MSXdev'21 is ON

What a quick reaction! That's great, Danjovic. Please be welcome.

I am not sure if I can find the time, energy and inspiration to participate. At least there's plenty of time until the deadline...

The rules say, "All entries must be unreleased games". I have considered lightly updating the game engine I made for my MSXdev'20 entry (Jäästä) and reusing that for a new adventure game (i.e., the difference will be in the graphics, scripts, text and sound, if I add some this time). Will this be acceptable? (I have no aspirations to win, only to bolster the number of participants if I can.)

In the same vein, will games made with AGD be accepted?

Great news ! Does it mean that this year if we donate we can still submit an entry ?

Wow, this came way earlier than expected!! Great news indeed!! I'll try my best to join. I am not sure I will have the amount of time I had in the last editions, but at least I'll try to submit something small (I have been wanting to do a BASIC game for a long time, so, maybe this is the excuse I needed!)

Count me in!

Sure! Why not a category where we can have "MSX 2 and above"?

I love this contest, but can't contain myself to nag about the MSX1-only restriction. I wonder if other platforms did the same:

• SMSdev contest: But we'll only accept the SG-1000 mk1/mk2 specs
• AmigaDev contest: But we'll only accept the OCS specs.
• PCdev contest: But we'll only accept the IBM-5150 specs
• SpeccyDev contest: But we'll only accept entries for the ZX-Spectrum 48 specs
• CPCdev contest: But we'll only accept the CPC-464 specs
• PC-98dev: But we'll only accept entries for the first PC-9801 / 5MHz / 8 colors / beeper model

I don't know about the other systems, but in the CPCRetroDev (that has been going on for many years), actually they do indeed ONLY allow CPC-464 specs!

Although I do not have a very strong opinion on whether there should be an MSX2 category, the years that this category has existed, it received VERY little attention (3 games at most if I remember correctly). So, I think that a separate MSX2 competition with longer terms (e.g. once every 2 years) might be more appropriate? (again, I don't have a strong opinion, and I am fine either way haha, just proposing possibilities )

ROFL!

Great to see the contest is back on track! Also glad that rules keep up the spirit that made the MSXdev huge and that preserve its legacy. Count Relevo in!

Very noice..

My ¢2:

* a community/dev feeler may be (might have been) a good/interesting thing to align the rules <> dev (and to a lesser degree: community) wishes (perhaps you did that (or are simply confident about the classic rules), but I haven't seen it (here));

* instead of 'blunty' dismissing > minimal specs content as (quote): "In addition, it is allowed to make use of additional MSX hardware but they will not be taken into account when determining the final quality of the game by the voters. The goal of the contest is producing fine quality games that could be fully enjoyed in any MSX system.": a game that takes advantage of >= MSX2 (e.g. improved palette), or (sound) expansions is nice/interesting. You could consider to give well executed extras bonus points (that have some weight in the final verdict)? (This could cater to the > MSX1/minimum wishes among some as well.)

  (The concept of a developer/team has a choice which route to take to score (extra) points is an interesting one IMO.)

* I'm missing (perhaps) a description of how the entries will be judged (what criteria, weight, etc.) (of course one can make an educated guess already..) (but perhaps essential when considering aforementioned concept );

* I remember an edition in the past where one could donate in relation to a specific 'trait', like 'best soundtrack'. Is that applicable this edition?

* 'MSXdev Team' === (a subset of) the MRC staff I guess?

* I like the logo, noice!

gl/hf!

Great news !

1

+

1

=

2

and now, ladies and gentlemen, with those beautiful specs, let's start with "pong clones" saga.

Maybe. However, there may be another thing to consider. It could perhaps be that coders want quick screen updates, which gives pattern mode the edge. Now you could choose screen 4, but if you don't need many sprites on a row, and you don't fancy an MSX2 palette, you may as well choose to go back to MSX1.

Very Cool!
But (just my thoughts)
I like MSX1 very much, but a petty there is no other category next to basic MSX1, because a lot of cool hardware out there newly released could be supported and get some new software. Thinking about GR8net, OPL4, big memory expansions, dual psg etc. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of getting the max out of MSX1 hardware, like they do at C64 but there is a lot of hardware out there that could have some more software support motivation. Let the developers decide what category they like todo.

What is meant by the RAM: 16Kbyte?
Really only 16KByte? So 32/48Kbyte games are not allowed? I really liked the idea that it was allowed to make like a mega-rom last year.

Minimum RAM: 16Kb
ROM limit: none
Both same as last year

Speaking for myself, I would try a MSX 2 game if it were an option. The incentive to learn something new is always greater than to impreve something you already know (for me, at least).

