Jump to content

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

Member
  • Content Count

    1546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX


  1. Rubbish. Your word against mine, and mine is more commonly accepted (which is why companies use 'realistic' to describe games)

    You don't get an electric shock when you get shot, how is that realistic?

    Quote[/b] ]Making certain bits realist produces 'a game with realistic bits' NOT 'a realistic game'

    No, I think you'll find that it does actually make a realistic game, as long as the realistic parts outweigh the unrealistic.


  2. You can't have a 'realistic' shooter. It would involve 48 hours of cleaning your weapon and sleeping then 20mins of hiding in a ditch spraying bullets over the edge at an unseen foe, then a 1shot kill/die scenario which would be 90% more luck/stray~bullets than marksmanship...

    I would like to see 'one shot kill' (two at most) ratios in more games though...

    I am fed up of this bloody arguement from other forums. YES you can.

    'Realistic' doesn't mean 100% realism, it means simulating chosen parts of real life in a manner consistent with the gameplay and with real life physics, attributes etc. It does NOT mean that it has to be a sleeping in a ditch simulator.


  3. Flashpoint Campaigns in multi Co-op? Hell yeah. At the LAN's I go to, a Multiplayer campaign would mean a lot of Flashpoint playing. And less CS and UT2003. Jeez those games are pointless.

    Or better yet, Flashpoint multi campaigns where you are capable of being either west, east or resistance, and fight each other, but that might turn the campaign storyline into water. None the less, I'd love to play some of the campaign missions from the opposing team, just to see how each mission is from a different point of view.

    I remember seeing somewhere that someone had converted the original campaign to MP, maybe Avon would know.

    You can do it yourself, for the most part it isn't that hard (some missions would be harder to convert than others)

    unpbo, stick in a couple extra players, change some triggers


  4. Well actually HL was based on Quake 2 engine smile_o.gif

    NO it WAS NOT.  How many bloody times!

    Look it up!  HL started development before quake 2 engine was released to dev teams.  They shared some code, but the actual base engine is quake 1, NOT quake 2.

    Regardless of what idiot amateur journalists might think without checking their sources. This issue has come up hundreds of times on HL forums; ITS MODIFIED QUAKE, NOT QUAKE 2


  5. HL is based on a HEAVILY MODIFIED quake 1 engine. IE Valve spent a lot of time modifying and upgrading the engine, so they do have experience making their own. Because a lot of the success of HL was due to the mod community (5 years old game, still going strong, anyone?), valve has made sure it is as easy or even easier to mod for HL2. Overall, the engine looks a lot more powerful than doom3, although we haven't seen any of the physics in doom3 (apart from the alpha leak which was pretty but uninspired.) Levels seem to be a LOT smaller than HL2s also.

    Steam - although I'm not a big fan of steam, you must realise that the problems that people have had with downloading it is that SO MANY PEOPLE want to do so at the same time. As everyone gets it, the huge demands on bandwidth will decrease and 99% of the problems will go away. And, of course, it can auto update to fix the rest of the problems.

    And it also promises to rid the world of cheating f#<|<tards.

    Valve has also categorically stated that HL2 WILL be in stores and not just available over steam.


  6. As if it wasnt enough with Swedish named Hurricanes. Now there's a new virus called "Swen". Apparently it comes with a fake e-mail from Microsoft.

    It makes you wonder if people still falls for these viruses? You'ld have to be pretty dense to fall for a virus like this again.

    BM

    I'm still amazed that any of the pop up ad companies are still in business. WHO THE HELL IS GIVING THEM MONEY??


  7. Absolutely, but Iraqi TV didn't exactly qualify for targeting exemption.

    Thinking about this, it was probably a bad example. My point was : does causing civilian casualties which are strictly unnecessary but which will probably end the war quicker make the aggressor a terrorist?*

    By some definitions it does.

    *Personally, I think either 'no it doesn't', or 'it does, but it's worth it.'

×