BATTLECRUISER 3000AD v1.01D6 Released
Derek Smart
As I announced the other day, I have released the **work-in-progress** v1.01D6
patch so that you guys can get a glimpse of what's
been going on since v1.01C5.3 and to see the new technology that is bound to
keep you screaming for more. Anyway, what you will see
in D6 is a fraction of the what is going to be in v2.0. This version is the
current testing level and contains bugs as normal. Once the orbital
model, tacOPS and surface ops are completed, another D patch variation
(probably D10) will be uploaded as the final patch. As I
mentioned before and I want to repeat it here, you will NOT be able to download
the full v2.0 due to it's size and new install
requirements.
Your comments are welcome.
The files are in the cargo bay. Download BC3KUSD6.ZIP (TAKE2) or BC3KUKD6.ZIP
(GAMETEK) depending on your version. Be
sure to read the README.TXT file before applying the patch.
You MUST do a new install to apply this patch, it will NOT patch ANY previous
versions!!!!!
Below is the README.TXT file included in the patch file. Enjoy.
======================================================================
BATTLECRUISER:3000AD READ ME
----------------------------
[10.12.97]
A WORD FROM THE SUPREME COMMANDER
=================================
Most of you are no doubt aware of the controversy surrounding the premature
release of BC3K a year ago. Yes, the product was not ready for release and
regardless of whose fault it was, I have worked very hard this year to complete
this development and bring this whole saga to an end.
You will no doubt agree that the game has come from totally unplayable to a
complex and enjoyable experience. All of you have waited patiently while some
of you have opted to ridicule myself, my team and my life's work in the online
forums. Nevertheless, I have stuck to my game, to my dream and to my goals
always hoping that one day the world would see what it is I have created. You
are all witnesses to the hard work that my team and I, including my dedicated
testers, have put into this development. We could all have quit when we had the
chance. We didn't.
In April, I realized that patching the game to completion would most likely
take it into the holiday season and that, once again, graphics technology
would pass me by. I did not believe that you folks would want to wait an entire
year to play a game that sported old technology considering the recent crop of
advanced games currently on the market. Some of you, disappointed, have already
stopped playing, saving the game for that day when it would be completed. My
thoughts led me to sanction the upgrade of the graphics technology in order to
keep up with recent trends. Once you start the game, these updates will be
immediately evident. You will NOT believe that you are playing the same game.
All the renderers have been updated. The graphics enhancements alone are too
numerous to list but consider that the BC3K core consists of over 25
independent renderers with more being added to support 3D accelerators.
External planets now have high definition maps even though only the solar
system has been updated for this. To include maps for the entire galaxy would
mean a 100MB patch. The final v2.0 cd-rom will have high res map support for
the entire galaxy. The cloaking system now uses a renderer with advanced
transparency routines. You will also notice the beautiful lens flare effects
in space and on the planet, the cloud cover on planets as well as the new
collision detect routines which is still work in progress. The most
significant gameplay feature you will notice is Xtreme Carnage. It now
supports the advanced ACM scripting technology and is more streamlined and a
lot of fun. You may want to start your adventures here, once you apply the
patch. The explosions have also been updated and timed based on frame rate.
Missiles are now more deadly, the flight engine on the surface has been slowed
down and enemy ai has been updated. Significant optimizations have also be
done to the kernel itself upon which BC3K runs. All in all, you will notice
some significant improvements in v1.01D6 over v1.01C5.3 and certainly the
original v1.00 release.
In order to keep the series alive there was no way that I could continue
development in order to release a final v1.1 without financial support. It has
been extremely difficult to fund this development on a shoe string budget and
it is your support of v2.0 that I am counting on in order to continue
supporting the title. As a result of this and other developments, I have
decided to bypass v1.1 entirely and do a commercial re-release of the title for
retail sales and distribution in 1998. This title has now been dubbed,
Battlecruiser 3000AD v2.0. and will include the v1.1 patch and all the
enhancements that have been done and which you will now see when you apply the
included patch. Existing owners of the original v1.00 will be charged a
minimum fee for the upgrade which will include a new cd-rom and on-line
manual. Plans are underway to include a printed manual if possible. New users
will be able to purchase the full repackaged v2.0 directly from 3000AD or via
the retail channel.
Some of you have expressed concern over being charged for a game that you paid
for a year ago. I understand those concerns but unfortunately, there is nothing
that I can do. I have plans to do a non-enhanced v1.1 patch for those who
request it but I can only do this once v2.0 is completed and released. I am
counting on you to understand my position on this matter. With advancements in
3D accelerator technology, you can expect to see a FREE 3Dfx patch for v2.0
once it is completed next year. I also have plans to do a Rendition and PowerVR
patch once the 3Dfx one is completed. I have also announced a sequel to the
title, Battlecruiser Commander (working title), as well as several add-ons for
it. As existing owners of BC3K, you can expect to purchase these titles at
significantly reduced prices. If you missed the press release, you can catch it
on www.game-wire.com. Anyway new titles in the series are as follows:
[Battlecruiser Commander]
A tentative working title for the sequel due out next year. All new galaxy, new
class of Battlecruiser with the ability to carry a variety of fighters, 3Dfx,
Rendition, MMX support as well as over 30 new features including the much
awaited ship to ship comms and direct first person control of deployed
personnel (as if you were controlling one of your ships). Support for buying
components to build your own bases and cities on planet surfaces is also
planned!
[BC3K: Strike Pak]
This is already in development and will allow you to board, in first person
perspective, ships that you target. You will also be able to walk around inside
your own Battlecruiser. The first pak will probably have 2-3 ships from each
class, ie carrier, cruiser, transport, station, base. More will be done based
on the success of the add-on. This add-on can be played stand-alone or linked
to Battlecruiser Commander. Now you can board Gammulan ships, stations and
bases and kick some serious butt. The Level Infinity team (splinter group from
BPD, the guys who brought you The Gate conversion for Duke3D) are already
on-board and will be working on designing all the ship interiors as
'levels'. Expect a demo of the Battlecruiser model which you can walk around
in, sometime soon.
[BC3K: Skirmish Pak]
A multi-player add-on for Battlecruiser Commander supporting TCP/IP, modem &
direct connection. Like Xtreme Carnage, this add-on will have a smaller unique
galaxy but will support all the features in BC3K and BC. You can enter as any
alien nation, caste with any ship type. Trade, mine, invade, hijaak etc.
Everything you can now do in BC3K and in BC, you will be able to do in the
Skirmish Pak.
TECHNICAL SUPPORT INFO
======================
There are several files included in the patch
README.TXT - This file
BC3KHELP.TXT - Installation assistance
BC3KVER.TXT - Version control file. Lists new features and changes
BC3KBUGS.TXT - Master bug list. Lists fixed and pending bugs. PLEASE check
this file before reporting a bug.
For more technical support, please visit the official BC3K web site COMMLINK
area at www.bc3000ad.com. If you are not already registered, please do so and
re-enter using the password provided. Updates will be available in the FTP
section of the Cargo Bay. The site is undergoing siginificant upgrades so
please excuse the mess. Here, you can download the preview manual in a file
called BC3KMAN.ZIP. You will need the Adobe Acrobat 3.01 reader (www.adobe.com)
for it. A new file, called BC3KNDX.ZIP is also available. It contains all the
manual appendix data in MS Word format complete with screen shots. You NEED
this file! If you don't have MS Word, you can download the latest version of
the MS Word Viewer at www.microsoft.com. These files were created using MS Word
'97 so you need the latest version and NOT the one which ships with the WIN95
cd-rom.
Have fun and PLEASE post your feedback at the site. Let us know what you think
of the D patch and perhaps, I may just release another version with the final
changes to the orbital model, tacOPS and surface ops <g>
Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD
UIN : 158435
EMAIL : dsm...@pobox.com
Media : bc3000a...@mindspring.com
Web : www.bc3000ad.com
CSI : GO GALCOM
Vorlin
What approximate system requirements do you forsee for V2.0 to run well,
assuming the computer it's installed on does -not- have a 3d card?
Typhonus
>Have fun and PLEASE post your feedback at the site. Let us know what you
>think
>of the D patch
Unless of course you don't like it, think it is unfair, or have any other
varying opinion. I will then shut you down instantly, as I love and
completely support the use of censorship.
H. John C. Hopkins
>
> Unless of course you don't like it, think it is unfair, or have any other
> varying opinion. I will then shut you down instantly, as I love and
... against those who have nothing constructive to offer, use ad hominem
arguments... I'm all for it! Boring! I'd also like to silence the
hundreds of "KEEP IT UP DEREK YOUR GAME RULEZ 4 EVER WE'RE NOT WORTHY"
posts, which are equally meaningless.
I've posted a few times with constructive criticism (none of which may have
been heeded, but, hey, game creation isn't a democratic process). No
reprisals. No censorship. Not quite sure where you're coming from.
Speaking of moderation, is there any way they can tone down the bloat on
that site? All the nifty whiz-bang multimedia sparkles really interfere
with getting information. Just because you CAN use frames doesn't mean you
SHOULD. Yeesh. :)
-John
Jonathan Normington
Derek Smart recently wrote:
[readme file and usual shoehorned-in advertising drivel snipped]
A quick question (for everyone except Derek, since his response is
predictable) on these apparently new and improved graphics - are they
comparable to I-War? Better, or worse? Do they improve the gameplay any?
I can't see for myself since I don't have a copy of BC3K any more.
--
Jonathan Normington
http://www.souragne.demon.co.uk/
ICQ: 3941294
Derek Smart
On 13 Oct 1997 13:06:13 GMT, "Vorlin" <vor...@earthlink.com> wrote:
>What approximate system requirements do you forsee for V2.0 to run well,
>assuming the computer it's installed on does -not- have a 3d card?
Pentium P166 with 16MB of RAM. I am uploading a 20MB demo at www.bc3000ad.com
in the Cargo Bay later tonite. It's based on the D6 engine which is the current
patch revision. You might want to check it out if you're interested. It has all
the enhancements in it.
Derek Smart
John, the site is being overhauled. However, you can turn off frames if you
don't want to use them. As for information, if you go into the OPTIONS menu in
COMMLINK, you should be able to set up a message filter. The Cargo Bay FTP area
has also been cleaned up. Please excuse the mess over there but the webmaster
has his hands full with other work he's doing.
B P
On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 05:53:00 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
wrote:
>As I announced the other day, I have released the **work-in-progress** v1.01D6
>patch so that you guys can get a glimpse of what's
>been going on since v1.01C5.3 and to see the new technology that is bound to
>keep you screaming for more. Anyway, what you will see
>in D6 is a fraction of the what is going to be in v2.0. This version is the
>current testing level and contains bugs as normal.
"bugs as normal"
What he is not telling you is that the "bugs as normal" means beta,
alpha and final releases.
Victor Healey
In article <19971013174...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, ft...@aol.com
says...
> P.S. BC3K: Not just unfinished bargain bin trash. Not just vaporware. It's
> both! The last game you'll ever desire!
>
>
I can not help but be amazed at the desire by anyone to get BC3000
working. Sure some of you lost good money and you are not getting the
upgrade to a real working product for free. You have to buy the whole
shooting match all over again.
HA HA
"A fool and his money..."
It is definitely the last game I would ever desire.
--
mailto:four...@bellsouth.net
Read about scandals of sex, greed and duplicity in religion!
http://www.sptimes.com/news2/Lyons/default.html
Ian Firth
Riboflavin wrote:
> I have not mastered the art of using long file names yet, so we'll use an
> old 8.3 name on the file.
Actually, that's the only part of his post that makes sense.
If the patch needs to be delivered on a CD, it needs to be 8.3
filenaming convention, as per ISO-9660 standards.
--
Regards,
Ian Firth
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Diversions Software - Game Development - http://www.divsoft.com
Home of Prairie Dog Hunt PRO '97 - DS Sporting Clays
G Wilson
Derek Smart wrote:
>
> As I announced the other day, I have released the **work-in-progress** v1.01D6
> patch so that you guys can get a glimpse of what's
> been going on since v1.01C5.3 and to see the new technology that is bound to
> keep you screaming for more. Anyway, what you will see
> in D6 is a fraction of the what is going to be in v2.0. This version is the
> current testing level and contains bugs as normal. Once the orbital
> model, tacOPS and surface ops are completed, another D patch variation
> (probably D10) will be uploaded as the final patch. As I
> mentioned before and I want to repeat it here, you will NOT be able to download
> the full v2.0 due to it's size and new install
> requirements.
>
> Your comments are welcome.
Why bother releasing a patch for a dead game? You can't even buy
this game in stores anymore. This would be like Sierra releasing a patch
for Outpost next week. What's the point? BC3000AD is a total loss - put
your efforts toward a successful sequel and just let this title rest in
peace.