AFAIK, restriction occurs as the community found a logical correlation:
- The more complex the hardware accepted, the less entries they get.

It's way easier and faster to code, create sound and GFX for MSX1 than it is for MSX2.
It's way easier to create something Impressive for MSX1 than it is for MSX2
Even a single person ream can, with all the tools we have today, code something that looks professional enough that could have been a hit back in the 80s.
Complexity grows exponentially.

Also, I would like to suggest to give some gift for every contender, something simple as a sticker or even a personalized gif image to be put on the personal website or github of the author.

From my experience, it's the opposite. The MSX1 has so many restrictions that you spend a lot of time trying to do something that ou could do much easier on an MSX2 ou MSX2+, and use that extra time to focus on a good gameplay.

That's true, but only because there's this weird excessive expectation that MSX2 games must look nothing less than a 16-bit game, instead of something more on the level of a NES or SMS.

There's nothing that impedes someone to make a simple a nifty game for the MSX2. Megalomania can occur regardless of the MSX generation.

Hyper Somen and Nyan Puzzle are pretty good example of very simple and fun games that are doable on an MSXdev and whose complexity is much lower than many of the MSX1 entries.

KV2 did it, with graphics for MSX1 and MSX2, though each version with its own cartridge. Also, if you jump, then you won't be landing on pixels, but on a map location. Whether this map location is being drawn by printing a character or by copying pixels in screen 5 doesn't matter that much for a game with static screens. It may cost a few interrupts more when switching screens, but that's it.

Sure, i like MSX 2 games. But I think it is very charming and interesting what is possible for MSX I machines. Think of The Cure or Zombie I. for example. In my opinion the rules are quite right for this special contest!

I fully agree.
the statement that msx 2 is more complex than msx1 to code with is the usual mantra that msx1 organizers recite to justify their point of view.
But from a logical point of view it could not be that the opposite

a) It's more simple to draw by getting crazy with the 8x1 color clash limit or be be free to place any pixel with the color you need
b) it's most easy to code a relatively complex sprite sat rotating routine or maybe avoid this when 8 sprites / scanline do not require any SAT rotation? Or we prefer to be forced for mono sprites in order to get a decent number of sprites/scanline ?
c) it's most easy to use a vertical scroll register (or horizontal one on v9958) that going crazy to have multiple tiles preshifted in VRAM (limiting the creativity because vram is not unlimited and the weird 1/3 screen arrangement make things worse when scrolling).

i think no-one could have any doubt about this.

a) there is no negativity. only objectivity. And please do not call me "simple minded".
The simple minded people are people that say that coding for msx1 is easier than for other gens, while if you ask every developer in the world that is not biased like the organizers, there would be no doubt that coding for newer gens will be more easy. It is only a fact of objectivity not a opinion that if i got a powerful hw i can do the same things more easily or i can do things that are simply impossible on msx1. Otherwise why msx companies wasted they time in improving msx developing V99x8 V9990 OPLx and so one? if msx1 was enough to compete with others of the era there would be no reason to improve it. try to Ask yourself? "Why c64 makers did not improve for a long time its computer?" Answer: "It was enough powerful (even with its limits) to cope with expectactions"

It is clear that there is a bias on the competition to allow only msx1 entries. otherwise there will be no gain or waste to allow any other kind of competions. allowing other generations contexts does not damage anything or anyone.
If for example i allow a TurboR context and no one would participate there is no waste. simply there is nothing to judge.

b) what i've coded or not coded for msx is out of question, or maybe here one can talk only if have coded something? how i use my time in only a thing that has to do with me. It's not your business.
Coding for MSX1 VDP is something i do not want to take into consideration at all , and to be honest i consider the TMS VDP (a obsolete chip of '70) the main reason of the *not* full success that the msx deserved in the 80'.

A novel idea for a "pong-clone" can result in a good game. I'm actually playing a Pong minigame as a boss fight in a recent game (Horace) right now. Plus Bit.Trip Beat was, of course, a heavily Pong-influenced game.

8K of RAM -- well, there are "BASIC ten-liner" contests already, so I might still be interested in the added challenge of using only 8K of RAM. (I actually don't know how much RAM my games truly required if I just changed the RAM start address.)

Just my two cents... if the scope of the target platform was extended, I would still code for MSX1 only. (But I suppose I'm an exception for having no personal affection for MSX2 or later.)

