It's a fact: Playstation is going down, Nintendo 64 reigns , supreme!!!
Phoenix Gamma
On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
>
> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
2600 joystick.
>
> Well, I guess we have a stalemate. There is no way one game is more
> interactive than the other, it seems.
Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
BTW, you're wrong again, Goldeneye is more interactive than DN3D, but I
suppose you would've had to have actually *played* Goldeneye to know that...
GoldenEye would be a much better game
> if you had the option of going into any vehicle you choose, whether that's a
> motorbike or a truck. Same goes for Duke.
>
Rare tried to keep the game as close to the film as possible and did an
admirable job. They missed a few bits here and there, but nothing
major. However, your "logic" seems to suggest that bond being able to
drive around in any vehicle on any level for the sake of it would make
ther game better. Have you ever thought (I don't suppose you have) for
one second that driving vehicles isn't the whole purpose behind Goldeneye
and simply wouldn't suit all the levels in the game?? Duh...
>
> Do those other people's experience's mean more than just one person's? I
> believe so.
>
But other people's opinions do not make an adequate substitute for your
own. If you want to know the game, you have to play it. Simple as that.
> It wouldn't offer any surprises.
Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
>
> In many respects, it is.
In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
> >>
> >What makes the story of RE2 differ from RE1?
>
> Oh, espionage is involved, as well as the individual motives of the
> characters. They are more developed than the first game.
Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the storyline
*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game? As long
as it gives a reasonably credible surmise to the game itself and why
you're doing what you're doing it doesn't really matter what its about,
whether it's saving princesses or "espionage".
>
> Well, I've played many 3D games with digital control and I enjoy the fast
> response. Takes you forever to aim in GoldenEye with analog control. The
> control is so sluggish with it I don't think I'd ever get used to it.
Oh come on, now you're just being stupid. I refuse to believe someone
can hate EVERY SINGLE GAME on a particular system. If you prefer your
PSX, then fair enough, but to not like one of the best games on any
system and to pick such stupid little faults in it is just going too
far. You're just being deliberately contentious for the sake of it.
That maried to the fact that your "criticisms" are so weak, leads me to
believe that you haven't actually played aany N64 game before and are
just looking for the smallest of reasons to try and make your system
"look better". Obviously, you couldn't find any big reasons...
> I never made one. Where did *that* come from?
Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
-me
Jody McLean
Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
>On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
>
>>
>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
>
>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
>2600 joystick.
Where did this come from?
>> Well, I guess we have a stalemate. There is no way one game is more
>> interactive than the other, it seems.
>
>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>BTW, you're wrong again, Goldeneye is more interactive than DN3D, but I
>suppose you would've had to have actually *played* Goldeneye to know
that...
Oh, but I have.
> GoldenEye would be a much better game
>> if you had the option of going into any vehicle you choose, whether
that's a
>> motorbike or a truck. Same goes for Duke.
>>
>
>Rare tried to keep the game as close to the film as possible and did an
>admirable job. They missed a few bits here and there, but nothing
>major. However, your "logic" seems to suggest that bond being able to
>drive around in any vehicle on any level for the sake of it would make
>ther game better. Have you ever thought (I don't suppose you have) for
>one second that driving vehicles isn't the whole purpose behind Goldeneye
>and simply wouldn't suit all the levels in the game?? Duh...
Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you want
to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>> Do those other people's experience's mean more than just one person's? I
>> believe so.
>>
>
>But other people's opinions do not make an adequate substitute for your
>own. If you want to know the game, you have to play it. Simple as that.
I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
>> It wouldn't offer any surprises.
>
>Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
>> In many respects, it is.
>
>In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
>Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
>statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive elements
have anything to do with the mission.
>> >What makes the story of RE2 differ from RE1?
>>
>> Oh, espionage is involved, as well as the individual motives of the
>> characters. They are more developed than the first game.
>
>Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the storyline
>*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game?
Yes, it does.
>> Well, I've played many 3D games with digital control and I enjoy the fast
>> response. Takes you forever to aim in GoldenEye with analog control.
The
>> control is so sluggish with it I don't think I'd ever get used to it.
>
>Oh come on, now you're just being stupid. I refuse to believe someone
>can hate EVERY SINGLE GAME on a particular system.
I've played three games for N64, and they were all supposed to be great
titles. I've played Diddy Kong Racing, Mario Kart, and GoldenEye.
GoldenEye was the only one that was good. I must reinterate that it wasn't
great.
If you prefer your
>PSX, then fair enough, but to not like one of the best games on any
>system and to pick such stupid little faults in it is just going too
>far.
The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on the
trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably will
never feel right.
You're just being deliberately contentious for the sake of it.
>That maried to the fact that your "criticisms" are so weak, leads me to
>believe that you haven't actually played aany N64 game before and are
>just looking for the smallest of reasons to try and make your system
>"look better". Obviously, you couldn't find any big reasons...
I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've had
better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent 3D
stick!
>
>> I never made one. Where did *that* come from?
>
>Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
Never heard of that planet...
Pinochet
Jody McLean wrote in message <6fqrlq$9k...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
>>
>>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
>>2600 joystick.
>
>Where did this come from?
An inference from your rather obvious personal bias.
>>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
>>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
>
>Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
>interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
Yawn....so Duke adds a few extra little snippets when the level maker's
felt like adding some toys....big deal, how does being able to listen to
a busy signal at the phones or watch OJ cruise down the highway improve
the game?
>Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
want
>to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
So how many trucks can I drive in Duke Nukem(or Shadow Warrior for that
matter..)
>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission.
I'll leave comment on that to someone who has played both games..
> Duke 3D is interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the
interactive >elements have anything to do with the mission.
So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
a dozen rockets?
>I've played three games for N64, and they were all supposed to be great
>titles. I've played Diddy Kong Racing, Mario Kart, and GoldenEye.
>GoldenEye was the only one that was good. I must reinterate that it wasn't
>great.
And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
playing it too?
>I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've had
>better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent 3D
>stick!
Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better be..
Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>>Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
>
>Never heard of that planet...
Not surprising..
Jeff Mathis
Jody McLean wrote:
> Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
> >On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
> >
> >You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
> >2600 joystick.
>
> Where did this come from?
>
> >> Well, I guess we have a stalemate. There is no way one game is more
> >> interactive than the other, it seems.
> >
> >Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
> >don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
>
> Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>
> >BTW, you're wrong again, Goldeneye is more interactive than DN3D, but I
> >suppose you would've had to have actually *played* Goldeneye to know
> that...
>
> Oh, but I have.
>
> > GoldenEye would be a much better game
> >> if you had the option of going into any vehicle you choose, whether
> that's a
> >> motorbike or a truck. Same goes for Duke.
> >>
> >
> >Rare tried to keep the game as close to the film as possible and did an
> >admirable job. They missed a few bits here and there, but nothing
> >major. However, your "logic" seems to suggest that bond being able to
> >drive around in any vehicle on any level for the sake of it would make
> >ther game better. Have you ever thought (I don't suppose you have) for
> >one second that driving vehicles isn't the whole purpose behind Goldeneye
> >and simply wouldn't suit all the levels in the game?? Duh...
>
> Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you want
> to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>
> >> Do those other people's experience's mean more than just one person's? I
> >> believe so.
> >>
> >
> >But other people's opinions do not make an adequate substitute for your
> >own. If you want to know the game, you have to play it. Simple as that.
>
> I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
>
> >> It wouldn't offer any surprises.
> >
> >Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
>
> No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
>
> >> In many respects, it is.
> >
> >In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
> >Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
> >statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
>
> I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
> interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive elements
> have anything to do with the mission.
>
> >> >What makes the story of RE2 differ from RE1?
> >>
> >> Oh, espionage is involved, as well as the individual motives of the
> >> characters. They are more developed than the first game.
> >
> >Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the storyline
> >*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game?
>
> Yes, it does.
>
> >> Well, I've played many 3D games with digital control and I enjoy the fast
> >> response. Takes you forever to aim in GoldenEye with analog control.
> The
> >> control is so sluggish with it I don't think I'd ever get used to it.
> >
> >Oh come on, now you're just being stupid. I refuse to believe someone
> >can hate EVERY SINGLE GAME on a particular system.
>
> I've played three games for N64, and they were all supposed to be great
> titles. I've played Diddy Kong Racing, Mario Kart, and GoldenEye.
> GoldenEye was the only one that was good. I must reinterate that it wasn't
> great.
>
> If you prefer your
> >PSX, then fair enough, but to not like one of the best games on any
> >system and to pick such stupid little faults in it is just going too
> >far.
>
> The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on the
> trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably will
> never feel right.
I am right handed and it feels just fine to me. Took about 1 hour or less for it
to feel right.
Jeff Mathis
Pinochet wrote:
> Jody McLean wrote in message <6fqrlq$9k...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>
> >>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
> >>
> >>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
> >>2600 joystick.
> >
> >Where did this come from?
>
> An inference from your rather obvious personal bias.
>
> >>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
> >>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
> >
> >Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> >interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>
> Yawn....so Duke adds a few extra little snippets when the level maker's
> felt like adding some toys....big deal, how does being able to listen to
> a busy signal at the phones or watch OJ cruise down the highway improve
> the game?
> >Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
> want
> >to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>
> So how many trucks can I drive in Duke Nukem(or Shadow Warrior for that
> matter..)
>
> >I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> >interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission.
>
> I'll leave comment on that to someone who has played both games..
I own both games and i fine that GoldeEye is much more interactive than Duke
Nukem.
Jesse Dorland
On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:32:13 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>>In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
>>Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
>>statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
>
>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
>interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive elements
>have anything to do with the mission.
Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
-Jesse
====================================================
Jesse Dorland
jessedorland AT hotmail DOT com
jester5858 on AIM
10268731 on ICQ
====================================================
Joshua S Redford
On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Jeff Mathis wrote:
>
>
> Jody McLean wrote:
>
> > Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
> > >On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
> > >
> > >You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
> > >2600 joystick.
> >
> > Where did this come from?
> >
> > >> Well, I guess we have a stalemate. There is no way one game is more
> > >> interactive than the other, it seems.
> > >
> > >Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
> > >don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
> >
> > Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> > interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
> >
> > >BTW, you're wrong again, Goldeneye is more interactive than DN3D, but I
> > >suppose you would've had to have actually *played* Goldeneye to know
> > that...
> >
> > Oh, but I have.
> >
> > > GoldenEye would be a much better game
> > >> if you had the option of going into any vehicle you choose, whether
> > that's a
> > >> motorbike or a truck. Same goes for Duke.
> > >>
> > >
> > >Rare tried to keep the game as close to the film as possible and did an
> > >admirable job. They missed a few bits here and there, but nothing
> > >major. However, your "logic" seems to suggest that bond being able to
> > >drive around in any vehicle on any level for the sake of it would make
> > >ther game better. Have you ever thought (I don't suppose you have) for
> > >one second that driving vehicles isn't the whole purpose behind Goldeneye
> > >and simply wouldn't suit all the levels in the game?? Duh...
> >
> > Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you want
> > to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
> >
> > >> Do those other people's experience's mean more than just one person's? I
> > >> believe so.
> > >>
> > >
> > >But other people's opinions do not make an adequate substitute for your
> > >own. If you want to know the game, you have to play it. Simple as that.
> >
> > I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
> >
> > >> It wouldn't offer any surprises.
> > >
> > >Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
> >
> > No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
> >
> > >> In many respects, it is.
> > >
> > >In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
> > >Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
> > >statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
> >
> > I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> > interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
> > interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive elements
> > have anything to do with the mission.
> >
Well....you see.....Jody's left hand is a little....uh....preoccupied with
something else. Hence, he needs games that only require one hand.
Josh
Jody McLean
Joshua S Redford wrote in message ...
>> > The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on
the
>> > trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably
will
>> > never feel right.
>>
>> I am right handed and it feels just fine to me. Took about 1 hour or less
for it
>> to feel right.
>>
>Well....you see.....Jody's left hand is a little....uh....preoccupied with
>something else. Hence, he needs games that only require one hand.
Thank you for that remarkable insight into the human condition. Too bad it
came out of your ass.
>Josh
>
Jody McLean
Pinochet wrote in message <6fqskq$2h5$1...@newsfep2.sprintmail.com>...
>
>Jody McLean wrote in message <6fqrlq$9k...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>
>>>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
>>>
>>>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
>>>2600 joystick.
>>
>>Where did this come from?
>
>
>An inference from your rather obvious personal bias.
I tried the stick, okay? I didn't like it. What do you have a problem
with?
>>>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
>>>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
>>
>>Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
>>interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>
>
>Yawn....so Duke adds a few extra little snippets when the level maker's
>felt like adding some toys....big deal, how does being able to listen to
>a busy signal at the phones or watch OJ cruise down the highway improve
>the game?
It makes it seem like you are in another world, and don't use this phrase to
make a lame comeback.
>>Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
>want
>>to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>
>
>So how many trucks can I drive in Duke Nukem(or Shadow Warrior for that
>matter..)
Not enough.
>>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission.
>
>I'll leave comment on that to someone who has played both games..
I have. GoldenEye is only interactive when it has to be, like I said. I've
played GoldenEye for a day, so I should have a pretty good idea of what I'm
talking about.
>> Duke 3D is interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the
>interactive >elements have anything to do with the mission.
>
>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
>a dozen rockets?
I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
>>I've played three games for N64, and they were all supposed to be great
>>titles. I've played Diddy Kong Racing, Mario Kart, and GoldenEye.
>>GoldenEye was the only one that was good. I must reinterate that it
wasn't
>>great.
>
>
>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>playing it too?
Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
game it is.
>>I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've had
>>better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent
3D
>>stick!
>
>
>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better be..
You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason. BTW,
get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough money
to buy any more games.
>>>Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
>>
>>Never heard of that planet...
>
>
>Not surprising..
Have you vacationed there once or twice?
Jody McLean
Jesse Dorland wrote in message <35215228...@news.primenet.com>...
>On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:32:13 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
>Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
>spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
>Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>
>>>In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
>>>Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
>>>statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
>>
>>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
>>interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive
elements
>>have anything to do with the mission.
>
>Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
>details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
When you are in another virtual world, you want everything to be as
interactive as possible. I just don't get that feeling when I play
GoldenEye. The enemies are well-animated, no question, but you can't go
here or you can't go there and the only interactive elements have to do with
the objectives themselves, which is a shame.
Pinochet
Jody McLean wrote in message <6fscvm$aq...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>Pinochet wrote in message <6fqskq$2h5$1...@newsfep2.sprintmail.com>...