G Wilson
--
IMPORTANT: When replying via email, please remove the SPAMSHIELD from my
email address.
WAR
On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 18:33:49 -0400, "Riboflavin" <ri...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
>Since many people are not all that familiar with Derek, I will post a
>translation of this message for you.
>
>Derek Smart wrote in message <61sd5s$b...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>...
<snip>
>Kevin Q*****-Allegood, Phd, thesis "Manual Writing: A Five-year plan"
That was one of the funniest posts I have read in quite some time.
Thanks, Kevin!
Andrew
P.S. I'll post a longer response this weekend. That will be
v.1.1A10.
M.
Hey! Quit picking on poor Derek. And I heard the coke machine wasn't hurt
that bad.
Riboflavin <ri...@mindspring.com> wrote in article
<61u7eh$c...@camel19.mindspring.com>...
> Since many people are not all that familiar with Derek, I will post a
> translation of this message for you.
>
> Derek Smart wrote in message <61sd5s$b...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>...
> >As I announced the other day,
>
> This is a rare event, I announced that I did something and I actually
did.
> Cherish this moment.
>
> > I have released the **work-in-progress** v1.01D6
> >patch
>
> The game will be finished "this weekend". Really.
Derek Smart
On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:38:12 -0700, G Wilson <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>Derek Smart wrote:
>>
>> As I announced the other day, I have released the **work-in-progress** v1.01D6
>> patch so that you guys can get a glimpse of what's
>> been going on since v1.01C5.3 and to see the new technology that is bound to
>> keep you screaming for more. Anyway, what you will see
>> in D6 is a fraction of the what is going to be in v2.0. This version is the
>> current testing level and contains bugs as normal. Once the orbital
>> model, tacOPS and surface ops are completed, another D patch variation
>> (probably D10) will be uploaded as the final patch. As I
>> mentioned before and I want to repeat it here, you will NOT be able to download
>> the full v2.0 due to it's size and new install
>> requirements.
>>
>> Your comments are welcome.
>
>
> Why bother releasing a patch for a dead game? You can't even buy
>this game in stores anymore. This would be like Sierra releasing a patch
>for Outpost next week. What's the point? BC3000AD is a total loss - put
>your efforts toward a successful sequel and just let this title rest in
>peace.
Thanks for your comments but somewhere out there, is a guy with this game and
it's incomplete. Until it's complete, I'm not giving up. So, the point is, I
said that I would fix it. I'm not done yet. I cannot do a sequel for a prequel
that is incomplete. Would you? My losses are my own.
Steve0634
hey i am not as smart as most of you here but as far as i can see from your
posts you have to fight with this game for over a year to make this game run
right. that is insane. why does'nt this guy just give up on this game and move
on to makeing another one. from what i have read on all the patches you need i
would never get this game running. it sounds like the game itself is really a
puzzle for computer experts to see if they can actually ever get it to run
good. if you ask me there are to many good games out there to even consider
something like this
ar...@ix.netcom.com
For those who care this is probaly the greatest improvement in the on
going line of patches yet.
Combat is a lot better, explosions are better, collateral damage if
you get too close to an exploding object, severely damaged enemy ships
can and at times do call for backup. (neat HUD effect when they do)
Lots of different types of ships pop up now and orbital defense
platforms are deadly especially to an Interceptor.
Cloud layers planetside, Earth from space is just stunning.
Tactical and inverse tactical views and on and on.
People who were shouting what they want for starship combat and
complaining about STARFLEET ACADEMY should really check BC3000AD with
the "D" patch.
And the Extreme Carnage mode is 100% better and plain FUN!
Has anyone made it through all the levels? I got to six before getting
blasted.
Rick Gridley
Derek Smart
Don't waste your time Rick. We have the web site for that.
Anyway, have you seen the Adrenaline Vault interview at www.avault.com
Lionel Thompson
Fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, shame on me.
Robert Whisler
>Your comments are welcome.
Ok.
Let me get this straight...
>Most of you are no doubt aware of the controversy surrounding the premature
>release of BC3K a year ago. Yes, the product was not ready for release and
>You will no doubt agree that the game has come from totally unplayable to a
>complex and enjoyable experience.
>In order to keep the series alive there was no way that I could continue
>development in order to release a final v1.1 without financial support. It has
>been extremely difficult to fund this development on a shoe string budget and
>it is your support of v2.0 that I am counting on in order to continue
>supporting the title. As a result of this and other developments, I have
>decided to bypass v1.1 entirely and do a commercial re-release of the title for
>retail sales and distribution in 1998. This title has now been dubbed,
>Battlecruiser 3000AD v2.0. and will include the v1.1 patch and all the
>enhancements that have been done and which you will now see when you apply the
>included patch. Existing owners of the original v1.00 will be charged a
>minimum fee for the upgrade which will include a new cd-rom and on-line
>manual. Plans are underway to include a printed manual if possible. New users
>will be able to purchase the full repackaged v2.0 directly from 3000AD or via
>the retail channel.
The game was released "totally unplayable", but now is an "enjoyable
experience". Nowhere are the two most important words: bug free.
Yet, we now hear of a "v2.0" release with improved graphics (still no
word on whether it will be bug free), which will cost $$ to obtain,
even if you've already bought the game. And there still is no printed
manual (what could "Plans are underway to include a printed manual if
possible" mean? Will there or won't there be a manual?).
Am I the only one thinking that the biggest feature to be added to
this game is a Black Hole? A Black Hole that sucks your money down
into it, leaving you nothing in return but a flashy, quick show and a
lot of hot air.
I neither own BC3K nor intend to. But as a consumer, I have to wonder
about the ethics of releasing a faulty product, buffing it up a
little, and charging even more money to get the gloss. Where is Ralph
Nader when you need him?
>Some of you have expressed concern over being charged for a game that you paid
>for a year ago. I understand those concerns but unfortunately, there is nothing
>that I can do.
There is something you can do. Shoot this lame horse and let it die.
Concentrate your energies on making your next project playable (I'm
sure plans are underway to make it playable if possible) and charge
the current owners of BC3K at most $5 for the sequel. And just pray
no one slaps a class action suit against you.
-robert
-= I like spam, but not the kind that turns up in my
-= e-mail box. Remove the obvious spam deterrent to reply
-= via email.
Jim
Derek Smart wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 20:35:01 GMT, rwhisler@nosp@am.sprynet.com (Robert Whisler)
> wrote:
>
> >Concentrate your energies on making your next project playable (I'm
> >sure plans are underway to make it playable if possible) and charge
> >the current owners of BC3K at most $5 for the sequel. And just pray
> >no one slaps a class action suit against you.
>
Or Bob Dole for that matter.
>
> Your comments are appreciated. Thanks for your time.
>
> Derek Smart
G Wilson
Derek Smart wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:38:12 -0700, G Wilson <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > Why bother releasing a patch for a dead game? You can't even buy
> >this game in stores anymore. This would be like Sierra releasing a patch
> >for Outpost next week. What's the point? BC3000AD is a total loss - put
> >your efforts toward a successful sequel and just let this title rest in
> >peace.
>
> Thanks for your comments but somewhere out there, is a guy with this game and
> it's incomplete. Until it's complete, I'm not giving up. So, the point is, I
> said that I would fix it. I'm not done yet. I cannot do a sequel for a prequel
> that is incomplete. Would you? My losses are my own.
Well then good luck to you. I'm sure people who have already
purchased this game will greatly appreciate your efforts. Take care.
Aaron Anderson
On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:47:21 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
wrote:
>Anyway, have you seen the Adrenaline Vault interview at www.avault.com
>
>
>Derek Smart, Ph.D.
>Designer/Lead Developer
>Battlecruiser:3000AD
>UIN : 158435
>EMAIL : dsm...@pobox.com
>Media : bc3000a...@mindspring.com
>Web : www.bc3000ad.com
>CSI : GO GALCOM
Reading the article at avault.com really changed my opinion about
Derek Smart and the whole BC3K fiasco. I hope everything goes well
with V 2.0 and I will be one of the first to buy the upgrade to Ver
2.0, and thanks for keeping us updated on what's going on.
Didier Duchet
In article <6202ar$l...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Derek Smart
<dsm...@pobox.com> writes
>Thanks for your comments but somewhere out there, is a guy with this game
Who is this lonely guy ?
<snip>
>Derek Smart, Ph.D.
<snip>
ar...@ix.netcom.com
G Wilson <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>Derek Smart wrote:
>>
>> As I announced the other day, I have released the **work-in-progress** v1.01D6
>> patch so that you guys can get a glimpse of what's
>> been going on since v1.01C5.3 and to see the new technology that is bound to
>> keep you screaming for more. Anyway, what you will see
>> in D6 is a fraction of the what is going to be in v2.0. This version is the
>> current testing level and contains bugs as normal. Once the orbital
>> model, tacOPS and surface ops are completed, another D patch variation
>> (probably D10) will be uploaded as the final patch. As I
>> mentioned before and I want to repeat it here, you will NOT be able to download
>> the full v2.0 due to it's size and new install
>> requirements.
>>
>> Your comments are welcome.
>
>
> Why bother releasing a patch for a dead game? You can't even buy
>this game in stores anymore. This would be like Sierra releasing a patch
>for Outpost next week. What's the point? BC3000AD is a total loss - put
>your efforts toward a successful sequel and just let this title rest in
>peace.
>
>G Wilson
>--
>IMPORTANT: When replying via email, please remove the SPAMSHIELD from my
>email address.
Hell, it took SH 3 years to get Falcon 3.0 right and they are a big
company.
If you don't care then fine. This thread is for those (however small
the group) that ARE interested in the latest patch.
Leave it at that. There are plenty of other topics to flame the game
and its author.
Derek Smart
On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:23:51 GMT, aja...@pmail.tamu.edu (Aaron Anderson)
wrote:
Thanks for the support. You won't be disappointed with the game.
Derek Smart
On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:06:41 -0700, G Wilson <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>Derek Smart wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:38:12 -0700, G Wilson <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> > Why bother releasing a patch for a dead game? You can't even buy
>> >this game in stores anymore. This would be like Sierra releasing a patch
>> >for Outpost next week. What's the point? BC3000AD is a total loss - put
>> >your efforts toward a successful sequel and just let this title rest in
>> >peace.
>>
>> Thanks for your comments but somewhere out there, is a guy with this game and
>> it's incomplete. Until it's complete, I'm not giving up. So, the point is, I
>> said that I would fix it. I'm not done yet. I cannot do a sequel for a prequel
>> that is incomplete. Would you? My losses are my own.
>
> Well then good luck to you. I'm sure people who have already
>purchased this game will greatly appreciate your efforts. Take care.
>
>G Wilson
Thanks for your time.
Derek Smart
>On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 05:53:00 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
>wrote:
>
>>Your comments are welcome.
>
>Ok.
<snip>
>
>The game was released "totally unplayable", but now is an "enjoyable
>experience". Nowhere are the two most important words: bug free.
The term 'bug free' is implicit. In the readme.txt, I made reference to v2.0
containing the v1.1 'fixes' and v2.0 enhancements. The game was released
INCOMPLETE which is why it had bugs in it. If it was released finished AND had
bugs, that would be a different issue. Any game that is released incomplete
will have the same problems that BC3K had upon release.
>Yet, we now hear of a "v2.0" release with improved graphics (still no
>word on whether it will be bug free), which will cost $$ to obtain,
>even if you've already bought the game. And there still is no printed
>manual (what could "Plans are underway to include a printed manual if
>possible" mean? Will there or won't there be a manual?).
Again, this is not my responsibilty. I cannot afford a printed manual. This is
Take2's problem. I will provide an on-line manual and that's the best that I
can do with my resources. The one I did 3 months ago is enough to play the
game.
>Am I the only one thinking that the biggest feature to be added to
>this game is a Black Hole? A Black Hole that sucks your money down
>into it, leaving you nothing in return but a flashy, quick show and a
>lot of hot air.
I'm sorry you feel that way but I don't think you're getting the full picture.
>I neither own BC3K nor intend to. But as a consumer, I have to wonder
>about the ethics of releasing a faulty product, buffing it up a
>little, and charging even more money to get the gloss. Where is Ralph
>Nader when you need him?
Understood. My publishers, Take2, released the game in Sept. 1996 before it was
ready. It wasn't tested and it wasn't complete. Using my own resources, I have
strived and worked hard to make it what it is today. Don't take my word for it,
ask at www.bc3000ad.com yourself and draw your own conclusions.
>>Some of you have expressed concern over being charged for a game that you paid
>>for a year ago. I understand those concerns but unfortunately, there is nothing
>>that I can do.
>
>There is something you can do. Shoot this lame horse and let it die.
It ain't happening.
