MSXdev '17 announced - community input desired

By Metalion

Paragon (1639)

09-12-2016, 11:47

Done !

By santiontanon

Paragon (1871)

11-12-2016, 03:49

Nice! This time I am participating for sure! Anyone else here planning on submitting something?

By Louthrax

Prophet (2503)

11-12-2016, 12:01

I was thinking that another interesting category for that contest could be "MSX tools/utilities"... Less fancy than games of course, maybe a bit harder to evaluate (no GFX, no sounds...), but that could give a nice boost to that area? There are still lots of things to be done here.

By Pac

Scribe (7167)

11-12-2016, 13:57

You are absolutely right on that, good point. New tools are a benefit for the MSX always. Maybe is time to expand this contest and avoid future editions without few or any entry. The more, the merrier!

By Uninteresting

Champion (378)

11-12-2016, 15:21

@santiontanon I hope to get something worth playing done by the deadline, so, yes. No expectations of ranking high, but at least I'll have the pleasure of knowing someone else will feel better for not being the last ;-)

By Sandy Brand

Champion (320)

11-12-2016, 15:26

I like the idea of adding a tools category, but I do wonder how we can compare them and pick a winner as they might vary wildly (e.g.: how do you compare a zip tool, with a music tool)?

By Louthrax

Prophet (2503)

11-12-2016, 15:46

Sandy Brand wrote:

I like the idea of adding a tools category, but I do wonder how we can compare them and pick a winner as they might vary wildly (e.g.: how do you compare a zip tool, with a music tool)?

That could also be said for games (comparing a Sudoku game to a shoot'em up ).

I had some criteria in mind:

Interest for the MSX community
Technical challenge
Innovation (has this already been done before ?)
Reliability
User interface
Documentation
...

By AxelStone

Prophet (3209)

11-12-2016, 17:29

I see no sense to have 2 categories: MSX classic and MSX no limits. Why MSX1 should have its own category and not other systems like MSX2, 2+ or turbo R? No limits category is too wide, it's a big bag where you can see MSX2 plain games or turbo R + 9000 + OPL4 games. I think that @Louthrax proposal is more interesting, open a category for apps / tools, so we could have 2 categories:

MSX games (no limits, use desired hardware)
MSX tools (no limits, use desired hardware)

By tfh

Prophet (3484)

11-12-2016, 18:41

Weird....
I left a reply on their site and it's gone now...

By Kai Magazine

Paragon (1428)

11-12-2016, 20:09

I think it is a good idea to have 2 separate caregories for msx games, considering there are 2 tendencies in the msx comunity:
One being he ones who love the msx just the way it was initially manufactured and or the ones who love the first era (1983-1986 for example)
And the other group are those who like all the improvements and extra features the msx extendable can manage to control.

Also, some of all those wanderful msx1 developers would feel it is unfair to judge their games compared to the ones with better hardware and they might decide not to participate at all, causing (maybe) a decrease in developement incentive.

Anyway, if I am not mistaken, there was a compo for "no limits" games already, and it failed (I do not know the reason exactly, but I belive it was something related to lack of participants).

As they say: "if it works, don't fix it!"

2 categories are just perfect in my opinion.

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (10151)

11-12-2016, 23:03

@Tools:

I'd say that tools should be made for PC, or at least be allowed to.

it's (far) easier to make, also for creative folks who are not 100% programmers
it's desirable to have a bigger system to edit/design something which has a smaller scale. Cross-development so to say. Assemblers are already used in that way, and I've been using my own tools to design tiles and to make maps over the years. Iirc Konami has also used other 'bigger' systems to develop MSX games with.

@separate systems:

While many make simple comparisons between MSX1 and higher, it's also related to the genre of games you want to make. Some games are just downright unrealistic for MSX1. Yea sure, with a large dose o' fantasy you could port SD-Snatched to MSX1, but let's not try to imagine what let-down that would be. Or, hey, Space Manbow for MSX1, or Aleste 2 for MSX1, I doubt anyone would like to spend a minute on that.