>>Jody McLean wrote in message <6fqrlq$9k...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>>>>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
>>>>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old
Atari
>>>>2600 joystick.
>>>Where did this come from?
>>An inference from your rather obvious personal bias.
>I tried the stick, okay? I didn't like it. What do you have a problem
>with?
I don't have a problem with anything...but it is quite easily to infer from
your comments that you automatically dislike anything to do with the N64
and then try to justify your feelings.
>>>>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
>>>>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
>>>
>>>Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
>>>interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>>
>>
>>Yawn....so Duke adds a few extra little snippets when the level maker's
>>felt like adding some toys....big deal, how does being able to listen to
>>a busy signal at the phones or watch OJ cruise down the highway improve
>>the game?
>
>It makes it seem like you are in another world,
Yawn.....that's not improving the game...and in fact is very subjective...if
I can watch one channel, why aren't there any others.....is there some
reason only one station is still broadcasting?
>and don't use this phrase to
>make a lame comeback.
Why? your comment was lame enough
>>>Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
>>want to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>>So how many trucks can I drive in Duke Nukem(or Shadow Warrior for that
>>matter..)
>
>Not enough.
Uh-huh...so what does that mean? Nothing, na-da..the game is still quite
fun, wouldn't you say?
>>>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>>>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission.
>>
>>I'll leave comment on that to someone who has played both games..
>
>I have.
Then why have others found you so consistantly wrong about it?
> GoldenEye is only interactive when it has to be, like I said.
Maybe.....but while such frippery could easily be put in the game, why
should it be? Wouldn't the effort be better put into the AI, or something
else that's actually useful......I'm sorry, but being able to shoot a few
poolballs
isn't all that spectacular..
>I've played GoldenEye for a day, so I should have a pretty good idea of
what I'm
>talking about.
Nope. For one thing you've only played a few levels, and for another one
day just isn't enough for you to make any conclusive statement other than
"I don't like it" when comparing GE with other games.
>>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
>>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
>>a dozen rockets?
>
>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
Because leaving them there would be a pointless use of resources.
>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>>playing it too?
>
>Why would I want to play a game like that, for?
So you'd at least have some idea of what you're talking about?
>I doubt I'd be surprised, and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the
heavens >about what a good game it is.
But at least you wouldn't be misinformed about it.
>>>I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've had
>>>better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent
>3D
>>>stick!
>>
>>
>>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better be..
>
>You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason.
Like I said, "For that price it darn well better be"
> BTW, get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
What facts? A question isn't a fact, it's an inquiry. And I was thinking
of the Force Feedback version which costs a bit over 100$ but no, that
possibility escapes you doesn't it?
>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>
>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough
money
>to buy any more games.
Who's asking you to do so? I was merely stating that while
one type of controller might be good for one set of games, another
might be far better at a different set.
simon
sorry but with all the silly system debates could people PLEASE STOP quoting
A WHOLE newsgroup post and then tagging TWO LINES on the end
it is sooo fucking annoying
just quote what you are referring to
AND FUCKING DELETE THE REST
</Rant Mode Off>
--
from Simon Hutchinson
email : ne...@s.mh.easynet.co.uk
Phoenix Gamma
On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> >You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
> >2600 joystick.
>
> Where did this come from?
Well, it's quite simple, Jody. I sat down in front of a computer, read
your funny little message, hit the reply button and the rest -as they
say- is history!
> Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
Oh of course, and you just *have* to pepper the walls with bullets, and
you just *have* to shoot and destroy all stationery objects in the gaming
environment, you just *have* to operate radios and consoles *all* of the
time. You just *have* to use your watch to detonate objects etc etc..
need I go on any further or are you humiliated enough already?
>
> Oh, but I have.
Oh, and it shows.
> Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you want
> to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
You can do this on the tank levels, get in the tank when you're being
fired upon, that is. The reason the truck isn't used is that there
simply wouldn't be any POINT to the level to use it, not because the game
isn't "interactive" enough. Next you'll be saying GE isn't "interactive"
enough because Bond can't take a leak in the toilets on the facility
level or something equally asinine.
> I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
Oh, I rest my case.
> >
> >Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
>
> No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
Again, without acutally having played it, that means nothing.
> I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
> interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive elements
> have anything to do with the mission.
Explain what you mean by "interactive on many levels" and outling how
Goldeneye doesn't fit in with this scheme of things. You d o actuall
have to *think* for this response, so be careful. I have every faith in
you coming up with a complete load of toss.
> >Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the storyline
> >*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game?
>
> Yes, it does.
It depends on the type of game. If its an RPG, then yes, but a platform
game or shooter!? Do you really care what the story is when you're
shooting things??
> I've played three games for N64,
And that would make you the biggest expert, wouldn't it. Again, I rest
my case.
>
> The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on the
> trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably will
> never feel right.
So are you saying that you don't like the N64 because you're left-handed?
> I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it.
Cheap? Ypu don't know what you're talking about.
> I've had
> better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent 3D
> stick!
He uses Microsoft products" *guffaw*
> >Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
>
> Never heard of that planet...
Having a spot of amnesia, then?
-me
Charles Miller Jr.
Lord Gleylancer <gleyl...@armageddon.net> wrote in article
> What the fuck are you playing at ? Stop whining and get yourself a
> faster modem , fucking idiot.
Playing at? LOL
Maybe you need to learn a thing or two, playing boy, because it is not just
the speed of the modem at hand here. Disk quotas on smaller isps can
become full fast. Also, it is just plain etiquette to not quote huge posts
to add your one line zingers, "that's exactly how I feel", or anything just
as inane.
W. Benjamin Fletcher
>>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
>>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
>>a dozen rockets?
>
>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
>
To keep the framerate up, plain and simple.. It gets hard to keep
track of hundreds, possibly thousands of bullet holes in ANY game.
>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>>playing it too?
>
>Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
>and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
>game it is.
>
Then you have no basis for commentary of ANY sort if you haven;t
played the damn game!
>>
>>
>>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better be..
>
>You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason. BTW,
>get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
>
What's this about getting your facts straight? Do we need to take you
to school with PC's as well? Here's a few "facts" for you...
1. A Sidewinder 3D sure as HELL does not cost that much, even
Canadian.
2. The Sidewinder 3D is NOT a 3D stick, the Sidewinder 3D Pro is.
3. The Sidewinder 3D *AND* Sidewinder 3D Pro are NOT analog sticks.
Digital, Jody, digital.
>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>
>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough money
>to buy any more games.
>
It's not like you can't use that controller with EVERY other game out
there, as well. Jeezz..
Ben
-={ To get my real email address, remove the NOSPAM }=-
SPAMMERS!!! Read this!!!
No spam for me! Unwanted, unsolicited commmercial email
WILL be dealt with.. And, why the hell do you even bother
sending the shit if you don't include your own return address?
Pinochet
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <3521f5d0...@195.121.6.68>...
>simon wrote:
>
>>sorry but with all the silly system debates could people PLEASE STOP
quoting
>>A WHOLE newsgroup post and then tagging TWO LINES on the end
>What the fuck are you playing at ?
A person annoyed by someone uselessly quoting pages and pages
of some other post to reply with just one or two lines.
> Stop whining and get yourself a faster modem , fucking idiot.
I don't know about you, but there's more to the situation that D/L time.
For one there's the sheer annoyance factor, for another there's the
server space issue, and finally there's the politeness issue.
Joshua S Redford
politeness?
:)
Matthew Devney
Lord Gleylancer wrote:
>
> Charles Miller Jr. wrote:
>
> >Maybe you need to learn a thing or two, playing boy, because it is not just
> >the speed of the modem at hand here. Disk quotas on smaller isps can
> >become full fast. Also, it is just plain etiquette to not quote huge posts
> >to add your one line zingers, "that's exactly how I feel", or anything just
> >as inane.
>
> simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
> etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
> concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
> Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
> And if you don't like it, leave it.
True. But we're all supposed to play nice, so more people have fun.
Almost everyone agrees that hogging bandwidth is unkewl; that you don't
simply makes you a boor.
But there are plenty of those on Usenet.
--
===============================================================
| Matthew Devney SPAMSUX!mde...@mirror-image.com |
| Network Operator 781-939-0517 |
| Mirror Image Internet 1-800-353-2923 |
| |
| It is against my religion to be eaten by reptiles! |
===============================================================
Denise L. Voskuil
Lord Gleylancer wrote:
> I guess you still don't understand what Usenet is all about. You
> simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
> etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
> concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
> Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
> And if you don't like it, leave it.
It's not _anarchy_, it's a _cooperative anarchy_. Take a look at the
news.* hierarchy some time - what do you think _that's_ for?
(Maintaining the system.) People work together, or the system falls
apart. Regularly, ISPs get filtered out by all the others if they let
too much spam into the system. Spam posted to too many groups gets
hit by cancelbots. ISPs have Terms of Service agreements that their
users must sign. And there are rules of netiquette (see
news.announce.newusers) that people are highly encouraged to follow.
Don't tell me I "still don't understand when Usenet is all about" -
I've been on since '91. It's the "I have every right to pee in the
sandbox" (read as: post as much garbage as I want, violate netiquette,
spam, etc.) types that mess up Usenet for everyone else. Quoting an
entire post and adding a couple of lines isn't exactly going to bring
down Usenet, but if everyone started doing it, you can bet you'd see
more problems like news articles that never show up, news admins at
sites making posts expire faster to clean out the disks, ISPs charging
higher fees to support all the new drives they have to buy, and so on.
If you like using Usenet, it pays to help it run right.
- Denise
--
Denise L. Voskuil-Marré - dvos...@mcs.com
http://www.mcs.net/~dvoskuil/
If you're posting to the group, please don't send me a cc: too
Phoenix Gamma
On Wed, 1 Apr 1998, Lord Gleylancer wrote:
> >Again, without acutally having played it, that means nothing.
> >
>
> Thus admitting the false logic of your previous posts.
> Well done,VaporBoy.
What exactly are you referring to? Kindly be a little more clear when
attempting to flame, and make sure you read posts p-r-o-p-e-r-l-y.
I have never in ANY of my posts used false logic or referred to games I
haven't played before. I don't know how anybody could make such a stupid
error. I think you have literacy problems which should be addressed
before you go anywhere near a computer, dyslexia boy.
-me
Darien Allen
>I guess you still don't understand what Usenet is all about. You
>simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
>etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
>concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
>And if you don't like it, leave it.
Talk about a stupid response. They are not Charles' rules and
regulations...they are they generally accepted netiquette that the
average person follows in ANY NG on Usenet.
-----------------------------
Darien Allen-ICQ-2927081
You know the place..www.Digital-Ages.com
Reviewer, PSX Unlimited
Mailbag Editor, N64 Unlimited
2 Sites Working Together to bring you the "scoop" on YOUR favorite
next-gen system(s).....
Remove TAKETHISOUT to reply
"To fear me....is to fear death itself..."
-----------------------------
Juergen Zeschky
In a message dated 01 Apr 98 03:25:59, you wrote:
Hello Pinochet,
> >What the fuck are you playing at ?
[...]
>> Stop whining and get yourself a faster modem , fucking idiot.
[...]
> For one there's the sheer annoyance factor, for another there's the
> server space issue, and finally there's the politeness issue.
Remind that you're talking to some kind of twelve year old guy that
uses words like 'fuck' in every sentence. You want to argue about
'politeness issue' with those guys? Come on :)
simon
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35220e3b...@195.121.6.68>...
====
>I guess you still don't understand what Usenet is all about. You
>simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
>etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
>concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
>And if you don't like it, leave it.
i do have as a decent an internet connection as i can (ISDN)
so that isnt the reason why i dont like this to happen
but if i quickly flick through a post and see most of the lines start with
>, then i (probably along with most others) ignore it....and what is point
someone posting a message that people will ignore
also dont call me 'control boy' from the sound of it you are new to the net
and see newsgroups as somewhere to say what you want....feel free to do what
you want
but people will just ignore you
Jared
Jody McLean wrote:
> Jesse Dorland wrote in message <35215228...@news.primenet.com>...
> >On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:32:13 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
> >Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
> >spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
> >Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
> >
> >>>In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
> >>>Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
> >>>statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
> >>
> >>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> >>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
> >>interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive
> elements
> >>have anything to do with the mission.
> >
> >Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
> >details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
>
> When you are in another virtual world, you want everything to be as
> interactive as possible. I just don't get that feeling when I play
> GoldenEye. The enemies are well-animated, no question, but you can't go
> here or you can't go there and the only interactive elements have to do with
> the objectives themselves, which is a shame.
He asked you to list some of the details which I see you have side stepped
once again... too bad... Yeah, I guess you can't open the bathroom stall doors,
eh?! Your shots leave bullet holes... shoot barrels and they blow up... shoot
tables to destroy them... Shoot windows and they get holes in the glass, then
they blow apart... you're not worth it... play a game Jody, then offer your
insight...
--
Jarr
http://members.home.com/jarr/mib.htm
- "Let me put it this way. You ever hear of Plato, Aristotle,
Socrates? . . . Morons!"
Jesse Dorland
On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:33:44 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>>playing it too?
>
>Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
>and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
>game it is.
You won't play Mario 64 because it's mindless. But you can't know if
it's mindless without playing it. But you won't play Mario 64 because
it's mindless. But you can't know if it's mindless without playing
it....
Ironic, no?
Jesse Dorland
On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:39:10 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>>Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
>>details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
>
>When you are in another virtual world, you want everything to be as
>interactive as possible.
I'm with you so far, but this isn't an answer to my question.
>I just don't get that feeling when I play GoldenEye.
And neither is this.
>The enemies are well-animated, no question, but you can't go
>here or you can't go there and the only interactive elements have to do with
>the objectives themselves, which is a shame.
Well, that was a right pretty speech, but you're still sidestepping my
question. You still have not listed any of the "little details" that
make Duke more intereactive.
Ralf Haring
Lord Gleylancer wrote:
> simon wrote:
>
> >and see newsgroups as somewhere to say what you want....feel free to do what
> >you want
> >
> >but people will just ignore you
>
No, actually he's just plain right. If you make an ass out of
yourself, people *will* ignore you. That's what killfiles are for.
|-| |-|
| \ / | /// Ralf
| | \/ | | (. .) Haring
| |\ /| |----oOO-(_)-OOo----------|
| | \/ | | Kilroy is watching YOU! |
| | | |-------------------------|
| | |_|
| | Close your eyes, look into the dream
| | Winds of change will winds of fortune bring.
|/
CKF
In article <6fsroh$pkl$2...@apple.news.easynet.net>, ne...@s.mh.easynet.co.uk
says...