>Concentrate your energies on making your next project playable (I'm
>sure plans are underway to make it playable if possible) and charge
>the current owners of BC3K at most $5 for the sequel. And just pray
>no one slaps a class action suit against you.
Again, it's not as easy as it sounds when you're Derek Smart.
Your comments are appreciated. Thanks for your time.
Henrik Schmidt
Yeh - well
I bought the game when it came out, and it was the single worst game
investment ever...
I will not fall for the same ruse twice - I will therefore not get the new
version..
Version one was 99% hype value and 100% bugs (I am pretty sure that the only
improvent will be in the hype department)
Derek Smart wrote in message <61sd5s$b...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>...
>As I announced the other day, I have released the **work-in-progress**
v1.01D6
>patch so that you guys can get a glimpse of what's
>been going on since v1.01C5.3 and to see the new technology that is bound
to
>keep you screaming for more. Anyway, what you will see
>in D6 is a fraction of the what is going to be in v2.0. This version is the
>current testing level and contains bugs as normal. Once the orbital
>model, tacOPS and surface ops are completed, another D patch variation
>(probably D10) will be uploaded as the final patch. As I
>mentioned before and I want to repeat it here, you will NOT be able to
download
>the full v2.0 due to it's size and new install
>requirements.
>
>Your comments are welcome.
>
>The files are in the cargo bay. Download BC3KUSD6.ZIP (TAKE2) or
BC3KUKD6.ZIP
>(GAMETEK) depending on your version. Be
>sure to read the README.TXT file before applying the patch.
>
>You MUST do a new install to apply this patch, it will NOT patch ANY
previous
>versions!!!!!
>
>Below is the README.TXT file included in the patch file. Enjoy.
>
>
>======================================================================
>
> BATTLECRUISER:3000AD READ ME
> ----------------------------
>
>[10.12.97]
>
> A WORD FROM THE SUPREME COMMANDER
> =================================
>
>Most of you are no doubt aware of the controversy surrounding the premature
>release of BC3K a year ago. Yes, the product was not ready for release and
>regardless of whose fault it was, I have worked very hard this year to
complete
>this development and bring this whole saga to an end.
>
>You will no doubt agree that the game has come from totally unplayable to a
>complex and enjoyable experience. All of you have waited patiently while
some
>of you have opted to ridicule myself, my team and my life's work in the
online
>forums. Nevertheless, I have stuck to my game, to my dream and to my goals
>always hoping that one day the world would see what it is I have created.
You
>are all witnesses to the hard work that my team and I, including my
dedicated
>testers, have put into this development. We could all have quit when we had
the
>
>chance. We didn't.
>
>In April, I realized that patching the game to completion would most likely
>take it into the holiday season and that, once again, graphics technology
>would pass me by. I did not believe that you folks would want to wait an
entire
>year to play a game that sported old technology considering the recent crop
of
>advanced games currently on the market. Some of you, disappointed, have
already
>stopped playing, saving the game for that day when it would be completed.
My
>thoughts led me to sanction the upgrade of the graphics technology in order
to
>keep up with recent trends. Once you start the game, these updates will be
>immediately evident. You will NOT believe that you are playing the same
game.
>
>All the renderers have been updated. The graphics enhancements alone are
too
>numerous to list but consider that the BC3K core consists of over 25
>independent renderers with more being added to support 3D accelerators.
>External planets now have high definition maps even though only the solar
>system has been updated for this. To include maps for the entire galaxy
would
>mean a 100MB patch. The final v2.0 cd-rom will have high res map support
for
>the entire galaxy. The cloaking system now uses a renderer with advanced
>transparency routines. You will also notice the beautiful lens flare
effects
>in space and on the planet, the cloud cover on planets as well as the new
>collision detect routines which is still work in progress. The most
>significant gameplay feature you will notice is Xtreme Carnage. It now
>supports the advanced ACM scripting technology and is more streamlined and
a
>lot of fun. You may want to start your adventures here, once you apply the
>patch. The explosions have also been updated and timed based on frame
rate.
>Missiles are now more deadly, the flight engine on the surface has been
slowed
>down and enemy ai has been updated. Significant optimizations have also be
>done to the kernel itself upon which BC3K runs. All in all, you will
notice
>some significant improvements in v1.01D6 over v1.01C5.3 and certainly the
>original v1.00 release.
>
>In order to keep the series alive there was no way that I could continue
>development in order to release a final v1.1 without financial support. It
has
>been extremely difficult to fund this development on a shoe string budget
and
>it is your support of v2.0 that I am counting on in order to continue
>supporting the title. As a result of this and other developments, I have
>decided to bypass v1.1 entirely and do a commercial re-release of the title
for
>retail sales and distribution in 1998. This title has now been dubbed,
>Battlecruiser 3000AD v2.0. and will include the v1.1 patch and all the
>enhancements that have been done and which you will now see when you apply
the
>included patch. Existing owners of the original v1.00 will be charged a
>minimum fee for the upgrade which will include a new cd-rom and on-line
>manual. Plans are underway to include a printed manual if possible. New
users
>will be able to purchase the full repackaged v2.0 directly from 3000AD or
via
>the retail channel.
>
>Some of you have expressed concern over being charged for a game that you
paid
>for a year ago. I understand those concerns but unfortunately, there is
nothing
>that I can do. I have plans to do a non-enhanced v1.1 patch for those who
>request it but I can only do this once v2.0 is completed and released. I am
>counting on you to understand my position on this matter. With advancements
in
>3D accelerator technology, you can expect to see a FREE 3Dfx patch for v2.0
>once it is completed next year. I also have plans to do a Rendition and
PowerVR
>patch once the 3Dfx one is completed. I have also announced a sequel to the
>title, Battlecruiser Commander (working title), as well as several add-ons
for
>it. As existing owners of BC3K, you can expect to purchase these titles at
>significantly reduced prices. If you missed the press release, you can
catch it
>
>on www.game-wire.com. Anyway new titles in the series are as follows:
>
>[Battlecruiser Commander]
>
>A tentative working title for the sequel due out next year. All new galaxy,
new
>class of Battlecruiser with the ability to carry a variety of fighters,
3Dfx,
>Rendition, MMX support as well as over 30 new features including the much
>awaited ship to ship comms and direct first person control of deployed
>personnel (as if you were controlling one of your ships). Support for
buying
>components to build your own bases and cities on planet surfaces is also
>planned!
>
>[BC3K: Strike Pak]
>
>This is already in development and will allow you to board, in first person
>perspective, ships that you target. You will also be able to walk around
inside
>your own Battlecruiser. The first pak will probably have 2-3 ships from
each
>class, ie carrier, cruiser, transport, station, base. More will be done
based
>on the success of the add-on. This add-on can be played stand-alone or
linked
>to Battlecruiser Commander. Now you can board Gammulan ships, stations and
>bases and kick some serious butt. The Level Infinity team (splinter group
from
>BPD, the guys who brought you The Gate conversion for Duke3D) are already
>on-board and will be working on designing all the ship interiors as
>'levels'. Expect a demo of the Battlecruiser model which you can walk
around
>in, sometime soon.
>
>[BC3K: Skirmish Pak]
>
>A multi-player add-on for Battlecruiser Commander supporting TCP/IP, modem
&
>direct connection. Like Xtreme Carnage, this add-on will have a smaller
unique
>galaxy but will support all the features in BC3K and BC. You can enter as
any
>alien nation, caste with any ship type. Trade, mine, invade, hijaak etc.
>Everything you can now do in BC3K and in BC, you will be able to do in the
>Skirmish Pak.
>
> TECHNICAL SUPPORT INFO
> ======================
>
>There are several files included in the patch
>
>README.TXT - This file
>BC3KHELP.TXT - Installation assistance
>BC3KVER.TXT - Version control file. Lists new features and changes
>BC3KBUGS.TXT - Master bug list. Lists fixed and pending bugs. PLEASE
check
> this file before reporting a bug.
>
>For more technical support, please visit the official BC3K web site
COMMLINK
>area at www.bc3000ad.com. If you are not already registered, please do so
and
>re-enter using the password provided. Updates will be available in the FTP
>section of the Cargo Bay. The site is undergoing siginificant upgrades so
>please excuse the mess. Here, you can download the preview manual in a file
>called BC3KMAN.ZIP. You will need the Adobe Acrobat 3.01 reader
(www.adobe.com)
>for it. A new file, called BC3KNDX.ZIP is also available. It contains all
the
>manual appendix data in MS Word format complete with screen shots. You NEED
>this file! If you don't have MS Word, you can download the latest version
of
>the MS Word Viewer at www.microsoft.com. These files were created using MS
Word
>'97 so you need the latest version and NOT the one which ships with the
WIN95
>cd-rom.
>
>Have fun and PLEASE post your feedback at the site. Let us know what you
think
>of the D patch and perhaps, I may just release another version with the
final
>changes to the orbital model, tacOPS and surface ops <g>
B P
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:23:24 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 20:35:01 GMT, rwhisler@nosp@am.sprynet.com (Robert Whisler)
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 05:53:00 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Your comments are welcome.
>>
>>Ok.
><snip>
>>
>>The game was released "totally unplayable", but now is an "enjoyable
>>experience". Nowhere are the two most important words: bug free.
>
>The term 'bug free' is implicit. In the readme.txt, I made reference to v2.0
>containing the v1.1 'fixes' and v2.0 enhancements. The game was released
>INCOMPLETE which is why it had bugs in it. If it was released finished AND had
>bugs, that would be a different issue. Any game that is released incomplete
>will have the same problems that BC3K had upon release.
Make up your mind. You said it was finished xmas 96? or was that 95
but you held it up due to a poor manual.
>
>>Yet, we now hear of a "v2.0" release with improved graphics (still no
>>word on whether it will be bug free), which will cost $$ to obtain,
>>even if you've already bought the game. And there still is no printed
>>manual (what could "Plans are underway to include a printed manual if
>>possible" mean? Will there or won't there be a manual?).
>
>Again, this is not my responsibilty. I cannot afford a printed manual. This is
>Take2's problem. I will provide an on-line manual and that's the best that I
>can do with my resources. The one I did 3 months ago is enough to play the
>game.
Thats what Take2 says about thw current manual.
>
>>Am I the only one thinking that the biggest feature to be added to
>>this game is a Black Hole? A Black Hole that sucks your money down
>>into it, leaving you nothing in return but a flashy, quick show and a
>>lot of hot air.
>
>I'm sorry you feel that way but I don't think you're getting the full picture.
>
So you admit its "A Black Hole that sucks your money down
into it, leaving you nothing in return but a flashy, quick show and a
lot of hot air."
>>I neither own BC3K nor intend to. But as a consumer, I have to wonder
>>about the ethics of releasing a faulty product, buffing it up a
>>little, and charging even more money to get the gloss. Where is Ralph
>>Nader when you need him?
>
>Understood. My publishers, Take2, released the game in Sept. 1996 before it was
>ready. It wasn't tested and it wasn't complete.
Make up your mind. You said it was finished xmas 96? or was that 95
but you held it up due to a poor manual.
>Using my own resources, I have
>strived and worked hard to make it what it is today.
Yes you have but you could have done twice the work if you didn't come
here an rant and rave all the time. Now get to work and lose another 3
mil.
> Don't take my word for it,
>ask at www.bc3000ad.com yourself and draw your own conclusions.
Is that the web site where you bar people you don't like ?
>
>>>Some of you have expressed concern over being charged for a game that you paid
>>>for a year ago. I understand those concerns but unfortunately, there is nothing
>>>that I can do.
>>
>>There is something you can do. Shoot this lame horse and let it die.
>
>It ain't happening.
>
>>Concentrate your energies on making your next project playable (I'm
>>sure plans are underway to make it playable if possible) and charge
>>the current owners of BC3K at most $5 for the sequel. And just pray
>>no one slaps a class action suit against you.
>
>Again, it's not as easy as it sounds when you're Derek Smart.
>
>Your comments are appreciated. Thanks for your time.
>
>
Derek Smart
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 08:54:22 +0200, "Henrik Schmidt" <h.sc...@pnad.com>
wrote:
>Yeh - well
>
>I bought the game when it came out, and it was the single worst game
>investment ever...
Why didn't you take it back?
>I will not fall for the same ruse twice - I will therefore not get the new
>version..
Fair enough
>Version one was 99% hype value and 100% bugs (I am pretty sure that the only
>improvent will be in the hype department)
Based on what facts _exactly_ ?
Brad Martin
dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>Again, this is not my responsibilty. I cannot afford a printed manual. This is
>Take2's problem. I will provide an on-line manual and that's the best that I
>can do with my resources. The one I did 3 months ago is enough to play the
>game.
It might well be enough to play the game if the game would play. I
bought it when it came out, it was unplayable, I waited for the
patches and fixes and tried again, barely playable, bugged to hell.
