Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - eXistenZ

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Podcasts / Re: Episode 36 Posted
« on: January 27, 2006, 12:12:51 pm »
I reeeeeeaaallllly want to know what's going to hatch out of that egg on Wednesday.  :)

17
Podcasts / Re: Episode 36 Posted
« on: January 26, 2006, 10:39:43 am »
You're welcome...gosh!   ;)

18
Podcasts / Re: Episode 36 Posted
« on: January 26, 2006, 10:16:06 am »
It was called "N" -- maybe you could just Google it.

Nevermind...here ya go, I found it:  http://www.harveycartel.org/metanet/downloads.html

19
Podcasts / Re: Episode 36 Posted
« on: January 26, 2006, 07:44:02 am »
Hey guys,

I really enjoyed the podcast. Thank you Steve for a great answer to both of my questions.

I really loved my Amiga 500. You are absolutely right, it was light years ahead of all other gaming rigs and consoles. Games like Shadow of the Beast (one of the best scrollers ever), Barbarian, Battlechess, Defender of the Crown (awesome game), Dragons Lair, Dungeon Master, if you like aircraft sims Amiga had a ton of great ones, Kings Quests (all Sierra adventure games), Sim City, Sinbad (great game), Test Drive...

Those are just a few from hundreds that were amazing games. I remember logging so many hours into Defenders of the Crown, Shadow of the Beast, and Sierra's Quest series...ah man.

My well-off buddy had an Amiga 4000. This was like the super computer of the time. In fact, if you remember they use to use the Amiga 4000 to do all of the best CGI and SFx of that era. Sea Quest, Star Treks...they used (I'm sure you recall) the program bundle called "Video Toaster." Video Toaster consisted of a hardy video editing bundle, along with the original Lightwave 3d app. Ah man...boy was that program difficult to use (and crazy expensive). But this is what got me into 3D art. Now I work with Max and Maya...it's undbelievable how much easier these new programs are compared to Video Toaster.

Anyhow. Thanks for playing my audio question...good show. And I look forward to the next cast.

20
Podcasts / Re: Podcasts to complement Steve's
« on: January 19, 2006, 08:56:30 am »

21
PC Games / Re: Anyone playing Guild Wars?
« on: January 17, 2006, 12:02:57 pm »
I love GW. What can be said other than, it's a great game. And it has no monthly. As far as I'm concerned, it can be played pretty damn similarly to a true MMO. I've only been playing a week...I'm a level 5 warrior/monk.

22
PC Games / Re: World of Warcraft VS City of Villians
« on: January 17, 2006, 12:00:33 pm »
I think they are both fantastic games, that overall are equal in FUN. The two most balancing things for me are: WoW has a smoother gameplay system--the overall game is of higher quality. CoV's theme is much more interesting to me.

I enjoyed both. I played WoW more. I had too many monthlys going on...I dropped them all, and got GW. I'm happy now.

23
Podcasts / Re: Episode 34 Posted
« on: January 17, 2006, 11:53:40 am »
I feel kinna dumb asking this, but how should I ask a question for the podcast? PM?

There are contact emails on the site main page. :)

Great episode, hearing that interview is making me want to buy Guild Wars.

Actually, the day after this episode aired, I went out and purchased Guild Wars. I think it's a sweet game...the only problems I have are:

1. A graphical flicker, mostly in distant objects and Fx. I think the fog layer/HDRI simulation/bloom effect isn't liked by my Vidcard.

2. The simplicity in overall stats is...well...a bit too simple. I like WoW's stats and attributes much better.

3. You can only be human.

Other than that, I love the game.

24
Podcasts / Re: Episode 32 Posted
« on: January 12, 2006, 11:47:12 am »
Steve,

I didn't mean to be offensive or rude. I'm sorry if I came across like that. I hope there are no hard feelings.

25
Podcasts / Re: Episode 32 Posted
« on: January 12, 2006, 11:45:05 am »
I know very well how to aim, you inane pieces of gutter trash. I've been playing Unreal Tournament, a game that has a functional aiming system for years and I've yet to place in a low ranking in any match. The problem here is the fact that BF2*is*(or was when I played it)  a horrendous game that does not have a functional aiming system. If it did have a functional aiming system, you would be able to go full-auto if you were standing right the hell in front of them with low ping, except you can't. And even if you do switch to burst shots, you still miss due to the ridiculous system. And you know what? Even though it had a pathetic aiming system, I still topped the charts in it every damn time I played an online match. Why? Because I know how to aim and kick ass despite everything else working in unison against me.

Look, mate, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the aiming system in BF2. Neither I nor my buddies have ever had a problem connecting with our targets. You won't find anything online about a bad aiming system either. The game engine and scripting for the weapons is fantastic. It's a perfect mix of simulation and fun.

