"Your Game" - a ZX Spectrum game making competition

Hello!

Here is an interesting information from Alone Coder:


****************************************
"Your Game" ZX Spectrum game making competition opens for the 5th
time: http://abzac.retropc.ru/ti
To stimulate the development of ZX Spectrum the organizers have selected
ZX Evolution as a target machine.
(It seems that only ATM Turbo 2 compatible, or potentially compatible,
Spectrums are produced now for sale.)

This does not mean you have to support all the extra features of ATM
Turbo 2 / ZX Evolution computers in your games. But if you use more of
them, it will be appreciated. And if your game is compatible in any way
with inferior
models, it will be appreciated too. (You can make as many executables
as you want.)

Super Spectrum is not a dream now. In ATM Turbo computers (since 1991)
each pixel can have its own colour, 320x200 in 16 colours out of 64. You
have 1MB
RAM (4MB in ZX Evolution), 7 MHz CPU (14 MHz in ZX Evolution) and
Beta 128 Disk Interface (plus SD card interface added in ZX
Evolution). You can use AY sound, 8-bit DAC, or any of NeoGS and
TurboSound FM sound cards.

The deadline will be in June 2014. But try to contact us as early as
possible if you write a game for our compo. We'll consult you and
help with sources, docs, testing etc.

Prize fund is $500 so far, from 6 sponsors interested in the development
of ZX Spectrum.

ATM Turbo 2 programming manual (English): http://alonecoder.nedopc.com/zx/books/ATMHW.rar
ZX Evolution user manual (English): http://nedopc.com/zxevo/zxevo_user_manual_revc_eng.pdf
ZX Evolution site (English): http://nedopc.com/zxevo/zxevo_eng.php
NeoGS sound card site (English): http://nedopc.com/gs/ngs_eng.php
TurboSound FM sound card site (Russian): http://www.nedopc.com/TURBOSOUND/ts-fm.php

Games and demos for ATM Turbo 2: http://atmturbo.nedopc.com/atmload.htm
Games and demos for ZX Evolution: http://forum.nedopc.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1162
ATM Turbo 2 emulator: http://alonecoder.nedopc.com/zx/CATDEMO.rar
ZX Evolution emulator: http://alonecoder.nedopc.com/zx/theboard2.rar
SDK for writing sprite based games in C: http://shiru.untergrund.net/files/src/evo_sdcc.zip
Quick and dirty sjasm programming example: http://alonecoder.nedopc.com/zx/atm_example.rar
Quick and dirty ALASM programming example: http://alonecoder.nedopc.com/zx/theboard.zip

--
Best regards,
Dmitry http://alonecoder.nedopc.com
****************************************
Post edited by Yerzmyey on
ZX81/ZX Spectrum/Amiga/Atari music: http://yerzmyey.i-demo.pl/
«1

Comments

  • edited May 2013
    interesting
  • edited May 2013
    the rules of teh contest are mystery.
  • edited May 2013
    Yerzmyey wrote: »
    each pixel can have its own colour, 320x200 in 16 colours out of 64. You have 1MB RAM (4MB in ZX Evolution), 7 MHz CPU (14 MHz in ZX Evolution) and... any of NeoGS and TurboSound FM sound cards.
    Can someone move this to Off-topic/Chit-chat? This clearly has about as much to do with the Sinclair ZX Spectrum as murtceps' action-figure collection. :lol:
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    joefish wrote: »
    Can someone move this to Off-topic/Chit-chat? This clearly has about as much to do with the Sinclair ZX Spectrum as murtceps' action-figure collection.

    Not sure whether it does belong there, since it's a Spectrum clone nonetheless. Maybe Announcements would do better.
  • edited May 2013
    Yerzmyey wrote: »
    each pixel can have its own colour, 320x200 in 16 colours out of 64. You have 1MB RAM (4MB in ZX Evolution), 7 MHz CPU (14 MHz in ZX Evolution) and... any of NeoGS and TurboSound FM sound cards.
    Well, sadly we don't have a thread for discussing Amiga games... :p
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    Ralf wrote: »
    ATM Turbo, you say :( Well, somehow I regret that we will not see normal Spectrum games anymore.

    Well, it's still unclear whether we will see the traditional Speccy compo. The new orgs say it's possible whenever they get more money to get this one running properly.
  • edited May 2013
    Sure, a release for a standard Spectrum will never win in a competition against a production written for an enhanced machine. Except for that time that it did, last weekend. And the Forever 2011 and 2012 demo compos, where a 48K demo won against a 128K demo. And tUM 2008, where Aeon beat a Nintendo DS demo...

    The people who vote on these things are not stupid. They'll take platform capabilities into account when judging, and it's entirely possible for a standard Spectrum game to win against one with flashy graphics, if it's good enough. Rather than sitting here complaining that the competition is going to be dominated by enhanced Spectrum entries, why not do something about it and submit an entry yourself?
  • edited May 2013
    gasman wrote: »
    Sure, a release for a standard Spectrum will never win in a competition against a production written for an enhanced machine. Except for that time that it did, last weekend. And the Forever 2011 and 2012 demo compos, where a 48K demo won against a 128K demo. And tUM 2008, where Aeon beat a Nintendo DS demo...

    The people who vote on these things are not stupid. They'll take platform capabilities into account when judging, and it's entirely possible for a standard Spectrum game to win against one with flashy graphics, if it's good enough. Rather than sitting here complaining that the competition is going to be dominated by enhanced Spectrum entries, why not do something about it and submit an entry yourself?

    Good point. Although I still thinking that making a separate compo for regular Spectrum alongside the ATM/Pentevo might be a pretty clever idea. For several reasons:
    1) not everyone thinks that ATM Turbo and ZX Evolution are Spectrums as such (although I don't belong to this kinda people);
    2) not everyone has ATM or Evo in his flat, despite one has access to the emulator. And let's not get on with everyone who lives outside the former USSR...
    3) there's no English-language guide on programming Evo apps on C so far.

    And here are the reasons why this idea might be, so to say, utopical:
    1) splitting this thing into a fair separate contest needs more money;
    2) needs more money;
    3) NEEDS. MORE. MONEY.
    4) there's not so many coders nowadays that could create pure masterpiece via pure ASM in just one year. Well, if not pure masterpiece, then definitely something of a nice time killer.

    And it's still in question on how the hell we're gonna vote for the entries. And who will vote, moreover. Formerly, only the ones who had the votedisk with all the games had a right to vote and leave a review right for Perspective Group's site. And, of course, you had to buy it. Now, when ATM and Pentevo games consume, at the very worst, the entire TR-DOS disc, who's gonna buy the entire collection at such rate?

    Therefore, I have an idea on making an online voting page where, on behalf of the local captcha, you have to answer questions related to the compo entries. Not quite fresh, not quite reliable, but still a nice idea, methinks.
  • edited May 2013
    gasman wrote: »
    Sure, a release for a standard Spectrum will never win in a competition against a production written for an enhanced machine. Except for that time that it did, last weekend

    Boobies for the win (grafx). Figures :roll:

    As for demos, I'm thankful to see that result. It's the one I voted for :)
    And the Forever 2011 and 2012 demo compos, where a 48K demo won against a 128K demo.

    Will have to look up.
    And tUM 2008, where Aeon beat a Nintendo DS demo...

    Just watched it. Very nice. Thanks for mentioning it.
    The people who vote on these things are not stupid. They'll take platform capabilities into account when judging, and it's entirely possible for a standard Spectrum game to win against one with flashy graphics, if it's good enough. Rather than sitting here complaining that the competition is going to be dominated by enhanced Spectrum entries, why not do something about it and submit an entry yourself?