I really liked the idea of this game so I stuck at it, managed to
accumulate some money and a few experience points by spending a vast
amount of time constantly redoing things after they crashed (bugs and
lock ups too numerous to mention). Now the D patch comes out. I
install it exitedly thinking this could be it! Guess what -it locks
everytime I try to jump into hyperspace, everytime. It's not my
graphics card, it still recognizes it as it did before, I've tried
everything imaginable because I want this game to work, I would love
this game if it bloody worked. But no. So now I don't even have the
pleasure of semi playing it. I should have installed it somewhere else
and kept the old one I know I know, but sometimes you really believe,
know what I mean? Anyhow I've been silently watching the to-ing and
fro-ing in this group with interest, but I have to say Derek, that we
all seem to be running to stand still here, and I think I will give up
now, it's a great shame.
Roll on Pax Imperia.
Cheers.
Brad.
Steve
Derek Smart wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:23:51 GMT, aja...@pmail.tamu.edu (Aaron
> Anderson) wrote:
>
> >Reading the article at avault.com really changed my opinion about
> >Derek Smart and the whole BC3K fiasco. I hope everything goes well
> >with V 2.0 and I will be one of the first to buy the upgrade to Ver
> >2.0, and thanks for keeping us updated on what's going on.
>
> Thanks for the support. You won't be disappointed with the game.
>
> Derek Smart, Ph.D.
I want to echo this poster's sentiments (aka "me too!" <G>); I also will
be buying 2.0 when it hits the stands. I would've bought the earlier
version, based on your dedication in upgrading it, but didn't have a
system sufficient to play it. A certain jolly, red suited, white
bearded guy is gonna break into my house in December and rectify that
problem around the night of the 24th, so that won't be an issue for BC3K
2.0. ;)
I'd also like to compliment you on your most recent responses here;
They've been very professional and even mannered. I didn't have a
problem with your earlier, more "earthy" replies to flammage but some
potential customers may have.
BTW, that's a fine looking woman shown with you in that Adrenaline Vault
interview. I assume it isn't the same girlfriend that screwed you over
a couple of years back (that you mentioned before), is it?
..and does this one have a sister...in Canada? ;)
Good luck in the future,
-Steve
Francois Messier
Derek,
I did buy BC3K v1.00. I considered this as investment on a future
great game. The last patches were proving that it was true.
The upcomming release you're announcing looks very promising.
Keep up with your good work.
By the way, I'm looking at those negative messages posted here since
an year now, and those guy's just like to complain... They will say
anything just to have a reaction from you.
Frank
Derek Smart
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:25:43 GMT, br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk (Brad Martin) wrote:
>dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>
>>Again, this is not my responsibilty. I cannot afford a printed manual. This is
>>Take2's problem. I will provide an on-line manual and that's the best that I
>>can do with my resources. The one I did 3 months ago is enough to play the
>>game.
>
>
>It might well be enough to play the game if the game would play. I
>bought it when it came out, it was unplayable, I waited for the
>patches and fixes and tried again, barely playable, bugged to hell.
>I really liked the idea of this game so I stuck at it, managed to
>accumulate some money and a few experience points by spending a vast
>amount of time constantly redoing things after they crashed (bugs and
>lock ups too numerous to mention).
ok
>Now the D patch comes out. I install it exitedly thinking this could be it! Guess what -it locks
>everytime I try to jump into hyperspace, everytime. It's not my
>graphics card, it still recognizes it as it did before, I've tried
>everything imaginable because I want this game to work, I would love
>this game if it bloody worked. But no. So now I don't even have the
>pleasure of semi playing it. I should have installed it somewhere else
>and kept the old one I know I know, but sometimes you really believe,
>know what I mean? Anyhow I've been silently watching the to-ing and
>fro-ing in this group with interest, but I have to say Derek, that we
>all seem to be running to stand still here, and I think I will give up
>now, it's a great shame.
>Roll on Pax Imperia.
Brad, you're one of very few people I know who can't run the game. Don't
believe me, go to the web site (www.bc3000ad.com) and read the responses on the
site. Most of the problems are sound and video related. There is NO way the
game would lock up when you enter hyperspace, it's just NOT possible. Trust me
on this, I KNOW my game. If you cannot jump to another region, it's because you
have the weapon systems armed which overrides the navigation hud. If you have
music turned on, disable it because a different tune is played each time you
jump and if it locks, that's the cause. MIDI music is a pain which is why I
took it out since the A patch. I put it back in the D patch because I did some
more work on it.
So far, no-one has complained.
Also, if you were serious about playing, you would have done what others have
done - send me email or post a message at the site. I PERSONALLY help people
with problems. Look at the message threads at my site and you will see this for
yourself.
You are giving up because you did not ask for help. That's your choice. The
game works. The D patch is THE best patch to date and there are NO complaints
about it. It even works better on low end machines though I have officially
increased the system requirements.
If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe you
have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
I'm also looking forward to Pax Imperia, for my library. BC3K is a different
kind of game.
Brad Martin
dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>Brad, you're one of very few people I know who can't run the game. Don't
>believe me, go to the web site (www.bc3000ad.com) and read the responses on the
>site. Most of the problems are sound and video related. There is NO way the
>game would lock up when you enter hyperspace, it's just NOT possible. Trust me
>on this, I KNOW my game. If you cannot jump to another region, it's because you
>have the weapon systems armed which overrides the navigation hud. If you have
>music turned on, disable it because a different tune is played each time you
>jump and if it locks, that's the cause. MIDI music is a pain which is why I
>took it out since the A patch. I put it back in the D patch because I did some
>more work on it.
Derek,
I am perfectly happy to believe you that I am one of the few
people who could not run the game, and no, I did not have the weapon
systems armed or the music on (I've been to many of the systems before
and played most aspects of the game).
>So far, no-one has complained.
Fine.
>Also, if you were serious about playing, you would have done what others have
>done - send me email or post a message at the site. I PERSONALLY help people
>with problems. Look at the message threads at my site and you will see this for
>yourself.
I was very serious about playing which is why I continued to play
through many bugs and lock-ups as I said, and yes, I should have
E-mailed you for some help, I missed that.
>You are giving up because you did not ask for help. That's your choice. The
>game works. The D patch is THE best patch to date and there are NO complaints
>about it. It even works better on low end machines though I have officially
>increased the system requirements.
O.K.
>If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe you
>have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
Now, heres the rub. In my original post I stated how much I liked this
game and how much I wanted it to work. I was civil and(with the
possible exception of the line "running to stand still", which could
have been taken as a dig, which it was'nt meant) pleasant.
And yet you feel, you have to call me a liar, in a public newsgroup. I
have never posted here before and I have never made any allusions on
your character (how could I, we don't know each other) but,
apparently, if I say the D Patch does'nt run on my machine, I am a
liar.
Well, what do you want to know Derek, that the lens flare effects are
very good, culminating in total white-out when looking at the sun,
that the earth map is very well rendered (I thought anyway) ,or
perhaps you'd like a list of the files in the D Patch?
bc3kbugs.txt 51,473
bc3khelp.txt 9,990
bc3kukd6.rtp 12,113,294
bc3kver.txt 83,645
readme.txt 8,576
updateuk.bat 1,831
patch.exe 46,024
Of course, I suppose I could have just rushed off and got the patch
just so I could put up that list, when I could'nt be bothered to get
it to play the actual game which as I said I really did want to play
(and indeed have been playing, exhaustively).
I paid fifty english pounds for this game the day it was released, and
I have given it all the time and effort I could spare.
I'm not interested in sniping at peoples characters or apportioning
blame, lifes too short. But Derek, I do not tell lies and I do not
appreciate being called a liar here. I have seen many flame wars
between you and other people and I have not taken a side, in fact, all
I'm guilty of is giving you money.
I find your attitude incredible, I'm a customer Derek.
Anyhow, I would have bought the new version but I won't be now, and
I'd just like to take this public opportunity to say Fuck you Derek.
Just keep pissing in your own doorway.
Cheers.
Brad.
sf...@nospam.cus.cam.ac.uk
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:14:41 GMT, br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk (Brad Martin)
wrote on Re: BATTLECRUISER 3000AD v1.01D6 Released:
>I paid fifty english pounds for this game the day it was released, and
>I have given it all the time and effort I could spare.
Wow, that sounds too much. I thought the official price was 30 pounds.
In fact, I have never seen a game being sold for _fifty_english_pounds b4,
you sure it is 'english' not 'English' ;) ?
<snip>
PLONK!
Derek Smart
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:14:41 GMT, br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk (Brad Martin) wrote:
<snip>
>>If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe you
>>have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>
>Now, heres the rub.
..oh, oh. It goes downhill from here. There's a typo in the above line. What I
meant was that I don't believe you have the 'right' D patch.
There are series of messages on the site where people were downloading the file
though it wasn't even finished. Frontpage '98 hung up when I was uploading and
there were a partial file at some point. I can't use an FTP program which I
normally use (cuteFTP) because MS changed the access rights in FP '98 to
prevent tampering or something. This invalidated my ability to delete/upload
files to the site using any program other than FP '98 which is what was used to
design the site once the hosting service upgraded. In fact, I was using FP '97
before and had to download the FP '98 beta just so that I could access my own
site. I called my web hosting service (www.akorn.net) and they told me why my
FTP program won't work. Sure, they could enable full rights but if I screwed
around with the directories, it would corrupt the site and I would be charged
for them to fix it. They said that as long as I was only uploading files and
not directories, via FTP, I would be fine. I opted to use FP '98. Since then, I
have had them give me full access rights so that I can use an FTP program with
the ability to resume aborted downloads and so that I could monitor the status.
This is how I uploaded D6a. Also, an FTP program will let you know what
percentage of the file has been uploaded. In FP '98 once your start to 'export'
a file from your local machine to the site, it only lists the name, you do not
get a status report at all. You just have to pray that a 10MB file uploads ok.
It was only when I glanced over at the machine I was using for the upload, that
I realize FP '98 had 'lost the connection' though I still had an active
internet connection.
Sorry for the confusion. Just verify the size+date of the file you have against
the versions on the web site. There are D6 and D6a right now.
>In my original post I stated how much I liked this
>game and how much I wanted it to work. I was civil and(with the
>possible exception of the line "running to stand still", which could
>have been taken as a dig, which it was'nt meant) pleasant.
>And yet you feel, you have to call me a liar, in a public newsgroup. I
>have never posted here before and I have never made any allusions on
>your character (how could I, we don't know each other) but,
>apparently, if I say the D Patch does'nt run on my machine, I am a
>liar.
No, I was not calling you a liar. I apologize for the confusion. Let's not turn
this into what it isn't. Believe me, this HAS happened where people have the
wrong patch, apply it wrong or similar. Just check the web site postings and
see for yourself. I end up helping those people.
>Well, what do you want to know Derek, that the lens flare effects are
>very good, culminating in total white-out when looking at the sun,
>that the earth map is very well rendered (I thought anyway)
Thank you. There's more that you have to see <g>
>,or perhaps you'd like a list of the files in the D Patch?
>bc3kbugs.txt 51,473
>bc3khelp.txt 9,990
>bc3kukd6.rtp 12,113,294
>bc3kver.txt 83,645
>readme.txt 8,576
>updateuk.bat 1,831
>patch.exe 46,024
You have the proper files, so you must have a configuration problem.
>Of course, I suppose I could have just rushed off and got the patch
>just so I could put up that list, when I could'nt be bothered to get
>it to play the actual game which as I said I really did want to play
>(and indeed have been playing, exhaustively).
>I paid fifty english pounds for this game the day it was released, and
>I have given it all the time and effort I could spare.
>I'm not interested in sniping at peoples characters or apportioning
>blame, lifes too short. But Derek, I do not tell lies and I do not
>appreciate being called a liar here. I have seen many flame wars
>between you and other people and I have not taken a side, in fact, all
>I'm guilty of is giving you money.
>I find your attitude incredible, I'm a customer Derek.
Again, it was a pure misunderstanding and my intention was not to call you a
liar. Yes, you are a customer and a gamer. This makes you my number one
priority. If you want to run the game, send me your system specs, config.sys,
autoexec.bat etc via e-mail and we'll get it all sorted out.
>Anyhow, I would have bought the new version but I won't be now, and
>I'd just like to take this public opportunity to say Fuck you Derek.
>Just keep pissing in your own doorway.
Well that's just great isn't it? Was there a need for profanity? Fair enough.
However, if you still need my help in getting your 50 pounds game running, you
know where to find me.
Pat Lundrigan
> dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>
> >If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe you
> >have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>
OK, Mr. Smart, please prove that he DOESN'T have the patch.
See how hard it is to prove a negative?
