Posts for moozooh


Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I'm not sure disproving the Bible has ever been scientific to begin with. Replace "Bible" with "Santa Claus" and it'll become more obvious. Debates such as this start when people take things more seriously than they should. As Warp has repeatedly pointed out, the Bible doesn't need to be taken literally. You can be a faithful Christian and I'm sure you'll go to Heaven even if you don't believe the Earth is 6000 years old.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Well, I guess you can say it's loosely based on atheism, as you can't observe and measure gods, let alone test them. Actually, scratch that, it's atheism that is based on the scientific paradigm.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Of course it does matter, because that way we can have some kind of a sentient entity to worship. Worshipping natural processes is animism, right?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I find it deeply insulting nobody has challenged my excellent claim.
Tub wrote:
If I find this species A right next to a species B, chances are both creatures existed during the same age.
I think I've found a great way to troll future generations of geologists: take a few modern-day items, take some dead people, visit an excavation that exposes items from another era, and bury the dead with the modern-day items. Repeat throughout the world. A few hundred years from now, future geologists will find ancient remains right next to early 2000s' ones and won't be able to solve this conundrum!
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
God just tucked some of the animals He created under the carpet layers of soil and rock, and arranged them into patterns as He saw fit. There. (I think I'm getting the hang of this now...)
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
IronSlayer wrote:
I don't see how the hell it makes any difference to a consumer, or annoys him or her in any manner. The original game is still around. The original developer makes some extra money. If you don't like the new game for whatever reason, don't fucking buy it. A win/win situation, no?
No, the idea is not charging money for something that has established itself to be free, selling it as the official, improved (which it arguably isn't) version. A commercial project is fine, too, but make it something new. Lex has pointed out one negative effect of this situation, I have cited another. It's not catastrophic or anything, but it's not a win/win situation. Most certainly because nothing new is being done, and we're once again left with something old and well-known sold to us under the guise of an improvement, making use of our nostalgia and desire to support the author. I'm willing to bet no-one who supports that motif has ever considered the possibility of sending something as simple as a $10 check to Pixel, or a $10 gift, before CS+ came out—let alone actually do it—now don't fool yourself into thinking he will receive all of the $10 if you spend them on a product several parties have been involved with.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Yeah, I don't really see how this is worth discussing. The Bible is full of "everything goes as planned" and "everything is intended this way", and speculating on the point of its authors knowing way less about how things work than we do now is pointless because the defense is absolute. How do you argue against the absolute defense? You don't.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Kuwaga wrote:
If you want to maximize annual profits, you can't add the extra finnishing touches to leave everybody in amazement and build a fan base that'll buy even more games in the future. You have to milk the existing fan base here and now instead. They're only being reasonable, I don't blame them at all.
That seems pretty contradictory to me. Indeed, the employed strategy is very short-sighted, even more so considering the blunders that soiled the ports' reputation as software products. But I don't think this is reasonable. I think what Valve did when they hired Narbacular Drop devs was reasonable: they took people who had a know-how (in our case that would be Pixel) and made a really damn awesome new game in collaboration. "Huge success" is not an understatement. In fact, Nifflas is a proficient developer by himself — he can create something new. We basically have two proficient indie developers who have already made names for themselves. If Nicalis has enough money to remake all assets under (some) supervision from Pixel, surely they could have hired Pixel himself and made something new together. I don't get this shit.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
If the initiative was to raise money for Pixel, or to hire him as a developer so that he wouldn't need his main job, it could have been a different story, but there's this middleman who wants their share of the pie without contributing anything of worth. In any case I'm not ordering people around; I vote with my wallet, and the vote is 'no'. Unfortunately, people who honestly believe they're supporting Pixel by buying Nicalis's endless rehashes only pave way for more rehashes. Because the model itself is unproductive and made for a different purpose altogether. Which is, again, profiting from an established name. Which is the current trend for pretty much anything, because making new stuff that is good, surprisingly, takes effort. So why make that effort when you already have the work cut out for you? Some people don't seem to understand the importance of cultural artifacts. When something, no matter if it's free or commercial by nature, crosses a certain threshold of popularity and public acclaim, it becomes an item of culture, and object of importance that starts living a life of its own, regardless of the author's wishes, or yours for that matter. We saw this when the fanbase became making mods and free conversions of the original CS to different systems, fully preserving what made it unique, its identity. It went much farther than Pixel intended, and it's a good thing. A good example from the commercial world would be Star Wars. It became so big and universally loved it didn't need change. Lucas didn't understand that either, and started introducing changes that were not only minor and cosmetic—something that is generally welcome, even if not expressly required—but also contentious, ones that break the established flow, implant personality traits that weren't there, and just don't make any sense (like putting Hayden Christensen at the end of RotJ, even though Luke's character would never recognize his father in that creepy looking young fellow). Well, at least Spielberg has woken up somewhat. In other words, when you're taking an established work and start rehashing it for money, marketing it as new and improved, you're spreading it thin; you're destroying parts that made it a unique cultural artifact, instead making it one with rest of the cookie-cutter crap. What makes it worse, that way you're hampering or even preventing further dissemination. With regards to "it's my property, I do what I want" comment, I recommend watching this video. It should become obvious that giving fans what they want is more important and profitable than giving fans what you want to give them.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Derakon wrote:
So, once someone makes a free game, they're never allowed to charge for any future works again.