    Hmm...
  • edited May 2013
    Ralf wrote: »
    ATM Turbo, you say :( Well, somehow I regret that we will not see normal Spectrum games anymore.
    Well, nowadays some games are written for ULAplus. That's not "normal" Spectrum, is it? These games could easily be adapted to ATM Turbo 2 palette by their authors. 6912 has palette, too.
    1bit samples could be changed to 8bit.
    Turbo support is the most easy one: use the 50 Hz timer to synchronize events!
  • edited May 2013
    Well, nowadays some games are written for ULAplus. That's not "normal" Spectrum, is it?

    Personally I'm not keen on ULA+ too :p I guess I'm some kind of purist when it comes to Spectrum.

    Of course there are a lot of people here with views different than mine.
  • edited May 2013
    Normally I don't take a part in flame-wars but I will tell it here once, although I didn't intend to, at first. Ah well. Only once.

    I'm with Gasman and Alone Coder of course.



    I will agree with others only then, when they start one day to type and send their dis into Internet from **ORIGINAL** IBM PC XT with Intel 8088 CPU 4,77 MHz.

    Or from Macintosh 128K with Motorola 68000 CPU 8 MHz.

    If you don't guys, then stop trolling.



    OK, have a nice evening anyway.
    ZX81/ZX Spectrum/Amiga/Atari music: http://yerzmyey.i-demo.pl/
  • LCDLCD
    edited May 2013
    It is on you to ignore enhanced clones in this compo, when you write games.
    No ULA+ games from me yet too. It is no tragedy.
  • edited May 2013
    Yerzmyey wrote: »
    I will agree with others only then, when they start one day to type and send their dis into Internet from **ORIGINAL** IBM PC XT with Intel 8088 CPU 4,77 MHz.
    First, you would have to understand the words 'trademark' and 'copyright' to realise what an utter load of irrelevant cr@p you just wrote.
    Yerzmyey wrote: »
    If you don't guys, then stop trolling.
    Second, if I had made my own fibreglass replica sports car at home, then gone onto a genuine owners' forum and started telling them what is and isn't the real thing, I would be the one considered the troll.
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    Yerzmyey, it's not trolling.

    You like new hybrids, I don't. Or better to say, I ignore them, don't get excited by them and by new productions for them.

    "Your Game "used to be for standard Pentagons, now it isn't.

    I feel a bit upset that I won't be able to see and play new classic Spectrum games. What's wrong with saying what I feel?
  • edited May 2013
    joefish wrote: »
    First, you would have to understand the words 'trademark' and 'copyright' to realise what an utter load of irrelevant cr@p you just wrote.
    ZX Spectrum circuit is not patented (if it was, the patent has expired).
    As for ROMs, "Amstrad have kindly given their permission for theredistribution of their copyrighted material but retain that copyright" http://www.worldofspectrum.org/permits/amstrad-roms.txt
  • edited May 2013
    Ralf wrote: »
    "Your Game "used to be for standard Pentagons, now it isn't.
    Your Game 1 had one game with extra gfx in turbo mode - Super Mario Bros.
    Your Game 2 had two games for extra memory - Atomic and Mortal Kombat.
    Ralf wrote: »
    I feel a bit upset that I won't be able to see and play new classic Spectrum games. What's wrong with saying what I feel?
    Software for "standard Pentagons" as well as software for "standard Sam Coupes" is not the thing you are able to play on your ZX Spectrum 48K/128K.
  • edited May 2013
    ZX Spectrum circuit is not patented (if it was, the patent has expired).
    No, it's called copyright; subject to the international Berne Convention, and it certainly hasn't expired. But then the Pentagon isn't a direct copy of the Sinclair-designed boards anyway.
    As for ROMs, "Amstrad have kindly given their permission for theredistribution of their copyrighted material but retain that copyright" http://www.worldofspectrum.org/permits/amstrad-roms.txt
    Again, irrelevant. I could load those ROM files into the microcontroller of my washing machine. That doesn't make it a 'ZX Spectrum'. And anyway, 'ZX' is still a registered trademark - that hasn't expired.

    What may be relevant is IF YOU ACTUALLY BOTHER TO READ the document you just linked to, you'd find, on the subject of clone machines, the following quote from the copyright holder:
    Anyone pirating hardware/software should be shot.
    Will you be complying with ALL of those conditions then?

    I just want an end to all these overblown clones being called 'ZX Spectrums' when they're no such thing.
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    This discussion goes in a very wrong flamewar direction. Don't you have enough discussions of copyrights?

    I quit :) Enjoy the compo people :)
  • edited May 2013
    Ralf wrote: »
    This discussion goes in a very wrong flamewar direction. Don't you have enough discussions of copyrights?

    Its the warm spring, which is coming all over Europe :D
  • edited May 2013
    joefish wrote: »
    No, it's called copyright; subject to the international Berne Convention, and it certainly hasn't expired. But then the Pentagon isn't a direct copy of the Sinclair-designed boards anyway.
    Amstrad computers aren't too.

    And you're wrong. Hardware is not a subject of copyright. Software is. Circuits can be patented. Algorithms can be patented (in the USA). Ideas and discoveries can't.
    And the machine that copies the behaviour of some other machine doesn't violate somebody's copyrights or patents, even in the USA (Atari v. Coleco, 1983).
    joefish wrote: »
    Again, irrelevant. I could load those ROM files into the microcontroller of my washing machine. That doesn't make it a 'ZX Spectrum'.
    It does if the machine runs ZX Spectrum software and generates ZX Spectrum video and sound.
    joefish wrote: »
    And anyway, 'ZX' is still a registered trademark - that hasn't expired.
    ZX is a pair of keys in the beginning of the bottom row of a keyboard. Or we can't say a word(tm) without asking some big corporation?
    joefish wrote: »
    What may be relevant is IF YOU ACTUALLY BOTHER TO READ the document you just linked to, you'd find, on the subject of clone machines, the following quote from the copyright holder:

    Will you be complying with ALL of those conditions then?
    The top quote that anyone can use the ROM is self-explanatory and accords to existing, not imaginary, laws (remember, Amstrad is not an author of the ROM, it's by Vickers, using few code from ZX81). If a comporation wants more it has to make a signed contract with me and you. They always want more. They steal your money and your rights (including your right for free speech and may-be-right of free trade) and they still want more. So, don't let them use you as their advocate for free.

    They steal your money:

    1. If I sell you, say, a car twice, you can sue me. They sell you some piece of code numerous times and they are clear. They even can sell one to a billion people!

    2. Don't know how's in the U.K. or the USA, but in Russia, an organization claiming itself a protector of authors, steals 1% from the price of any electronic device that can copy: computers, mobile phones, even compact discs.

    They steal your rights:

    1. You can't say "09 F9..." - AACS LA sends DMCA takedown notices to sites containing this. Even the Wikipedia had to remove the code!

    2. You can't improve, for example, a dictionary - you are violating somebody's rights. You can, only for your own use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc. (In other words, they still let you think on your own anything you want. Thanks they haven't stolen THIS right yet.)

    3. In certain countries you can't even take a photo in a street because you are violating the builders' rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama

    4. You can't start a production of a computer for big markets - they ALWAYS find you're violating somebody's patent or two if they see you have money they can steal from you. They patent everything. The only way to do is to be a corporation with armies of lawyers and patent experts, and with a lobby in the parliament.

    5, 6... I can continue if you're interested.