--
////////////////////
Dr. Pat "I'm not a doctor but I play
one on Usenet" Lundrigan PhD
thesis, "Sylogisms and Jingoisms-Logic
made simple through nested GOTO loops."
meg_maxatmsndotcom
////////////////////
Adam Littman
In article <34466E...@atmsn.dotcom>, Pat Lundrigan <meg...@atmsn.dotcom> wrote:
>> dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>>
>> >If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe
> you
>> >have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>>
>
>OK, Mr. Smart, please prove that he DOESN'T have the patch.
>See how hard it is to prove a negative?
If you are talking about the PhD thing that is rather ironic. Since the fact
that "Derek Smart" does not have a PhD has been proven. Of course whether this
person has a PhD under another name cannot be disproven without that name.
___________
Adam Littman / ^ \
AL...@cornell.edu /\ / \ /\
/__\__/___\__/__\
/ \( ) ( )/ \
\ /\ o /\ /
\ / \( )/ \ /
"Four minutes twenty-two seconds, \/____\_/____\/
Baldric, you owe me a groat" \ \ /
--Blackadder \ / \ /
---------
Stuart Park
Derek Smart (dsm...@pobox.com) wrote:
<snip..>
> I'm sorry you feel that way but I don't think you're getting the full picture.
> Understood. My publishers, Take2, released the game in Sept. 1996 before it was
> strived and worked hard to make it what it is today. Don't take my word for it,<snip..>
> Your comments are appreciated. Thanks for your time.
Your messages may still be full of inaccuracies and
bending of the truth.. but at least you're being a bit
more civil now and not automatically abusing every person
criticising BC3K.
Now all you have to do is go that 1 extra step and admit
you don't have a Ph.D
> Derek Smart, Ph.D.
--
"If only he used his talent for niceness, instead of evil"
- Get Smart
Stuart Park
E-Mail: stuart @ banana.psd.com.au Melbourne, Australia
Greg Cisko
Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote in article <3445bd23....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>...
> >
> >I bought the game when it came out, and it was the single worst game
> >investment ever...
>
>
> >version..
>
>
> >Version one was 99% hype value and 100% bugs (I am pretty sure that the only
> >improvent will be in the hype department)
>
Oh please. Enough already. You know darn well what the facts are. You hyped
the crap out of a piece od shit that Take 2 released prematurely. After several
patches the game was as screwed as ever. Now you make like everything is
all fixed & rosey. You are not the Taco Supremo. You are the flim-flam-man.
Sheesh. DUH "Based on what facts _exactly_ ?" What a laugh.
--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.
Derek Smart
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:27:16 -0400, Steve <Ste...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>I want to echo this poster's sentiments (aka "me too!" <G>); I also will
>be buying 2.0 when it hits the stands. I would've bought the earlier
>version, based on your dedication in upgrading it, but didn't have a
>system sufficient to play it. A certain jolly, red suited, white
>bearded guy is gonna break into my house in December and rectify that
>problem around the night of the 24th, so that won't be an issue for BC3K
>2.0. ;)
Thanks for your support and to those lurkers who send me similar messages
daily. Thank you.
>I'd also like to compliment you on your most recent responses here;
>They've been very professional and even mannered. I didn't have a
>problem with your earlier, more "earthy" replies to flammage but some
>potential customers may have.
Understood. Those days for me, are gone. Been there, done that. Didn't gain a
thing. I'm ambitious and a man driven by progress as my life has proven. Flame
wars did not improve my life nor did they help me make any progress. I simply
quit. As the saying goes, f the left arm hurts....
>BTW, that's a fine looking woman shown with you in that Adrenaline Vault
>interview. I assume it isn't the same girlfriend that screwed you over
>a couple of years back (that you mentioned before), is it?
>..and does this one have a sister...in Canada? ;)
hehe, that's Lisa my fiancee. My ex-wife is in England somewhere, no that's not
her <g> She has a sister in California but she's married <g> Actually, I sent
Emil the only scanned photo I had of Lisa and I because I couldn't be bothered
to connect my scanner, scan, scale etc so I asked him if it was ok. That pic is
also my Win96 wallpaper on my main desktop machine. He said yes and said that
if I also had one of me, I should send it because he wanted to use two. So, I
had to go thru the scanner shuffle (I only have a Logitech Pagescan that is
never connected), scanned it at 800 dpi, used Photoshop to clean it up and sent
it to him. They had to rescale it to size to fit the page which is why it looks
a little blurry.
>Good luck in the future,
Thanks Steve
Fiend
Hello Derek,
Here are my conditions for purchasing the game...just for your own
information:
1. A printed manual
Any time I shell out money for complicated software, I expect
a complete manual. I can understand your problem with producing
one, but I won't buy a program without one.
2. Direct 3D support.
I noticed you mentioned 3DFX and other chipsets, but I have a Riva.
If my chipset is not supported, I would rather buy a product that
does support it.
3. Positive reviews from several sources.
With so many games out there and so little time, I can't play them
all or even come close. I just want to play the best. For
example, I would only buy one or two 3D shooters like Quake II
or Unreal/Prey (which ever comes out first). In the case of
a space simulation, I've read about several up and coming releases
that sound interesting.
4. Relatively bug-free code.
No code is perfect (I should know since I'm a professional
software developer) but I would find it a pain to have to apply
patches all the time to obtain minimum functionality.
5. A demo of the game.
I know that you put one out in CGW a few months ago, but I'm talking
about a demo of V2.0. That is the best way to determine if a game
is worth purchasing and is a great benefit to the consumer.
I have to admit, I first remember reading about this program back
when 386s were the top machines (around 1991) and I was very
disappointed that it did not work out as planned. If the above
conditions are met, I'm certainly willing to give the game a shot
after almost 7 years of waiting.
fiend
c72...@sp2n09.missouri.edu
Derek Smart (dsm...@pobox.com) wrote:
: On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:14:41 GMT, br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk (Brad Martin) wrote:
: >Now, heres the rub.
: ..oh, oh. It goes downhill from here. There's a typo in the above line. What I
: meant was that I don't believe you have the 'right' D patch.
I think I see the problem here.
Brad, it seems that you downloaded one of the decoy D patchs that
are scattered around the net. This is designed to throw off detractors
who try to download the patch so that they can claim that they own the
game. Unless you've signed the NDF, I'm afraid that you will be unable to
dl the *real* D patch.
==
Chris Hemme, PhD-in-training
University of Missouri-Biochemistry, Derekology
Thesis-"A Neurochemical Analysis of the Superior Brain"
Derek Smart
On Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:31:05 GMT, rebr...@mindspring.com ("Reb" Ruster)
wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:11:04 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
>wrote:
>
>>Also, an FTP program will let you know what
>>percentage of the file has been uploaded. In FP '98 once your start to 'export'
>>a file from your local machine to the site, it only lists the name, you do not
>>get a status report at all. You just have to pray that a 10MB file uploads ok.
>>It was only when I glanced over at the machine I was using for the upload, that
>>I realize FP '98 had 'lost the connection' though I still had an active
>>internet connection.
>
>Consider using FTP Explorer, which is a rehash of Windows Explorer
>except that you access the remote system's directories.
Thanks for the tip. I think I was in navigate mode or something like that.
Derek Smart
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:00:38 GMT, al...@cornell.edu (Adam Littman) wrote:
>In article <34466E...@atmsn.dotcom>, Pat Lundrigan <meg...@atmsn.dotcom> wrote:
>>> dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>>>
>>> >If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe
>> you
>>> >have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>>>
>>
>>OK, Mr. Smart, please prove that he DOESN'T have the patch.
>>See how hard it is to prove a negative?
>
>If you are talking about the PhD thing that is rather ironic. Since the fact
>that "Derek Smart" does not have a PhD has been proven. Of course whether this
>person has a PhD under another name cannot be disproven without that name.
er, Adam, nothing has been proven, only doubts have been levied. Surely being
from Cornell (?) you'd be more logical than this <g> I don't have to prove that
I have a Ph.D. to anyone except a potential employer. Nor do I have to prove
that you are wrong.
Derek Smart
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 22:24:16 -0400, "Francois Messier" <fmes...@citenet.com>
wrote:
As you can see, they're wasting their time, I'm not.
Thanks for your continued support and all the best.
Bryan Chow
In article <3449ea3...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> I don't have to prove that I have a Ph.D. to anyone except a potential
> employer.
Then what's stopping every Tom Dick and Harry from tacking "PhD" behind
their names??!
If you want to use the label, you are CLEARLY obliged to back it
up when requested.
--
Bryan Chow - http://NSX.vtec.net
`The value of life can be measured by how many times your soul
has been deeply stirred.' - Soichiro Honda
Bill Huffman
>
>>In article <34466E...@atmsn.dotcom>, Pat Lundrigan <meg...@atmsn.dotcom> wrote:
>>>> dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe
>>> you
>>>> >have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>>>>
>>>
>>>OK, Mr. Smart, please prove that he DOESN'T have the patch.
>>>See how hard it is to prove a negative?
>>
>>If you are talking about the PhD thing that is rather ironic. Since the fact
>>that "Derek Smart" does not have a PhD has been proven. Of course whether this
>>person has a PhD under another name cannot be disproven without that name.
>
>er, Adam, nothing has been proven, only doubts have been levied. Surely being
>from Cornell (?) you'd be more logical than this <g> I don't have to prove that
>I have a Ph.D. to anyone except a potential employer. Nor do I have to prove
>that you are wrong.
>
>
Another bold-faced lie by Derek, it has been proven and Derek knows it.
Here's another copy of my summary of the proof which Derek has never
responded to, because, the only reasonable response is to admit that
he is a habitual liar and a fraud.
Here's the proof that Derek's PhD is a fraud. It proves the negative
that Derek has not earned a PhD at any accredited university. These
facts coupled with the fact that Derek refuses to reveal what college he
earned his PhD at, leads to the inescapable conclusion that his PhD is
a fraud.
As a side note, Derek has made the lame claim on a couple
occasions that if he reveals his alma mater then the detractors will
just find something else to flame him about. This is an extra lame attempt
because I have said that if his PhD is validated I will write a public
apology and never post to a Derek Smart thread again. Other detractors
have said they would also abide by this.
It's very important to note that everything stated here has been verified
by multiple people and can be verified by you. All you need to do is
to either visit your local college library or to look in www.dejanews.com
between the dates of about 8/24/97 and about 9/9/97. The most interesting
threads being "Derek Smart = Habitual Liar", "Proof - Derek PhD NOT!",
and "DEREK SMART - PhD?".
Derek has claimed to have a PhD in every post he's made that I've seen.
Whenever anyone has asked about details he was strangely silent. What
he has said is that his dissertation title was "Artificial Intelligence
and the Art of Computer Thinking". He has also said it was entitled
"The Art of Computer Thinking". He refuses to say where he received
his PhD because it is too personal. However, he says it will be in
his biography that is currently being done. On a humorous note, in
the post where he first said his alma mater name was too personal to post
on Usenet, he supposedly posted his Florida drivers license number.
The reason this particular negative can be proven is an abstract of every
dissertation ever done is collected together by the schools to facilitate
the further advancement of academic research and human knowledge. Upon
searching this information no Derek Smart shows up. No dissertation with
the title Derek claims for his dissertation shows up. He said the searches
failed because his real name is Derek K???????????-Smart. He refused
to reveal his K????????? name, only that it began with the letter K.
When searches were done that proved that there was no K??????-Smart
with a PhD, he said the dissertation wasn't published because
it was the basis of BC3K and was secret. When it was pointed
out that the dissertation abstract should still be available and
on file even when the dissertation is not available, Derek was
silent. When it was pointed out that dissertations are school
property and not the property of the student, Derek was silent.
The search was done and verified by multiple people. Multiple
people reported that different librarians have said that it should
be in the records, if he had a PhD. The records covered the whole
world and all the way back to the middle 1800's. There was even
some guy from Germany that thought we wouldn't be able to find
his PhD dissertation. Someone that didn't know German posted
what the search came up with. No one complained so I guess
that it was correct but, I don't know German either.
As a side note, searches were also done for anything published
by Derek Smart. These also came up empty.
The point of all this from my point of view is that it seems
to prove that Derek Smart is a habitual liar. It is irrelevant
when it comes to evaluating whether or not BC3K is a good or
bad game. It is very relevant when it comes to evaluating
the truth in what Derek is saying.
Adam Littman
Well since people have looked for the name "Derek Smart" in comprehensive
databases which include the names of every PhD going back over 30 years (and
since AFAIK you are not old enough to have gotten your PhD that long ago), and
failed to find your name, I would say that the fact that "Derek Smart" has a
PhD has been pretty convincingly disproven.
