HellMood

4 ms·

1.
"Boing " in 64 Bytes(pouet.net)
4 points by HellMood 3mo ago|1 comments
2.
by HellMood 3mo ago
For 486, no FPU, for MsDos FreeDos, WinXP Dos, DosBox-X ... i made that rather in a hurry, so right now i have a version without background but wall bouncing like the original. But since the competition is already over, i will tinker a bi
3.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Those people should also definitely check out "Mariana" (2024), a 256 byte demo from the same author, using the same techniques, which was even nominated for the Meteoriks Award for that year. https://www.pouet.net&#x2F
4.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Howdy =) I didn't spot your analysis back then, but it's (still) spot on. A tiny addition, 0xA0000 to 0xB0000 is VGA memory when using graphics modes, so it's quite safe to write there until it flows into the visual text mode
5.
by HellMood 4mo ago
It requires specific graphics card setup ( it simulates an old system) Use the provided config from here https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=106210 Edit: for Dosbox X
6.
by HellMood 4mo ago
At the same event I released "Broccolori", a 32 Byte fractal for old-school PCs. https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=106205 Related to the Dragon Fractal, with a twist:)
7.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Author of "wake up" here. Yes, that one reactivated me again. We thought (as size coding community) that we found every cellular automaton trick years ago, but then Plex came around and showed us otherwise ♥
8.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Author of "wakeup" here. You would would need between 32 and 64 bytes. I have something that almost looks like one in 32 but it's not published yet ;)
9.
by HellMood 4mo ago
"Spongy" was one of my inspirations to try something similar in 64 bytes. Of course it's not the same, but "flying through a 3D grayscale orthogonal structure" is actually possible in 64 https://www.pouet
10.
by HellMood 4mo ago
I tested this on a real FreeDos based notebook and it survived ;) But seriously, on more modern systems it doesnt do anything harmful anymore, while i have read that on older systems, you could provoke a system crash this way. Which then wo
11.
by HellMood 4mo ago
"Rainy" was a 32 bytes production in a (strong!) 256byte competition "Wakeup" was a 16 bytes production in a (strong ^^) 128byte competition Sometimes, content to size ratio wins. Other times, not so much ;)
12.
by HellMood 4mo ago
In that way the title is misleading. My original "m8trix" from 2014 already did smear pseudorandom letters across the screen ( in 8 bytes, then in 7 ) https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=63126 and i always wond
13.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Hey, glad you like this as well. Fun fact, i had a COVOX version which even sounded better, but didnt work sometimes ... so i handed in the "slightly worse" version xD
14.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Oh yes, that was one of my first demoscene productions :) Actually, just a few days ago, i had the chance to run a modified CGA 8086 version of this on a real old piece of hardware https://youtu.be/XLrjChvJf0k
15.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Hey, Blackle! Yeah, i agree :/ In short, for now: Manually, dozens or hundreds of them. The process was just tinkering around with CAs and sound. "What's left" is how it still sounds remarkably different than it should o
16.
by HellMood 4mo ago
It was and is still super unepxected! i created a lot of "noise" or "CA" sound intros but this one stands out. The specific spice here is how memory is initialized on "clear screen" and whats "before"
17.
by HellMood 4mo ago
It kind of still is! The pure sound shouldnt even sound like that, so i have to still dig around memory configurations and initalizations (graphics card wise) to 100% explain why it sounds a tad different than it should.
18.
by HellMood 4mo ago
Actually a) polymorphic asm instructions, like "add [bx+si],al" which is 0x0000 b) jumping into middle of instructions to save bytes and reuse opcodes In hundreds of tiny experiments, this one stuck out, just by the sound of it.
19.
by HellMood 4mo ago
TLDR: Each time step, another sierpinski triangle line is a) played on the speaker b) drawn to the screen with stepsize of 56. You can sense the motion, but not really see it, since it's 8192 "pixels wide" but one line of cha
20.
WriteUp: 16 Bytes of x86 that turn Matrix rain into sound(hellmood.111mb.de)
259 points by HellMood 4mo ago|33 comments
21.
by HellMood 4mo ago
"wake up! 16b" (Outline Demoparty, May 2026, Ommen, NL) is a 16-byte MS-DOS production that uses video memory to calculate a Sierpinski fractal and play it as audio. Video: https://youtu.be/MvycyU-kLjg | Pouet: h
22.
by HellMood 5mo ago
Well, it would be 2^(7*8) = 72057594037927936 possible intros. Someone/something has to generate, run and evaluate them all. Theoretically it's the "halting problem" all over, to wait for the "final output" of
23.
by HellMood 5mo ago
Thanks :) and yes, your observations are spot on.
24.
by HellMood 5mo ago
I ran a patched version of it on WinXP (DOS NTVDM), the sound works there! But it requires a few extra bytes to enable MIDI UART Mode first. On DosBox-X, this can simply be set in the config ;)
25.
by HellMood 5mo ago
i second that. "Second Nature" is also my party favorite! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFVxntafsXM&t=1764s
26.
by HellMood 5mo ago
it's fine, you're right ;) i'm thinking of making that interactive, remove (a bit of) sound and plot timing (which takes surprisingly many bytes!) but i won't spoil anything until it's ready ;)
27.
by HellMood 5mo ago
I mean, give it a try? the source is right there ;)
28.
by HellMood 5mo ago
You can (on real MSDOS!) go as low as 6 bytes https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=63538 But most people wouldn't find that visually satisfying The technical details why this works are very interesting though :)
29.
by HellMood 5mo ago
I mean now that the (human written) source for this is out in the wild, of course it can ;)
30.
by HellMood 5mo ago
https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=105909 The "silent" version is only 219 bytes A new version that adds new features into the remaining bytes is in the works

More ›