Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
nfq wrote:
all new computers have vista in them.
Then you're not buying your computer in the right place. You should at least be able to buy a computer without an OS and then set up whatever you choose. When I got my laptop, I could choose any version of Windows, or any version of GNU/Linux to be pre-set up for me. Hopefully there is such a nice shop near you.
Xp is also getting pretty old, so shouldn't it start to suck soon? and nothing will be compatible with it.
Maybe, but hopefully by the time XP becomes unusable, Vista or Windows 7 will be at a use-able stage of development. Or you could easily switch to GNU/Linux.
Why would i use a 5 year old OS when I can use vista? it would be like using win95 when there's win 2000. I don't know much about computers, but i've never understood what's so bad about vista.
No one is stopping you from using anything you want. If you like Vista, hey, don't let me or ayone else spoil it for you.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
nfq wrote:
I remember when XP first came out everyone said that it sucked, but now everyone says it's the best Windows.
That's because the've fixed it since it was released. (largely)
I wonder if people will say the same about Vista in the future when Windows 7 is released.
It seems to me like Windows 7 should be released in a too short amount of time for them to fix Vista in the meantime.
Just forget about Windows Vista or Windows 7. Use something else.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Ferret Warlord wrote:
Warp wrote:
Or maybe this is a silent admission by Microsoft that "yes, we screwed up a bit with Vista, so we will be fixing this mistake sooner than we really expected".
Kinda like the Xbox's 4-year lifespan!
* Ferret Warlord prepares to run
Or maybe Vista is Windows ME. Nobody uses it because it's a piece of garbage, and they'll get it right in the next version. (disclaimer: I have not used, and do not plan to ever use, Windows Vista)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
I honestly don't know why ANYONE would have ANY reason to try it. If you want to use Windows, there's Windows XP, which is pretty stable and actually works. If you want something else, well, there are plenty of choices out there. What's the point of purposely making your computer worse? It's not like Windows 7 is free in any sense, so the hacker motivation is not there. Windows 7 (and Vista as well, for that matter) is pointless, don't bother.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Coincidentally, I just got my microphone to work with Skype, so if you want me to say something in Icelandic (edit: or something in English with a genuine Icelandic accent), you could call me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
YES.
More specifically, I think it's a little overly complicated (it feels like Bisqwit had a lot of fun making it), but it's not about the "rating" anyway.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
I got 8 right first, then read the forum and got and , then after some more thinking I got everything except these:
I think I've seen the umbrella somewhere before, but I can't remember where.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
You can very easily jump from a block while also picking it up in the SNES version. I used to do it all the time on the actual console to save time. I never played the NES version so I don't know anything else. Is is completely identical to the SNES version? (other than the graphics and sound, obviously).
(edit: the below only applies if the SNES version is levellly (this should be a word) identical:)
Oh, and the game is VERY long. So long in fact, I think it's unlikely that the run will go under two hours. You just can't speed up the damn mice unfortunately, so I think most levels will consist of: set everything up, then fool around for several minutes until all the mice have obliviously walked into their own doom like the annoying vermin they are.
There are some levels that require walking back and forth to haul a bunch of boxes across the level one at a time, and some levels that require you to actually walk among the mice and direct them in real-time, but mostly just setup. I think. Do you plan on getting all the bonus items, or just kill all the mice and then get out? (you can do both most of the time, but some areas have just bonuses and no mice to exterminate).
Actually, I don't remember exactly how the later levels were, and I never got past the fourth uh... world? I think it's the fourth, anyway it's the one where everything is gooey and disgusting and I think it's also the one where you first have to deal with putting the mice into bottles, the password to it is "bartdude" or something like that. So it might get interesting, I'm not sure. Anyway, good luck! (I'll watch the WIP later and comment on that when I have time)
One thing that could make this run interesting is that by using the jump-pickup trick, if you have just two pick-up-able objects, you can reach any high place, or even take the mice with you if you can do it fast enough and bunch them all together. But I probably don't even have to tell you that.