>
>sorry but with all the silly system debates could people PLEASE STOP
quoting
>A WHOLE newsgroup post and then tagging TWO LINES on the end
>
>
>just quote what you are referring to
>AND FUCKING DELETE THE REST
>
></Rant Mode Off>
>
--
--------------------------------------------
Chris Fairchild
Resident Director & Conservatory Faculty
Shenandoah University
Video gamer Golfer Sports Card Collector
Orioles in 98!!!!
--------------------------------------------
Kyle...just Kyle
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35220e3b...@195.121.6.68>...
>Charles Miller Jr. wrote:
>
>
>>Maybe you need to learn a thing or two, playing boy, because it is not
just
>>the speed of the modem at hand here. Disk quotas on smaller isps can
>>become full fast. Also, it is just plain etiquette to not quote huge
posts
>>to add your one line zingers, "that's exactly how I feel", or anything
just
>>as inane.
>
>I guess you still don't understand what Usenet is all about. You
>simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
>etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
>concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
>And if you don't like it, leave it.
The netiquette he's referring to is not HIS netiquette, but THE netiquette.
Some of us have been around here for much longer than you, and in the
beginning there were some informal rules established to keep order. It may
be anarchy, but there's still an order imposed on it to keep it from being
totally chaotic.
-------------------------
Digital Ages Online indepdendent video games network
http://www.digital-ages.com
--containing:
PSX Unlimited senior editor, news editor
N64 Unlimited mailbag editor
-------------------------
Kyle...just Kyle
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35244041...@195.121.6.68>...
>What an ignorance.The problems you've mentioned are simply being
>caused by the increasing number of users, not by quoting. But, again,
>you still don't know what Usenet is all about. Maybe someday you will,
>but I doubt it.
>
The hardware can keep up with the increasing number of users, but if those
increased number of users started posting like you did then the hardware
wouldn't be able to keep up. Usenet is NOT about anarchy and freedom of
expression. There are things which you can do which WILL get you
booted/suspended. Your post isn't one of them, but it does take away
available disk space. If more people did that then ISPs would have to
either charge more to keep up with the storage demand, cut off some or part
of the Usenet so their users can't subscribe, etc.
Kyle...just Kyle
Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
Remember when you were talking about Zelda?
Roger Christie
Lord Gleylancer wrote:
>
> Darien Allen wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 01 Apr 1998 10:22:56 GMT, gleyl...@armageddon.net (Lord
> >Gleylancer) wrote:
> >
> >>simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
> >>etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
> >>concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
> >>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
> >>And if you don't like it, leave it.
> >
> >regulations...they are they generally accepted netiquette that the
> >average person follows in ANY NG on Usenet.
>
> GENERALLY accepted ?
Because its published in countless places by people that have been on
usnet
far longer than you, you hairless cave newt.
>
> BTW by the rules of this netiquete your sig's too long, hypocrite.
Roger Christie
Lord Gleylancer wrote:
>
> Denise L. Voskuil wrote:
>
> >Lord Gleylancer wrote:
> >> I guess you still don't understand what Usenet is all about. You
> >> simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
> >> etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
> >> concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
> >> Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
> >> And if you don't like it, leave it.
> >
>
>
> > Take a look at the
> >news.* hierarchy some time - what do you think _that's_ for?
> >(Maintaining the system.) People work together, or the system falls
> >apart.
> >
> don't YOU take a look at the alt.* hierarchy and tell me what the
> structure/system is ?
>
> > Regularly, ISPs get filtered out by all the others if they let
> >too much spam into the system. Spam posted to too many groups gets
> >hit by cancelbots. ISPs have Terms of Service agreements that their
> >users must sign. And there are rules of netiquette (see
> >news.announce.newusers) that people are highly encouraged to follow.
>
There are elements that are now enforced through cooperation amongst
site admins. He's quite correct. Try posting large binaries to
non-binary newsgroups for example. Try spamming.
> >
> >Don't tell me I "still don't understand when Usenet is all about" -
> >I've been on since '91.
>
> So what ? It just proves you're learning a bit slow, but that's your
> problem, not mine.
>
> > It's the "I have every right to pee in the
> >sandbox" (read as: post as much garbage as I want, violate netiquette,
> >spam, etc.) types that mess up Usenet for everyone else.
>
> Stop whining. You're embarrassing yourself. Ever heard of freedom of
> speech ? Ever heard of freedom of expression ? If you don't like it,
> don't read it.
>
> > Quoting an
> >entire post and adding a couple of lines isn't exactly going to bring
> >down Usenet, but if everyone started doing it, you can bet you'd see
> >more problems like news articles that never show up, news admins at
> >sites making posts expire faster to clean out the disks, ISPs charging
> >higher fees to support all the new drives they have to buy, and so on.
> >If you like using Usenet, it pays to help it run right.
> >
> >- Denise
>
Kyle...just Kyle
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <352f7b2c...@195.121.6.68>...
>Kyle...just Kyle wrote:
>
>>The netiquette he's referring to is not HIS netiquette, but THE
netiquette.
>>Some of us have been around here for much longer than you, and in the
>>beginning there were some informal rules established to keep order. It
may
>>be anarchy, but there's still an order imposed on it to keep it from being
>>totally chaotic.
>>
>Please explain. How can there be anarchy and order at the same time ?
>There are moderated and unmoderated NG's. That's all.
>To me that's part of the charm of Usenet. And as long as no criminal
>activities are involved, please let it stay that way. IMHO, rules will
>only kill Usenet.
If Usenet is total anarchy then why would it be separated into so many
different groups? Why not just have everybody posting to the same group?
Newsgroups have rules within which you can do a lot, but the rules are still
there.
THGill
>What's this about getting your facts straight? Do we need to take you<BR>
>to school with PC's as well? Here's a few "facts" for you...<BR>
>1. A Sidewinder 3D sure as HELL does not cost that much, even<BR>
>Canadian. <BR>
>2. The Sidewinder 3D is NOT a 3D stick, the Sidewinder 3D Pro is. <BR>
>3. The Sidewinder 3D *AND* Sidewinder 3D Pro are NOT analog sticks.<BR>
>Digital, Jody, digital. <BR>
Actually the Sidewinder 3D Pro is digital/optical based. As is the "Analog"
stick on N64 controller. Same technology.
GiLL
Kyle...just Kyle
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35307edd...@195.121.6.68>...
>Kyle...just Kyle wrote:
>
>>The hardware can keep up with the increasing number of users,
>
>Not true. Not every ISP is equally well equipped.
The ISPs which aren't that well equipped offer poor service then.
>> but if those
>>increased number of users started posting like you did
>
>Meaning ? I haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Examples
>please.
Quoting long posts just to add one line.
>> then the hardware
>>wouldn't be able to keep up. Usenet is NOT about anarchy and freedom of
>>expression. There are things which you can do which WILL get you
>>booted/suspended. Your post isn't one of them, but it does take away
>>available disk space.
>
>Yours don't ?
Everyone's does. But my post wasn't a one liner tagged onto a long post.
That would have been 2KB of storage allocated to a post which said
essentially nothing.
>> If more people did that then ISPs would have to
>>either charge more to keep up with the storage demand, cut off some or
part
>>of the Usenet so their users can't subscribe, etc.
>
>If storage capacity is the problem, then isn't it a hardware problem
>after all ?
It is a hardware problem, and rules have been established to keep that
problem from occurring. Those rules are netiquette.
>BTW and for your information, more users mean cheaper rates.
That's not true. A lot of ISPs are switching from a pay per month unlimited
use to a pay per month set number or hours. More users means more hardware
required, which costs the ISPs more money, which gets passed onto the
customers.
Brian Ruhmann
b...@blowmespammers.mindspring.com (W. Benjamin Fletcher) wrote:
>>>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better be..
>>
>>You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason. BTW,
>>get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
>>
What makes any stick a 3d controller? The main difference between the
two sticks is that the Pro has a hat switch, and can be twisted for an
extra axis of control. Does the extra axis make it 3d? (Hardly) I
think your getting confused with the use of the much overused term
"3d". You need 6 axis of control for a true 3d controller, not 3.
And yes, the Sidwinder Pro is digital, yet it acts like an analog
stick. You get the precision of a digital controller with the
accuracy of an analog controller. However, I think the orginal poster
was thinking that digital controllers are only controllers like
gamepads.
>>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>>
>>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough money
>>to buy any more games.
>>
>It's not like you can't use that controller with EVERY other game out
>there, as well. Jeezz..
Yeah, you COULD use the SpaceOrb for almost any game, but why would
you want to? It's a fairly useless controller for games other than
true 3d first person shooters. Just think about trying to play a
sports game, a fighter, or even a side scroller with the spaceorb.
UGHH!
Ruhmann
____________________________________
remove "spam.this!." to reply
Hardset Head
@195.121.6.68> <6fttaa$rjv$1...@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>
<352f7b2c...@195.121.6.68>:
Organization: New Mexico Internet Access
Distribution:
Hitting random keys, "Lord Gleylancer" spelled out:
: Please explain. How can there be anarchy and order at the same time ?
Contrary to the socially twisted definition of "anarchy", anarchy has
nothing to do with lawlessness. Anarchy represents the people (the users
of the usenet, for example) creating the standards by which they live.
It is a misconception that anarchy means no order or chaos. Anarchy means
lack of government...NOT lack of order. The usenet IS anarchy in the
sense that no one governing body decides major things for us (like what'
acceptable, not acceptable), but there ARE standards, ettiqutte and norms
created by the users that have evolved over the lifespan of the usenet.
--
-----------------
psl...@nmia.com
-----------------
"Dance, baby, dance!! Dance to the death!!" -Time Crisis
"Do you REALLY know where you're going, Avatar?" -Ultima VII
"Grrrrrr Zrrrrrrr Graaaaaaaaaaaammmm!!" -Final Fantasy II (US)
Darien Allen
>If storage capacity is the problem, then isn't it a hardware problem
>after all ?
>BTW and for your information, more users mean cheaper rates.
More users who spend more time online doesn't mean cheaper
rates....see AT&T, IBM and AOL as recent examples....
William Powers
Brian Ruhmann wrote:
> >>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
> >>
> >>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough money
> >>to buy any more games.
> >>
> >It's not like you can't use that controller with EVERY other game out
> >there, as well. Jeezz..
>
> Yeah, you COULD use the SpaceOrb for almost any game, but why would
> you want to? It's a fairly useless controller for games other than
> true 3d first person shooters. Just think about trying to play a
> sports game, a fighter, or even a side scroller with the spaceorb.
> UGHH!
>
I want to play too.....
Of course you don't want to buy a controller with EVERY game;
however, in some instances another controller is almost required
to enjoy the game. In my mind Robotron requires dual sticks. No
button layout can compete with the proper controls. Likewise
Missile command without a trac-ball just sucks. Driving games
require a wheel or other analog control.
In some cases you will be buying a controller for a single game.
It may have later uses, but it might not. For many games you
might never use anything but the standard pad. When you
consider the number of games each controller can be used
for they are not an outrageous expense.
Will
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
William Powers
wpo...@nortel.ca
Visit my homepage at http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arcade/9844/
to turn your home game console into an arcade.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Miller Jr.
Everyone sing along...
Rebel Without a Cause....
Joshua S Redford
On Wed, 1 Apr 1998, Lord Gleylancer wrote:
> Denise L. Voskuil wrote:
>
> >Lord Gleylancer wrote:
> >> I guess you still don't understand what Usenet is all about. You
> >> simply can't control NG's with rules and regulations. The plain
> >> etiquette you're referring to, is YOUR etiquette, not mine. Your
> >> concern for small ISP's is just hypocritical and irrelevant.
> >> Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
> >> And if you don't like it, leave it.
> >
> >It's not _anarchy_, it's a _cooperative anarchy_.
>
> Cooperative anarchy ? You must be joking.
>
> > Take a look at the
> >news.* hierarchy some time - what do you think _that's_ for?
> >(Maintaining the system.) People work together, or the system falls
> >apart.
> >
> So that's your cooperative anarchy, just another system. Well, why
> don't YOU take a look at the alt.* hierarchy and tell me what the
> structure/system is ?
>
> > Regularly, ISPs get filtered out by all the others if they let
> >too much spam into the system. Spam posted to too many groups gets
> >hit by cancelbots. ISPs have Terms of Service agreements that their
> >users must sign. And there are rules of netiquette (see
> >news.announce.newusers) that people are highly encouraged to follow.
>
> Encouraged maybe, but - sorry for you - not forced.
> >
> >Don't tell me I "still don't understand when Usenet is all about" -
> >I've been on since '91.
>
> So what ? It just proves you're learning a bit slow, but that's your
> problem, not mine.
>
> > It's the "I have every right to pee in the
> >sandbox" (read as: post as much garbage as I want, violate netiquette,
> >spam, etc.) types that mess up Usenet for everyone else.
>
> Stop whining. You're embarrassing yourself. Ever heard of freedom of
> speech ? Ever heard of freedom of expression ? If you don't like it,
> don't read it.
>
> > Quoting an
> >entire post and adding a couple of lines isn't exactly going to bring
> >down Usenet, but if everyone started doing it, you can bet you'd see
> >more problems like news articles that never show up, news admins at
> >sites making posts expire faster to clean out the disks, ISPs charging
> >higher fees to support all the new drives they have to buy, and so on.
> >If you like using Usenet, it pays to help it run right.
> >
> >- Denise
>
> What an ignorance.The problems you've mentioned are simply being
> caused by the increasing number of users, not by quoting. But, again,
> you still don't know what Usenet is all about. Maybe someday you will,
> but I doubt it.
>
>
>
Good post
:)
Joshua S Redford
> There are elements that are now enforced through cooperation amongst
> site admins. He's quite correct. Try posting large binaries to
> non-binary newsgroups for example. Try spamming.
>
>
>
> > >
> > >Don't tell me I "still don't understand when Usenet is all about" -
> > >I've been on since '91.
> >
> > So what ? It just proves you're learning a bit slow, but that's your
> > problem, not mine.
> >
> > > It's the "I have every right to pee in the
> > >sandbox" (read as: post as much garbage as I want, violate netiquette,
> > >spam, etc.) types that mess up Usenet for everyone else.
> >
> > Stop whining. You're embarrassing yourself. Ever heard of freedom of
> > speech ? Ever heard of freedom of expression ? If you don't like it,
> > don't read it.
> >
> > > Quoting an
> > >entire post and adding a couple of lines isn't exactly going to bring
> > >down Usenet, but if everyone started doing it, you can bet you'd see
> > >more problems like news articles that never show up, news admins at
> > >sites making posts expire faster to clean out the disks, ISPs charging
> > >higher fees to support all the new drives they have to buy, and so on.
