And lo on Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:46:52 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>> Just annoying, repetitive and boring. Hey look it's a Strider, oo and  
>> another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and  
>> another, and another, and oh wait we're done. Nope silly me here's  
>> another Strider, and another, and another, and another, and another.  
>> Gee wasn't that fun?
>
> More fun than that battle in EP1 that takes place in a dark room waiting  
> for the lift to arrive.

I was more annoyed by the Mr Benn approach - As if by magic the Head-crab  
zombies appeared. Then again the scripted events in HL2 are getting tired  
especially the second time around - ran around as much as like with no  
enemies until you step in the magic area/pull the lever at which point you  
get a Mr Benn.

> [Honestly, no matter how many zombies I killed, there always seemed to  
> be more of them... Not to mention that killing things with a crowbar  
> isn't easy. But hey, if you have no ammo left, what else can you do?]

Hmm shotgun for the speedy little sods, grav-gun plus HE barrels (minding  
you don't hit Alyx) for the others. Don't head for the lift until it's  
down, then run for it; the speedy ones will get to you anyway and there  
seems to be more slow-walkers closer to the lift.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

>> [Honestly, no matter how many zombies I killed, there always seemed to 
>> be more of them... Not to mention that killing things with a crowbar 
>> isn't easy. But hey, if you have no ammo left, what else can you do?]
> 
> Hmm shotgun for the speedy little sods, grav-gun plus HE barrels 
> (minding you don't hit Alyx) for the others. Don't head for the lift 
> until it's down, then run for it; the speedy ones will get to you anyway 
> and there seems to be more slow-walkers closer to the lift.

I still don't "get" how you can kill anything with a gravity gun. 
[Except yourself, that is.]

Seriously. You point it at a gas cylinder and it picks up a tiny pebble 
6 feet to the left of the gas cylinder. FTW? It's just so *hopelessly* 
inaccurate. It takes 10 minutes to do anything useful with it - far too 
slow to be of use turing a tense battle scene.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:27:11 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

>>> [Honestly, no matter how many zombies I killed, there always seemed to  
>>> be more of them... Not to mention that killing things with a crowbar  
>>> isn't easy. But hey, if you have no ammo left, what else can you do?]
>>  Hmm shotgun for the speedy little sods, grav-gun plus HE barrels  
>> (minding you don't hit Alyx) for the others. Don't head for the lift  
>> until it's down, then run for it; the speedy ones will get to you  
>> anyway and there seems to be more slow-walkers closer to the lift.
>
> I still don't "get" how you can kill anything with a gravity gun.  
> [Except yourself, that is.]
>
> Seriously. You point it at a gas cylinder and it picks up a tiny pebble  
> 6 feet to the left of the gas cylinder. FTW? It's just so *hopelessly*  
> inaccurate. It takes 10 minutes to do anything useful with it - far too  
> slow to be of use turing a tense battle scene.

Again I'm on a PS3 so the aiming's tweaked, but yeah it's still a bit too  
precise and it's damned annoying that you've just picked up that splinter  
of wood and not the buzzsaw blade right next to/beneath it; some sort of  
priority system needs to be put in there.

It's also fun to kill the head-crabs with if you want to save ammo don't  
want to use the crowbar; takes a couple of hits, bt at least it's a range  
weapon.

For a device that's supposed to be used in handling hazardous materials  
I've also found it amusing that a) it's difficult to manipulate an object  
you're holding i.e. rotate it; and b) that for any object of around  
briefcase size it obscures your forward vision.

That was the other annoying thing about the pathetically fragile bombs in  
Ep2 pick one up and watch the Strider disappear. 'Aim at the Strider',  
'What Strider? All I can see is this bloody bomb in front of my face'.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:

>> Seriously. You point it at a gas cylinder and it picks up a tiny 
>> pebble 6 feet to the left of the gas cylinder. FTW? It's just so 
>> *hopelessly* inaccurate. It takes 10 minutes to do anything useful 
>> with it - far too slow to be of use turing a tense battle scene.
> 
> Again I'm on a PS3 so the aiming's tweaked,

1. There exists a PS3?

2. You own one?

3. EP2 is available for something other than PC?

4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??