The consequences of small specs are that games end up being small-scaled too. And that's nice if Comic Bakery or Pippols is what you're after. For bigger games, it just won't cut it. So the discussion shouldn't be whether MSX1 should compete against MSX2+whatever, but about what scale a game is allowed to have.

By santiontanon

Paragon (1871)

12-12-2016, 00:22

"Nostalgia" is a big factor for me, and I never owned anything more powerful than an MSX1, so, I don't get too excited with MSX2/MSX2+ games, and that's why, personally, I like the MSX1 separate category. But other people might feel differently since they actually owned an MSX2 or MSX2+ back in the day. But in any case,I don't care much about how many categories there are, etc., since for me this is just an excuse to develop a new game. So, as long as there is a competition, and people get excited about the new games or tools, any kind of rules would work for me!

By Louthrax

Prophet (2503)

12-12-2016, 01:41

wolf_ wrote:

@Tools:

I'd say that tools should be made for PC, or at least be allowed to.

it's (far) easier to make, also for creative folks who are not 100% programmers
it's desirable to have a bigger system to edit/design something which has a smaller scale. Cross-development so to say. Assemblers are already used in that way, and I've been using my own tools to design tiles and to make maps over the years. Iirc Konami has also used other 'bigger' systems to develop MSX games with.

I think there are already lots of cross-platform development tools available for PC/Mac/Linux, so it might be harder to create something innovative here. Also, creating a polished tool with a good UI is definitively not that easy!

Anyway, I fully agree it would be better to keep the contest open to non-MSX applications, as long as they are MSX-related of course (like the SCC voice encoder recently made by Artrag: there are already lots of sound conversion tools, but this one is very MSX specific... and allowed to create a great Salamander voice-addon patch).

By AxelStone

Prophet (3209)

12-12-2016, 15:39

wolf_ wrote:

The consequences of small specs are that games end up being small-scaled too. And that's nice if Comic Bakery or Pippols is what you're after. For bigger games, it just won't cut it. So the discussion shouldn't be whether MSX1 should compete against MSX2+whatever, but about what scale a game is allowed to have.

I think that specs should not be limited, there should be free. As you say, small specs means small scaled games.

By snout

Ascended (15187)

12-12-2016, 16:02

I think one part of its success was MSXDev being limited to MSX1 and modest memory specs. I wonder if a similar attempt for MSX2 would do well. So MSX2, 64kB RAM, same soundchip/rom limitations as before. Most - if not all - Japanese MSX2 games were created for MSX2, 64kB, often adding characteristic MSX-MUSIC, so it's safe to say impressive things can be achieved.

By mars2000you

Enlighted (6613)

12-12-2016, 17:32

snout wrote:

I think one part of its success was MSXDev being limited to MSX1 and modest memory specs. I wonder if a similar attempt for MSX2 would do well. So MSX2, 64kB RAM, same soundchip/rom limitations as before. Most - if not all - Japanese MSX2 games were created for MSX2, 64kB, often adding characteristic MSX-MUSIC, so it's safe to say impressive things can be achieved.

The two Passion MSX2 contests were something similar to the test you suggest. However, the mazimum size was 512kB ROM and 128kB (memory-mapped) RAM to be more realistic considering that generally European MSX2 (and higher) developers dislikes small games. For the sound, it was limited to PSG as for MSXdev' (and maybe it was a wrong choice, as MSX2 coders like more advanced sound chips).

These contests provided only 4 games, all made by Dutch coders. No any Spanish or Brazilian coder had the idea (or the envy) to participate, even if I had chosen a Spanish coder as one of the judges for the second edition. Why? Probably because MSX1 is more popular in these countries than MSX2.

I don't think that limiting the RAM to 64kB should be a good idea for MSX2 (and higher) contests, even if many Japanese coders work with this limitation. The European culture, based on Philips and Sony machines, is different from the Japanese culture on this matter. If 64kB seems 'normal' in Japan, 128kB is more viewed as 'standard' in Europe, at least in the countries where MSX2 was very popular.