> > >If you like using Usenet, it pays to help it run right.
> > >
> > >- Denise
> >
> > What an ignorance.The problems you've mentioned are simply being
> > caused by the increasing number of users, not by quoting. But, again,
> > you still don't know what Usenet is all about. Maybe someday you will,
> > but I doubt it.
>
>
I think.......spammings wrong;)
heh heh
Charles Miller Jr.
Lord Gleylancer <gleyl...@armageddon.net> wrote in article
> Don't always believe what other people tell you. Try to use your own
> head for a change, asshole.
Dear Lord Geydancer,
Not all of us were granted with the ability to think with our ass and head
at the same time.
Karen L Schumacher
<6fu4jn$i...@hume.nmia.com>
Organization: New Mexico Internet Access
Distribution:
: Hitting random keys, "Lord Gleylancer" spelled out:
: : Please explain. How can there be anarchy and order at the same time ?
: Contrary to the socially twisted definition of "anarchy", anarchy has
: nothing to do with lawlessness. Anarchy represents the people (the users
: of the usenet, for example) creating the standards by which they live.
: It is a misconception that anarchy means no order or chaos. Anarchy means
: lack of government...NOT lack of order. The usenet IS anarchy in the
: psl...@nmia.com
I think you should point out also that the lack of order is chaos, and
pure chaos is very hard to find since most things found have SOME kind of
order to them, either in parts or the whole.
ne...@nmia.com
Thomas
Ralf Haring wrote in message <35227514...@duke.edu>...
>Lord Gleylancer wrote:
>> simon wrote:
>>
>> >and see newsgroups as somewhere to say what you want....feel free to do
what
>> >you want
>> >
>> >but people will just ignore you
>>
>> You're either joking or you're just plain stupid.
>
>No, actually he's just plain right. If you make an ass out of
>yourself, people *will* ignore you. That's what killfiles are for.
So far Lord Gleylancer has not been ignored by at least four people who
continue to post to him and then say that he will be ignored. Although I
disagree with Lord Gleylancer about "one liners" he is correct in the word
"Hypocrite."
-Vissy-
Pinochet
Thomas wrote in message <6ful7c$ail$1...@gte1.gte.net>...
>>No, actually he's just plain right. If you make an ass out of
>>yourself, people *will* ignore you. That's what killfiles are for.
>
>
>So far Lord Gleylancer has not been ignored by at least four people who
>continue to post to him and then say that he will be ignored. Although I
>disagree with Lord Gleylancer about "one liners" he is correct in the word
>"Hypocrite."
Nope....some people would prefer not to have to killfile anyone, and
prefer to spend the effort to get others to use proper netiquette before
going to the stage of *plonking* somebody.
Hypocrisy would be replying to Lord Gleylancer's posts with one-liners.
Pinochet
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <352c67e2...@195.121.6.68>...
>simon wrote:
>
>>also dont call me 'control boy'
>
>Where or when did I call you control boy ? Read again and don't come
>to the wrong conclusions.
He didn't say you did....however you did call Charles Miller Jr.
"control boy"
See:
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35220e3b...@195.121.6.68>...
>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
>And if you don't like it, leave it.
So, obviously "simon" was making a preemptive strike to hopefully
prevent you from yet another pointless attack.
Pinochet
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <352f7b2c...@195.121.6.68>...
>Please explain. How can there be anarchy and order at the same time ?
>There are moderated and unmoderated NG's. That's all.
>To me that's part of the charm of Usenet. And as long as no criminal
>activities are involved, please let it stay that way. IMHO, rules will
>only kill Usenet.
IMO, using the excuse of no rules to misbehave, is an abuse of
that privilege, and an unnecessary infringement upon others.
I'm not saying you *have* to follow any rules, but that you *should*
because of innumerable reasons, many of which have been
explained to you before..
simon
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35307edd...@195.121.6.68>...
====
>> but if those
>>increased number of users started posting like you did
>
>Meaning ? I haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Examples
>please.
the example i was orignally referring to was people quoting an entire post
then either just tagging one little 'me too' comment on the end or just
referring to one part
====
>> then the hardware
>>wouldn't be able to keep up. Usenet is NOT about anarchy and freedom of
>>expression. There are things which you can do which WILL get you
>>booted/suspended. Your post isn't one of them, but it does take away
>>available disk space.
>
>Yours don't ?
====
it isnt how much space they take up on one group, but since it happens in
EVERY newsgroup then it DOES have an impact....again i was just referring to
posts that offer little over the previous one they referred to
====
>> If more people did that then ISPs would have to
>>either charge more to keep up with the storage demand, cut off some or
part
>>of the Usenet so their users can't subscribe, etc.
>
>If storage capacity is the problem, then isn't it a hardware problem
>after all ?
>BTW and for your information, more users mean cheaper rates.
====
no it doesnt.......
more users mean isps have to increase there capacity to cope with new users
(or if they are hlafway decent they will)
which means buying more dial in lines, more storage capacity and loads of
other shit like that
did you know a halfway decent isp has upwards of 15Gb A DAY of usenet
messages and that sort of capacity ISNT CHEAP....the more people that join
up mean more people to post messages and more people posting messages means
more storage space needed
simon
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <352c67e2...@195.121.6.68>...
====
>>also dont call me 'control boy'
>
>Where or when did I call you control boy ? Read again and don't come
>to the wrong conclusions.
okay, here:
>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
>And if you don't like it, leave it.
that pretty much means your calling someone 'control boy'
====
>>from the sound of it you are new to the net
>
>I'm certainly not.
====
it was just from all the anarchy shit that you said
====
>>and see newsgroups as somewhere to say what you want....feel free to do
what
>>you want
>>
>>but people will just ignore you
>
>You're either joking or you're just plain stupid.
====
no, if you generally disagree with and wind up people they will ignore you
Syrjänen Jussi
Pinochet (nogra...@spam.sprintmail.me.com) wrote:
: Thomas wrote in message <6ful7c$ail$1...@gte1.gte.net>...
: >So far Lord Gleylancer has not been ignored by at least four people who
: >continue to post to him and then say that he will be ignored.
: Nope....some people would prefer not to have to killfile anyone, and
: prefer to spend the effort to get others to use proper netiquette before
: going to the stage of *plonking* somebody.
Funny, that's what I used to say to myself. "There's no point in
killfiling someone, after all who knows if he'll change over times..." But
after reading the thread, I'd say Greylancer will never grasp the idea of
the net as a place for everyone. He won't change his rules no matter what
you say. In fact, he'll probably comment this article as well. He's
looking for publicity and that's exactly what you're giving him - a chance
to continue arguing with you.
He's partially right; there's no such thing as enforcing here. No one can
enforce someone not to hack a system or read someone's email or send tons
of spam to a mailbox. Not unless he uses the same nonmoral methods as
well.
That's the purpose of the netiquette: it is a set of rules which lets
everyone to have fun in the net, no matter what ISP they have or which
platform they use, since we're all equal here. True, it's not a written
contract. It's a mutual silent agreement which everyone is expected to
follow. If Greylancer wants to change it, he must first understand it and
learn to respect the rights it gives to everyone. How unfortunate no one
ever explained him the idea of the netiquette before he started writing
here.
I don't know what you're going to do about him, but he's the first one to
end up in my killfile. I suggest you killfile him too. There are so many
persons in the net that it really isn't that vital for people to read what
some Greylancer has to say. Not unless you're that Greylancer.
And here's something for Greylancer: If you want attention, grow up and
start discussing things like grown-ups do, respecting others and their
opinions. Or you can continue doing things your way, but eventually you'll
either be ignored by everyone or get scorched by someone who hasn't got
the tolerance for you. Clean up your act while you still can.
----------------------------
"I have nothing against working with computers, it's just that these days
they are on strike 90% of the time."
Jussi Syrjanen
Pinochet
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35234f8...@195.121.6.68>...
>>okay, here:
>>>Usenet is anarchy, control boy, whether you like it or not.
>>>And if you don't like it, leave it.
>>
>>that pretty much means your calling someone 'control boy'
>
>Yes - but again- not you.
Yep, but then again he didn't say you did call him "control boy"
he merely said "don't do it" which is an entirely different thing.
> Now stop being such a moron and get
>yourself a decent newsreader
What's that got to do with it? How would the best newsreader in
the world deal with a one-line reply after pages of text? And you
should note some people don't have that choice, being forced to
use things like tin or trn...
> and/or a better ISP.
And that's even worse...the best ISP in the world would still be
storing the useless quoting followed by a 1 liner.
Charles Miller Jr.
> Yes - but again- not you. Now stop being such a moron and get
> yourself a decent newsreader and/or a better ISP.
> Nuff said.
Hypocrite. He can say whatever he wants and annoy you just to annoy you...
I mean, that's your rules, why don't they apply to him?
LOL
YumeKiri
Was wondering if anyone grabbed this title already. From the previews I've
seen, it looks hot. Please post any thoughts or reviews.
-Kiri
Ralf Haring
They do apply to him. He *can* say whatever he wants, but is it too
much to ask that it be done in a reasonable intelligent manner, i.e.
following netiquette?
|-| |-|
| \ / | /// Ralf
| | \/ | | (. .) Haring
| |\ /| |----oOO-(_)-OOo----------|
| | \/ | | Kilroy is watching YOU! |
| | | |-------------------------|
| | |_|
| | Close your eyes, look into the dream
| | Winds of change will winds of fortune bring.
|/
Jody McLean
Pinochet wrote in message <6fshm5$17r$1...@newsfep4.sprintmail.com>...
>
>Jody McLean wrote in message <6fscvm$aq...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>
>>Pinochet wrote in message <6fqskq$2h5$1...@newsfep2.sprintmail.com>...
>
>>>Jody McLean wrote in message <6fqrlq$9k...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>
>>>>>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
>
>>>>>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old
>Atari
>>>>>2600 joystick.
>
>
>>>>Where did this come from?
>
>
>>>An inference from your rather obvious personal bias.
>
>>I tried the stick, okay? I didn't like it. What do you have a problem
>>with?
>
>
>I don't have a problem with anything...but it is quite easily to infer from
>your comments that you automatically dislike anything to do with the N64
>and then try to justify your feelings.
Look, a game has to prove to me that it's good, just like a system has to
prove to me it's good. I don't like things just because they are made by
Nintendo or Sony, I want those companies to prove to me that they are the
real deal. That said, I get a lot more enjoyment from Sony than Nintendo.
Nintendo has to get its butt in gear if it wants to keep its fanatics
satisfied, and this has been a topic of more than one post from N64 owners.
>>>>>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
>>>>>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
>>>>
>>>>Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
>>>>interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yawn....so Duke adds a few extra little snippets when the level maker's
>>>felt like adding some toys....big deal, how does being able to listen to
>>>a busy signal at the phones or watch OJ cruise down the highway improve
>>>the game?
>>
>>It makes it seem like you are in another world,
>
>Yawn.....that's not improving the game...and in fact is very
subjective...if
>I can watch one channel, why aren't there any others.....is there some
>reason only one station is still broadcasting?
It's not that subjective, and you know it.
>>and don't use this phrase to
>>make a lame comeback.
>
>
>Why? your comment was lame enough
Compared to what? Sorry, but there isn't anything lame about it. It's the
truth.
>>>>Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
>>>want to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>
>>>So how many trucks can I drive in Duke Nukem(or Shadow Warrior for that
>>>matter..)
>>
>>Not enough.
>
>
>Uh-huh...so what does that mean? Nothing, na-da..the game is still quite
>fun, wouldn't you say?
Not near as interactive, yes. I much rather feel part of the game than just
an observer.
>>>>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>>>>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission.
>>>
>>>I'll leave comment on that to someone who has played both games..
>>
>>I have.
>
>Then why have others found you so consistantly wrong about it?
Because they are inherently biased?
>> GoldenEye is only interactive when it has to be, like I said.
>
>Maybe.....but while such frippery could easily be put in the game, why
>should it be? Wouldn't the effort be better put into the AI, or something
>else that's actually useful......I'm sorry, but being able to shoot a few
>poolballs
>isn't all that spectacular..
The enemies in GoldenEye aren't all that smart. They blindly rush at you
instead of running for cover like you do.
>>I've played GoldenEye for a day, so I should have a pretty good idea of
>what I'm
>>talking about.
>
>
>Nope. For one thing you've only played a few levels, and for another one
>day just isn't enough for you to make any conclusive statement other than
>"I don't like it" when comparing GE with other games.
So there is a set time you have to be at a game to figure out whether you
like it or not? I figured playing six levels was enough, but hell, even if
I played for that period of time, I'd still have the same opinion.
>>>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
>>>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
>>>a dozen rockets?
>>
>>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
>
>
>Because leaving them there would be a pointless use of resources.
How hard is it to render bullet holes? Bullet holes stay in Duke 3D.
>>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>>>playing it too?
>>
>>Why would I want to play a game like that, for?
>
>So you'd at least have some idea of what you're talking about?
Why would I play a game I'd know I'd hate?
>>I doubt I'd be surprised, and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the
>heavens >about what a good game it is.
>
>But at least you wouldn't be misinformed about it.
Might as well pour some flesh-eating ants on me and see whether or not I
like the feel of flesh being stripped from my body.
>>>>I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've
had
>>>>better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent
>>3D
>>>>stick!
>>>
>>>
>>>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better
be..
>>
>>You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason.
>
>Like I said, "For that price it darn well better be"
Likewise, the N64 stick has a very cheap feel to it. Analog sticks included
with any system have a nasty habit of being poor quality. The Atari 2600
was no exception. That was the stiffest joystick I've ever encountered.
>> BTW, get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
>
>
>What facts? A question isn't a fact, it's an inquiry. And I was thinking
>of the Force Feedback version which costs a bit over 100$ but no, that
>possibility escapes you doesn't it?
Yes it does. You didn't elaborate, so what am I supposed to believe? You
said the Sidewinder 3D costs $100, and I said it doesn't. You are wrong.
Please make it clearer when you post. And for $85 CDN, the Sidewinder 3D is
*still* better than that excuse for an analog stick on the N64 controller.
>>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>>
>>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough
>money
>>to buy any more games.
>
>
>Who's asking you to do so? I was merely stating that while
>one type of controller might be good for one set of games, another
>might be far better at a different set.
Well, then, that sounded like a recommendation to me. You see, that's why I
don't play many games on PC. Look at all the 'recommended' hardware you
have to have to fully enjoy a given game. Is it essential? No. Is it
essential to get full enjoyment out of a given game? Yes.
