The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'.
Is now available!!!! I've heard about a pirate version being circulated around. Ages before its release. And unlike the pirate version of Halflife 2, it apparently works quite well.
I'll post a review if I get my grubby mits on a copy.
I'll post a review if I get my grubby mits on a copy.
Page:
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Errm, yes. That's why I'm trying to draw it to a close.
Yeah, but you've been trying that for a few days now.
By the way, anyone know why my windows refused to boot to my desktop just now until I'd control alt deleted something called an idle system process?
> Errm, yes. That's why I'm trying to draw it to a close.
Yeah, but you've been trying that for a few days now.
By the way, anyone know why my windows refused to boot to my desktop just now until I'd control alt deleted something called an idle system process?
Yeah, but you smell.
*sows seeds of discontent*
*sows seeds of discontent*
Heh, like you can talk IB. ;)
*dangles carrot*
Would it not be quicker to just leave it alone, or can you not concede defeat ;)
Errm, yes. That's why I'm trying to draw it to a close.
Good God, Hobbo, this is going on longer than our pointless rantings.
Have you nothing better to do?
Have you nothing better to do?
Not even going to bother giving that one a proper reply.
You've simply dug around the matter again, while managing to regurgitate everything you've already said at the same time. I enjoy having a proper argument, but not when the facile and puerile logic used by the offending party is less reasonable than the WOMD government argument.
A perfect example being your phrase 'I don't claim to be an expert based on very limited experience, but I know enough to spot a troll when I see one and you fit the bill nicely'.
If you think your hazy interpretation of the character of someone you have never met gives you the better insight, then so be it. Carry on thinking what you want to think, because to be honest I couldn't give a monkeys what you think if you are genuinely as dumb as your posts make out.
*Waits for inevitable post containg the words: priceless, rant, pride rubbish, God, avoid, ridiculous, UT 2003, Boohoooohoooohooooo!!*
You've simply dug around the matter again, while managing to regurgitate everything you've already said at the same time. I enjoy having a proper argument, but not when the facile and puerile logic used by the offending party is less reasonable than the WOMD government argument.
A perfect example being your phrase 'I don't claim to be an expert based on very limited experience, but I know enough to spot a troll when I see one and you fit the bill nicely'.
If you think your hazy interpretation of the character of someone you have never met gives you the better insight, then so be it. Carry on thinking what you want to think, because to be honest I couldn't give a monkeys what you think if you are genuinely as dumb as your posts make out.
*Waits for inevitable post containg the words: priceless, rant, pride rubbish, God, avoid, ridiculous, UT 2003, Boohoooohoooohooooo!!*
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Rather than go to all that length to explain to me how right you are,
> if truth be told, it was simply different interpretations of the same
> word by us. We are both right, and yet both wrong.
Oh my god - well done, nice u-turn there. You're finally seeing the issue here then.
> Actually as you will have known from your Half Life mod, it is
> remarkably similar. Some basic mods just utilise the same tools and
> graphic sets, but the more complex mods that create a diametrically
> opposed dynamic require a whole new creation process. Making a mod
> is extremely similar to making a game, in fact certain famed mod
> makers have been hired to create games by impressed publishers.
> Having made a Half Life mod, you must surely be aware of that. Your
> ignorance is frankly painful.
Ermmm... and it's relevant how? Obviously modding is a recognised first step on the ladder, but comparing making a few levels for game X when you've already got a working engine (plus suite of dev tools) and aren't actually adding any SIGNIFICANT (put that in capitals just so you don't think I'm using it all subtle again) content is a world away from what happens in the real world. Oh, and you don't have publishers to keep happy, a marketing department to appease or a budget to work within.
> You are once again narrowing things down. Game developers come in
> all different shapes and sizes, so to take just one as an example is
> an exercise in futility, and displays great ignorance.
*bangs head on desk*
But it is the situation this whole ream of junk spaws from. What's the obsession with talking about this in absolutely no context? Seemingly it is simply because when we take this all in the context we started in what I'm saying makes sense.
> You think that cohesion comes about by running in and letting the
> code monkeys tweak where and whatever they want?
>
> If you cannot see how illogical that assumption is then I truly pity
> you.
Ahem. Pardon? You're now plunging into the totally ridiculious. Game budgets now stretch into, what, a couple of million? Fair estimate. You think that's run by reacting to the coders or by an overarching plan of which they are the lowest of low? You think walking into any publishing office in the country without a detailed marketing plan will get you anywhere? No, and no. It's the most important bit to get right now, hence it is also the bit that is done first and everything else is dictated by. Granted, not for every single development ever, but for the majority who can't even fund hiring anyone before they've got a publisher it is.
> If you want to know the real reason I jumped in, it was to rescue
> Bob_the_Moose from an inaccurate and unjustified attack from you.
Rubbish. You've consistantly struggled to actually keep on the issue here - note the constant problems with putting things in context and actually responding to anything I've said versus sweeping generalisations and neat reversals.
