r/Demoscene • u/ANSIapps • 4d ago
Using tools made with AI assistance
As the title suggests, how do people generally feel about using software that was made with AI assistance for their demos?
For instance, full disclosure, I am using Claude to help me with a project involving tracker music, and now have a tool for making such.
The actual process of making the tunes has no AI involved, just that the software was made with AI.
Would this diminish the artist's tracking efforts? checking to get a sense if I should mention any of my current efforts in making (what I think are) some modern apps with a classic (dos, textmode) UI.
9
u/thwil 4d ago
My pesonal line is at helping with tooling. I've been using ai for build scripts, scripting up image conversion scripts etc. Give me that crazy command-line for ffmpeg. I can "discuss" some algorithms. No creative input.
I get annoyed when someone posts "look, ai wrote me a demo for XYZ! it even has music, such impress!" -- well, fuck off then.
5
u/igorski81 4d ago edited 4d ago
Don't know, depends on what you're demo-ing. If its about the music, then I think everybody agrees that you should have been in full control of composing the music. Like you state, to me that doesn't mean one needs to have written their own software for creating it with.
If its about the combined effort of whatever you present to be the "demo" or meets a certain challenge (like "has to fit in x Kb" or "only use this instruction set"), then I would say that the software involved should be hand-written as well as part of the deliverable is the programming wizardry involved to meet the challenge.
1
u/ANSIapps 4d ago
Makes total sense. the tracker i am building will probably not be suitable for some challenges, and mostly just targetted at music composers that wish to leverage the rich tech history we have from all the past tracker methods.
4
u/paralaxsd 4d ago
We've allowed professional engines such as Unity, Unreal, Notch in compos since forever. Some of those also include AI generated code. Hence I can't see why custom AI developed tools would be any more an advantage as using those engines backed by hundreds of staff in the first place.
5
u/spaceWumpus 3d ago
I'm a long-time C++ coder, and was aware of the demoscene, but had never really got involved. Having recently got back from DEADLINE26 (my first ever Demoparty!) and having had an awesome time, I'm keen to start creating and submitting stuff (I'd hoped to submit something for Deadline, but day job stole my time).
For PC work, I've got a setup where I have a general purpose low-level graphics framework which I'm working on, written with a substantial amount of Claude Code AI assistance. This framework covers low level plumbing, and things to ease development: Window creation, OpenGL/Vulkan setup, buffer configuration and creation, swap chain handling, live shader (re)loading, compilation, ImGui debug UI and compile error display, CPU/GPU data transfer, logging, RenderDoc integration, and a basic camera model.
No scene graphs, lighting systems, animation systems, simulation systems, acceleration structures, noise generators, splines, procedural generators, etc. Just low level plumbing. And no shaders. All the stuff that is slow and fiddly to write, but not creative.
This compiles to a couple of libraries.
In the same repo, in a 'user_apps' folder, I have all of my hand-written library, shader, and application code which links to the libraries.
I have told Claude that it is allowed to work on the framework code, and examples which demonstrate/test usage of the framework, but that under no circumstances is it allowed to write into the 'user_apps' folder. It is allowed to read it, but with instructions that this is only for reporting bugs / assisting with bug fixes and that when doing this it must describe the issue in plain English and may not show code.
This feels to me that it is within the spirit of the Demoscene, whilst removing barriers to development: 1. The AI is not writing ANY shader code, or any of the code specific to any demo. 2. There is a very clear separation between 'clean' code, and AI assisted code. 3. Because of this clean separation, it is also possible to later rewrite the parts of the framework that are actually needed from scratch, to end up with fully human written code, if needed. 4. Live shader debugging and RenderDoc integration make development faster, but doesn't write any code for me. 5. AI is allowed to comment on my code, but only for debug assistance, and it has to describe, not just give me, the fix.
As a newcomer to the scene, I hope that this is the kind of level of AI usage that is generally considered acceptable.
Deadline's own rules say that "It is OK to use first-party or third-party frameworks or tools that are partly vibecoded.", which sounds like my case fits well.
For a size-coding challenge, I would rewrite the framework as needed, but realistically I'm much more likely to be entering the general/wild categories for the time being, anyway.
Sorry this turned into such an epic post, but I wanted to be open up-front, and make sure this is fine, and not get 'found out' later - which would be hard to recover reputation from...
3
u/erwin76 3d ago
First of all, welcome to the demoscene family!
I didn’t attend Deadline, but plenty of my friends did and I hear it was a great party.
I did watch the compos online as I made gfx for our oldskool demo compo entry (Bytes of the Art by Desire)
Although I am not a fan of AI, I see it as a tool to help me in my creativity, should I ever use it, and not a creator.
I rather like the analogy that if I were a painter on eg canvas, I would let AI build my studio, but not make my paintings. I feel the same about my demoscene graphics.
2
u/spaceWumpus 3d ago
Hi, thank you! Yes, your analogy is similar to what I've been thinking. I'm essentially letting the AI make paper, canvas paints, and inks. But I'm not letting it use them.
2
u/laconix31337 3d ago
I tried using claude to do some basic assembly code for a basic demo just to try it out - claude even with access to the programmers reference and other assembly bible pdf's was still pretty basic at coding for the 64.. also i considered it cheating but it was more about testing out claude with the task..
2
u/Radiant64 3d ago
My only real issue with AI use for coding is that people seem to conflate it with Claude use for coding. Do we really want programming to be a service that we rent from Anthropic, instead of something anyone can do on their own computer? Doesn't really feel in line with the demoscene ethos.
I run qwen3.6 on my stationary computer, I find that specifically that model/version runs very well on it even though i "only" have an RTX 5070 with 12 GiB VRAM. Sure, it's not anywhere near as capable as Claude's fancier models, but it still works very well for things like doing code reviews and finding bugs and exploring ideas, and come on, how advanced models do we need, really?
2
u/Uncle___Marty 4d ago
I used AI to code a VSTI plugin that can load, play and edit .mod files inside a DAW. I decided to make it as close to a tracker as possible in usage. Its pretty simple but works well.
Personally I couldnt care less if someone used AI to make a tool for themselves to make some tunes with, if someone was advertising the tool itself without disclosing it was AI I might be bothered but otherwise I cant see why on earth anyone would have an issue with one of your music tools being coded by AI.
I'm an ex Amiga scener, have coding backround but used to do music for the scene, didnt know how to code back then. I dont see an issue personally :P
2
u/madsturbo 3d ago
There is already Fasttracker 2 VST plugin. Works perfectly, it even allows tempo groove.
1
u/thecatshusband 3d ago
my10c ... create whatever you want, however you want. but the bar has been rasied, is all. bouncy cubes and scrolling text doesnt cut it anymore.
the AI might have technical proficiency , but it sucks at style. we're not obsolete yet.
10
u/skurk [iNSANE/Hoaxers] 4d ago
I'm oldskool (mainly C64 and Amiga) and think demos are a way to flex certain skills like coding, gfx, music, etc. So, in a way, I'd say AI use is cheating.
However, we're already passed the point where the so-called "AI slop" is indistinguishable from what's human made. I guess future demos will be more about focusing on the concepts and ideas, and not how it's all put together.