No, I suggest reading my post instead of reading... whatever made you say that. Specifically this:
moozooh wrote:
I just very much dislike when a person or a company [...] sees a popular free product and says, "hey, we SO can monetize this! This is a goldmine!" And then they continue to cash in the hell out of it, adding ridiculous "improvements", often making the game worse in the progress.
Cave Story+ is a rehash made for quick and dirty buck, as the audience is already there, you need little to no advertising, and most obviously you need not try to make something new and awesome like the original CS was. It's exploiting the popular name to make money. And if you're still not getting what I said, look at this. It's a yet another rehash of Cave Story, this time robbing it of its unique look and sound completely, but adding another arrangement of the soundtrack and the ever-awesome gimmick that is 3D. I'm sure you would understand it better if Valve, instead of hiring the devs of Narbacular Drop to make Portal, just bought the rights to the game and started releasing countless rehashes of Narbacular Drop running on Source engine. Thankfully Valve is a company that makes money by making sense.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I just very much dislike when a person or a company, especially one that hasn't made anything noteworthy by itself, sees a popular free product and says, "hey, we SO can monetize this! This is a goldmine!" And then they continue to cash in the hell out of it, adding ridiculous "improvements", often making the game worse in the progress. Support or not, the concept itself is sickening, and I'm not going to endorse it, ever. Besides, as far as I understand, Pixel doesn't have a percentage share of CS+'s sales, but a fixed license fee. It's not the first time, either. Notice how the porting/publishing parties involved haven't had a single in-house developed title. I'm not even sure Kenta Cho received anything from them, but, I guess, this isn't the best place to discuss it anyway...
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I already have SMB and Jamestown as well; as far as I'm concerned they're the only two games worth paying for on the list (YMMV). Cave Story+ is a child of a concept that generally pisses me off to a considerable extent, so I won't buy that one on principle.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I'm sure it can be done with any sufficiently fast projectile (most of them accelerate indefinitely) if conditions are right, but I can't remember offhand if there's a single door behind such an obstacle that opens slow enough the player actually has to wait for it.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I see you're very much determined to squish every last frame out of this game. :P
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
DarkKobold wrote:
x2poet?
Good point; I guess I'll eat only a half of my hat if it goes to x2poet.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Well, thankfully, we're not going to deal with I/O bottlenecks at the rates we're using. On the other hand, I'm honestly surprised it's --keyint, and not --b-pyramid or --bframes 16, or anything else like that, slowing down playback on Flygon's machine. </drunkposting>
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
sgrunt wrote:
in fact, fewer key frames would, in principle, speed up playback
What would be behind that principle? Keyframes should require less processing power—in principle!—because they are complete images that don't require information from other frames. An all-keyframe stream is compatible with any device, while most of them pose limitations on the amount of consecutive b-frames, as those are the most computationally intensive.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
No seriously, if this guy is not the TASer of the Year, I'll eat my hat.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Getting 10 million in Crimsonland's Survival mode: Link to video
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
funnyhair wrote:
Moozah
D'oh!
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
funnyhair wrote:
If you native language is not english, and you are giving it your best shot, I do not care. If you butcher the english language, and its your native tongue, I do care.
:)
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
What upsets me is when people keep making the same mistake that renders the meaning of their words ambiguous, and when you try to point their attention to it, they take a defensive stance, "yeah yeah, nobody is perfect, sue me". And then they continue making that mistake.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Voted meh. I'm not opposed to this run being published, but of all the 55-something seconds only one was actually notable, imo.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
YoungJ1997lol wrote:
yes, child.
YoungJ1997lol wrote:
sorry, rookie.
If "young" and "1997" in your name are any indication of your age, I'm not sure where that condescending tone is coming from. :P
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
fsvgm777 wrote:
So close to a 1CC... By the way, I use some bombs, especially during later stages.
You should definitely bomb more. MoF gives you plenty of power items, quite enough to bomb through everything that is hard.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.