Edit: It seems that my memory of the game was slightly off. Apparently you do need to get involved with the mice and micro-manage them around a bit. I liked when you put the box down just long enough for one mouse to walk on it, then removed it and put in in another place for another mouse before the previous mouse had even finished walking across it. Good stuff! Probably a lot of shortcuts will present themselves since the levels were not designed with this kind of superhuman speed and precision.
I still think the SNES version is superior, if only because of better sound quality, but oh well.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Baxter wrote:
If your food is gonna spoil if you hold off too long eating it, but you feel don't feel like eating it, but feel like eating something else, do you still eat it, somewhat against your will, or do you throw it away?
(Hmm, that sentence isn't very readable... but you probably get what I meant.)
It would depend on the situation. If the food was something I was totally sick of, then I would probably eat something else if it was available. But this situation doesn't come up for me very often.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
I was briefly on the Concrete Man board when the game was new. My time was around 1:35-ish, which at the time I thought was a pretty good time. But just as I predicted, the scoreboard was quickly filled with increasingly ridiculous times. Right now the best time for Concrete Man is 1:21:58 and the #10 is 1:23:61.
Also, have you looked at the "endless attack" boards? It's just stupid. I can just about manage 50 or so screens before I inevitably do something stupid and fall on some spikes (of which there are a LOT). With a lot of trial and error (learning the layouts of the level segments), some luck, and several hundred hours of free time, I could probably manage 200-300 screens, which would have gotten me close to the #10 spot when it was still fresh. Now the top score is an unbelievable 3067 screens and the #10 score is 1355 screens. Even if you don't make any mistakes, it would take you several HOURS get that far.
Edit: yay, 144 screens in endless attack! Then I got careless and jumped on some spikes.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
I don't support the death penalty is because really, the only reason anyone supports it is because of their feeling of needing some kind of revenge. I understand that, of course, and I do think some people simply do not deserve to live at all (child rapist-murderers, for example). But I think we as a society should be "above" such low human feelings as hatred and revenge. The death penalty is nothing other than murdering someone in revenge. Besides, if you do have the death penalty, you run the risk, however remote, of wrongly convicting innocents. If you put an innocent person in jail, there is at least the possibility of letting him out later, If you've already killed him, you can't do that.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Warp wrote:
I have a philosophical question:
What is happiness? How do you know if you are happy?
Happiness is a state of mind. You know if you are happy because then you're ... well, happy. And it doesn't depend on how much stuff you own or even how successful you are. If you simply enjoy existing, then you are happy.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
mikwuyma wrote:
why did you switch between Bop-Louie and Gil? It didn't look like there was much benefit to switching.
Because jumping on top of that boss boosts you to the top of the screen. Switching to Bop-Louie in the water makes him play the "drown" animation and sets his upwards-going speed at a fixed very slow speed. When he switches back to Gil he can fall back down immediately. So that's why he switches between the two.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
AKA wrote:
My main problem with the game is I felt the designers put too much focus on trying make the game hard by having lots of unforeseeable instant death traps. Basically, it takes a large amount of trial and error which requires knowing and guessing whats gonna happen in advance.
I agree, there are too many of those in the game. Like the things in Galaxy Man stage that clamp on you and push you forwards.
There is many sprites randomly flying around the screen, more than could probably be handled on SNES, never mind a NES game.
Hmm. Which stage was that on? I don't remember any extreme mayhem in the game.
You might say "Mega Man games have always been like that", I can assure you the NES counter parts were a much fairer challenge, there was never a need to cram every room full of instant death spikes. I don't mind them being in pits or on the ground, but I don't like them being on the ceilings or walls as it artificially inflates the difficulty of many jumps and rooms. Still, it will be appealing to certain people for nostalgic reasons.
To me, only a couple levels have too much spikes. Jewel Man stage is one, and the Wily-something that has an underwater part and breakable blocks. Yes. Too many spikes there. But other parts, I don't mind.
Now that the euphoria of playing a new Mega Man game has worn off, I can maybe actually comment on the game slightly objectively. The only significant complaint I have about the game are the magnetic lifts on Wily 3 (I think). Those are slow and awful! They bring the flow of the gameplay to a screeching and painful stop, twice! More often if you happen to die! They should have been removed and instead replaced with a moving lift that Megaman can stand (and jump) on.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Warp wrote:
(long post)
Great, you figured out that some people are just assholes.