As much as I hate to pit people against one another... the contest involves the organizers, the devs and the public who will play the finished games. I may be missing some group. The organizers appear to favour MSX1 only, the public presumably mostly prefers less constraints, and I don't know what the devs (other than albs_br) think, if we ignore the past number of entries for MSX2 or better. So... how are the competition's mission goals (probably stated on their website?) best achieved with reasonable cost and effort? (Completely cancelling MSXdev after organizers burn out or something is too big a sacrifice, and I refuse to demand volunteers to give more effort than they can or want.)

Are there other, possibly multiplatform, game competitions that would allow MSX2 (or better) entries?

Every competition lives from its participants. MSXdev tries to offer the largest possible basis for taking part in this contest.
The more participants, the more we win.
Anyone is free to add extra capabilities to their programme, and isn't that the spirit of MSX?
Choosing from many entries is certainly easier than choosing the only participant in the category "MSX2+, PSG, SVI RobotArm".

I am convinced that the criticism will not fall on deaf ears, but for this time you should use your energy to participate instead of searching for mistakes.
At this point, I would also like to urge a friendly tone and ask you to accept the rules that have been set.
After all, there is nothing else you can do.

Without knowing the entire history of MSXdev and (re)involving myself with MSX relatively late by making my very first game and entering MSXdev'20 edition, I can't understand constant complaints about this competition. Seeing in the tfh's summary of 2020 most played games, how this community is in fact small, and taking into account that MSXdev'20 was organized and judged by 2 people only, that had to quit because of lack of support - it is a miracle that MRC stepped up and organized '21 edition. It is unrealistic that after sudden change in organization, and having a successful '20 edition, a large change in rules would happen. Let us all give time and support to current organizers. I will try to submit a game this year also. If I can contribute somehow else besides an entry or a donation feel free to contact me.

the difference between me and others thinking the same i think it is they use only a more diplomatic way than me.

The problem is clear here: If you push down the specs you limit the ability to take another kind of challenge and this result in the "pong like approach".
That's way my hylarious comments about the competition.

For example:
Suppose i'm planning to make a port of green beret and want to keep a decent level of quality.
If my idea was to create this game, and i face with strong hw limitations, i quickly realize that it is impossible (or at least impossible at decent level), so i will desist to do it. My other way is to choose another port, but maybe i WANT GB.
So probably i will not even take into consideration to go ahead or choose a very easy game to port (pong).
If the specs are more relaxed maybe i would accept the challenge.

Take for example the excellent port of GNG, it uses V9990. Would be possible to get at decent level on different MSX gens ? Let's see:
the game has :
a)full-omidir smooth scrolling,
b) three to five enemies on screen row at time, at least with two color per line.
c) some big enemies.

Here i score the difficulty level (Say DF) (that qualify the result-effort ratio), the higher value, the higher the effort compared to the result (and then the satisfaction). Values range from 0- easy, to 5-almost impossible

Let's assume that to not discourage me a total score should be not higher than 7,

MSX1:
(a) very hard to achieve, will limit a lot the number of different tiles, manage this would result also in non negligible use of CPU power - DF: 4
(b) worst case 8-10 sprites/row, let's start a flicker party ( i known, i'm sarcastic ) that made gameplay hard - DF: 3
(c) Big enemies are only doable with patterns, and if i want smooth scrolling i will be forced to move on a solid background and by 8 steps, but i've almost no tiles free because of (a) - DF:4

MSX2:
(a) vertical is easy, horizontal not so easy may be with some uridium like approach but not so easy, maybe worth the effort , the result pay for the effort - DF: 3
(b) worst case: i need some flickering routine but having three or four sprites flickering would not ruin the game totally - DF: 2
(c) Big enemies could be doable with bitmap gfx, and can move smoothly if i can accept to move on solid backgrounds - DF: 2

MSX2+:
(a) scroll is easy - DF: 0
(b) same as MSX2 : - DF:2
(c) same as MSX2 or better (maybe if i have some vdp time left i can also consider to have big enemy with full transparent support) - DF:2

V9990:
(a) very easy, pattern mode allow me relatively fast operation with low cpu load - DF: 0
(b) sprites do not require any effort, just place it on screen and they do not need to be paired to achieve decent multicolor. - DF: 0
(c) Here i can use the sprites or made some tricks using the blitter power of V9990 if i choose do not use sprites or pattern mode. - DF: 0

Let's summarize the totals:

MSX1: 11
MSX2: 7
MSX2+: 4
V9990: 0

Given that i judge that the effort/result will pay barely on a msx2 while better on msx2+, on V9990 is soo easy that there is pratically no real challenge . So i choose MSX2 or MSX2+ in order to achiveve the result.

