Definitely a mix of the two. There's a definitively competitive aspect that isn't necessarily present in other livecoding scenarios (eg. algorave) which makes it at least e-sports like, while still being an inherently artistic medium.
What are the reasons a shader wins over another one in a livecoding session and why, in your opinion?
It depends on the audience of course. It's the same with demos - people like what they like. For the demoscene, a cool 3D scene with lots of shiny things will often win. However, sometimes a very stylistic 2D shader will also win if it captures the audience (which is particularly common if it appeals to an "oldschool" palate, eg. by using a classic C64 color scheme/dithering style).
In the form it is now, I guess 5+ years ago. I'm not sure exactly when. But I was aware of the first competition at WeCan (I think that's where it was?) and I helped do some mac fixes for bonzomatic in 2015 or so (which I think were superceded by more proper work by alkama etc) and I've tried to participate in most of the competitions that were happening at parties that I was attending around that time, especially as Solskogen was embracing them.
That said, I remember there being compos with a similar format long before this. The "drunk master coding compo" comes to mind, which I never personally saw, but heard about from the likes of kusma / excess and a few others. I believe this was a feature of Kindergarden in Norway, but I'm not sure. This was more theme-focused, i.e. make a "texture mapped tunnel" and every time you hit compile you had to take a shot. Or something. :)
I definitely heard of this a few years later, eg. 2017 or so (maybe before?), my memory is a bit fuzzy. But this was the whole algorave thing which I think I first heard of from CODAME ART + TECH in SF.
Certainly not, though I definitely like to :D
wut?
Admittedly, while I've tried to be somewhat involved in the livecoding scene, as it's become larger/more competitive, my interest has waned a bit. I've been in the scene for a long time and I appreciate the typical compo entries more, especially larger ones like 64k and full sized demos (even though I focused specifically on 4k's in my late teens). When livecoding happened, the fresh part for me was the spontaneity of it, that you could just bang out something and it would be cool. As people started memorizing more and more it was less interesting to watch, even though I know that's not an easy feat and it's impressive, it just doesn't capture me personally as much.
That said, blueberry is always my favorite person to watch because he comes up with crazy colors and usually fresh ideas, and I think he has a similarly not-so-competitive attitude as me. So, he's both my favorite contestant and my favorite opponent :)
Of course there are! Frankly I think the best coders are the ones that take their time and do something more comprehensive. Livecoding to me isn't better/worse, it's a very different thing, and it's an odd skillset that to me doesn't really overlap much with what I've typically thought of as "best" coding skills, though I have a lot of respect for it certainly!
Did livecoding shaders get better, technically, through the years? if yes, what’s the reason in your opinion?
I think they've peaked a bit actually, and I think it has to do with a certain overlap of 1. what people can conceive of in their heads with such a limited format and 2. the round time limit. Admittedly I think it's usually a bit stale, though we are seeing better and more impressive space folding/lighting stuff as GPUs get faster in particular. In fact I think GPU technology advancements are what drive livecoding advancements more than coder skill, but it's certainly not the only factor.