I saw a quoted post of yours from some time back which said that the PhD was
under the name Derek K?????-Smart but somehow I think the relevant databases
would be able to find such a variant. If I am wrong it would take less than
one line of text to prove it. Just tell us the full name your PhD was granted
under.
Organization
J313008062
net.att.net> <6C2B58FCE4E4B693.91C7FC9CDBF7AD5A.3CC77A2532EB7C1B@library-proxy.
airnews.net> <62164a$8...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net> <344506c9...@news.demo
In article <3449ea3...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, dsm...@pobox.com wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:00:38 GMT, al...@cornell.edu (Adam Littman) wrote:
>
>>In article <34466E...@atmsn.dotcom>, Pat Lundrigan <meg...@atmsn.dotcom>
> wrote:
>>>> dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe
>>> you
>>>> >have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>>>>
>>>
>>>OK, Mr. Smart, please prove that he DOESN'T have the patch.
>>>See how hard it is to prove a negative?
>>
>>If you are talking about the PhD thing that is rather ironic. Since the fact
>>that "Derek Smart" does not have a PhD has been proven. Of course whether this
>
>>person has a PhD under another name cannot be disproven without that name.
>
>er, Adam, nothing has been proven, only doubts have been levied. Surely being
>from Cornell (?) you'd be more logical than this <g> I don't have to prove that
>I have a Ph.D. to anyone except a potential employer. Nor do I have to prove
>that you are wrong.
>
>
>Derek Smart, Ph.D.
>Designer/Lead Developer
>Battlecruiser:3000AD
>UIN : 158435
>EMAIL : dsm...@pobox.com
>Media : bc3000a...@mindspring.com
>Web : www.bc3000ad.com
>CSI : GO GALCOM
___________
Phil Worthen
> Just tell us the full name your PhD was granted
> under.
Obviously he is a fraud.
In this case, it's assumed he's a fake until HE proves otherwise...to the
public as well as a potential employer. The public has every "virtual
right" to operate under the same assumptions as any employer. Every
employer will assume any degree is false until a check is run, and the
claim is confirmed. That's why employers require a real name, a real
school, and real years attended.
The burden of proof is clearly on his shoulders.
'Nuff said.
-Surfer
--
Phil "Surfer" Worthen
--------------------
phi...@gte.net
Reb Ruster
On 18 Oct 1997 14:53:08 GMT, phi...@gte.net (Phil Worthen) wrote:
>Obviously he is a fraud.
>
>In this case, it's assumed he's a fake until HE proves otherwise...to =
the
>public as well as a potential employer. The public has every "virtual
>right" to operate under the same assumptions as any employer. Every
>employer will assume any degree is false until a check is run, and the
>claim is confirmed. That's why employers require a real name, a real
>school, and real years attended.
>
>The burden of proof is clearly on his shoulders.
>
>'Nuff said.
Why is so important that he proves his credentials? Will doing so put
him in more creditable public light? Will doing so lessen the number
of critics and detractors? Will it prove that he is as smart as he
says he is? Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
to write a sucessful software package.
_ _ ____ __ _ _
( | ) / __ \ ___ / /_( | )
|/|/ / /_/ // _ \ / __ \/|/
/ _, _// __// /_/ /
/_/ |_| \___//_.___/
=20
=20
=20
Phil Worthen
> Why is so important that he proves his credentials? Will doing so put
> him in more creditable public light? Will doing so lessen the number
> of critics and detractors? Will it prove that he is as smart as he
> says he is? Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
> to write a sucessful software package.
Reb...good point.
stephen j messer
In article <344a8387....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>As for my Ph.D.,
>my explanation still stands
Which explanation? There have been several.
>Derek Smart, Ph.D. NOT
Franc Kaos
On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:47:09 +0100, Didier Duchet
<duc...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <6202ar$l...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Derek Smart
><dsm...@pobox.com> writes
>
>>Thanks for your comments but somewhere out there, is a guy with this game
>
>Who is this lonely guy ?
>
><snip>
>
>>Derek Smart, Ph.D.
><snip>
Er, me actually, but thanx for the interest...
Franc Kaos ~ Cheers
Hey! If you're passing thru'... ~ (www.netcomuk.co.uk/~kaos)
Derek Smart
>Derek,
>
>I did buy BC3K v1.00. I considered this as investment on a future
>great game. The last patches were proving that it was true.
>The upcomming release you're announcing looks very promising.
>Keep up with your good work.
>
>By the way, I'm looking at those negative messages posted here since
>an year now, and those guy's just like to complain... They will say
>anything just to have a reaction from you.
>
>Frank
Thanks for your continued support Frank
To Frank, Sava and all you silent lurkers who send me email each day and post
one off messages like this every so often, thank you very much. I know you're
there and that's all that matters to me.
...continuing my response to Sava
As for these detractors. It's plain pure jealously and the fact that they have
too much time on their hands. In the case of the latter, this time is spent on
a character assassination spree because it suits the purpose of augmenting
their own boring lives. The fact is, no-one expected me to stick to this game.
They expected me to quit and face defeat. I did not and the game now WORKS and
does exactly what I said it would do. Had it not been released incomplete by
the publishers in the first place, it wouldn't have been such a issue and one
which I have busted my ass to resolve. I'm waiting for few of the detractors
such as Rebuster, Pat etc whom I have convinced to take a second look at the
game, to come and give honest opinions. Rebuster finally got the game going (he
didn't have enough disk space which is why he had problems originally). As for
Bill, fthx et al, the focus is not on the game, it's on me for the same reasons
I cite. A lot of things have been done to this game which this group is aware
of but with each advancement came something else to bitch about. The game was
fixed, a manual was done, a demo was done, I released the D patch contrary to
what I had originally planned to do etc. Of course, none of them are talking
about the game and as for fthx who creates thread after thread of useless and
stuff that he conveniently edits to serve his purpose (saying I wrote them),
I'll let every sane person in this newsgroup draw their own conclusions.
*speaking of which, did anyone read P48 of November PC Games. I quote (without
permission from PC Games but I'm sure Steve Klett won't mind).
This is just ONE of several positive responses since I started work on patching
the game. In fact, I have stiffled several reviews of the game in progress and
asked the reviewers to wait until v2.0 was complete and done. Adrenaline Vault
did an 'early' story sometime this year (URL is at the bottom of the recent
interview) and a review this week (www.avault.com/articles/smartint.asp). I
just concluded another interview for another industry mag at
http://www.compunotes.com/main.html
It should be posted sometime this week.
PC Gamer, Novemeber 1998, Page 48
GOLDEN TURKEY TIME
====================
PC Games did their annual Golden Turkey awards. The GT award is the
booby-prize equivalent of the Oscars. Each Nov they are handed out to
developers and publishers who tried to swindle gamers out of their hard-earned
dollars over the previous year.
After discussing other prize winners including those that went out of business
as a result of their booboo, ie AnyRiver who did A Fork In the Tale, including
Activision who got beat up for releasing A10 Cuba, gasp!, sans manual, this
is where we come in...
! This excerpt only pertains to BC3K. If you want to see the whole article
which names, names, please buy a copy of the mag.
Excerpt verbatim...
"The last winner in the games category is actually a repeat winner, and the
toughest one of The Player's selections: Battlecruiser 3000AD. BC3K won in
vaporware category last year for it's extremely prolonged development cycle.
Imagine the shock when it was finally released after years of development, in
half-finished form. This game has undergone a multitude of major patches and
to developer Derek Smart's credit, it's now pretty much complete (and
enjoyable). However, the simple truth is that, no matter what the reasons,
the sad shape Battlecruiser was in upon release was inexcusable. Thus, another
Golden Turkey goes to it's publisher, Take 2 Interactive."
Jim
Phil Worthen wrote:
>
> > Why is so important that he proves his credentials? Will doing so put
> > him in more creditable public light? Will doing so lessen the number
> > of critics and detractors? Will it prove that he is as smart as he
> > says he is? Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
> > to write a sucessful software package.
>
> Reb...good point.
It isn't really about having or not having a Ph.D. It's about
how a man (or woman) is only as good as their word. For Derek
to say that he won a Gold Medal in the Olympics (when he didn't)
would be just as bad. It would make him look like a childish
person who needs to lie to make himself look better than he is.
I actually hope that Derek does have a Ph.D. For it to come
out that he doesn't have one after all this time of claiming he
does would make him look quite bad and cast a lot of doubt on
anything he ever said or claimed in the future.
Jonathan Normington
Cesar recently wrote:
> Mr. Smart, if you are referring to Reb Ruster, I think you should
>check your agent database because he was never a detractor but
>somewhat of one of your supporters.
Derek's definition of a "detractor" is far broader than you think.
--
Jonathan Normington
http://www.souragne.demon.co.uk/
ICQ: 3941294
Jim
Derek Smart wrote:
>
> I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you over this, just be careful
> where you point the finger because you know nothing about me expect the crap
> you read here.
But a lot of what we read here comes directly from you. We know
about the types of cars you own, your girlfriend, your BC3K license
plates and your driver's license number. Pretty much all of this
stuff is most likely true (but who knows) since you posted this
information with such enthusiasm (to the extent of even including
a picture of your girlfriend in your interview). So why the lack
of enthusiasm over what so many here have questioned for too long
now, proof of your ownership or lack of a Ph.D.?
Josh Martin
Jonathan Normington wrote:
>
> Cesar recently wrote:
>
> > Mr. Smart, if you are referring to Reb Ruster, I think you should
> >check your agent database because he was never a detractor but
> >somewhat of one of your supporters.
>
> Derek's definition of a "detractor" is far broader than you think.
His definition of "the greatest game of all time" also seems to be far
broader than I would think.
Josh
Darren Chriest
Excellent post Fiend...
Derek, I would like to echo his sentiments exactly (except I have a
3Dfx card and don't need D3D).
In article <3445E1...@sprynet.com>, Fiend <fien...@sprynet.com> wrote:
=>Hello Derek,
=>
=>Here are my conditions for purchasing the game...just for your own
=>information:
=>
=>1. A printed manual
=>
=> Any time I shell out money for complicated software, I expect
=> a complete manual. I can understand your problem with producing
=> one, but I won't buy a program without one.
=>
=>2. Direct 3D support.
=>
=> I noticed you mentioned 3DFX and other chipsets, but I have a Riva.
=> If my chipset is not supported, I would rather buy a product that
=> does support it.
=>
=>3. Positive reviews from several sources.
=>
=> With so many games out there and so little time, I can't play them
=> all or even come close. I just want to play the best. For
=> example, I would only buy one or two 3D shooters like Quake II
=> or Unreal/Prey (which ever comes out first). In the case of
=> a space simulation, I've read about several up and coming releases
=> that sound interesting.
=>
=>4. Relatively bug-free code.
=>
=> No code is perfect (I should know since I'm a professional
=> software developer) but I would find it a pain to have to apply
=> patches all the time to obtain minimum functionality.
=>
=>5. A demo of the game.
=>
=> I know that you put one out in CGW a few months ago, but I'm talking
=> about a demo of V2.0. That is the best way to determine if a game
=> is worth purchasing and is a great benefit to the consumer.
=>
=>I have to admit, I first remember reading about this program back
=>when 386s were the top machines (around 1991) and I was very
=>disappointed that it did not work out as planned. If the above
=>conditions are met, I'm certainly willing to give the game a shot
=>after almost 7 years of waiting.
=>
=>
=>
=>
=> fiend
Motor gently through the greasemud, for there lurks the skid demon.
sf...@cus.cam.ac.uk.spamoff
On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:38:28 GMT, al...@cornell.edu (Adam Littman) wrote on
Re: BATTLECRUISER 3000AD v1.01D6 Released:
<snip>
>As for me, the only thing I have against DS is that he refuses to provide
>proof of his credentials when asked but continues to claim to be a PhD, I
>think he is demeaning the work that every real PhD must go through by claiming
>one he hasn't earned.
I don't care, you are not in the right ng for that. Post it to a war board.
>If I am wrong he has only to provide some way of proving that he has one and I
>will have nothing more to post about him.
Please be noted that this is c.s.i.p.g.* series.
Now getting back to the game-related threads...but b4 that,
PLONK!
Adam Littman
In article <344a8387....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, dsm...@pobox.com wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:07:18 GMT,
>dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust) wrote:
>I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you over this, just be careful
>where you point the finger because you know nothing about me expect the crap
>you read here.
Not quite true, we also know what we haven't read here. We haven't read
anything which would prove you have a PhD. We haven't read any explaination
that someone who was lying about having a PhD wouldn't also give.
If you act like someone who is lying about having a PhD it is perfectly
reasonable to point a finger at you and say you don't have one.
Especially since searches that would have turned up a record of your PhD if
you have on came up empty.
In other words all the evidence points to your PhD being just made up.
Especially since you have endured accusations which no person with a PhD would
endure without refuting them.