By ren

Paragon (2025)

12-12-2016, 18:01

I like the idea of an 'unrestricted' compo next to the classic MSXdev compo.
Bonus points for progressively enhanced entries of course..!

I also like the idea of an utilities compo.
In 2012 there was a fun mini-compo actually: The Experimental Sound Mini-Compo

Entries:

VDP Music (@hap)
The Alan Randoms Project (@aorante)
Noise Raiser (@msxkun)

Next to the criteria Louthrax mentioned, there could also be a 'popular vote' here: just the tool with the most 'thrill' factor.. ;)

AFAIC MSXdev could be the annual compo with multiple categories to compete in, like e.g. the big Revision & Assembly compos have.

Size-restricted compos (e.g. 4K) could be fun as well I guess? :)
Other areas to compete in could be music (PSG/FM/.../free/wild), demo, or gfx..

Btw wasn't there a bit of a mess organisation-wise last MSXdev compo? Just hope it will be properly done now (and in the future). On the MSXdev site I'm missing info regarding who's behind it (who's 'MSXdev Team' ?) + the history/background of the compo..

So I guess the compo could grow, with success being dependent on organisation, interest, and I guess the prices/sponsors/donations made available (next to competing for the honour of course.. ;))

By tvalenca

Paladin (747)

12-12-2016, 21:53

I understand that for a 30+ years old plataform almost everything has been done to it, that's why some developers find more attractive coding for a restricted category than a no-limit category... But there's a lot of really cool things that people do everyday which could be under a MSXDEV category but since MSXDEV is a MSX1 Cartridge/Cassette only contest they doesn't even bother posting:

With this in mind, I can think on a number of categories:

- OPL4 and/or V9990 with other kind of restrictions to generate an appropriate level of challenge (limited to 64k RAM and 720k disk drive for example) category
- Turbo R and MSX2+ specific categories
- Demo categories
- Tool/Utilities Category

I don't think that MSXDEV will grow to a number of categories instantly, but this would definetely be good for the scene.

By Uninteresting

Champion (378)

13-12-2016, 07:45

While I'd rather work with MSX1 and 16kB limit (because that's what I expect I can 'fully' utilize when working alone and my only physical MSX is an MSX1), would it be possible for the judges to consider the technical limitations when evaluating the entries? I mean, an MSX1 game that has exceptional graphics for MSX1 would be regarded better than an MSX2 game that looks identical if there would've been reason to put the extra capabilities into use.

By spl

Paragon (1470)

13-12-2016, 08:41

tvalenca wrote:

I understand that for a 30+ years old plataform almost everything has been done to it, that's why some developers find more attractive coding for a restricted category than a no-limit category... But there's a lot of really cool things that people do everyday which could be under a MSXDEV category but since MSXDEV is a MSX1 Cartridge/Cassette only contest they doesn't even bother posting:

With this in mind, I can think on a number of categories:

- OPL4 and/or V9990 with other kind of restrictions to generate an appropriate level of challenge (limited to 64k RAM and 720k disk drive for example) category
- Turbo R and MSX2+ specific categories
- Demo categories
- Tool/Utilities Category

I don't think that MSXDEV will grow to a number of categories instantly, but this would definetely be good for the scene.

Remember the dissapeared #MSXDev compo? It had no restrictions... nobody wanted to participate. And only few games, most of them incomplete, were done in several years.

By spl

Paragon (1470)

13-12-2016, 08:51

snout wrote:

I think one part of its success was MSXDev being limited to MSX1 and modest memory specs. I wonder if a similar attempt for MSX2 would do well. So MSX2, 64kB RAM, same soundchip/rom limitations as before. Most - if not all - Japanese MSX2 games were created for MSX2, 64kB, often adding characteristic MSX-MUSIC, so it's safe to say impressive things can be achieved.

A similar attempt without any restrictions, #MSXDEV compo, was a complete failure, and closed because nobody wanted to participate on it, and most of the entries are still incomplete... for years.

I like MSX 2> much more than original MSX 1, but... that's still the reality. Few MSX 2 games are finished. And even some of them (SF2) are "finished" (hope it will be finished with original title screen and some details) as jokes for former great projects.

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (10151)

13-12-2016, 10:27

There are many parameters to consider, you can't just narrow it down to just MSX1 vs MSX2/+, or small specs vs free specs.

PassionMSX contests: little was done by the organizer(s) to create a hype. There was a contest, and then it was "bye bye, see you at the deadline". It doesn't work like that.

The reign of MSXDev'xx. If most teams go for MSXdev'xx, there's no time left for other contests, e.g. they will end up with little or no entries.

We grow older. The facts of life (tm). Most evenings I'm just laying down on the couch, whereas years ago I'd be more productive.

Momentum. In 2005/2006/2007 there was an MSX-momentum in the scene. In recent years, I feel it's slipping away, probably also related to the previous point.

Like-factor! Some people just prefer contest A over contest B, regardless of the specifications.

To limit specifications influences game genres, and it indicates how hard it becomes to do things. The less RAM you can use, the less you can use things like look-up tables, buffers etc. The less RAM you can use for code, the more you have to optimize and go through dozens o' loopholes to get there. This doesn't create better games, it does create longer development trajects and thus increases the risks that things won't get finished. If someone creates a title image in Photoshop, then reducing it to sc2 would take more efforts (to get it right) than reducing it to sc5/7/8, yet the latter we consider high-spec and prone to delays. The world upside down!

By Latok

msx guru (3973)

13-12-2016, 13:39

I'd like to add to the discussion that multiple categories only work if there are enough submissions. And I don't expect many submissions. So I would let them compete within the same competition (one category).

Why don't you just raise the bar to MSX2 standard definition as maximum configuration. So V9938 VDP and 64kB RAM. And maybe MSX-MUSIC as an allowed add-on...

Then people who want to make an MSX1 game can still make an MSX1 game and if someone prefers MSX2, he's free to do so.

They can all still compete in the same competition. After all, there are many MSX1 games better than MSX2 games.

By andrear1979

Expert (98)

13-12-2016, 13:57

Hi! my personal feelings:

as a user: I feel frustration when I can't run a new game because my MSX specs aren't high enough
as a developer: I like to reach the largest possible audience with my game
as a developer short of time, ability and energies: I'm more inclined to participate in a low-spec contest or a mini-compo, because it's easier to keep self-discipline, limit the amount of features and honour the deadline

So, I do like a "your-game-must-work-on-every-MSX-1" contest. Of course I have no objection to a "no-limits" category within the same contest. The more, the merrier

PS: this sounds like good topic for a new MRC poll!

By tvalenca

Paladin (747)

13-12-2016, 17:48

spl wrote:

Remember the dissapeared #MSXDev compo? It had no restrictions... nobody wanted to participate. And only few games, most of them incomplete, were done in several years.

That's exactly what I meant when I said:

tvalenca wrote:

I understand that for a 30+ years old plataform almost everything has been done to it, that's why some developers find more attractive coding for a restricted category than a no-limit category...

And if I may, this is a huge pile of bollocks. The first thing people say when you release anything for MSX1 is: "when you're going to make a MSX2 version?" VERY FRUSTRATING. That's why I (unfortunately) don't bother with MSXDEV, even if I'm not half the coder some people here. And if I ever release anything, it will be at least for MSX2+ (or V9958 loaded MSX2) or V9990. If you coders refuse to code to anything better than a 16k MSX1, I refuse to code for anything worse than V9958.

By tvalenca

Paladin (747)

13-12-2016, 17:51

andrear1979 wrote:

Hi! my personal feelings:

as a user: I feel frustration when I can't run a new game because my MSX specs aren't high enough
as a developer: I like to reach the largest possible audience with my game
as a developer short of time, ability and energies: I'm more inclined to participate in a low-spec contest or a mini-compo, because it's easier to keep self-discipline, limit the amount of features and honour the deadline

So, I do like a "your-game-must-work-on-every-MSX-1" contest. Of course I have no objection to a "no-limits" category within the same contest. The more, the merrier

PS: this sounds like good topic for a new MRC poll!

You wanna low specs? bring a n-liner BASIC Contest!

By sd_snatcher

Prophet (3684)

13-12-2016, 21:16

I loved the new rules! They're simple and straightforward. And also they please both sides of the spectrum:

1) We have a lot of people people here who like the restrictions of the plain vanilla MSX1

2) OTOH, we have quite some people that feel frustrated with such restrictions. Since there wouldn't be resources to judge a huge context with a lot of categories, a single category with all possible freedom is an excellent bet

Too sad I probably won't have enough free time for such huge projects like a complete game programming. Maybe in the next editions. I wish a lot of success for the participants in both categories.

And as a user, I really will welcome games for the MSX2/2+/TR.

By Manuel

Ascended (19803)

13-12-2016, 22:55

Personally, I'd really like to see a minimal-spec MSX2 contest. A nice balance between limits and programming comfort, I'd say. But still, what can I say about it... I'm probably not going to participate anyway. It's just that I like to see new MSX2 software more than new MSX1 software. For me, MSX2 is the true MSX This feeling became clear in 2001 when Nishi said that the V9938 was the VDP that was actually supposed to be in MSX. Because it was too late (which would later be a repeating story), they used the older TMS9xxx. Or, that is what I remember of it, at least.

Anyways, what I really like is that lately, despite having no contests, some really nice games were released, for MSX and MSX2. And that is what is the most important for me: people enjoy their MSX and create something for it that other MSX fans can also enjoy. That way we can all simply extend our enjoyment in MSX! Yay. Positiveness!

By pitpan

Prophet (3158)

14-12-2016, 10:48

A contest is as good as the quality of the resulting entries. MSXdev was born to revert a situation: in 2002 no MSX(1) games were being produced. In fact, no new MSX(1) games had been released for almost 10 years, whereas only MSX2 + FM games were being published. At the moment, the situation is more balanced and therefore a new compromise could be reached in order to keep both "families" happy: die-hard plain MSX(1)ers and almighty frankenupgraded MSX(2/2+/R)ers. The only facts that remain the same are that (1) there is always more people complaining about rules (in any contest) than programming actual games; and (2) keeping the specs restricted also helps to reduce/control development times.

Best of lucks to the organization and all the contestants! May the MSX be with you.

By Kai Magazine

Paragon (1428)

14-12-2016, 10:58

With the amount of opl4 and v9990 cartridges sold lately, I belive this second caregory could be a nice boost to create software for those chips.
I am working on several v9990 projects at the moment and I would not mind to submit 1 or 2 of them to the "no limits" category.
Someone else? any takers?

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (10151)

14-12-2016, 13:22

pitpan wrote:

and (2) keeping the specs restricted also helps to reduce/control development times.

Choice of game genre increases or decreases development time. Slim RAM limitations increases development time, because you need more loopholes to get things done. ROM-size limitations increase development time (e.g. you need intelligent compression schemes).

So, with increased specs (say, more RAM, more ROM), the development will get easier, and will allow e.g. C-language entries more easily.

Before the success rate of game development is solely related to specs, it's smarter to investigate the reasons why game projects fail. Is it purely the code? Is it art (gfx + music)? Is it the tools? Something else?

By marcos.m.carvajal.1

Expert (85)

14-12-2016, 18:38

For me, the perfect solution is the one that would make people submit the most number of games. Last MSXDev had only 3 entries. I think that if we make several categories is not going to make people submit more games per category, but divide the sumbisions, thus creating a worse experience overall

So I would vote for one category only.
About the specs, I agree that MSX1 calls for limited games, but higher specs calls for more complex games, thus increasing development time too.
My vote goes for no spec restrictions, because this competition is to have fun! This year everybody is excited about v9990. Personally, I'm excited about the gr8net and the online possibilities (Must be the only one though...) MSX means something slightly different for everybody, so let's make a competition that sums all the excitement.
Honestly, I don't think a game is going to have more possibilities to win because has v9990 graphics. A good game is going to be a good game anyway...

So, I vote for no restrictions, no categories. Let only passion and excitement drive the submissions. If somehow we end up with too many games(yipee!) then let's think about categories next year.

Oh, and if one sumbision is a tool (MSX only, please) that's perfect for me. I woul'd love to vote for, say, an original musical tool if I feel more excited about that than another scroller...

By Kai Magazine

Paragon (1428)

15-12-2016, 10:25

wolf_ wrote:

pitpan wrote:

and (2) keeping the specs restricted also helps to reduce/control development times.

Choice of game genre increases or decreases development time. Slim RAM limitations increases development time, because you need more loopholes to get things done. ROM-size limitations increase development time (e.g. you need intelligent compression schemes).

So, with increased specs (say, more RAM, more ROM), the development will get easier, and will allow e.g. C-language entries more easily.

Before the success rate of game development is solely related to specs, it's smarter to investigate the reasons why game projects fail. Is it purely the code? Is it art (gfx + music)? Is it the tools? Something else?

I agree 100%
We released 4 msx2 games this year, with various hardware support (msx audio, msx music, opl4, scc, 2+ and r800 enhancements etc) and those were no small games (3 of them were 2048k).
I find it way easier and faster to create games without limits.

By pitpan

Prophet (3158)

15-12-2016, 11:06

Kai: adding more media to a game does not make it more complex, just bigger. Check the compression ratio of your games and benchmark some other MSX titles. This is no criticism, it is just a fact: no answer required.

Wolf: I partially agree. But limited specs make you realistic as a programmer when you choose the game genre, and thus provide a better chance of meeting deadlines, although it is true that my description was oversimplistic. When faced with unlimited specs you'd find people saying that they will port Monkey Island in 3 months or any other nonsense

By santiontanon

Paragon (1871)

15-12-2016, 13:05

I do not fully agree that "no limits" means "easier development" and more games completed. In my limited experience of MSX development, the limits were (1) the main reason I finished the game (if I had not imposed myself the limit of doing a 32KB cartridge, I'd still be creating more and more levels, adding more enemy types, etc., and probably would never finish the game), and (2) the most fun, since it turned the process into a small puzzle (if there was no challenge, I would have probably not have had the motivation to work on in on the first place).

So, I think that having the two categories: limit and no-limit, is a very good solution. I wish the "MSX1" category was MSX1 with 64KB of RAM rather than 16KB of RAM, but oh well, I'll adapt

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (10151)

15-12-2016, 13:15

@santiontanon: The limits you're describing are artificial limits. Limits you impose onto yourself to keep you focused. Even when you have e.g. a 128 KB MSX2 at your disposal, you limit yourself to 32 KB MSX1 just to get a game done. And that's fine. However: others may cling more to technical limits. Artificial limits would simply get in the way. That is why there's such a discussion here, these artificial limits are so vague. They mean something different for everyone.

If we're talking technical limits, then more VDP/ROM/RAM-resources simply mean speeding up the process. If we're talking artificial limits, then feature creep sneaks into the development. One is not better than the other, but at least the technical limits are clear to everyone.

By pitpan

Prophet (3158)

15-12-2016, 13:31

It is also related to the way you understand development. For me, it is always a challenge and I like it hard

For puzzles or other less real-time critic genres, it is clear that I could made them in, lets say, compiled BASIC for MSX2, throw in lots of full-screen images and then pack the resulting disk (or disks) as a ROM image, consuming a tiny fraction of time. But the thing is that I do not want to do that, and it is a matter of personal choice. I like the beauty of over-optimisation even when it is not strictly required, and creating from scratch every single byte included in the final ROM. But, once again, that is just me and my perks.

For me, game development has an inner technical beauty related to getting the most using less resources.

As long as I am allowed to keep it small, the rules can say anything about limits, including a limitless compo, even if it admits PC games with an MSX flavour on top: no need to worry about specs!