David Mitchell
Karen L Schumacher wrote:
>
>
> I think you should point out also that the lack of order is chaos, and
> pure chaos is very hard to find since most things found have SOME kind of
> order to them, either in parts or the whole.
> ne...@nmia.com
Now, I don't really want to rock anyones boat, but isn't this
conversation
now getting out of place amongst a bunch of video-game newsgroups? Does
not contradict everything everyone is saying about order and stuff? No
offense people, but please, between "Playstation is going down", all
this stuff with Benjamin and GameOver, and now this, it's starting to
become increasingly difficult to actually find any game related stuff
here.
Just My two cents.
David.
Jody McLean
Jesse Dorland wrote in message <352271cd...@news.primenet.com>...
>On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:33:44 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
>Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
>spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
>Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>
>
>>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>>>playing it too?
>>
>>Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
>>and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
>>game it is.
>
>You won't play Mario 64 because it's mindless.
'Mindless' to me means 'repetitive'. I just wish to make that clear.
But you can't know if
>it's mindless without playing it. But you won't play Mario 64 because
>it's mindless. But you can't know if it's mindless without playing
>it....
If I've played any number of Mario games, I know full well how mindless it
is.
>
>Ironic, no?
Not if you played all the other Mario games.
Jody McLean
W. Benjamin Fletcher wrote in message
<352203c8....@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:33:44 -0600, "Jody McLean"
><jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
>>>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
>>>a dozen rockets?
>>
>>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
>>
>To keep the framerate up, plain and simple.. It gets hard to keep
>track of hundreds, possibly thousands of bullet holes in ANY game.
Duke 3D does that with ease. And GoldenEye is having a tough time keeping
the frame rate up as it is without worrying about trivial things like bullet
holes, so I highly doubt that's the reason.
>>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
>>>playing it too?
>>
>>Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
>>and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
>>game it is.
>>
>Then you have no basis for commentary of ANY sort if you haven;t
>played the damn game!
So if you said you got a cool feeling in your toes walking over hot coals,
why would I want to walk over hot coals to experience it?
>>>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better
be..
>>
>>You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason. BTW,
>>get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
>>
>What's this about getting your facts straight? Do we need to take you
>to school with PC's as well? Here's a few "facts" for you...
>1. A Sidewinder 3D sure as HELL does not cost that much, even
>Canadian.
Yes, it does. If you are getting a pack-in game with it, as with 3/4 of the
sticks sold, it would be sold at that price.
>2. The Sidewinder 3D is NOT a 3D stick, the Sidewinder 3D Pro is.
Why would they call it 3D if that wasn't the case? Should I declare
Microsoft false-advertised their joystick?
>3. The Sidewinder 3D *AND* Sidewinder 3D Pro are NOT analog sticks.
>Digital, Jody, digital.
They are analog sticks because they are analog. The movements are tracked
digitally, but the analog stick on the surface is no different from any
other analog stick in existance.
>>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>>
>>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough
money
>>to buy any more games.
>>
>It's not like you can't use that controller with EVERY other game out
>there, as well. Jeezz..
Why would you?
Jody McLean
Jared wrote in message <35226BAC...@home.com>...
>Jody McLean wrote:
>
>> Jesse Dorland wrote in message <35215228...@news.primenet.com>...
>> >On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:32:13 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
>> >Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
>> >spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
>> >Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>> >
>> >>>In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
>> >>>Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
>> >>>statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
>> >>
>> >>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye
is
>> >>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
>> >>interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive
>> elements
>> >>have anything to do with the mission.
>> >
>> >Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
>> >details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
>>
>> When you are in another virtual world, you want everything to be as
>> interactive as possible. I just don't get that feeling when I play
>> GoldenEye. The enemies are well-animated, no question, but you can't go
>> here or you can't go there and the only interactive elements have to do
with
>> the objectives themselves, which is a shame.
>
> He asked you to list some of the details which I see you have side
stepped
>once again... too bad... Yeah, I guess you can't open the bathroom stall
doors,
>eh?! Your shots leave bullet holes... shoot barrels and they blow up...
shoot
>tables to destroy them... Shoot windows and they get holes in the glass,
then
>they blow apart... you're not worth it... play a game Jody, then offer your
>insight...
I've played it. Wouldn't you think that merely blowing tables up is a poor
form of interactivity? I guess it could be akin to shooting pool in Duke,
but I don't feel like the details are all there like in Duke.
Jody McLean
Jesse Dorland wrote in message <35227272...@news.primenet.com>...
>On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:39:10 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
>Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
>spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
>Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>
>>>Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
>>>details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
>>
>>When you are in another virtual world, you want everything to be as
>>interactive as possible.
>
>I'm with you so far, but this isn't an answer to my question.
What little details you want listed? The fact you can tip lap-dancers, the
fact that you can play pool, and the fact you can fully interact with almost
anything in the game?
>>I just don't get that feeling when I play GoldenEye.
>
>And neither is this.
>
>>The enemies are well-animated, no question, but you can't go
>>here or you can't go there and the only interactive elements have to do
with
>>the objectives themselves, which is a shame.
>
>Well, that was a right pretty speech, but you're still sidestepping my
>question. You still have not listed any of the "little details" that
>make Duke more intereactive.
I just have. Any questions?
Jody McLean
Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
>
>> >You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old
Atari
>> >2600 joystick.
>>
>> Where did this come from?
>
>Well, it's quite simple, Jody. I sat down in front of a computer, read
>your funny little message, hit the reply button and the rest -as they
>say- is history!
>
>> Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
>> interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
>
>Oh of course, and you just *have* to pepper the walls with bullets, and
>you just *have* to shoot and destroy all stationery objects in the gaming
>environment, you just *have* to operate radios and consoles *all* of the
>time. You just *have* to use your watch to detonate objects etc etc..
>need I go on any further or are you humiliated enough already?
Yes you have to. Why would Q give you those weapons if they weren't meant
for the missions involved?
Stand and gloat, you idiot. It don't change a thing.
>> Oh, but I have.
>
>Oh, and it shows.
>
>> Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
want
>> to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
>
>You can do this on the tank levels, get in the tank when you're being
>fired upon, that is. The reason the truck isn't used is that there
>simply wouldn't be any POINT to the level to use it, not because the game
>isn't "interactive" enough.
Would that have to do with not having to do with objectives?
Next you'll be saying GE isn't "interactive"
>enough because Bond can't take a leak in the toilets on the facility
>level or something equally asinine.
The number of elements you can interact with is severely limited. Tell me
some gadget you use in GoldenEye that has nothing to do with the mission at
hand.
>> I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
>
>Oh, I rest my case.
Your case got thrown out of court.
>> >Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
>>
>> No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
>
>Again, without acutally having played it, that means nothing.
It's enough.
>> I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
>> interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
>> interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive
elements
>> have anything to do with the mission.
>
>Explain what you mean by "interactive on many levels" and outling how
>Goldeneye doesn't fit in with this scheme of things. You d o actuall
>have to *think* for this response, so be careful.
You haven't been paying attention, have you?
I've explained all those things in another post, so I won't waste my time
with you, Mr. Newbie.
I have every faith in
>you coming up with a complete load of toss.
That's your newbie self talking.
>> >Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the
storyline
>> >*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game?
>>
>> Yes, it does.
>
>It depends on the type of game. If its an RPG, then yes, but a platform
>game or shooter!? Do you really care what the story is when you're
>shooting things??
Yes. Look at Colony Wars. Your actions directly affect the story.
>> I've played three games for N64,
>
>And that would make you the biggest expert, wouldn't it. Again, I rest
>my case.
Three games is enough, especially when they are supposed to be the class of
the N64 library.
>> The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on the
>> trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably will
>> never feel right.
>
>So are you saying that you don't like the N64 because you're left-handed?
No, you idiot. Do I have to draw you a picture?
>> I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it.
>
>Cheap? Ypu don't know what you're talking about.
What do you expect for $30 CDN dollars?
>> I've had
>> better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent
3D
>> stick!
>
>
>He uses Microsoft products" *guffaw*
Who doesn't?
>> >Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
>>
>> Never heard of that planet...
>
>
>Having a spot of amnesia, then?
None more so than you. I think I've wasted enough time on you.
Kim or Joel or both
Just wanted to put in my $0.02. I really like RWT for N64. The multi-death
feature is great for old people who suck at vids but still want to feel like
they're making progress. Multi-player kicks ass, too.
Joel.
Phoenix Gamma
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> Yes you have to. Why would Q give you those weapons if they weren't meant
> for the missions involved?
Of course the gadgets are for the mission, but blowing things up and
operating random consoles aren't necessarily part of the missions, and
you can do that.
>
> Stand and gloat, you idiot. It don't change a thing.
??????????
>
> Would that have to do with not having to do with objectives?
No. You don't *have* to use the tank. Its easier if you do, but its not
a necessity.
> The number of elements you can interact with is severely limited. Tell me
> some gadget you use in GoldenEye that has nothing to do with the mission at
> hand.
The Tazer, and on some missions, the remote mines which you get but don't
actually need (ie Jungle, Caverns).
>
> >Oh, I rest my case.
>
> Your case got thrown out of court.
I very much doubt that somehow.
> >Again, without acutally having played it, that means nothing.
>
> It's enough.
If you intend to make superficial statements, then yes, it is.
> >
> >Explain what you mean by "interactive on many levels" and outling how
> >Goldeneye doesn't fit in with this scheme of things. You d o actuall
> >have to *think* for this response, so be careful.
>
> You haven't been paying attention, have you?
I've been paying attention alright, its just that you don't make any real
sense. And instead of being specific, you become evasive and change the
subject (like you are doing now).
> I've explained all those things in another post, so I won't waste my time
> with you, Mr. Newbie.
Ooooh, jumping on that bandwagon now, are we? Aren't you a little bit
late for that one? I'm not going to get offended by the fact that I'm
relatively new (not so much now), but you should feel ashamed that in
this short time, I've already made you look stupid, Mr.GirlyName.
>
> That's your newbie self talking.
That's your Girly-Named self talking.
>
> Yes. Look at Colony Wars. Your actions directly affect the story.
One word: Starfox.
> Three games is enough, especially when they are supposed to be the class of
> the N64 library.
You've merely skimmed the surface of these games (as your posts prove),
you say things which are shot down such as:-
"You can't duck on Goldeneye" - which has been proved wrong.
"You can't complete the missions as you like" - which was also refuted.
"Goldeneye isn't free-roaming" - another falsehood.
"The missions are on rails" - anothe lie.
"You can't use vehicles" - proved to be complete and utter bull.
"You can't aim properly with the control set" - which made you look foolish.
Those are just some of the many thoroughly untrue statements you've
graced us with, all of which have been blown away, so don't talk to me
about the N64 library when your knowledge of only three of its games is
limited only to a bunch of false statements and blanket assumptions about
screenshots for as yet unreleased games.
> No, you idiot. Do I have to draw you a picture?
Don't try and get smart with me you fool.
> None more so than you. I think I've wasted enough time on you.
>
Oh, I've heard it all now: *You've* wasted time on *me*, have you? That
told me, now go back to being a brainless troll.
You've really got this court jester thing sussed, haven't you?
-me
Phoenix Gamma
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> Because they are inherently biased?
Unlike you, of course.
>
> The enemies in GoldenEye aren't all that smart. They blindly rush at you
> instead of running for cover like you do.
Another factless statement there from Jody, as obseverved by somebody who
-apparently- "hasn't been paying attention".
> >So you'd at least have some idea of what you're talking about?
>
> Why would I play a game I'd know I'd hate?
How do you know you'd hate it?
>
>
> Might as well pour some flesh-eating ants on me and see whether or not I
> like the feel of flesh being stripped from my body.
Gladly.
#
-me
Phoenix Gamma
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
>
> Duke 3D does that with ease.
Well, its a bit easier when all you have to worry about is a bunch of
blocky sprites and superficial backgrounds. DN3D isn't anywhere near as
detailed as Goldeneye in any respect, so this doesn't even warrant a
comparison, methinks.
> And GoldenEye is having a tough time keeping
> the frame rate up as it is without worrying about trivial things like bullet
> holes, so I highly doubt that's the reason.
You must be completely and utterly blind. I think you got a little too
over-excited about your Playstation. Think about it. I'll give you a
clue: Right hand (that is if you don't have difficulty finding "it"). Hehe!
> So if you said you got a cool feeling in your toes walking over hot coals,
> why would I want to walk over hot coals to experience it?
Playing a game to know what its like is ahrdly the same as walking
barefoot over hot coals, is it? Common sense and the laws of nature
dictate that fire or intense heat burns and is painful, but you can't
know what a game plays like until you pick up a controller and sit down
and play it. End of story.
>
> Yes, it does. If you are getting a pack-in game with it, as with 3/4 of the
> sticks sold, it would be sold at that price.
I don't care, I'm not Canadian.
>
> >2. The Sidewinder 3D is NOT a 3D stick, the Sidewinder 3D Pro is.
>
> Why would they call it 3D if that wasn't the case? Should I declare
> Microsoft false-advertised their joystick?
They falsely advertise most of their other stuff, so why not. But that's
a totally different can of worms...
-me
Pinochet
Jody McLean wrote in message <6g064j$nj...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
>>I'm with you so far, but this isn't an answer to my question.
>
>What little details you want listed? The fact you can tip lap-dancers, the
>fact that you can play pool, and the fact you can fully interact with
almost
>anything in the game?
And of course that is dead wrong. I can't drive any cars, I can't do
anything with the phones, I can only watch one porno movie, I can't
play all the arcade machines(only one does *anything*), I can't change
channels on the TV in the bar, etc, etc, ad infinitum.
And why are there so many of those clone bitches from Aliens waiting
around for me to kill?
Jason E Smith
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35245201...@195.121.6.68>...
>Syrjänen Jussi wrote:
>
[...snip...]
>Get real. There are some 30000 NG's. Do you really think they all meet
>your hypocritical standards ? I assure you, not even a fraction does.
>Well, I hope your HD is up to it, cause your killfile will be a
>pretty large one in no time.
>
Just to let you know Gaydancer, Although you do not seem to acknowledge the
netiquette standards, you do seem to follow most of them with the exception
of being a total pain in the ass, which is completely within your rights.
And for further information, I checked out the alt.society.anarchy
newsgroup, and they actually converse and debate like sophisticated adults
instead of decending into foul language and pissy little remarks. They
follow netiquette just like most adults do. You strike me as the little
victim lashing out in the only way he knows how.