    DON'T LET THEM USE YOU.
  • edited May 2013
    And you're wrong. Hardware is not a subject of copyright. Software is. Circuits can be patented. Algorithms can be patented (in the USA). Ideas and discoveries can't.
    No, you're wrong. The design of a circuit is protected by copyright. What the circuit does is not subject to copyright, so you can design a different circuit to do the same task. However, someone my try to patent the 'function' - what it is designed to do, and that stops you making your own design to do the same job. But this does not apply as the Pentagon has its own circuit design and the ZX Spectrum one is not protected.
    And the machine that copies the behaviour of some other machine doesn't violate somebody's copyrights or patents, even in the USA (Atari v. Coleco, 1983).
    Not if it doesn't copy (a) the circuit design (b) the case design or (c) any in-built software such as a ROM, and doesn't violate any functional patents.
    It does if the machine runs ZX Spectrum software and generates ZX Spectrum video and sound.
    No, it's not. Sinclair, and now Amstrad, own the name 'ZX Spectrum' and choose what machines have that name. If they don't make it, or authorise it, then it's not a 'ZX Spectrum'. It's a clone or compatible machine that can have its own name.
    ZX is a pair of keys in the beginning of the bottom row of a keyboard. Or we can't say a word(tm) without asking some big corporation?
    'ZX' is a trademark relating to computers. You can't sell a computer with that name as it counts as passing your product off as one of theirs, which is fraud. Just like you can't make your own cartoons and call them 'Disney', or make an MP3 player and sell it under the name 'iPod'. It's trying to pass your work off with someone else's good reputation, and it's criminal.
    The top quote that anyone can use the ROM is self-explanatory and accords to existing, not imaginary, laws.
    No. Amstrad is not releasing the code to the Public Domain or under any sort of open licence. They retain the copyright but grant permission to certain uses. Part 8 is pretty clear that clone machines is not one of those permitted uses. As the rights holder it is within their rights to say so.
    They steal your money:
    Here we go. The usual 'Stick it to the man'!
    You think because someone tries to make a profit from something you want to buy they're ripping you off, so you're justified in stealing whatever you can. Grow up.
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    joefish wrote: »
    No, you're wrong. The design of a circuit is protected by copyright.
    Only topography of a circuit is protected by copyright, the topology is a subject to patent law. Nobody uses Sinclair topography, even Amstrad.
    joefish wrote: »
    No, it's not. Sinclair, and now Amstrad, own the name 'ZX Spectrum' and choose what machines have that name. If they don't make it, or authorise it, then it's not a 'ZX Spectrum'. It's a clone or compatible machine that can have its own name.
    What computer you are writing THIS on? If I follow you, it's not a 'PC' because IBM owns this trademark, so what's it?
    joefish wrote: »
    'ZX' is a trademark relating to computers.
    The only 'ZX' trademark related to computer hardware is this: http://www.trademarkia.com/zx-85114500.html
    It's neither Sinclair nor Amstrad.
    joefish wrote: »
    You can't sell a computer with that name as it counts as passing your product off as one of theirs, which is fraud.
    If a computer doesn't have 'ZX' in its name, it doesn't make it non-Spectrum.
    joefish wrote: »
    Amstrad is not releasing the code to the Public Domain or under any sort of open licence.
    Amstrad doesn't own the code. Vickers owns it, and he's released it back in 1982. From then, it was used by Sinclair Research Ltd, Enterprise Computers, Investronica, Amstrad, Institute for School Books and Teaching Aids (Yugoslavia), Didaktik Skalica Co., and Miles Gordon Technology.