Adam Littman
In article <62d1ae$rjq$1...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, sf...@cus.cam.ac.uk.NOSPAM wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 03:56:16 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) quoted:
>
><Names snipped>
>>>
>>>>Why is so important that he proves his credentials? Will doing so put
>>>>him in more creditable public light? Will doing so lessen the number
>>>>of critics and detractors? Will it prove that he is as smart as he
>>>>says he is? Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
>>>>to write a sucessful software package.
>>>
>
>be they will start putting the burden of proof on Derek, for him to show that
>he is in fact, a man and have a willy. Even if he put up a pic to
>prove that, somebody will start criticizing that it was a cut-and-paste
>job.
Well actually many of his hardcore detractors have made him a bet that he
doesn't have a PhD. If he comes up with proof that he has one, they will never
post to a Derek Smart or BC3k thread again.
As for me, the only thing I have against DS is that he refuses to provide
proof of his credentials when asked but continues to claim to be a PhD, I
think he is demeaning the work that every real PhD must go through by claiming
one he hasn't earned.
If I am wrong he has only to provide some way of proving that he has one and I
will have nothing more to post about him.
___________
Adam Littman
In article <62d4sr$c82$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>, dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust) wrote:
>dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>>You mention a history of lying knowing fully well that all of it calls for
>>speculation.
>
>Yeah, sure, Derek -- in the same way that it calls for "speculation"
>to say that OJ killed his ex-wife.
Hey Derek could get lucky and get an LA jury :-)
>By the same token, it is unreasonable, given both the extensive
>research done by many other posters and your unwillingness to give
>even the most benign information regarding it, to believe that you
>have a PhD. Your lack of a PhD has been proven beyond a reasonable
>doubt. If this were an issue in a criminal trial (not that it is, but
>just if it were hypothetically), the evidentiary hurdle would have
>been met. "Reasonable doubt" is the highest level of proof in a court
>of law -- why shouldn't it be an acceptable standard on Usenet, a
>lesser forum?
Reb Ruster
On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:07:18 GMT,
dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust)
wrote:
>rebr...@mindspring.com ("Reb"=A0Ruster) wrote:
>
>>Why is so important that he proves his credentials? Will doing so put
>>him in more creditable public light? Will doing so lessen the number
>>of critics and detractors? Will it prove that he is as smart as he
>>says he is? Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
>>to write a sucessful software package.
>
>Derek's having/not having a PhD has *nothing* to do with his
>game-writing skills. It has *everything* to do with his credibility.
Okay, so it still does not explain why he has to answer to you or
anyone else.
>On the "lie scale," claiming a degree you don't own is a doozy, and it
>pretty much calls into question any statement you make thereafter --
>if you're willing to lie about something as important as having an
>advanced degree, you're probably willing to lie about lesser things as
>well.
I think we are defining a "Boast", not a "Lie". Everyone has a bit of
the ol' ego.
>
>Derek repeatedly posts claims regarding the game and himself in this
>newsgroup. So far, a substantial number of them have been found
>false, including the PhD claim. It's important to note this because
>you should weigh the fact that Derek has a history of lying whenever
>you evaluate any of his future statements.
>----------------------------------------
So what would it cost you to get the game, appliy the patches and
prove out these theories?
Adam Littman
In article <62e1j7$dnc$1...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, sf...@cus.cam.ac.uk.spamoff wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:38:28 GMT, al...@cornell.edu (Adam Littman) wrote on
>Re: BATTLECRUISER 3000AD v1.01D6 Released:
>
><snip>
>
>>proof of his credentials when asked but continues to claim to be a PhD, I
>>think he is demeaning the work that every real PhD must go through by claiming
>
>>one he hasn't earned.
>
What the heck are you talking about? What is a war board?
And the appropriate place to confront fraudulent use of academic titles is
where they are being used fraudulently (if that is the case here).
I hate your kind, you bloody holier than thou jerks who think you own the
usenet.
Adam Littman
In article <344bb2e8...@news.mindspring.com>, rebr...@mindspring.com wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:07:18 GMT,
>dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust)
>wrote:
>>On the "lie scale," claiming a degree you don't own is a doozy, and it
>>pretty much calls into question any statement you make thereafter --
>>if you're willing to lie about something as important as having an
>>advanced degree, you're probably willing to lie about lesser things as
>>well.
>
>I think we are defining a "Boast", not a "Lie". Everyone has a bit of
>the ol' ego.
No, claiming you have a degree when you don't is not a "boast" a "boast" is
when you are trumpting the fact that you have some accomplishment, just in
case someone may have missed it. Claiming a degree you have never been awarded
is one of the more despicable types of lies.
steven joseph chmura
Derek,
How dare you claim to have a PhD when you probably did not even graduate
high school. Many of us worked very hard for our MD's and PhD's and do not
appreciate your lying crap.
If all you have is a 12th grade education fine - no one gives a shit if
you write good software. Hell, BG does not have a PhD.
Take the damn thing out of your sig or the PhDs of the world will force
you
to get a new email address.
--
________________________________________________________________________________Steven Chmura MuDPhud4
1st Zoloft Lawndart Member "... no frame rate too high"
Derek Smart
>Derek,
>
>How dare you claim to have a PhD when you probably did not even graduate
>high school. Many of us worked very hard for our MD's and PhD's and do not
>appreciate your lying crap.
Really?
>If all you have is a 12th grade education fine - no one gives a shit if
>you write good software. Hell, BG does not have a PhD.
Really?
>Take the damn thing out of your sig or the PhDs of the world will force
>you to get a new email address.
Really?
Derek Smart
On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:39:17 GMT, rebr...@mindspring.com ("Reb" Ruster)
wrote:
<snip>
>>Derek repeatedly posts claims regarding the game and himself in this
>>newsgroup. So far, a substantial number of them have been found
>>false, including the PhD claim. It's important to note this because
>>you should weigh the fact that Derek has a history of lying whenever
>>you evaluate any of his future statements.
>>----------------------------------------
>So what would it cost you to get the game, appliy the patches and
>prove out these theories?
$15 + shipping from Chips 'n Bits at www.cdmag.com. Patches are free at
www.bc3000ad.com They also have a return policy. Last time I checked, they only
had a few units left.
Derek Smart
On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:47:07 GMT, toku...@highway.or (Cesar) wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 14:08:03 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
>wrote:
>
><snip>
>> I'm waiting for few of the detractors
>>such as Rebuster...
><snip>
>
> Mr. Smart, if you are referring to Reb Ruster, I think you should
>check your agent database because he was never a detractor but
>somewhat of one of your supporters.
Got the name wrong. Sorry.
Derek Smart
On Sun, 19 Oct 97 17:13:06 GMT, dar...@cnw.com (Darren Chriest) wrote:
>
> Excellent post Fiend...
>
> Derek, I would like to echo his sentiments exactly (except I have a
>3Dfx card and don't need D3D).
3Dfx will be the first patch. I have no interest in D3D and will NEVER support
it. OpenGL is my direction for my next generation renderer.
Derek Smart
On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 03:11:31 GMT,
dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust) wrote:
<snip>
>In this world, credibility is EVERYTHING. Didn't your mom ever tell
>you the story of the little boy who cried "wolf"?
Obviously, with your ridiculous claims, we can all look forward to one more
bogus attorney to add to the numerous we have to deal with. How do you like
that?
Derek Smart
On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:17:06 -0400, "Riboflavin" <ri...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Phil Worthen wrote in message <62ekab$hri$1...@gte2.gte.net>...
>>> Claiming a degree you have never been awarded
>>> is one of the more despicable types of lies.
>>
>>Isn't impersonating a doctor illegal?
>>
>AFAIK, in the US it's only impersonating an MD that's illegal; claiming
>bogus Phds is not. Which is very good for Derek's sake.
No, it's NOT good for Derek's sake because it's still frowned up. Since I do
have a Ph.D., I am not worried about any implications whatsoever.
Besides, you can still get an honorary Doctorate, a mail order Ph.D or a
bonafide Ph.D. from a non-accredited institution. All very, very legal.
Gary Hladik
dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) writes:
>On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:39:17 GMT, rebr...@mindspring.com ("Reb" Ruster)
>wrote:
>>So what would it cost you to get the game, appliy the patches and
>>prove out these theories?
>$15 + shipping from Chips 'n Bits at www.cdmag.com. Patches are free at
>www.bc3000ad.com They also have a return policy. Last time I checked, they only
>had a few units left.
Or, one could wait until game and manual are "finished" (v2.0?), released,
re-reviewed, and re-rehashed in the newsgroup before buying. May be more
expensive, but it saves the hassle of downloading and applying patches,
and the buyer should know *exactly* what he's getting. Hey, what's a few
more months in this epic saga? :-)
Gary
Bill Huffman
In article <62d1ae$rjq$1...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
<sf...@cus.cam.ac.uk.NOSPAM> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Why is so important that he proves his credentials? Will doing so put
>>>>him in more creditable public light? Will doing so lessen the number
>>>>of critics and detractors? Will it prove that he is as smart as he
>>>>says he is? Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
>>>>to write a sucessful software package.
>>>
>
>be they will start putting the burden of proof on Derek, for him to show that
>he is in fact, a man and have a willy. Even if he put up a pic to
>prove that, somebody will start criticizing that it was a cut-and-paste
>job.
>
validated my last post to a Derek Smart thread would be an apology,
other detractors said they would abide by the same "bet". If
Derek's PhD was real he could probably get at least a half dozen
of the most vocal detractors to agree to this and then tell us
where he got his PhD and be rid of us and remove the best
ammunition for Derek-bashing, all in one fell swoop.
Plastic Nuclear Ferret
Derek Smart (dsm...@pobox.com) wrote:
[snippety-snippity-snip]
: My dear Adam, what PROOF do you or anyone have that I am lying???
we have no proof to either confirm or deny that you are indeed a Ph.D....
however i am quite sure that some people are just DYING to know as to where
your Ph.D. was recevied. myself, i'm only mildly curious. 8^)
later-
shane
--
###############################################################################
# Shane Knapp # do...@bayarea.net # skk...@nas.nasa.gov #
# "I'd like to be Superman, but you're standing on my cape...." #
# http://www.bayarea.net/~donut #
###############################################################################
Bill Huffman
In article <344a2fa5...@news.mindspring.com>,
Reb <rebr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>On 18 Oct 1997 14:53:08 GMT, phi...@gte.net (Phil Worthen) wrote:
>
>>Obviously he is a fraud.
>>
>>In this case, it's assumed he's a fake until HE proves otherwise...to =
>the
>>public as well as a potential employer. The public has every "virtual
>>right" to operate under the same assumptions as any employer. Every
>>employer will assume any degree is false until a check is run, and the
>>claim is confirmed. That's why employers require a real name, a real
>>school, and real years attended.
>>
>>The burden of proof is clearly on his shoulders.
>>
>>'Nuff said.
>
>Why is so important that he proves his credentials?
Since his PhD is fake it proves him to be a habitual liar.
>Will doing so put
>him in more creditable public light?
Of course it will. When someone claims for years that they
have a PhD and then it's brought into serious question. It
makes them appear to be a fraud.
>Will doing so lessen the number
>of critics and detractors?
Yes it will. I have said that if Derek names his alma mater
and his PhD is verified then, my last post to any Derek Smart
thread will be a public apology. Other "detractors at the time
said that they would abide by the same terms.
>Will it prove that he is as smart as he
>says he is?
Of course not, I believe it would be practically impossible to
prove that Derek is as smart as he says he is.
>Far as I'm concerned, it doesn't take a degree in anything
>to write a sucessful software package.
>
Derek is the one that made that claim not any detractor.
You are falling for one of Derek's favorite tricks. To
twist the situation around so that he can easily defend
against it and try to make his opponent look like the fool.
Don't feel bad about it. Derek has many years of practice
at twisting and fabricating the truth. It is what he
seems to do best.
Bill Huffman
In article <344b2136...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, <sn...@skjs.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 03:56:16 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:07:18 GMT,
>>dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Derek's having/not having a PhD has *nothing* to do with his
>>>game-writing skills. It has *everything* to do with his credibility.
>>>pretty much calls into question any statement you make thereafter --
>>>if you're willing to lie about something as important as having an
>>>advanced degree, you're probably willing to lie about lesser things as
>>>well.
>>>
>>>newsgroup. So far, a substantial number of them have been found
>>>false, including the PhD claim. It's important to note this because
>>>you should weigh the fact that Derek has a history of lying whenever
>>>you evaluate any of his future statements.
>>
>>you've written. I guess this is why we can always look forward to good, bad and
>>bent attorneys.
>>
>Was that a flame ? I think it was.
>>my explanation still stands and what you folks think is the very least of my
>>worries.