Jason Smith
tbr...@trinity.edu
In article <6g064j$nj...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>,
"Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Jesse Dorland wrote in message <35227272...@news.primenet.com>...
> >On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:39:10 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
> >Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
> >spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
> >Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
> >
> >>>Like what? Do you ever plan to actually list any of these "little
> >>>details," or are you happy *not* backing up your statements?
> >>
> >>When you are in another virtual world, you want everything to be as
> >>interactive as possible.
> >
>
> What little details you want listed? The fact you can tip lap-dancers, the
> fact that you can play pool, and the fact you can fully interact with almost
> anything in the game?
Just to carry things further, tipping lap dancers, using toilets, and
shooting pool balls is a different form of interactivity than shooting alarms
and bad guys with a silenced gun to keep more enemies from showing up. It's
also different from having to AVOID shooting certain people, and to keep
other bystanders from being shot.
I like that Duke has small interactive elements that actually factor into the
gameplay (opening the movie curtains for hidden items, using cameras to see
where some enemeies are hiding), and THAT's what I like about Goldeneye, as
well.
But are we still going to argue "more interactive"?
PEace to you...
Terrence Briggs
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
tbr...@trinity.edu
In article <6g05os$nn...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>,
"Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Jesse Dorland wrote in message <352271cd...@news.primenet.com>...
> >On or around Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:33:44 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
> >Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
> >spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
> >Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
> >
> >
> >>>playing it too?
> >>
> >>Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
> >>and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
> >>game it is.
> >
>
> 'Mindless' to me means 'repetitive'. I just wish to make that clear.
>
> But you can't know if
> >it's mindless without playing it. But you won't play Mario 64 because
> >it's mindless. But you can't know if it's mindless without playing
> >it....
>
> If I've played any number of Mario games, I know full well how mindless it
> is.
Total, unequivocal, and absolute BULL! The jump from Mario World, Mario 3,
or Yoshi's Island to Mario 64 is NOTHING like the jump from Final Fight 1 to
FF2, or Tekken 1 to Tekken 2. Mario 64 is certainly about free-roaming and
terrain navigation and platform jumping and all that. It most certainly is
NOT about the intricacies of bounding off 4 enemies in a row, or going down
pipes to secret underground levels, or even about the subconscious mind-sync
involved in running and jumping to navigate level. It's very much a
different playing experience, even if the most basic CONCEPTS of the game
(platform navigation, jumping in general) are similar. It's not a Quake
clone or a Tomb Raider derivative, but that doesn't mean Mario 64 is a
retread.
Of course, you'd never know that if you don't play the game, Senyor Ingenuity.
> >
> >Ironic, no?
>
> Not if you played all the other Mario games.
Stay hypothetical and see if it helps your argument.
Charles Miller Jr.
> The enemies in GoldenEye aren't all that smart. They blindly rush at you
> instead of running for cover like you do.
Jody, play the game. Please?
Charles Miller Jr.
> They do apply to him. He *can* say whatever he wants, but is it too
> much to ask that it be done in a reasonable intelligent manner, i.e.
> following netiquette?
I think you missed a post or two...
Peter Bott
On Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:15:23 GMT, "Kim or Joel or both"
<kim....@MCI2000.com> wrote:
If it still has unlimited continues and a lack of level warps, like in
the Playstation version, it's an irritating and lengthy *and* painful
test of endurance. 130+ levels? Who can tolerate playing more than
20 of the gameplay identical stages? Did you die? No bother, just
hit the start button and go at it again! Who cares if you're a
skilled Rampage-r or not? Going for a high score? Pshaw, that's
easy, just keep continuing because your score never resets!
The playstation version could have been so much more with but only a
few minor tweaks and added options. A versus mode was desperately
needed, ie: Compete on a *single* stage to see who can cause the most
rampage. Maybe even expand on that a little more by having 3 stages
of select rampaging, ie: On one stage the focus is placed on eating
people, on another, jumping onto vehicles, etc..etc...
Most of the problems come from the arcade version itself. It did very
little to expand on the original apart from updating the graphics.
The gameplay is simple and ultra-repetitive, just like the original.
In the arcade it's not so obvious because you only have so many tokens
you're willing to spend on one machine, but at home when you have
unlimited free access? It's blatantly obvious. The game desperately
needs more gameplay elements, cooperative and competitive ones
inparticular. For instance, there needs to be an option to pick up
and throw things. Mad at your buddy? Pull out a section of building
and toss it at him, causing him to plummet to the ground. The
characters also need some kind of power to make them different from
each other, as is now, they're all identical. Lizzie should be able
to breathe fire, and George should have some kind of
tarzan-swing-from-a-rope type move going for him.
I'd love to see Capcom do a rendition of what they think a Rampage
game is.
I doubt if the N64 version corrected any of the faults. Adding a 3rd
player helps(and is something I still don't understand why the psx
version didn't have. The game is *not* that demanding on resources.)
If it didn't correct any of these problems, it's a rental at best.
Peter Bott
Jesse Dorland
On or around Thu, 2 Apr 1998 08:01:17 -0600, a member of the Kuwaiti
Mafia, under the alias "Jody McLean" <jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca>, was
spotted delivering the following message in discrete brown packaging to
Lenny, the funny-smelling guy on the pier:
>What little details you want listed?
The ones you claim exist. Duh.
>The fact you can tip lap-dancers, the fact that you can play pool
Like these. Was that so difficult? I don't agree that being able to
kick around pool balls and throw money at strippers makes Duke more
interactive than GE, but now I know why you think Duke is more
interactive, and that's what I've been asking all along.
>>Well, that was a right pretty speech, but you're still sidestepping my
>>question. You still have not listed any of the "little details" that
>>make Duke more intereactive.
>
>I just have. Any questions?
Just one. Why did it take you so long for you to give a straight
answer?
-Jesse
====================================================
Jesse Dorland
jessedorland AT hotmail DOT com
jester5858 on AIM
10268731 on ICQ
====================================================
simon
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <352f7b2c...@195.121.6.68>...
====
>>The netiquette he's referring to is not HIS netiquette, but THE
netiquette.
>>Some of us have been around here for much longer than you, and in the
>>beginning there were some informal rules established to keep order. It
may
>>be anarchy, but there's still an order imposed on it to keep it from being
>>totally chaotic.
>>
>Please explain. How can there be anarchy and order at the same time ?
>There are moderated and unmoderated NG's. That's all.
>To me that's part of the charm of Usenet. And as long as no criminal
>activities are involved, please let it stay that way. IMHO, rules will
>only kill Usenet.
====
no, i think mr greylancer has got usenet all wrong, there is order within
the anarchy
moderated newsgroups DONT WORK, people just cant be bothered to post to them
semi-moderated newsgroups - with some sort of charter/follow up posts DONT
WORK, it justs eneds up with people arguing about the charter
if you post to an unmoderated newsgroup and people dont agree with what you
say then you are killfiled (as someone else has said) or ignored and less
people reply to your posts so your views are expressed to a much smaller
'audience', this isnt rules it is just what happens...it has happened
probably since the start and what i first said (quoting previous articles)
wasnt a 'rule', simply a polite request
usenet cant have rules, because of the scale of it
simon
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <35234f8...@195.121.6.68>...
====
>Yes - but again- not you. Now stop being such a moron and get
>yourself a decent newsreader and/or a better ISP.
>Nuff said.
i have a decent isp, one of the best in the uk - easynet
i have a decent newsreader - outlook express
it isnt a slowness problem i complained about, it was that people send
massive messages that are all one big reply
YOU STOP BEING SUCH A FUCKING MORON AND READ WHAT I SAY
Ralf Haring
Nah, just bringing this thing full circle.
Captain Calzone
"Charles Miller Jr." <cwmil...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes - but again- not you. Now stop being such a moron and get
>> yourself a decent newsreader and/or a better ISP.
>> Nuff said.
>
>Hypocrite. He can say whatever he wants and annoy you just to annoy you...
>I mean, that's your rules, why don't they apply to him?
>
>LOL
SHH! Logic annoys them, you might scare him off before he has the
time to mature into a full grown troll.
----------------------
Captain Calzone
Webmaster: Church of the Golden Monkey
We're coming back, and there is nothing you can do!
----------------------
"There is nothing in the fine print that says "idiots get hurt!"
I'm gonna sue!!!!"
Captain Calzone
gleyl...@armageddon.net (Lord Gleylancer) wrote:
>Jason E Smith wrote:
>
>>And for further information, I checked out the alt.society.anarchy
>>newsgroup, and they actually converse and debate like sophisticated adults
>>instead of decending into foul language and pissy little remarks. They
>>follow netiquette just like most adults do. You strike me as the little
>>victim lashing out in the only way he knows how.
>>
>>Jason Smith
>
>I was referring to the alt.* HIERARCHY, not the alt.anarchy.newsgroup,
>shithead.
>Try alt.flame for some better examples of your so called adult
>netiquette and while you're there, try to convince THEM of your
>shitiquette, you fucking moron.
>
Well, here is a thing. Alt.flame was created so that people who
enjoyed spewing insults at each other and engaging in usenet wars
would have a place to go without really disturbing the other users.
Unwittingly, you have cited an example of the very netiquette you seem
to oppose. Do you see alt.flame people coming into the RGV newsgroups
trying to start wars? Of course not, simply because it is not right
to do so. They are acting far more maturely than you, since they know
the time and the place for their actions. You, it appears, do not.
Simple things like respecting the feelings and wishes of other usenet
users has always seemed to me to be simply acceptable behavior. Where
you get off saying we should all be assholes I will never know.
Jason E Smith
I wrote "decending into foul language and pissy little remarks. They follow
netiquette just like most adults do. You strike me as the little victim
lashing out in the only way he knows how."
and recieved this -- **shitiquette, you fucking moron.**-- as the response
Thank you for reinforcing my opinion and point of view and emphasizing your
immaturity to the rest of us in the intelligent world.
Jason Smith
terrell gibbs
In article <6g0561$nn...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>, "Jody McLean"
<jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Likewise, the N64 stick has a very cheap feel to it. Analog sticks included
>with any system have a nasty habit of being poor quality. The Atari 2600
>was no exception. That was the stiffest joystick I've ever encountered.
It wasn't analog, though.
Alex Mendes
In article <3525c808....@news.ptd.net>,
fae...@ptd.net.justtakethispartout (Peter Bott) wrote:
<snip justified hatred of Rampage: world tour>
>I doubt if the N64 version corrected any of the faults. Adding a 3rd
>player helps(and is something I still don't understand why the psx
>version didn't have. The game is *not* that demanding on resources.)
>If it didn't correct any of these problems, it's a rental at best.
Well, you were right. A friend bought it for N64, and returned it the next
day, for the same reasons you outlined in your post.
-Alex Mendes
Charles Miller Jr.
> Nah, just bringing this thing full circle.
No, you obviously missed something... Something key.
Maxime Pouliot
People stop responding to this idiot, he's obviously been lobotomized....
Joshua S Redford
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Peter Bott wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:15:23 GMT, "Kim or Joel or both"
> <kim....@MCI2000.com> wrote:
>
> If it still has unlimited continues and a lack of level warps, like in
> the Playstation version, it's an irritating and lengthy *and* painful
> test of endurance. 130+ levels? Who can tolerate playing more than
> 20 of the gameplay identical stages?
Is there a save option (for the N64 anyone)? If so, I definitely
wouldn't mind playing 130+ levels. However, this seems to be a catch-22.
If they had made it with less than say 50 boards, people would be bitching
about the game being too short (myself included). Too steal a thought
from My Fellow Americans: there is no "gamer" voice. It's just millions
of people, all of which screaming for different things.
Did you die? No bother, just
> hit the start button and go at it again! Who cares if you're a
> skilled Rampage-r or not? Going for a high score? Pshaw, that's
> easy, just keep continuing because your score never resets!
That is the same problem with the Waverace cheat problem I posted before.
Anyway, I guess a good solution would be just to be HONEST! I know it's a
hard concept to grasp in today's society (this isn't directed at you), but
just compete with yourself/your friends that way. Set a certain number of
lives and see who can get the greates score with those.
>
> The playstation version could have been so much more with but only a
> few minor tweaks and added options. A versus mode was desperately
> needed, ie: Compete on a *single* stage to see who can cause the most
> rampage.
That would have been neat.
Maybe even expand on that a little more by having 3 stages
> of select rampaging, ie: On one stage the focus is placed on eating
> people, on another, jumping onto vehicles, etc..etc...
No, here I think keeping "rampaging" more general equals more fun.
Really, who would want to compete to see who can destroy the most vehicles
by jumping on them when there is so much other good stuff to destroy.
> unlimited free access? It's blatantly obvious. The game desperately
> needs more gameplay elements, cooperative and competitive ones
> inparticular. For instance, there needs to be an option to pick up
> and throw things.
That sounds like a good idea. Are you sure there isn't some way
of doing that? I'm not accusing you of being a Jody, but, since you're
renting (I'm assuming from your conclusion) it, maybe you overlooked it?
I doubt it would be the same button for punching since then you would
probably throw something that you wouldn't mean to.
> and toss it at him, causing him to plummet to the ground. The
> characters also need some kind of power to make them different from
> each other, as is now, they're all identical. Lizzie should be able
> to breathe fire, and George should have some kind of
> tarzan-swing-from-a-rope type move going for him.
I thought they did? I know there was no tarzan-swing-from-a-rope
thing, but I thought there were some powers that separated them other than
physical characteristics.
> I'd love to see Capcom do a rendition of what they think a Rampage
> game is.
Then we would be seeing 6-10 sequals:) Super Rampage Alpha Turbo 3
anyone? Not that I'm knocking Capcom, I like them. I hope ppl aren't so
sensitive now that little jokes don't have to be followed by a just
kidding statement.
> I doubt if the N64 version corrected any of the faults. Adding
a 3rd > player helps(and is something I still don't understand why the psx
> version didn't have. The game is *not* that demanding on resources.)
> If it didn't correct any of these problems, it's a rental at best.
I'll wait and see. However, if it is as good as the original, they should
consider it sold (at least to me).
Josh
Joshua S Redford
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
>
> Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
> >On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> >
> >> >You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old
> Atari
> >> >2600 joystick.
> >>
> >> Where did this come from?
> >
> >Well, it's quite simple, Jody. I sat down in front of a computer, read
> >your funny little message, hit the reply button and the rest -as they
> >say- is history!
> >
> >> Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> >> interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
> >
> >Oh of course, and you just *have* to pepper the walls with bullets, and
> >you just *have* to shoot and destroy all stationery objects in the gaming
> >environment, you just *have* to operate radios and consoles *all* of the
> >time. You just *have* to use your watch to detonate objects etc etc..