    One of the following: (1) you imply all of these bought the rights, (2) you have double standards for Russians.
    joefish wrote: »
    You think because someone tries to make a profit from something you want to buy they're ripping you off, so you're justified in stealing whatever you can. Grow up.
    I wrote a lot of software and I released it freely. All the authors I know except those who write for a company under a contract did the same, sooner or later. Grow up.
  • edited May 2013
    What kind of competition is this thread about ?:-?:razz:
  • edited May 2013
    What computer you are writing THIS on? If I follow you, it's not a 'PC' because IBM owns this trademark, so what's it?
    IBM do not claim to own the terms 'Personal Computer' or 'PC'. The phrase was in use long before the machine that IBM called their 'IBM PC'.
    The only 'ZX' trademark related to computer hardware is this: It's neither Sinclair nor Amstrad.
    Wrong again:
    http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK00001196410
    If a computer doesn't have 'ZX' in its name, it doesn't make it non-Spectrum.
    'Personal Computer' is a phrase - it's an idea - that applies to all sorts of computers. 'ZX Spectrum' is not a phrase or an idea. It's a name that someone came up with for a product. It's their idea and their copyright, to do with as they chose. It's not for you to apply to whatever you feel like.
    Amstrad doesn't own the code. Vickers owns it, and he's released it back in 1982. From then, it was used by Sinclair Research Ltd, Enterprise Computers, Investronica, Amstrad, Institute for School Books and Teaching Aids (Yugoslavia), Didaktik Skalica Co., and Miles Gordon Technology.
    One of the following: (1) you imply all of these bought the rights, (2) you have double standards for Russians.
    Wrong again. Steve Vickers wrote the code while working for Sinclair Research. That means Sinclair Research own it, not him. That's why the ROM says 'Copyright Sinclair Research' not 'Copyright Steve Vickers'. He did not 'release' it. Sinclair used it; it was theirs to do so, and theirs to sell to Amstrad or license to Enterprise.
    The SAM Coup? did not use the Sinclair ROMs - they wrote their own.
    I do not know if either of those Yugoslavian companies had permission to use the ROM, if they did - I doubt it. Given those countries' relationships with the UK at the time they probably copied it regardless and no-one from the UK knew or could do anything to stop them, just like happened in Russia. That doesn't make it anything less than violation of copyright. I notice that Didaktik didn't use the 'Sinclair', 'Spectrum' or 'ZX' names anywhere or pretend their machines were the real thing.
    I wrote a lot of software and I released it freely.
    Good for you. Now explain how that gives you the right to steal from anyone who doesn't do the same?
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    kpuchatek wrote: »
    What kind of competition is this thread about ?:-?:razz:
    It's about writing for a computer whose ROM is stolen from Sinclair/Amstrad but whose circuitry and specification is basically made up as you go along.
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    joefish wrote: »
    Wrong again. Steve Vickers wrote the code while working for Sinclair Research. That means Sinclair Research own it, not him. That's why the ROM says 'Copyright Sinclair Research' not 'Copyright Steve Vickers'. He did not 'release' it. Sinclair used it; it was theirs to do so, and theirs to sell to Amstrad or license to Enterprise.
    You do not know the history Sinclair Research Ltd. When Sinclair sold AMSTRAD his company Sinclair Research Ltd., it was found that Sinclair Research Ltd. all previous time did not have any rights to the contents of the ROM.
  • edited May 2013
    Black_Cat wrote: »
    You do not know the history Sinclair Research Ltd. When Sinclair sold AMSTRAD his company Sinclair Research Ltd., it was found that Sinclair Research Ltd. all previous time did not have any rights to the contents of the ROM.
    But Sinclair paid a royalty for them whilst they were making Spectrums and then Amstrad bought them outright. They may not have owned them originally, but they were paying to legitimately use them. That just changes whose copyright was being violated. It still doesn't justify anyone else using them without permission, and Amstrad are well within their rights to control their use now.
    Joefish
    - IONIAN-GAMES.com -
  • edited May 2013
    joefish wrote: »
    But Sinclair paid a royalty for them whilst they were making Spectrums and then Amstrad bought them outright. They may not have owned them originally, but they were paying to legitimately use them. That just changes whose copyright was being violated. It still doesn't justify anyone else using them without permission, and Amstrad are well within their rights to control their use now.

    From a legal point of view, Sinclair had no right to use on all computers on the ZX Spectrum and ZX Spectrum-128 firmware ROM. All of these computers, produced by Sinclair Research Ltd., produced with pre-installed illegal software. Absolutely everything!! Only in the sale of Sinclair Research Ltd., it became known that the Sinclair there is absolutely no rights to the firmware.

    Amstrad allowed to use the firmware in the emulators. Modern exUSSR clones ZX Spectrum, such as the Speccy-2010 and the Pentagon v.2.666, hardware emulate the ZX Spectrum, without the use of a chip ROM. Therefore, they use a Amstrad firmware is completely legal.
This discussion has been closed.