And I mentioned before, you may be used to a different style of game (UT) and found BF2 a bit awkward. For the record, recoil has a lot to do with whether you hit your target or not.

I mean you say, "a horrendous game that does not have a functional aiming system." It's not functional? Well, I've been playing FPShooters for over 10 years and I find the system very functional. I've played them all, and I play them well. BF2 has a great weapon system--and I'm picky.

I seriously think you just need more practice with real-world based weapons. Either that, or you or your enemy were lagging. That's all I can think of.

When you think about it Kagan, every game out there has the "WTF! I totally shot him" moments. It happens in every FPShooter. For example, I find Counter Strike to be THE most responsive FPS...and there are plenty of "Pulp Fiction" moments where it seems impossible I didn't drop my enemy. It happens.

It's not the game engine...it's either lag, or the end user.

26
Podcasts / Re: Episode 32 Posted
« on: January 09, 2006, 08:19:04 am »
Fair enough.

If I recall properly, Q1 didn't have true mouse look. The ability to look up and down with the mouse was restricted, and had to be bound to a button. Perhaps I was smoking something back then. But I remember the mouselook being mostly on the horizontal...how could I have confused this?

Ah well.

27
Podcasts / Re: Episode 32 Posted
« on: January 06, 2006, 11:49:46 am »
Oh no he Didn't!

Steve did not just auto-post some mundane obvious off-topic stuff on top of the post I started. Wow, I didn't realize he does stuff like that. To top it off, he didn't even reply to my issues on the podcast he's auto-posting about. And lastly, he actually changed the subject line of this thread to suit his needs. Clearly my topic isn't about Podcast # 32...it's about an ISSUE I had with 32--Wow...this changes everything

Ok, I understand...he doesn't read these posts--he's a busy man. I just wasn't aware of this practice. No offense to anyone.

Anyhow.

Firstly, I have to say Quake 2 was FAR superior to Quake 1. The don't even compare in multiplayer. The main reason is simple: MOUSE LOOK. You had full control over looking up and down...all over. This changed the entire genre...before this, FPSs were mostly crappy in the multiplayer department.

BF2 was a horrendous game that screwed up the most important feature; aim. You could be right in front of someone, going full-auto, yet still miss. What kind of BS is that?

Wow. I must say this is a rubbish statement. Horrendous game? Ummm...have you seen the gamerankings scores? Have you read the reviews? Have you any skill in FPShooters?

Sounds to me like you just stink at FPShooters. And that's ok, many people do. Many people get frustrated when they continually get killed over and over. When their weapons don't work like other games they are accustomed to...this frustrates people, and causes them to consider a game "horrendous." But in all actuality, you probably just aren't too skilled at the genre or BF2.

Firstly, if you unload full auto right in front of someone and you don't hit them...that sounds like a personal problem. You must be doing something wrong. Are you using an M60 standing up running around? MY advice to you is practice--in time you won't miss nearly as much.

Let me clarify: It is NOT the game engine's fault you can't kill your enemy. It is the end-user's abilities that are in question. Thousands and thousands of BF2 players have little trouble hitting an enemy when they aim at them PROPERLY.

Things to keep in mind:

*Squat when you shoot (go prone if your enemy is unaware of your presence)
*Use 3-5 bullet bursts...always (there are exceptions to this rule...but you must gain skill to understand)
*Aim small -- Miss small (from The Patriot --do not aim at your enemy...aim at their nose. This will naturally decrease inaccuracy)
*Choose your weapon wisely depending on your situation
*As soon as you run out of primary ammo, switch to pistol on hotkey, and continue to aim small...once depleted, knife the bastard)


These will help you, follow them well. :)

28
Podcasts / Re: Episode 32--game picks issue & TOP 5 BEST FPShooters EVER!
« on: January 05, 2006, 02:55:36 pm »
Even in games where you are the "lone wolf", there are ways to make even the smallest rolled NPC engaging. This is another thing that HL2 did extremely well, the camaraderie of your NPC buddies which followed and fought with you through out the game.

Quickly about the AI. The AI in FEAR was admirable, but HL2 as well had great AI. The enemies would "find" a way to your location, and if they couldn't get there, they would find a spot they could shoot you from.

And come on...the gravity gun? Wow, what a great gameplay element. And on the same note, there were a lot of puzzles in HL2 which required use of a real in-world physics system. Very cool.

Well, I'm off to go jump on a subway and head home. Bye.

29
Everything Else / Re: Who do you look like?
« on: January 05, 2006, 10:16:18 am »
Not sure with all this percentage stuff...doesn't add up to me  ???

I've been told I look almost identical to this dude:


30
Everything Else / Re: How old are you?
« on: January 05, 2006, 10:01:48 am »
Im 29 year old male, living in Brooklyn, NY.

Pages: 1 [2] 3