> >need I go on any further or are you humiliated enough already?
>
> Yes you have to. Why would Q give you those weapons if they weren't meant
> for the missions involved?
>
> Stand and gloat, you idiot. It don't change a thing.
Just like in the movie, Q gives you what he thinks would be the most
appropriate weapon for the mission. Why would Q give you a watch laser
when you are supposed to intercept computer data? Likewise there are
times when certain items would come in handy that Q never provided.
Starting with Bond's trademark gun, while it is my favorite, just isn't
all that helpful in the beginning of some missions. Gloat? Sure thing.
> >> Oh, but I have.
> >Oh, and it shows.
> >> Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
> want
> >> to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
> >You can do this on the tank levels, get in the tank when you're being
> >fired upon, that is. The reason the truck isn't used is that there
> >simply wouldn't be any POINT to the level to use it, not because the game
> >isn't "interactive" enough.
> Would that have to do with not having to do with objectives?
C'mon now Jody. Let's not get obscene! GoldenEye isn't interacting, you
rip plants out of the ground, you can't climb trees, you can't duck (oops
wait, sorry Jody you can), well...uh...ducking isn't important. But Jody,
you said that it needed interactivity. Well, it isn't needed to beat the
game. But, Jody, neither is driving a truck, but you seem to still scream
about that as a serious downfall. If you could, would that suddenly
become "unimportant" also?
>
> Next you'll be saying GE isn't "interactive"
> >enough because Bond can't take a leak in the toilets on the facility
> >level or something equally asinine. (He probably already has
somewhere)
>
> The number of elements you can interact with is severely limited. Tell me
> some gadget you use in GoldenEye that has nothing to do with the mission at
> hand.
Easy, half the guns, you don't need. You don't need the watch lazer.
Also, what would be the point of having a gadget that had nothing to do
with the mission? Wow, bond has 3-d glasses/keychain/floby/spoon. What
are they for? Uh, nothing but this kid with a girl's name told us that
putting useless items in the main character's inventory would add tons to
the interactivity of the game.
> >> I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
> >
> >Oh, I rest my case.
>
> Your case got thrown out of court.
>
> >> >Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
> >>
> >> No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
> >
> >Again, without acutally having played it, that means nothing.
>
> It's enough.
The data couldn't have been that good for you not to know that a
tank is used twice. This, of course, goes back to my "looking at the back
of the box comment"
> >> I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> >> interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
> >> interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive
> elements
> >> have anything to do with the mission.
> >
> >Explain what you mean by "interactive on many levels" and outling how
> >Goldeneye doesn't fit in with this scheme of things. You d o actuall
> >have to *think* for this response, so be careful.
>
> You haven't been paying attention, have you?
>
> I've explained all those things in another post, so I won't waste my time
> with you, Mr. Newbie.
You *just* did that Jody so don't act like it has been part of
your signature since you started gracing this newsgroup with your
presence. I think we can all agree if it comes down to being you (who is
more of a troll than a newbie, but should still be considered a newbie)
and classified as a newbie, most would beg to be called a newbie.
> I have every faith in
> >you coming up with a complete load of toss.
>
> That's your newbie self talking.
*yawn* let's side-step all issues with "you newbie you" responses.
> >> >Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the
> storyline
> >> >*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game?
> >>
> >> Yes, it does.
> >
> >It depends on the type of game. If its an RPG, then yes, but a platform
> >game or shooter!? Do you really care what the story is when you're
> >shooting things??
>
> Yes. Look at Colony Wars. Your actions directly affect the story.
Oh Jody, you newbie you.
> >> I've played three games for N64,
> >
> >And that would make you the biggest expert, wouldn't it. Again, I rest
> >my case.
>
> Three games is enough, especially when they are supposed to be the class of
> the N64 library.
Oh Jody, you newbie/troll you. There are more than three good games for
the N64.
> >> The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on the
> >> trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably will
> >> never feel right.
> >
> >So are you saying that you don't like the N64 because you're
[not] left-handed? (added the not, assuming it was a mistake)
>
> No, you idiot. Do I have to draw you a picture?
hmmm, and yet he doesn't draw the picture.
> >> I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it.
> >
> >Cheap? Ypu don't know what you're talking about.
>
> What do you expect for $30 CDN dollars?
Your mom has a cheaper feel to her and she costs $40 dollars:)
I think the N64 controller is ideal, but it is all a matter of opinion.
At least I didn't see that there were three handgrips and thus claim that
it is a clumsy, hard-to-use controller.
Josh
Joshua S Redford
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
>
> W. Benjamin Fletcher wrote in message
> <352203c8....@news.mindspring.com>...
> >On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:33:44 -0600, "Jody McLean"
> ><jmc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
> >>>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
> >>>a dozen rockets?
> >>
> >>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
> >>
> >To keep the framerate up, plain and simple.. It gets hard to keep
> >track of hundreds, possibly thousands of bullet holes in ANY game.
>
> Duke 3D does that with ease. And GoldenEye is having a tough time keeping
> the frame rate up as it is without worrying about trivial things like bullet
> holes, so I highly doubt that's the reason.
Yeah, I almost threw GoldenEye out when it lost track of some of my
thousands of bullet holes.
> >>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
> >>>playing it too?
> >>
> >>Why would I want to play a game like that, for? I doubt I'd be surprised,
> >>and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the heavens about what a good
> >>game it is.
> >>
> >Then you have no basis for commentary of ANY sort if you haven;t
> >played the damn game!
>
> So if you said you got a cool feeling in your toes walking over hot coals,
> why would I want to walk over hot coals to experience it?
Well, I wouldn't go "Man, it hurts like hell having a book fall on my
foot", if it never happened. However, this is straying way, way off
topic. hmmmm, another avoidance tactic?
Josh
Joshua S Redford
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> >You won't play Mario 64 because it's mindless.
>
> 'Mindless' to me means 'repetitive'. I just wish to make that clear.
Hmmmm, another reredefintion. Next, mindless will refer to kiddy enemies.
> But you can't know if
> >it's mindless without playing it. But you won't play Mario 64 because
> >it's mindless. But you can't know if it's mindless without playing
> >it....
>
> If I've played any number of Mario games, I know full well how mindless it
> is.
>
> >
> >Ironic, no?
>
> Not if you played all the other Mario games.
They're hardly the same. Bowser isn't even the main enemy in all of them/
you don't defeat enemies the same way/ the enemies are not all the same/
Mario doesn't even have to be the main character in a couple of them.
What makes it repetitive? The fact that you defeat enemies in order to
finish the game?
Josh
W. Benjamin Fletcher
>>>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
>>>
>>To keep the framerate up, plain and simple.. It gets hard to keep
>>track of hundreds, possibly thousands of bullet holes in ANY game.
>
>Duke 3D does that with ease. And GoldenEye is having a tough time keeping
>the frame rate up as it is without worrying about trivial things like bullet
>holes, so I highly doubt that's the reason.
>
Compared to the Goldeneye engine, the Duke 3D "BUILD" engine is LAME.
Duke's engine tracks spirtes and sectors, not polygons. GEye's engine
is true 3D, while the Duke engine is 2.5D. (Look at some old
comp.sys.pc.games.action for further reference... ) Plain and simple,
there is NO need to track thousands of bullet holes, just enough in
the area you're in to keep it realistic.
>>>
>>Then you have no basis for commentary of ANY sort if you haven;t
>>played the damn game!
>
>So if you said you got a cool feeling in your toes walking over hot coals,
>why would I want to walk over hot coals to experience it?
>
No, you can KNOW that walking on hot coals will burn you, but you
won't know how a game plays until you play it.
>
>>2. The Sidewinder 3D is NOT a 3D stick, the Sidewinder 3D Pro is.
>
>Why would they call it 3D if that wasn't the case? Should I declare
>Microsoft false-advertised their joystick?
>
Same as Duke Nukem *3D*, which it isn't. How about 3D movies? Are
they? Nope. The Sidewinder Pro 3D is the closest MS stick that's "3D",
because it give you 4 axes of movement, plus a rudder, and that's how
MS defines the 3D for that stick.
>>3. The Sidewinder 3D *AND* Sidewinder 3D Pro are NOT analog sticks.
>>Digital, Jody, digital.
>
>They are analog sticks because they are analog. The movements are tracked
>digitally, but the analog stick on the surface is no different from any
>other analog stick in existance.
>
NO! It is a DIGITAL stick, period. Just because it has a regular
joystick handle on it does NOT make it analog. If it's tracked
digitally, it's a digital stick. If it's tracked with analog, it's an
analog stick.
>>>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
>>>
>>>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough
>money
>>>to buy any more games.
>>>
>>It's not like you can't use that controller with EVERY other game out
>>there, as well. Jeezz..
>
>Why would you?
>
Why WOULDN'T you, if you prefer it?
Ben
-={ To get my real email address, remove the NOSPAM }=-
SPAMMERS!!! Read this!!!
No spam for me! Unwanted, unsolicited commmercial email
WILL be dealt with.. And, why the hell do you even bother
sending the shit if you don't include your own return address?
tbr...@trinity.edu
> >
> >Jody McLean wrote in message <6fscvm$aq...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
> >
> >>Pinochet wrote in message <6fqskq$2h5$1...@newsfep2.sprintmail.com>...
> >
> >>>Jody McLean wrote in message <6fqrlq$9k...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>...
> >
> >>>>>> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
> >
> >>>>>You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old
> >Atari
> >>>>>2600 joystick.
> >
> >
> >>>>Where did this come from?
> >
> >
> >
> >>I tried the stick, okay? I didn't like it. What do you have a problem
> >>with?
> >
> >I don't have a problem with anything...but it is quite easily to infer from
> >your comments that you automatically dislike anything to do with the N64
> >and then try to justify your feelings.
>
> Look, a game has to prove to me that it's good, just like a system has to
> prove to me it's good.
You can forget that argument, becuase you've already stated that you won't
play a game if you don't like the way it looks.
> I don't like things just because they are made by
> Nintendo or Sony, I want those companies to prove to me that they are the
> real deal. That said, I get a lot more enjoyment from Sony than Nintendo.
> Nintendo has to get its butt in gear if it wants to keep its fanatics
> satisfied, and this has been a topic of more than one post from N64 owners.
Of course, because that wasn't the argument you leveled against Goldeneye or
Zelda 64, nor was it directly related to your discussion of ingenuity,
interactivity, or brainpower.
If we're moving on to a new argument, however...
> >>>>>Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
> >>>>>don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
> >>>>
> >>>>Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> >>>>interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
> >>>
> >>>Yawn....so Duke adds a few extra little snippets when the level maker's
> >>>felt like adding some toys....big deal, how does being able to listen to
> >>>a busy signal at the phones or watch OJ cruise down the highway improve
> >>>the game?
> >>
> >>It makes it seem like you are in another world,
> >
> >Yawn.....that's not improving the game...and in fact is very
> subjective...if
> >I can watch one channel, why aren't there any others.....is there some
> >reason only one station is still broadcasting?
>
> It's not that subjective, and you know it.
It *is* subjective, as the conflicting posts prove. Some of us consider
interactivity relating to the gameplay (as stated in Goldeneye and bits of
Duke) to be more important than auxillary interactivity like shooting pool
and keeping bullet holes in the walls for long periods of time.
> >>and don't use this phrase to
> >>make a lame comeback.
> >
> >
> >Why? your comment was lame enough
>
> Compared to what? Sorry, but there isn't anything lame about it. It's the
> truth.
Another world where the enemies are flat and dumb, another world where
falling three stories from a building means you can still walk afterwards, or
another world where blasting a wall with a rocket launcher do visible
damage. We can define and refine the rule sof the game world all we want, be
we've done more than a few comparisons between Goldeneye and Duke on this
level (glass breaking after it's shot, shooting alarms, etc.)
> >>>>Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you
> >>>want to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
> >
> >>>So how many trucks can I drive in Duke Nukem(or Shadow Warrior for that
> >>>matter..)
> >>
> >>Not enough.
> >
> >Uh-huh...so what does that mean? Nothing, na-da..the game is still quite
> >fun, wouldn't you say?
>
> Not near as interactive, yes. I much rather feel part of the game than just
> an observer.
So shooting your weapons mean nothing, aiming for various parts of the body
means nothing, jumping into a tank that's slightly off the game path means
nothing, and just plain NOT shooting everything in sight to advance through
all the stages means nothing.
> >>>>I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> >>>>interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission.
> >>>
> >>>I'll leave comment on that to someone who has played both games..
> >>
> >>I have.
> >
> >Then why have others found you so consistantly wrong about it?
>
> Because they are inherently biased?
As opposed to you, who's being totally neutral about this...
The only way to be neutral on this score is to be ignorant, because everyone
who's played Goldeneye has an opinion on how interactive it is. Anyone who
knows the rules of the game's AI knows more.
Kinda like some fighting games. SFII seems pretty mindless at first until
the rules of the game engine were explored.
> >> GoldenEye is only interactive when it has to be, like I said.
> >
> >Maybe.....but while such frippery could easily be put in the game, why
> >should it be? Wouldn't the effort be better put into the AI, or something
> >else that's actually useful......I'm sorry, but being able to shoot a few
> >poolballs
> >isn't all that spectacular..
>
> The enemies in GoldenEye aren't all that smart. They blindly rush at you
> instead of running for cover like you do.
To quote Charles, "Jody, play the game, please." It isn't just about enemies
apaearing in the game path for the sake of a body count. There are way to
limit their numbers, snuff them out of hiding places, etc.
> >>I've played GoldenEye for a day, so I should have a pretty good idea of
> >what I'm
> >>talking about.
> >
> >Nope. For one thing you've only played a few levels, and for another one
> >day just isn't enough for you to make any conclusive statement other than
> >"I don't like it" when comparing GE with other games.
>
> So there is a set time you have to be at a game to figure out whether you
> like it or not? I figured playing six levels was enough, but hell, even if
> I played for that period of time, I'd still have the same opinion.
I guess so. If you went in wondering why you couldn't use any of the
toilets, though, you porbably weren't going to have your opinions changed,
anyway.
Besides, given your prejudices toward Mario 64, why shouldn't we expect you
to have your opinions changed after a few gaming sessions...
> >>>So exactly what does shooting a couple pool balls do for the player...and
> >>>why can't I kill anyone with them....and how do those pots stand up to
> >>>a dozen rockets?
> >>
> >>I dunno. How come bullet holes keep disappearing in GoldenEye?
> >
> >Because leaving them there would be a pointless use of resources.