>Kind of sounds like the tabasco industry leader saying the don't
>believe smoking causes cancer,
>
>
>> Now, as an aspiring attorney or at least an aspiring 'bad'
>Was that a flame ? I think it was.
>
>> one, try to
>>be more logical in your posts. If I tagged 'game developer' at the end of my
>>sig, I'd make damn sure that I can design and develop a game. This, I have
>>done.
You've been putting that on your sig for long before you ever even pretended
to have a release Derek.
>>You tag a law school at the end of yours and I'll let everyone else read
>>your post and draw their own conclusions. Nothing about my Ph.D. has been
>>proven to be true or false by anyone here.
Derek, the same old lie? Why don't you respond to the summary
of the proof. While it was being proven you were posting all
kinds of irrelevant rants trying to deflect the issue.
>
>
>>Derek Smart, Ph.D. NOT!
Here's the proof that Derek's PhD is a fraud. It proves the negative
that Derek has not earned a PhD at any accredited university. These
facts coupled with the fact that Derek refuses to reveal what college he
earned his PhD at, leads to the inescapable conclusion that his PhD is
a fraud.
As a side note, Derek has made the lame claim on a couple
occasions that if he reveals his alma mater then the detractors will
just find something else to flame him about. This is an extra lame attempt
because I have said that if his PhD is validated I will write a public
apology and never post to a Derek Smart thread again. Other detractors
have said they would also abide by this.
It's very important to note that everything stated here has been verified
by multiple people and can be verified by you. All you need to do is
to either visit your local college library or to look in www.dejanews.com
between the dates of about 8/24/97 and about 9/9/97. The most interesting
threads being "Derek Smart = Habitual Liar", "Proof - Derek PhD NOT!",
and "DEREK SMART - PhD?".
Derek has claimed to have a PhD in every post he's made that I've seen.
Whenever anyone has asked about details he was strangely silent. What
he has said is that his dissertation title was "Artificial Intelligence
and the Art of Computer Thinking". He has also said it was entitled
"The Art of Computer Thinking". He refuses to say where he received
his PhD because it is too personal. However, he says it will be in
his biography that is currently being done. On a humorous note, in
the post where he first said his alma mater name was too personal to post
on Usenet, he supposedly posted his Florida drivers license number.
The reason this particular negative can be proven is an abstract of every
dissertation ever done is collected together by the schools to facilitate
the further advancement of academic research and human knowledge. Upon
searching this information no Derek Smart shows up. No dissertation with
the title Derek claims for his dissertation shows up. He said the searches
failed because his real name is Derek K???????????-Smart. He refused
to reveal his K????????? name, only that it began with the letter K.
When searches were done that proved that there was no K??????-Smart
with a PhD, he said the dissertation wasn't published because
it was the basis of BC3K and was secret. When it was pointed
out that the dissertation abstract should still be available and
on file even when the dissertation is not available, Derek was
silent. When it was pointed out that dissertations are school
property and not the property of the student, Derek was silent.
The search was done and verified by multiple people. Multiple
people reported that different librarians have said that it should
be in the records, if he had a PhD. The records covered the whole
world and all the way back to the middle 1800's. There was even
some guy from Germany that thought we wouldn't be able to find
his PhD dissertation. Someone that didn't know German posted
what the search came up with. No one complained so I guess
that it was correct but, I don't know German either.
As a side note, searches were also done for anything published
by Derek Smart. These also came up empty.
The point of all this from my point of view is that it seems
to prove that Derek Smart is a habitual liar. It is irrelevant
when it comes to evaluating whether or not BC3K is a good or
bad game. It is very relevant when it comes to evaluating
the truth in what Derek is saying.
Bill Huffman
In article <3452590e....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:17:06 -0400, "Riboflavin" <ri...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Phil Worthen wrote in message <62ekab$hri$1...@gte2.gte.net>...
>>>> Claiming a degree you have never been awarded
>>>> is one of the more despicable types of lies.
>>>
>>>Isn't impersonating a doctor illegal?
>>>
>>AFAIK, in the US it's only impersonating an MD that's illegal; claiming
>>bogus Phds is not. Which is very good for Derek's sake.
>
>No, it's NOT good for Derek's sake because it's still frowned up. Since I do
>have a Ph.D., I am not worried about any implications whatsoever.
>
>Besides, you can still get an honorary Doctorate, a mail order Ph.D or a
>bonafide Ph.D. from a non-accredited institution. All very, very legal.
>
It may be legal. But, tell us the non-accredited institution
that you received your mail order honorary PhD at and let
the world decide how bona fide it is.
>Derek Smart, Ph.D. NOT!
Bill Huffman
In article <345058d3....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 02:52:45 GMT, al...@cornell.edu (Adam Littman) wrote:
>
>>In article <344bb2e8...@news.mindspring.com>, rebr...@mindspring.com wrote:
>>>On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:07:18 GMT,
>>>dfal...@mail.utexas.edu.REMOVE.THIS.SPAM.FILTER (Damien Falgoust)
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>pretty much calls into question any statement you make thereafter --
>>>>if you're willing to lie about something as important as having an
>>>>advanced degree, you're probably willing to lie about lesser things as
>>>>well.
>>>
>>>the ol' ego.
>>
>>No, claiming you have a degree when you don't is not a "boast" a "boast" is
>>when you are trumpting the fact that you have some accomplishment, just in
>
>
so much cognitive dissonance you blank it out?
Jorge Diaz
>re-reviewed, and re-rehashed in the newsgroup before buying. May be more
>expensive, but it saves the hassle of downloading and applying patches,
>and the buyer should know *exactly* what he's getting. Hey, what's a few
>more months in this epic saga? :-)
In this epic saga? A few more months is probably about three more promised
manuals, at least one new patch, a score of Personal Guarantees, and at least
a couple of dozen more flames.
--
Jorge Diaz | "I want you to remember, Clark... in all
Georgia Institute of Technology | the years to come, in your most private
Office of Information Technology | moments... my hand at your throat. I want
cco...@oit.gatech.edu | you to remember the one man who beat you."
JMarti
On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:10:16 GMT, sn...@skjs.com wrote:
>Kind of sounds like the tabasco industry leader saying the don't
~
>believe smoking causes cancer,
>
Well, there is nothing wrong with that "spicy" comment ; ) !!!
(sorry.... could not resist)
>
>If you say so Derek.
>BTW Do you beleive smoking causes cancer ?
And about a dozen other major medical problems...
>Please what was that experts name that backs up your story ?
>????
That would have been me; I am an Assistant Professor who performs
biomedical research at a PhD granting Institution. Does Derek Smart
have a PhD? I do not know for sure, in the truest sense of the word.
However, I reached the conclusion that he probably did finish at least
97-98% of all that is necessary to complete a PhD program (and maybe
the whole thing). I also believe that there are rational, real reasons
as to why DK would not have published his dissertation. I wrote about
them in another thread (A question for Derek Smart..).
Would I hire him for my lab? Sure, depending on how much salary he
wanted <g>.
Would I buy his game? Sure, depending SOLELY on the quality of the
game.
Would I NOT buy his game because of flames by all the Derekologists?
Are you f**ing kidding me? Would you believe ANYTHING by these
individuals regarding BC3K gameplay?
Would I buy the game if proven that DS has no PhD? Same answer as
above; sure, depending SOLELY on the quality of the game.
DEREK SMART IS A FRIGGING _G_A_M_E_D_E_V_E_L_O_P_E_R !!! Not your
doctor, not your teacher, not your government. "Credibility"??? Are
you KIDDING me? Is there ANYONE in the gaming industry that has NOT
lied/exagerated about features? release dates? hardware compatibility?
face it, the derekologists are just having their fun at the expense of
a human being who, worst case scenario, <insert favorite adjective
here> into buying a $40 game that was unplayable. If that is the
worst thing that anyopne has done to you, well kid, come out of the
bubble and smell the outside air, full of bugs and vermin.
there, I feel better now.
PS> when I upgrade my computer, I will definitively buy V2.0.
Bill Huffman
In article <344633a...@news.demon.co.uk>,>>Brad, you're one of very few people I know who can't run the game. Don't
>>believe me, go to the web site (www.bc3000ad.com) and read the responses on the
...snip...
>>If you need my help, you know where to find me but somehow I don't believe you
>>have the D patch. Sorry, but that's just me.
>
>Now, heres the rub. In my original post I stated how much I liked this
>game and how much I wanted it to work. I was civil and(with the
>possible exception of the line "running to stand still", which could
>have been taken as a dig, which it was'nt meant) pleasant.
>And yet you feel, you have to call me a liar, in a public newsgroup. I
>have never posted here before and I have never made any allusions on
>your character (how could I, we don't know each other) but,
>apparently, if I say the D Patch does'nt run on my machine, I am a
>liar.
>Well, what do you want to know Derek, that the lens flare effects are
>very good, culminating in total white-out when looking at the sun,
>that the earth map is very well rendered (I thought anyway) ,or
>perhaps you'd like a list of the files in the D Patch?
>bc3kbugs.txt 51,473
>bc3khelp.txt 9,990
>bc3kukd6.rtp 12,113,294
>bc3kver.txt 83,645
>readme.txt 8,576
>updateuk.bat 1,831
>patch.exe 46,024
>
>Of course, I suppose I could have just rushed off and got the patch
>just so I could put up that list, when I could'nt be bothered to get
>it to play the actual game which as I said I really did want to play
>(and indeed have been playing, exhaustively).
>I paid fifty english pounds for this game the day it was released, and
>I have given it all the time and effort I could spare.
>I'm not interested in sniping at peoples characters or apportioning
>blame, lifes too short. But Derek, I do not tell lies and I do not
>appreciate being called a liar here. I have seen many flame wars
>between you and other people and I have not taken a side, in fact, all
>I'm guilty of is giving you money.
>I find your attitude incredible, I'm a customer Derek.
>
>Anyhow, I would have bought the new version but I won't be now, and
>I'd just like to take this public opportunity to say Fuck you Derek.
>Just keep pissing in your own doorway.
>
>Cheers.
>
>Brad.
Please don't be too hard on Derek. The problem is that he has a different
set of values than most of the rest of us. Especially when it comes
to telling the truth. To Derek, the proven habitual liar, lying
is not bad. Getting caught lying is only bad when you can't lie your
way out of it. So, when he called you a liar he was just giving
you the opportunity to better explain yourself, at least within
his value system. It's all a matter of perspective and Derek's
perspective is that the world is this tangled web of lies that
he has so masterfully constructed.
Bill Huffman, PhD, dissertation "The Art of Web Detanging", from
(Sorry, too personal)
P.S. Derek, why not tell us your alma mater and collect your apology
and get rid of me?
Bryan Chow
In article <19971020195...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
Fthx <ft...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>[Derek Smart:]
>Also, this bogus bullshit about a librarian? Nice try.I don't know _what_
>criteria she's searching under but I can tell you one thing, it's published
>and it's listed.
Mr Smart - so was it or was it not published??
--
Bryan Chow - http://NSX.vtec.net
`The value of life can be measured by how many times your soul
has been deeply stirred.' - Soichiro Honda
Pedro Gomez
[snip]
Derek Smart wrote:
> >Concentrate your energies on making your next project playable (I'm
> >sure plans are underway to make it playable if possible) and charge
> >the current owners of BC3K at most $5 for the sequel. And just pray
> >no one slaps a class action suit against you.
>
> Again, it's not as easy as it sounds when you're Derek Smart.
>
> Your comments are appreciated. Thanks for your time.
Wooooooow! A tolerant Derek Smart??? I lose my net connection for
1 month and THIS is what happens
--
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/7210/
- A gallery Of Dark Tranquillity -
Derek Smart
On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:09:19 -0700, Josh Martin <jma...@netarrant.net> wrote:
>Jonathan Normington wrote:
>>
>> Cesar recently wrote:
>>
>> > Mr. Smart, if you are referring to Reb Ruster, I think you should
>> >check your agent database because he was never a detractor but
>> >somewhat of one of your supporters.
>>
>> Derek's definition of a "detractor" is far broader than you think.
>
>His definition of "the greatest game of all time" also seems to be far
>broader than I would think.
Have you played it?
Bill Huffman
In article <62c18f$2...@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
stephen j messer <st...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <344a8387....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,>Which explanation? There have been several.
>
>>Derek Smart, Ph.D. NOT
>
1.My current favorite is the Popeye defense. I am what I am ....
2.The "too personal" is also good. But, here's my drivers license number.
3.I have a secret name beginning K****** will provide laughs for years. But,
has been proven irrelevant.
4.My detractors will just find something else to flame me about.
This is false since Derek forgot about our apology and disappearance
after validation of the PhD. You can't really blame Derek for
forgetting about this since I'm sure he always considered it
irrelevant to the situation.