| | mankeli
Registered: Oct 2010
Posts: 134 |
About the origins of c64 demoscene
It almost feels to me that C64 demoscene is somewhat younger than the Amiga demoscene. Would that be (historically) correct thing to say? Not by much, but kinda couple of years.
Many of the screens and effects often seen on C64 seem to have done earlier on the Amiga. (like 1986 vs. 1988) - This doesn't surprise me, since Copper makes raster programming so much more pleasant. But C64 setup was still a pretty usable in late 1980s, and much cheaper too, so I wonder if the C64 demoscene did start by trying to imitate stuff seen on Amiga? I mean just a random example of a 1986 Amiga intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg96m76o7JA |
|
... 36 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| | Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2957 |
Quoting HCLWow, that was a strong reaction :) Quoting chatGPZThat escalated quickly Oh, Fourgy? He does that all the time. =) |
| | chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11327 |
Just to stir the pot a bit: i'd like to see proof that the demoscene did NOT originate on compunet. |
| | 4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 206 |
Quote: Quoting HCLWow, that was a strong reaction :) Quoting chatGPZThat escalated quickly Oh, Fourgy? He does that all the time. =)
Guilty as charged. I know. I admit. Sorry, I guess it’s some kinda autism.
About the subject. (Well not the real subject, Krill already hijacked that with his fishooks some time ago…) History is full of “informed best guesses”. Krill, i just happen to strongly think that you simply cannot provide enough evidence to eliminate the current “informed best guess” i.e. current standing theory and justify a major rethink + emergence of a new, different “informed best guess”. One can go and question every single “informed best guess” in whole of human history. That’s pretty useless. And counterproductive. We can try to re-re-revision history for a millionth time. For what?
And if you yourself are not willing to perform an extensive research into the matter, I don’t understand what exactly are you trying to accomplish with your “in my book” statements. Are you fishing, are you luring someone else to perform the research to back or dismiss your opinion? Or you’re perhaps just doing it to make that autist Fourgy blabber? Remember, we have a valid theory about the begginings of the demoscene. If you want do disprove this theory, do the research, publish results. You shouldn’t tempt the other side to prove what needs no further proof for now, you’re the one with a “new insight” who should search for proof, do a whole new research thru some new approach, not just pull stuff out of your nose. |
| | deetsay
Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 43 |
Handles and groups originate from the telephone phreaking scene. Or maybe it's some cowboy thing where all famous gunslingers have a nickname? Or a circus performer thing?
I wouldn't be surprised if animating logos, balls, scrollers, credits and greetings (like the Spreadpoint prod that was linked) could be found in C64 crack intros even before 1986, but either way that "demo" specifically simply looks to me like a crack intro on crack (pun intended).
And finally, the Amiga was obviously more powerful and a lot of the techniques that drive modern C64 demos weren't invented until the 90s, so... I think I get what @mankeli was saying, but the wording "C64 demoscene is younger" is just not right. That's certainly not physically the case with the people involved, and the demoscene absolutely has roots on the C64, meaning it older, not younger, regardless of what may have been happening later. |
| | Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2957 |
Quoting deetsayI wouldn't be surprised if animating logos, balls, scrollers, credits and greetings (like the Spreadpoint prod that was linked) could be found in C64 crack intros even before 1986, but either way that "demo" specifically simply looks to me like a crack intro on crack (pun intended). The vast majority of early demos undeniably shares a lot of style with crack intros, but that wouldn't contradict either interpretation, imho, of the demo scene springing from cracking scene vs both of them emerging at the same time, with a common proto-scene ancestor. |
| | Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1643 |
This topic is something for the most high gentlemen of the Scene Court to decide, with wigs on. Not up to you low life guys to decide just like that. |
| | Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1082 |
I think it's a microcosm of more serious things. |
| | hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4714 |
Well. Both me and MacX has already stated the obvious many times, and we also had a smaller copy party up on the big royal barrow at Jelling, Denmark (close to Harald Bluetooth's runestone) together with Morphfrog and Zzap69 to connect to the true scene. Confused? Here we go again:
The first scene handles were used by the vikings in Scandinavia, like Red-Ass, Óttarr the Vendel Crow, and Ketill Flatnose, for example. This is well known. Runestones were made, where data was preserved for well over 1000 years - look at it as primitive scroll texts, but instead of the text moving, you have to move your head (more or less like a floppy drive, where the head moves to read). Only the elite knew runes, which made this scene exclusive just like the scene is today. You might wonder what all this has to do with the C64? Well, it's a code: as you know C stands for 100 in roman numerals, and then add 64 = 164. The runestone 164 in Spånga, Södermanland, Sweden, just happens to mention a swapper, Guðmarr, who eagerly awaits to visit other countries to spread and mostly get new warez: "Guðbjôrn (and) Oddi, they raised this stone in memory of Guðmarr, their father. He who died stood valiantly in the staff of the ship; (now) lies inhumed in the west." The stone is of course coded for sceners eyes only, as it sports not only long-branch runes, but also cipher runes made of both short-twig runes and staveless runes. Coincidence? I think not.
There is more evidence, but it does not remain, because it is gone. |
| | Ziaxx
Registered: Oct 2020
Posts: 18 |
I think the original post got "demoscene" mixed up with "demo effects". It's possible that there were raster effects and such on the Amiga before the C64, but to me anything made to be spread to others is part of the scene. A simple picture with a scroller and ripped music is also part of the scene, and those were around way earlier. All those music collections with music from various games as well. Just because it doesn't include raster bars or other effects doesn't excude it from the scene, because then all the new releases such as graphics and PETSCII aren't part of the scene either, and that doesn't make much sense, right? |
| | hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4714 |
My guess is the concept "demoscene" was invented on the Amiga, before that, on the C64, it was only "The Scene" - with everyone intertwined in a big chaotic family, making cracks, demos, intros etc.
With the Amiga and Atari ST everything obviously had to be autistically sorted into horrible terms like dentro, cracktro, trackmo whatever. :D |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 - Next | |
