I'm up to it. Here's my submission, done in FamiTracker 0.2.2.
You know; all this contest is doing is forcing you to use instrument settings for the majority of effects available to us in newer FamiTracker versions (besides the fact that you can still create tracks without any expansion chips, multiple instruments & effects commands with any tracker version up to 0.3.0, without breaking inter-program compatibility). Forcing the use of a still-compatible tracker version defeats the purpose of having a challenging contest; the only thing you have to rely on for these submissions is the contestant's honesty (& possibly some NES music ASM code).
Nevertheless, it was still good practice.
And on the bright side; FamiTracker 0.2.2 can output ASM code for you.
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
I know what you're probably saying; the latest versions of FamiTracker don't output NES assembly language source code for whatever music you compose (even though it technically acts like a compiler when creating NSF & NES ROMs). Earlier versions of FamiTracker DID have assembly code output (which could be used by homebrew programmers instead of referring to an NSF as an include file). Of course, ASM output must have been dropped to make way for other export features (aside from the fact that it's more efficient to use include files in ASM).
Anyways, how do you like the submission? Basic indeed, but that's what you get from only 2 hours of figuring out FamiTracker 0.2.2's interface & writing the song. I'm so used to doing blank-instrument tracks now, that I feel I've lost all my freedom as a result of the tracker's older interface; it has only a handful of commands to halt the song, change tempo & jump frames, but everything else has to be controlled through your instruments.
By the way, for anyone who's wondering, use ; for a note-stop.
Just out of curiosity, is there any reward or prize for this contest?
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
I guess the .BIN export is more or less like the old .ASM export, but already compiled. It's not human readable, but I suppose the FTM is the "real" human readable version.
I've been using "1" for note cut; I guess ";" works too, interesting. The effect I miss most is Pxx. Everything else I think there's an okay way to do.
I'm working on my entry, but it will be a little while before I finish it.
Thanks, man. I've decided to include this in my WIP OST (with some modification). But, if you have any other use for it, feel free to do so (if you want a license to go with that track, I use the MIT license).
rainwarrior wrote:
I guess the .BIN export is more or less like the old .ASM export, but already compiled. It's not human readable, but I suppose the FTM is the "real" human readable version.
I've been using "1" for note cut; I guess ";" works too, interesting. The effect I miss most is Pxx. Everything else I think there's an okay way to do.
I'm working on my entry, but it will be a little while before I finish it.
Well, you can always reverse an NSF with any NES disassembler to get human-readable ASM code. I'm looking forward to what you're working on; I know it'll be better than my submission.
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
Mm, disassembled code isn't exactly what I'd call human readable, but even so the .BIN (and even the compiled .ASM) is a chunk of data, not code. It would disassemble, but into a set of nonsense instructions.
What makes the .ASM readable where the raw data wouldn't be is all the labels. They tell you exactly which block of data is for frames, for patterns, etc. All of these are lost when compiling.
) 