>
> How hard is it to render bullet holes? Bullet holes stay in Duke 3D.
I'll take your word for it, rather than assume my recolection of the game to
be true (which conflict with yours, by the way).
Considering how many bullets exist in the game, I'm sure I'll live if a minor
issue like that doesn't live up to your expectations.
> >>>And yet you've claimed how many times Mario64 is mindless.....without
> >>>playing it too?
> >>
> >>Why would I want to play a game like that, for?
> >
> >So you'd at least have some idea of what you're talking about?
>
> Why would I play a game I'd know I'd hate?
Because your assertions about its gameplay are essentially wrong. If you
were correct about Mario 64 being a retread on the earlier games, your
assertions might hold more weight (i.e. Not wanting to play Darkstalkers
because you don't like Street Fighter II's gaemplay).
That would be like me not wanting to Resident Evil because I thought it to be
a Doom clone.
> >>I doubt I'd be surprised, and I'd *highly* doubt I'd be screaming to the
> >heavens >about what a good game it is.
> >
> >But at least you wouldn't be misinformed about it.
>
> Might as well pour some flesh-eating ants on me and see whether or not I
> like the feel of flesh being stripped from my body.
Nice attempt at an fitting analogy there. Then again, you never said gameplay
was paramount to your game playing experience, anyway...
> >>>>I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've
> had
> >>>>better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent
> >>3D
> >>>>stick!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Doesn't it cost around 100$ too? For that price it darn well better
> be..
> >>
> >>You pay for quality. Analog sticks are more expensive for a reason.
> >
> >Like I said, "For that price it darn well better be"
>
> Likewise, the N64 stick has a very cheap feel to it. Analog sticks included
> with any system have a nasty habit of being poor quality. The Atari 2600
> was no exception. That was the stiffest joystick I've ever encountered.
But the N64 analog stick isn't stiff. No one who's complained about it
complained about the stiffness. I don't know what stick you're using, but
the quality and ergonomic feel was A-OK with me.
This wasn't you inital complaint about Zelda, Mario or Goldeneye, however.
But if you want to carry this, I've had a few nasty blisters using Nintendo
and Sony digital control pads for years :)
> >> BTW, get your facts straight. A Sidewinder 3D costs $85 CDN.
> >
> >
> >What facts? A question isn't a fact, it's an inquiry. And I was thinking
> >of the Force Feedback version which costs a bit over 100$ but no, that
> >possibility escapes you doesn't it?
>
> Yes it does. You didn't elaborate, so what am I supposed to believe? You
> said the Sidewinder 3D costs $100, and I said it doesn't. You are wrong.
> Please make it clearer when you post. And for $85 CDN, the Sidewinder 3D is
> *still* better than that excuse for an analog stick on the N64 controller.
If you say so.
It still wasn't part of your inital discussion on N64 games, however. You
don't rag on a library's lack of ingenuity and overuse of primary colors then
jump ship to complain about the control stick all the time, do you?
> >>>Course its not as good as a SpaceOrb 360 for Quake..
> >>
> >>If I bought a controller for every game I play, I wouldn't have enough
> >money
> >>to buy any more games.
> >
> >
> >Who's asking you to do so? I was merely stating that while
> >one type of controller might be good for one set of games, another
> >might be far better at a different set.
>
> Well, then, that sounded like a recommendation to me. You see, that's why I
> don't play many games on PC. Look at all the 'recommended' hardware you
> have to have to fully enjoy a given game. Is it essential? No. Is it
> essential to get full enjoyment out of a given game? Yes.
Keeping the argument to the N64's games (the three you've played, anyway)
what are your fair judgements of the games, based on the fact that you
couldn't do anything in the game due to the cheapness of the controller.
BTW, I'm right handed, and I'm doing fine. Peace to you...
Air Syxx
I just wanted to jump in here on the equality of the systems bandwagon.
Actually... I think that the N64 is a quality system.. I own a Playstation.. I
love it.. for sports and for RPG's and its strategy game are fly too. I would
have an N64 if it had the things that I wanted it to. I still play Madden 64
at my budds house.. and its great.. once the baseball games come out.. it will
be better... I just think that there are not enough games for the best of the
N64 to come out... I think once more games are out.. the quality of the games
will get even better... that is why I have the playstation... but that is why I
will have a N64 one day. My question is... which system do people think WILL
be superior 2 years in the future.
NickleCat
Air...@aol.com
tic...@spike.forfree.at
0Shadow0
Jody McLean wrote:
> Phoenix Gamma wrote in message ...
> >On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Jody McLean wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I like PlayStation controllers better, even without the analog stick.
> >
> >You'd probably like the PSX controller better if it was like an old Atari
> >2600 joystick.
>
> Where did this come from?
> yeah thats what i wonder about all your claims and assumptions.
> >> Well, I guess we have a stalemate. There is no way one game is more
> >> interactive than the other, it seems.
> >
> >Ah, when all else fails, attempt to assue some kind of compromise. Why
> >don't you just admit that you've been blown out?
>
> Both games are interactive on different levels. GoldenEye is only
> interactive when it has to be, while Duke adds the extra details.
> wow shooting pool balls with a pistol.ok ok we all get it you just like games
> where you can go and actually use the toilet.
> >BTW, you're wrong again, Goldeneye is more interactive than DN3D, but I
> >suppose you would've had to have actually *played* Goldeneye to know
> that...
>
> Oh, but I have.
> than you must be delusional or something cos none of waht you say regarding
> the game (or anything else for that matter) makes much sense or could be
> passed for unbiased criticism.
> > GoldenEye would be a much better game
> >> if you had the option of going into any vehicle you choose, whether
> that's a
> >> motorbike or a truck. Same goes for Duke.
> >>
> >
> >Rare tried to keep the game as close to the film as possible and did an
> >admirable job. They missed a few bits here and there, but nothing
> >major. However, your "logic" seems to suggest that bond being able to
> >drive around in any vehicle on any level for the sake of it would make
> >ther game better. Have you ever thought (I don't suppose you have) for
> >one second that driving vehicles isn't the whole purpose behind Goldeneye
> >and simply wouldn't suit all the levels in the game?? Duh...
>
> Look, if people are firing at you and there's a truck nearby, would you want
> to hide behind it or would you want to drive it.
> you cant have everything.if you want a driving game go play interstate
> whatever or grand theft auto.the game was meant to be a first person shooter
> not a driving game or a hybrid of the two generes.if you want to level that
> sort of criticism then please wait until some developer actually develops a
> game of that sort.
> >> Do those other people's experience's mean more than just one person's? I
> >> believe so.
> >>
> >
> >But other people's opinions do not make an adequate substitute for your
> >own. If you want to know the game, you have to play it. Simple as that.
>
> I've played it. Never played the tank level, though.
>
> >> It wouldn't offer any surprises.
> >
> >Looking into your crystal ball again, Jody?
>
> No, looking at screenshots and data on the game.
> oh so is that your way of admitting that you havent actually played the
> game.because your comments suggest so and so does the above preceding
> statement
> >> In many respects, it is.
> >
> >In what way is Duke Nukem 3D with its 2D sprites more realsitic than
> >Goldeneye? If you're going to make such a startlingly preposterous
> >statement, at least have the decency to give examples.
>
> I find it's the little details that count. The only reason GoldenEye is
> interactive on any level is simply to complete the mission. Duke 3D is
> interactive on many levels, not in such a way that the interactive elements
> have anything to do with the mission.
> does that make the game better???
> >> >What makes the story of RE2 differ from RE1?
> >>
> >> Oh, espionage is involved, as well as the individual motives of the
> >> characters. They are more developed than the first game.
> >
> >Are we talking about a game here or a soap opera? And does the storyline
> >*really* matter all that much when you're involved in the game?
>
> Yes, it does.
>
> >> Well, I've played many 3D games with digital control and I enjoy the fast
> >> response. Takes you forever to aim in GoldenEye with analog control.
> The
> >> control is so sluggish with it I don't think I'd ever get used to it.
> >
> >Oh come on, now you're just being stupid. I refuse to believe someone
> >can hate EVERY SINGLE GAME on a particular system.
>
> I've played three games for N64, and they were all supposed to be great
> titles. I've played Diddy Kong Racing, Mario Kart, and GoldenEye.
> GoldenEye was the only one that was good. I must reinterate that it wasn't
> great.
>
> If you prefer your
> >PSX, then fair enough, but to not like one of the best games on any
> >system and to pick such stupid little faults in it is just going too
> >far.
>
> The awkward analog control where you have to use your *left* hand on the
> trigger is pretty awkward. With me being right handed, it probably will
> never feel right.
> so what a lot of ppl are right handed?
> You're just being deliberately contentious for the sake of it.
> >That maried to the fact that your "criticisms" are so weak, leads me to
> >believe that you haven't actually played aany N64 game before and are
> >just looking for the smallest of reasons to try and make your system
> >"look better". Obviously, you couldn't find any big reasons...
>
> I've played N64 controllers. The stick has a cheap feel to it. I've had
> better response from my Microsoft Sidewinder 3D. Now *there's* a decent 3D
> stick!
> your opinion.ive never used the microssoft stick but i have used the n64 stick
> and i cant say if the ms joystick is better or not but the n64 analouge
> controller is a treat to play with.imho
> >
> >> I never made one. Where did *that* come from?
> >
> >Where did you come from, the planet Ignoramus?
>
> Never heard of that planet...
i wonder why?
Naz Reyes
tbr...@trinity.edu wrote:
>
> Total, unequivocal, and absolute BULL! The jump from Mario World, Mario 3,
> or Yoshi's Island to Mario 64 is NOTHING like the jump from Final Fight 1 to
> FF2, or Tekken 1 to Tekken 2. Mario 64 is certainly about free-roaming and
> terrain navigation and platform jumping and all that.
I'll even add that Mario 64 is more like Gex 2 than Super Mario World or
Yoshi's Island! Repeat...Mario 64 is a MUCH different game than its
16-bit counterparts. If people can't see this, then they obviously
haven't played the game or do not know what they are talking about.
But the most different about Mario 64 compared to other Mario games
is that Mario in Mario 64 has a gazillion moves such as long jumps, back
flips, dives, butt stomp, crawl, swim, fly, wall kick, and many others.
In the other Mario games, you can only jump (or jump higher), swim
(2D swimming, that is), fly, or ride Yoshi. Plus, the powerups in
Mario 64 are completely different from the previous Mario games.
But, of course, the BIGGEST difference is that Mario 64 is 3D
compared to all the other Mario games, which are 2D.
Another one that set Mario 64 apart from the other Mario games
is the fact that Mario makes all sorts of sounds. He could
say, "whoa!", "ummmph!", "I'm tired", <panting sound when close
to dead>, "yippeeeee!", "yahooo!", "hahaa!", and a number of
others. Now, how many times have you heard Mario say anything
in other Mario games?
-Naz
Ralf Haring
Charles Miller Jr. wrote:
>
> > Nah, just bringing this thing full circle.
>
> No, you obviously missed something... Something key.
You know I just looked at my keychain, and I ain't missin' no
steenkin' key! ;-)
Charles Miller Jr.
Oi Vay.
Nevermind....
Moto of the story, when someone comes late to the party and doesn't bring
anything, don't let them in...
Pinochet
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <3524d7d5...@195.121.6.68>...
>You are missing the point here. The original post was about QUOTING. I
>was just pointing out that NG as an example of endless quoting,
>that's all.
You don't have to condone misbehavior just because there are people
who tolerate it..
>Let me give you and all other netiquette defenders some final thoughts
>about this subject.
Ok.
>IMO netiquette is nothing but wishful thinking.
Fine with me....and it may be a long and difficult struggle, but who
knows, maybe the NQers will prevail..
> Look at the facts for a change.
Ok.
>Take this NG for example.
Ok.
>Just look at the endless stream of modchip
>spam.
>Look at the shameless dealers of illegal CDR software. Are they
>within the boundaries of your netiquette ?
They are within mine, as long as they don't post 100 copies of the
same message and/or fill them with endless quoting...... Now they
may be doing something illegal, but that's not a violation of netiquette,
that's criminal behavior..
>Usenet is full of binary groups, filled to the brim with illegal
>software.
Yep, but that's not a netiquette issue, that's a legal matter.
>They're on topic, sure, but does that make them an example
>of your carefully defined system of netiquette ?
No, they make a perfect example of criminal behavior and the
difficulty of law enforcement on the Usenet.
>And didn't it occur to all you netiquette defenders that just by
>participating in this totally off topic thread, you were offending the
>rules of your own netiquette in the first place ? Hypocrites.
Nope, sorry, this isn't about on or off-topic postings, this is about
proper editing....and encouraging others to do the same....and
in any case, IMO, that's always a on-topic issue...just like complaining
about binary and HTML postings..
>I rest my case.
Not that you made one...
Ralf Haring
Charles Miller Jr. wrote:
>
> Moto of the story, when someone comes late to the party and doesn't bring
> anything, don't let them in...
Well, here's the motto of my story, get off your high horse.
Kyle...just Kyle
Lord Gleylancer wrote in message <3525ded9...@195.121.6.68>...
>Captain Calzone wrote:
>
>>SHH! Logic annoys them, you might scare him off before he has the
>>time to mature into a full grown troll.
>>----------------------
>>Captain Calzone
>
>Hmm, the only full grown troll I've noticed in this NG, is you,
>DipSwitch.
>
Now that's a good comeback there. Could you point out more instances of the
good Captain being a troll than you? Or of any instances at all?
-------------------------
Digital Ages Online indepdendent video games network
http://www.digital-ages.com
--containing:
PSX Unlimited senior editor, news editor
N64 Unlimited mailbag editor
-------------------------
Doktor
I just wanted to participate in this thread, nothing else.
On 1 Apr 1998 17:14:49 GMT, cfai...@su.edu (CKF) wrote:
>In article <6fsroh$pkl$2...@apple.news.easynet.net>, ne...@s.mh.easynet.co.uk
>says...
>>
>>sorry but with all the silly system debates could people PLEASE STOP
>quoting
>>A WHOLE newsgroup post and then tagging TWO LINES on the end
>>
>>it is sooo fucking annoying
>>
>>just quote what you are referring to
>>AND FUCKING DELETE THE REST
>>
>></Rant Mode Off>
>>
>>--
>>from Simon Hutchinson
>>email : ne...@s.mh.easynet.co.uk
>>
>>
>okay.
>--
>--------------------------------------------
>Chris Fairchild
>Resident Director & Conservatory Faculty
>Shenandoah University
>Video gamer Golfer Sports Card Collector
>Orioles in 98!!!!
>--------------------------------------------
>