However, if i want to take the competition and not only to code the game, the rules make me out of the game.
So i go to do nothing
- or -
to choose an easy (LOW SPEC) to port game, forcing me to think about "pong like ports" that are intrinsically feasible.

In the end, to make me life easier instead to step up to higher hw specs i step down the game specs by choosing a more feasible objective.

Take into consideration that the process i've described above is not strictly related to me but to any developer that knows the limits it has to respect to achieve a specific result and also know what level of quality want to achieve at minimum.

the end result is that will be a lot of "Pong like games" and no GNG port.

I think we need to go back to the early years to see why there is MSXdev. We came out of the 90's with MSX2/+/tR/g9k/Moonsound 'n such hardware. Not always with lots of support for all chips, but it'd be safe to say that MSX2, diskdrive, FM-PAC was kind of a standard demo/gaming config. Then Viejo/Robsy came along, and were like 'whoah, no more MSX1 attention?' and the set up MSXdev as it was. But we're so many years on now, all these generations are old by now. I think the point has been made. You can make neat MSX1 games, but at some point you'll hit a brick wall and you'll be wanting more. The question is whether we've hit this brick wall already. The stone-age 'bigger specs lead to bigger games which will lead to more canceled projects' is a fallacy. Game development simply doesn't work like that.

If it'd be up to me, I'd say: any specs. Let the burden of the equal playing field lay on the shoulders of the jury rather than in artificial limitations. That is really the only factor that's important: the jury should know a thing or two about game development on all platforms. Most likely, a Nemesis 2 entry for MSX1 would win from an F1-Spirit 3D entry for MSX2+.

"The question is whether we've hit this brick wall already. The stone-age 'bigger specs lead to bigger games which will lead to more canceled projects' is a fallacy. Game development simply doesn't work like that."
Exactly. the problem here is that to develop something you need to get satisfaction. Developing msxdev is not for people that look for:
- Economical rewards
- Success
- Popolarity

instead is a matter of passion / feelings / personal satisfaction / sense of competition.

So the question is: i one aims to make a good port o the game X and the restrictions are setup in a way that
best efforts -> poor result -> low satisfaction
who will do it? no one.
if given 100 people, 30 give up because they are not interested (at those conditions), who gains? No one. (except the msx1 taleban fans), we are a very small group and there is no reason to reduce even more the possible n. of games.

There was already, in the past, a competition with a very small n. of entries if i recall well.
And 'strangely' the organizers releaxed a bit the specs...

"If you referred to MSXdev'15 and its 4 entries, which was followed by MSXdev'17 with the open series (that got 2 entries) and 8 in the classic series, I don't understand how the addition of the open series brought more than two new contestants (namely, those in the open series)? Or maybe I misunderstood your point?"
I think it is at least clear and prove my observations. The more are the restrictions the less the entries.
MSXDEV organizers undestood this and, while partially , were forced to change some rules.
this had the effect of rewamp the interest of some competitors. but this does not mean that for that context they coded only msx2 titles, maybe their wish was for a game doable on msx1 so they coded for msx1.

Also if there will be an open context with all gens and a lot of people adhere to the new context i will be sure than msxdev will soon follow the change by relaxing restrictions, simply because an open context can reach all potential competitors.
about your estimations, i'm not sure how exact they are. they should be estimated in a time greater than one competition.

The rules equal those of 2020 which was a good edition. The organizational shift called for an easy start; keeping the show running under the same conditions.

But, change is always good. So, let the organisers settle in this year while keeping the discussion going on the forum. That way we can agree on new compo limits, or no limits at all. When the time is ready.

Meanwhile, lez cram some code

I don't think it's a matter of touching an "exposed nerve" PingPong. I respect your opinion, but the problem here is that it takes a lot of time to do anything, e.g., organize a competition like the MSXDev. None of us "has time". None of us. We are all adults with a life, work and family, and doing anything (organizing a competition, maintaining a website, coding a game, etc.) takes time, which can only be obtained by sacrificing something else (sleep, work, life or family). The organizers sacrificed time to organize the competition and non-constructive criticism is not something that would go down well with anyone.

So, while I think it is healthy to discuss what would the community as a whole would like to see in the competition for the future, we should do it politely, and respecting the work that everyone else has done.

Having two contests at the same time doesn't mean a developer has time to make two entries. So this could render the amount of entries thin for both contests.

May be no.. if i can submit to both contexts...
but the real problem here is that i takes time, it is not enough to make a post on MRC and say "Hey, there is a new context here, join!"
you need a site,
you need time to test the entries on several msx machines
you need a jury. (and imho the winner should be decided by us using votes, not by a predefined jury )

in other words you need time, not all of us have time to organize all these things, so things remain unchanged.