It's very hard to make a video that criticizes something that has a lot of meaning for people without being at least a little condescending. The people making videos on YouTube are just regular people. They're not some highly trained masters of unbiased reporting. Some videos will be better than others, some will be dishonest, others respectful.
Have you seen the "banana proof" video (if not search:banana proof)? How can you possibly not just make fun of that? It's not even necessary, the clip works as a joke without any modification. Do you envision a serious discussion following the "banana proof" video where everyone respects each others' opinion? The "peanut butter proof" is similar but not as funny. My point is that in some cases there's really nothing to discuss, and you just want to make fun of the person. You can't expect a serious discussion about the divine-ness of bananas. Anyway, there are probably some legitimate discussions of religion somewhere, but I sure haven't found them. It's always the exact same arguments back and forth and it's been discussed a million times already. Both sides have all types of people and both sides *know* they're right.
So I very much understand why people (on both sides) get frustrated and start insulting the other person. There's often nothing else because both sides are immune to the others' arguments, because it's not a real discussion, it's just jerking off. But you can't just expect either side to just shut up. People actually care and they think they can convince the ones they're talking to. It's called a dialog.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
I'm pretty sure it would be like the Sonic runs, where the in-game time is the goal rather than real time. (In Sonic 3, if you do a level really fast, the bonus score delays the run more than if you had completed the level slower).
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Bisqwit wrote:
Blublu wrote:
and you automatically punch holes in their arguments without even thinking about it anymore
Since you didn't present an actual argument, I can't punch holes in it.
I occasionally discuss religion on the internet, but I try not to do it so much anymore. I still always do though, I just can't resist. But really, it's always just the same thing back and forth over and over again for all eternity. I've heard all the religious arguments before, and you're probably also heard all the atheist arguments before. None have convinced you, and also nothing has convinced me yet. Because to me, the religious arguments all have a rational explanation that doesn't invoke the supernatural, so why invoke the supernatural at all? But now I'm discussing religion again, so I better try and stop.
I find that so unaesthetic to watch. Simply because the ingame timer does'nt increment during pauses, which means constant weapon switching is encouraged. We could be left with a situation in the future where a TAS is faster in real time but some of the ingame WR's are faster.
No way. Even if the non-TAS WR is absolutely frame-perfect in-game, a TAS would also be frame-perfect on the weapon-switch meaning the real-time would always be faster, but in-game time would always be at least equal or faster.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Warp wrote:
Basically they are absolutely and completely convinced of their atheistic views, and there's absolutely nothing you can do to make them listen to anything else. They might pretend to listen in a friendly and open way, but the underlying reason is always the same: They listen to your responses only to try to find flaws and counter-arguments to them, not because they are honestly interested in what you have to say nor open to alternative ideas.
Maybe it's because every argument has been refuted or nullified many times, and the current arguments are just variations on the old ones. It gets annoying after a time, you know. When you hear the same things over and over again, and you automatically punch holes in their arguments without even thinking about it anymore, it's hard to really listen. But here are things that would convince me, and every other thinking atheist in the world. Here's a nice video of youtube about what those things are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rqUsC2KsiI
I would like to see a similar video about what would convince a religious person that they are wrong. Such a video will probably never get made, though. Warp, what you said is really the opposite of what's true.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Derakon wrote:
Xkeeper: what's a practical, efficient, moral, and effective way to solve world hunger?
;)
I know I'm not XKeeper, but I'll answer anyway.
Step 1. Education for everyone and get some sort of infrastructure going there. Teach them to make stuff like food and houses.
Step 2. Trade with them stuff so they get profit or other stuff they need. They get more stuff and become stronger.
Step 3. Eventually create a unified global trading infrastructure system thing.
So, upgrade fourth-world countries to at least third world or whatever the "well you're poor but at least you have something to eat" stage is. Whatever the hell that even means. This would also be an important step towards finally establishing world peace.
and 
, then after some more thinking I got everything except these:
I think I've seen the umbrella somewhere before, but I can't remember where.