commodore-oriented publication. This publication is essentially geared towards the Commodore users who ususally have fully tricked out CMD setups or are into GEOS/Wheels.

This is the kind of people that tend not to download and try out demos, even if they are NTSC-fixed or pure NTSC. Their idea of great music is what's found in SIDPlayer .mus files and never mind cutting-edge SID's found in demo's. By having semiregular coverage on demos and the demoscene, I hope to bring exposure in this area to these kind of Commodore users so that they can better appreciate their hobby and the people that contribute mightily to it.

Anyway, I want to have some kind of grading or consistent criteria in which to judge demos and review them accordingly. Such criteria would lend itself to a 100% scale, where 100% would be considered a 'perfect' score and a 5% score would be considered the equivalent to pure crapola and not worth the download. :) obviously, such demos having a low score would simply be unfit for a review on a publication.

Here's my criteria;

Graphics: up to 20%
This would simply cover the quality of graphics and animation. Are there esoteric graphics modes used? Are the graphics wired? Lovingly hand-drawn?
Sound: up to 20%
This would cover sound effects and music. I'll admit not being too good in this area and I'd hate to judge demos in this area on an unfair basis. My usual criteria regarding SID's is if I hear repititive music, it's crap. The more varied and complex the composition is, the better the SID review is going to be.
Technical: up to 20%
How difficult is this demo from a coding perspective? Are the borders opened? Animation seemingly going in impossible directions? Sprite trickery and wizardry? Is it NTSC-fixed? Etc.
Presentation: up to 20%
Just how is the demo laid out? Does the user have to press the infamous SPACE bar? Is there an IRQ loader, which makes it incompatible on CMD devices? (A big minus, considering my audience.) Is there rhyme and reason behind the choreography of individual parts making up the entire demo? Is there a theme continuing throughout or is it nonsensical babble of demo effects?
Content: up to 10%
I feel that demos should tell a story as it is a creative endeavor. Just what kind of content is it? Are purely c64 effects used? Or are PC-style effects are used? Amiga influences? Is it aping other code and/or effects from other demos? Also, some content may be objectionable to the target audience like nudity, offensive text, glorification of drugs like pot, political/religious themes, etc.
Wildcard: up to 10%
This is the bonus round. Points are usually assigned such as the reptuation of the demo coder/graphician, group, etc. If this demo marked the first effect of the FLI or FLD, etc.

This would add up to 100% and it would be very hard for a demo to reach a perfect score. Any thoughts? Anything I've missed? Any experienced demo reviewers care to chime in? I'd like to develop a consistent way of reviewing demos so I can semireguarly publish them to the NTSC/CMD audience.

Enjoy!
-Todd Elliott

2002-12-31 10:54

T.M.R
Account closed

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749

i'd say not to use such a rigid system because some (well, most) productions would get a skewed percentage because they lean more heavily on one aspect than another; Dutch Breeze isn't a massively complex demo on the code front but does have stunning graphics and good music, Mathematica is technically brutal but is far more sparse graphically so by using a combined score you'd be biasing against both titles.

When Kenz and i started reviewing stuff in Commodore Zone, we consciously ripped off part of the system used by Zzap! 64 where each category (for demos we used graphics, music, lastability and technical) has it's own percentage but the overall mark could be skewed to fit the reviewer's opinion so a product that scores in the 90's for music and technical doesn't get heavily marked down for a low graphics score.

Oh, and i'd say not to mark down because something isn't NTSC or CMD compatible because they were never *meant* to be; that's like marking a BMW down in a car review because it's crap at off-road driving and isn't a 4x4. Add a note by all means, but don't let it affect the score.

2002-12-31 16:50

Puterman
Account closed

Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 188

I agree with most of what TMR said, but I'd just like to add that wasting demo reviews on a bunch of Geos and CMD addicts probably isn't worth the effort.

2002-12-31 17:28

T.M.R
Account closed

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749

Yeah, but i'm more polite than you are... =-)

Refresh

Subscribe to this thread: