MSXdev '08

Hurray \o/

Best event of the year!

and not unsuccessfully, if you compare the amount of dev entries to the amount of g9k games/demos..

What´s the problem? You can gladly design your MSXDev game and then release an MSX2 port of it.

I would like to point that:

(a) MSX1 development is easier than MSX2 or higher development. Ok, I would admit that MSX1 development is more limited, but that means that you can save a lot of development time.

(b) MSX1 is the base standard. Therefore, all MSX2, 2+, Turbo-R, Zemina, OCM would be able to run such games.

Therefore: MSXdev'08 rules allow for shorter development times as well as a broader target users. I think that it is a step forward in any case. And it would be easier to compare games if all of them are judged as raw MSX1 entries.

Just in case: how many GFX9000 boards were sold? how many games were coded for such a config?

Again, I should admit that perhaps my perspective is a bit biassed. Or even totally skewed

Drawing tiles is certainly faster because there's less to doubt about. At a certain point you can't get more detail on a line of 8 pixels so at some point you'll call it a day. On MSX2/+/g9k you'd spend more time with those 8 pixels because there are far more possibilities.

What's limiting on MSX1 are sprites. On MSX2 you have 4 decent sprites on a row (2+or), on msx you have 4 ugly sprites on a row or 2 decent ones or some odd combination, which requires planning. Also limiting on MSX1 are those tiles-sprites hybrid images viejo makes and I made for MJTT. Mainly because Photoshop sucks for pixel work.

Edwin is making that version, but certain challenges and competitions are in the way 24/7 .. Perhaps we have some time after the megachallenge..

Well, I don't think ppl are really like boycotting the G9k or something, however:
- in the last, say, 4 years MSXdev'xx got in the way
- on MSX1 is easier to develop gfx for ppl who aren't 100% pixel artists
- now and then MRC got in the way with another challenge
- I don't think the current scene has many people who can actually draw well enough to make the G9k look like something decent, instead of uplifted msx1/msx2 gfx.
- Usually, for a G9k, ppl target on large-scale games. I don't think everyone could just make a large-scale game with the snap of a finger. I mean, have you ever heard of someone making a tetris-clone for G9k, or a pacman, or whatever is simple? So far I recall 1 large-scale game by XL2s, which isn't ready, and it's been on their website for years already.

I've told this before, but I'll bring it on again: if tomorrow a new videocard/chip is brought on for MSX which is twice as good as a G9k, then you'll get even less activity. I just don't think the ppl we have around today are much into all these colors 'n specs. This is -I think- why MSXdev'xx remains to be popular.

If you want to know what's living inside current developers' heads regarding G9k gaming, we need a large investigation/inquiry.

Note that at some point I actually want to do a large-scale G9k game, esp. as both Edwin and I have one and we usually are rather quick/streamlined with game development tools 'n stuff. It's just that MSXdev'08 got in the way again, and we're about to come up with our second MRC MEGAchallenge entry this month.

@Pingpong: We are currently playing around with the gfx9000. But not because we want a better looking game (superb gfx, multi layer scrolling, hundred or more sprite on screen etc.). It would be because we want to implement gameplay that isn't very easy to do on MSX1. Think about needing diagonal walls for gameplay (Those are a real nightmare to draw in screen2). And also to make it much easier on ourselves (removing the 4 sprite-on-a-line limit for example).

So if we decide to use gfx9000 it would still look like MSX1 (but with a little better gfx). Why?
1) Well I just love the MSX graphics from the old games.
2) I cannot make good gfx without the screen2 limitations in a shot time span.
3) I simply don't have the time/motivation to make incredible looking graphics.
4) It's all about gameplay. I have more fun playing ugly fun games than boring eye candy games (and thats why I'm still using (emulated)MSX).

But I do think there should be more software for g9k. We probably need a pioneer to start something and trigger other to show they can do better. Perhaps a Gbasic compo would be a start.

I disagree at this point. With MSX2 and higher video modes, such as G9k, you can draw what you want. Lots of possibilities. On MSX1, you are more limited, so you need more patience to draw anything. If you draw a brick, for sure it is easier on MSX1. Only one or two possible ways to draw it. On MSX2, you have many possibilities, and have to find the right texture and so. Sure. But if tou want to draw something more complex, MSX1 is more difficult, not to find the way it looks better, but simply to find the way it looks what you want.
The problem is that a lot of people can draw MSX1 graphics. But few ones can do good MSX2 graphics, and even less can do G9k graphics. Therefor MSXdev is more popular than MSX2/G9k: there are simply more people who can make a convincing MSX1 game than that there are people who can do an MSX2 game. The fact that more complex graphics for MSX1 are harder to make is partly true. Often MSX1 graphics are set-up in a typical 8x8 fashion, graphical objects are always a multiple of 8 in size. Anyway, there's a certain charm in it, to get the best out of this limited drawing mode. Besides: look at Space Manbow, that's tilemode alright, and their gfx weren't just rectangles. MSX1 wall tiles simple to draw? Suredo, and that's why I think a lot of people choose to make a game for MSXdev'xx.

I think my opinion was not correctly understood: i've compared msx1 with gfx9000 to push to extreme comparisons.
The real thing is that msxdev is a msx1 only competition. IMHO this is stupid. Period.
MSX is a system that spawned 4 generations of computers, msx is not only msx1 machines.

Instead recently the feel is that developing for msx is developing for msx1. If a developer makes a game for a little better hw like msx2 is the same as if he develop for another beast, like c64 or speccy or pc. That's the point.

I totally agree with Wolf.

No one is forced to join MSXdev. But MSXdev is MSXdev and has its own rules. If you think that there should be higher spec contests, please feel free to promote such an idea. MSXdev wanted to increase the MSX1 development and apparently this goal has been achived. It was created from scratch to aim such goal. Everyone can do so, of course.

When MSXdev was created, it intended to resurrect the MSX1 scene, that was literally forgotten by all the developers, strictly focused on MSX2 development. Everyone understood MSX development, MSX games = MSX2 development, MSX2 games.

Luckily, this has changed and the MSX1 scene has its own space ATM. But it shouldn't affect negatively the MSX2, MSX2+ and Turbo-R development. Moreover, if MSX1 is the entry point for new developers, it means that there are more programmers available and many of them will eventually switch to higher specs.

@PitPan:
".....Strictly focused on MSX2 development. Everyone understood MSX development, MSX games = MSX2 development, MSX2 games."

And This was an error, obviusly. As said more and more msx = (msx1,msx2,2+,tr) not a specific generation.

Now, the same error is repeating the only difference is the generation of msx..