Lets remember how this started, you went off on one saying how every game gets into coding at an early stage. I pointed out I never actually said anything of the sort, just that playable code wouldn't come about until late in the project.
You then go off on one (again) about how they'll need to be analysing code as they go. I explained that's what I'd meant by tech demos in the original post, though being a commonly used term to refer to such testing you either i) chose to ignore, b) don't actually read my posts, or c) don't actually have a clue. I then explained what I meant by playable code.
Getting back into your stride, you have a rant about how playable code isn't necessarily fun. I reminded you playable is a relative term, hence my definition and the differing definitions between the two. You note that's fair enough.
Throught you've cited you're vast experience of a uni project and an UT 2003 project you're starting soon. Suddenly the UT 2003 project lost importance when I mentioned that, like most internet geeks, I've messed about with Half-Life mods and done a little coding to supplement years and years of messing with computers and reading around the subject.
Like I've said already, this isn't an issue of pride, this is an issue of me spectaularily falling for your bait. Unlike yourself, I don't claim to be an expert based on very limited experience, but I know enough to spot a troll when I see one and you fit the bill nicely.
> Rather than go to all that length to explain to me how right you are,
> if truth be told, it was simply different interpretations of the same
> word by us. We are both right, and yet both wrong.
Oh my god - well done, nice u-turn there. You're finally seeing the issue here then.
> Actually as you will have known from your Half Life mod, it is
> remarkably similar. Some basic mods just utilise the same tools and
> graphic sets, but the more complex mods that create a diametrically
> opposed dynamic require a whole new creation process. Making a mod
> is extremely similar to making a game, in fact certain famed mod
> makers have been hired to create games by impressed publishers.
> Having made a Half Life mod, you must surely be aware of that. Your
> ignorance is frankly painful.
Ermmm... and it's relevant how? Obviously modding is a recognised first step on the ladder, but comparing making a few levels for game X when you've already got a working engine (plus suite of dev tools) and aren't actually adding any SIGNIFICANT (put that in capitals just so you don't think I'm using it all subtle again) content is a world away from what happens in the real world. Oh, and you don't have publishers to keep happy, a marketing department to appease or a budget to work within.
> You are once again narrowing things down. Game developers come in
> all different shapes and sizes, so to take just one as an example is
> an exercise in futility, and displays great ignorance.
*bangs head on desk*
But it is the situation this whole ream of junk spaws from. What's the obsession with talking about this in absolutely no context? Seemingly it is simply because when we take this all in the context we started in what I'm saying makes sense.
> You think that cohesion comes about by running in and letting the
> code monkeys tweak where and whatever they want?
>
> If you cannot see how illogical that assumption is then I truly pity
> you.
Ahem. Pardon? You're now plunging into the totally ridiculious. Game budgets now stretch into, what, a couple of million? Fair estimate. You think that's run by reacting to the coders or by an overarching plan of which they are the lowest of low? You think walking into any publishing office in the country without a detailed marketing plan will get you anywhere? No, and no. It's the most important bit to get right now, hence it is also the bit that is done first and everything else is dictated by. Granted, not for every single development ever, but for the majority who can't even fund hiring anyone before they've got a publisher it is.
> If you want to know the real reason I jumped in, it was to rescue
> Bob_the_Moose from an inaccurate and unjustified attack from you.
Rubbish. You've consistantly struggled to actually keep on the issue here - note the constant problems with putting things in context and actually responding to anything I've said versus sweeping generalisations and neat reversals.
Lets remember how this started, you went off on one saying how every game gets into coding at an early stage. I pointed out I never actually said anything of the sort, just that playable code wouldn't come about until late in the project.
You then go off on one (again) about how they'll need to be analysing code as they go. I explained that's what I'd meant by tech demos in the original post, though being a commonly used term to refer to such testing you either i) chose to ignore, b) don't actually read my posts, or c) don't actually have a clue. I then explained what I meant by playable code.
Getting back into your stride, you have a rant about how playable code isn't necessarily fun. I reminded you playable is a relative term, hence my definition and the differing definitions between the two. You note that's fair enough.
Throught you've cited you're vast experience of a uni project and an UT 2003 project you're starting soon. Suddenly the UT 2003 project lost importance when I mentioned that, like most internet geeks, I've messed about with Half-Life mods and done a little coding to supplement years and years of messing with computers and reading around the subject.
Like I've said already, this isn't an issue of pride, this is an issue of me spectaularily falling for your bait. Unlike yourself, I don't claim to be an expert based on very limited experience, but I know enough to spot a troll when I see one and you fit the bill nicely.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> If you want to know the real reason I jumped in, it was to rescue
> Bob_the_Moose from an inaccurate and unjustified attack from you. I
> don't blow my own trumpet, I simply used my experience as evidence
> against you, as what you were saying was complete toss.
Thanks, much appreciated :D
> If you want to know the real reason I jumped in, it was to rescue
> Bob_the_Moose from an inaccurate and unjustified attack from you. I
> don't blow my own trumpet, I simply used my experience as evidence
> against you, as what you were saying was complete toss.
Thanks, much appreciated :D
Page: