| |
Knight Rider
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 116 |
Event id #3294 : X-2024
I was having a discussion with a few guys over beers in X'2023 and the compos. I was telling about my days as OR8 pilot in the RC world where we had junior, hobby and pro categories for the races.
To make it abit more motivational the people/groups who aren't 20 members strong each with 30+ years of demo coding experience it might be worth while considering other options ?
eg. some of the ideas we discussed:
. Having a pro (ie previous winner category) and hobby section so that contributors are compared to peers of similar experience
. Splitting the voting/ranking for 1 filers from multi disk entries
. Newcomer award for those individuals or teams who never submitted to X before |
|
... 155 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 575 |
Quoting krillMe neither. Just wondering why the same loader used in competing demos would be a problem.
Somebody said that each coder/artist/musician should only be in one demo entry .. but if there're 24 entries, that means we need 24 different loaders. Plus the complication of what happens if 5 demos user Krill loader and then you, Krill, enter your own demo as well? :-)
As I say .. for me, I'd leave everything alone. And I don't think it matters, compo-wise, whether there's a 1, 2, 5 or 10 year gap. |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 575 |
One small thing that I wonder about .. the play order of demos.
There's obviously some pre-screening or decision making that goes on behind the scenes to decide in what order the demos are played in. It seems unlikely that the top 5 demos were just surprisingly chosen to be the last 5 that would be played ;-)
I wonder how this works.. and whether a more typical (thinking outside of demoscene here, more about regular competitions) randomised play order would be fairer..?
Any system of pre-ordering can suggest to people about which demos the orgas think are better... which feels unfair to all the demos that came earlier in the compo... and especially for those shown at the very beginning.
Just a thought.
I did wonder how the ordering is determined, though.. is the order based on placings from previous years? Pre-viewings of submitted demos? Or just a gut feeling from the orgas based on which groups are submitting and how many disks there are? (this could be true - we were the first of the top 5 and the only to be on a single disk instead of two). |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5029 |
Raistlin, imho it would seriously suck to watch the best demos earlier, and then some of the compofiller ones. Do you seriously think this changes results? |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 575 |
Quote: Raistlin, imho it would seriously suck to watch the best demos earlier, and then some of the compofiller ones. Do you seriously think this changes results?
I'm not sure that I understand why it would suck.. but I'm sure there's method in the madness - and I think it's been this way for a long time at many of the parties so there must be a good reason for it.. |
| |
Wile Coyote
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 646 |
@Raistlin Agreed, the demo display order should be random. Maybe X should have one of those Bingo machines fill with balls. Each demo could be assigned a number or letter :D |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2855 |
Quoting RaistlinI'm not sure that I understand why it would suck.. but I'm sure there's method in the madness - and I think it's been this way for a long time at many of the parties so there must be a good reason for it.. Random has been tried and comes with its own set of problems. The bumpy change quality and effort, as Oswald mentioned, maybe be refreshing to some but annoying to others.
The way it is now (randomised within ordered bins) seems to have the least problems. Watching a compo expecting generally progressively "better" entries has a certain charm.
As for changing compo results, pretty sure a different voting system would have more sway there. Such as ranking entries (with a same-rank option) instead of grading them. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2855 |
Quoting RaistlinSomebody said that each coder/artist/musician should only be in one demo entry .. but if there're 24 entries, that means we need 24 different loaders. You're casually omitting the new-work clause. But anyways, nobody agreed with that suggestion, so better ignore it from now on.
Quoting RaistlinPlus the complication of what happens if 5 demos user Krill loader and then you, Krill, enter your own demo as well? :-) Easy, it'll be a onefiler. =) (Or running on a previously unreleased loader version.) |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Raistlin, the order was based on the size of the entries. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2855 |
Quoting TDJRaistlin, the order was based on the size of the entries. Seems like a good proxy for amount of content (size after compression, i take it). Can of course be trolled with some random bits. =) |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2855 |
Quoting ChristopherJamI do like the idea of limiting the number of disk sides.. This doesn't seem to happen for X, but it would certainly make it more interesting.
Adding another disk side is cheap these days, and an easy way out for ever more content.
Restricting to two disk sides would pose new and interesting challenges, and yield better comparability of demos.
Development of denser disk encoding schemes and associated tools would be resumed. People would put unrolled code to disk less casually. The sweet spot somewhere in the range between fully real-time and fully-streamed would shift. Etc. =) |
| Previous - 1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 18 - Next |