By marcos.m.carvajal.1

Expert (85)

15-12-2016, 15:14

For me, as a pixel artist, it's faster to create MSX1 tiles and sprites because I spend less time drawing. Well, sometimes you have to spend time to find some clever solution but overall it's faster.

But for other artists it might be different.

Aso, for coding I see the two sides also. "Restrictions = faster development" for some and "No restrictions = faster developments for others"

So, why make rules that would discourage some people to participate? Let's make the rules that get us all the most number of entries.

Different people value different things. So even if one game is more beautiful because it has "better" graphics, it might not be seen that way by people that admire other aspects, like clever solutions on limited machines. Certain games designs calls for higher specs than others. So I believe in letting creators decide what they want to create and then let the community decide which one is their favorite.

Public voting is a must in my opinion. It's makes the contest fun for everybody.

By Kai Magazine

Paragon (1428)

16-12-2016, 00:54

I thought this was a competition about game developement (the whole game, including variety, originality, beauty...), not a coding complexity competition.
If that is the case, I am not interested.

By pitpan

Prophet (3158)

16-12-2016, 09:16

Please note that I started my post with a blatant "for me". That means that it is just my opinion, and you are welcome to ignore it. On the other hand, I will not join MSXdev competition either, because I am currently involved in non-MSX projects and I do not have enough spare time.

By Kai Magazine

Paragon (1428)

16-12-2016, 09:49

It is not just your opinion (which I consider valid, true and I welcome your feedback) but an overall of many other opinions. It looks like it is a coding skills contest.
I am no coder. I am a game designer and graphist. For me the most important thing is to create a nice game the easiest way possible, not the most difficult possible. Perhaps if games were easier to develope there would be more participants? and even more msx games outside the compo?
Regarding the compression ratio, offcourse you are right, but as you might know, to compress heavily dithered screen 8 images or interlaced screen 7 images often creates a larger file than the uncompressed one, and a very powerfull compressor which actually saves space takes way too long to uncompress the image to make the load times acceptable, so the most player friendly (and simple) solution in those games was not to compress the images. It is not the same to compress 1 tileset in screen 2 than 2 screen 7/8 images (112k). It is way too slow
Life on Mars is heavily compressed (everything: code, music, graphics) and load times are very long on msx2.

By santiontanon

Paragon (1871)

16-12-2016, 11:42

@Kai Magazine: the way I see it, the competition is whatever we want it to be!

If we want to have a healthy competition, I think there should be a mix of games. If we get some entries that try to show off coding skills, some with good story-lines, some with interesting and original gameplay, some with good graphics, some with with good music, and (very importantly) some small games from people that take the competition as a chance to learn how to do MSX games, then we got it all!! Of course that is much to ask, but here's hoping

In any case, I just hope we have a successful competition and it serves as motivation for lots of people to get engaged on creating more games

By Uninteresting

Champion (378)

16-12-2016, 18:20

Hmm, I see that my point has already been invalidated by good arguments and a bit of self-reflection. I plan to participate to have a reason and a deadline for coding, not to win. In such case, it doesn't matter if the games are for MSX1 only or without limitations. And since I'm not interested in competing, my take on the competition is irrelevant. I'm in just to challenge myself.

So... I'd delete my earlier comments if I could.

By viejo_archivero

Paragon (1395)

26-12-2016, 16:57

What we really need is more games with nude characters!! (/me looks at Lobo )

By rjp

Master (195)

31-12-2016, 16:01

Louthrax wrote:

I was thinking that another interesting category for that contest could be "MSX tools/utilities"... Less fancy than games of course, maybe a bit harder to evaluate (no GFX, no sounds...), but that could give a nice boost to that area? There are still lots of things to be done here.

Sure! There are so many software to be created for MSX... As a Unix freak, I found many utilities in MSX-DOS Tools, which help me a lot. But there are many Unix core utils which must have a MSX version. I wanna build some of them, despite the contest.

MSXdev '17 announced - community input desired

Share

Related content

Comments (45)