IMO, I do think it makes sense / it's time to let go of the MSX1-only focus. It's 2021, the world's going to h*** I don't know what, let's live a little

IMO:

* a single, well-organized compo seems best (the scene isn't that big after all);
* accept MSX1 entries with the current specs;
* accept MSX2 entries: 64K RAM, 128K VRAM;
* reward extras (e.g. MSX2+ features, custom palette on MSX2, taking advantage of more RAM, Turbo, SCC/MSX-Music, etc.)

* although, games should be primarily be rewarded for, something in the order of the following:

1. gameplay;
2. 'engrossment' (one aspect of this w(/c)ould be game <> soundtrack+gfx alignment/harmonisation);
3. addictiveness and/or replayability;
4. originality;
5. polish/looks: gfx & soundtrack/sfx;
6. 'ingenuity';
7. ...

So MSX1 or MSX2 should matter not, and implemented 'extras' only to a lesser extent. On both platforms you can make a great game and be 'ingenious'.

Some things to consider:

* there are common expansions, and more exotic. Common seems: SCC & MSX-Music. MSX-Audio: less common.
* When game has SCC soundtrack, should it also have proper/polished PSG-only support, or is SCC considered as part of the 'virtual cartridge' (like a real Konami)?
* Then, what about MSX-Music (which is often an upgrade to the PSG soundtrack, right)?
* ...

But well, the 2021 edition has been announced, specs/rules have been set, and last year(s) didn't disappoint.

I figure there would be still time to adjust a thing or two, but that's up to the organization (who should primarily listen to the wishes of the developers / (aspiring/prospective) contestants I think) (at this moment in time anyway).

Those who want more freedom in specs, should perhaps consider creating a game for one of the many demoparties planned for 2021.
Sure, you'll be up against other systems and not just MSX, but they don't stand a chance against our beloved system with all its expansions, right? ;) This way you can also help disprove the falsehoods about MSX such as lacking smooth scrolling and basic speccy graphics, and spread the love you/we have for the system that's kept us entertained one way or another for several decades.

I would especially recommend multi-platform demoparties such as:

• Revision 2021 Online, planned for April 2021, 2nd - 5th, normally held in Germany, though currently planned to be online-only, as last year, due to the global circumstances.
• Outline Demoparty 2021, planned for May 2021, 21st - 24th, normally held in the Netherlands, though due to the global circumstances, I wouldn't be surprised if that would be held online again this year, just like last year.

Though other parties, such as for example LostParty in Poland, expected to be held from July 2021, 8th - 11th, usually have a WILD Compo category where other platforms are also welcome.

What's particularly nice about a demoparty, especially if you can attend in person, is seeing and hearing the crowd react live to your production. Perhaps a live-viewing party where all entries are presented at the end of the competition, could be a nice addition to MSXdev. :)

Anyway, let's all just enjoy the competition in its present form!
And remember, you don't need a competition to create a game or other soft-/hardware that's free for the community to enjoy. :)

I have developed Games for both platforms. There are my two cents:

A good MSX2 Game requires a lot of effort. The higher specs makes some things easier, but the users are much more demanding: It requires the same effort for me to make two SC5 backgrounds that all the graphics and sprites from a MSX1 Game.

I would not make any restriction about the MSX generation. A good MSX Game can be better than a MSX2 Game.

PSG Mayhem! Like!

Good to see that the specs discussion is still alive and kicking. I will not explain my own views once again, although they don't carry any weight at the moment, not being involved anymore in MSXdev contest organization.

In any case, let me provide some facts:
- There was a 1KB PONG contest hold in 2005
- The organizers of any contest are entitled to choose whatever rules they want, and it is up to the developers to decide to join them or not
- Luckily enought, game developement is not only limited to contests: you can code and publish anything anytime and even try to sell the result if it is good enough.
- About required RAM in Konami MSX cartridge games, Manuel did all the homework 2 years ago
- Coding for MSX is an activity fun in itself

(and now it is time to teleport back to the non MSX-related kingdoms)

I think I like the idea of some sort of "rotating rules" year by year, where in some year, say 2021, the competition is focused on MSX1, and then the next year, it is more focused on MSX2 and higher, etc. maybe the year after that it could be even narrower specs, like "16KB ROM games", and the year after that focused on supporting external hardware like v9990, etc. I think this rotating scheme would allow covering all the different sub-communities of the MSX scene.

Had contact with the organisation; Despite the ‘Mail delivery failed’ my entry is received.