> but yeah it's still a bit 
> too precise and it's damned annoying that you've just picked up that 
> splinter of wood and not the buzzsaw blade right next to/beneath it; 
> some sort of priority system needs to be put in there.

Like I said, it tends to pick up things I'm not even remotely pointing 
at. Point it directly at the huge boulder and it picks up something 
several feet to one side or another. Hmm.

> It's also fun to kill the head-crabs with if you want to save ammo don't 
> want to use the crowbar; takes a couple of hits, bt at least it's a 
> range weapon.

Yeah, but you can *never* find anything to throw when you actually want 
to use the gravity gun. Only when you're *not* trying to use it. That's 
why it's useless in any kind of battle. You can never find ammo in time, 
it takes 12 attempts to pick up the ammo, now you can't see where you're 
aiming... oh, NM, you're already dead.

> For a device that's supposed to be used in handling hazardous materials 
> I've also found it amusing that a) it's difficult to manipulate an 
> object you're holding i.e. rotate it; and b) that for any object of 
> around briefcase size it obscures your forward vision.

It does, however, reset the fuse on grenades. Note disable it, just 
reset it at the moment you pick it up. WTF?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:49:02 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
  

spake, saying:

> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>>> Seriously. You point it at a gas cylinder and it picks up a tiny  

>>> pebble 6 feet to the left of the gas cylinder. FTW? It's just so  

>>> *hopelessly* inaccurate. It takes 10 minutes to do anything useful  

>>> with it - far too slow to be of use turing a tense battle scene.
>>  Again I'm on a PS3 so the aiming's tweaked,
>
> 1. There exists a PS3?

Yes.

> 2. You own one?

Yes.

> 3. EP2 is available for something other than PC?

Even availble for the Xbox360. Not the Wii though (yet).

> 4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??

Assuming you're vaguely serious I've got 14 buttons plus two analogue  

joysticks, that's a standard pad. Let's see if I can recall my setup Lef
t  

analogue = WASD, right analogue stick = mouse. The 4-way directional
 D-pad  

selects weapons. Of the shoulder triggers I've got R1 (right top) as fir
e  

primary, R2 secondary, L1 jump, L2 crouch. Triangle is torch on/off,  

circle is grav-gun toggle, X is use, and square is reload.

>> but yeah it's still a bit too precise and it's damned annoying that  

>> you've just picked up that splinter of wood and not the buzzsaw blade
  

>> right next to/beneath it; some sort of priority system needs to be pu
t  

>> in there.
>
> Like I said, it tends to pick up things I'm not even remotely pointing
  

> at. Point it directly at the huge boulder and it picks up something  

> several feet to one side or another. Hmm.

I second that hmm, I've not had it that bad.

>> It's also fun to kill the head-crabs with if you want to save ammo  

>> don't want to use the crowbar; takes a couple of hits, bt at least it
's  

>> a range weapon.
>
> Yeah, but you can *never* find anything to throw when you actually wan
t  

> to use the gravity gun. Only when you're *not* trying to use it. That'
s  

> why it's useless in any kind of battle. You can never find ammo in tim
e,  

> it takes 12 attempts to pick up the ammo, now you can't see where you'
re  

> aiming... oh, NM, you're already dead.

The fixed POV is damn annoying with the gun, make the pick-up  

semi-transparent to simulate looking around the thing. I'm so surprised 
 

this got past the beta with no complaints.

>> For a device that's supposed to be used in handling hazardous materia
ls  

>> I've also found it amusing that a) it's difficult to manipulate an  

>> object you're holding i.e. rotate it; and b) that for any object of  

>> around briefcase size it obscures your forward vision.
>
> It does, however, reset the fuse on grenades. Note disable it, just  

> reset it at the moment you pick it up. WTF?

Never noticed, I always assumed it wouldn't so I'd just run away from it
  

rather then switch and grab it or more often the loose board is happened
  

to passing at the time. I love the way that the Dog catch game is suppos
ed  

to teach you to catch thrown grenades except the objects thrown by Dog a
re  

about four times larger and don't explode.

-- 

Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

>> 1. There exists a PS3?
> 
> Yes.

I'd heard there was a PS2 out, but PS3 is news...

>> 3. EP2 is available for something other than PC?
> 
> Even availble for the Xbox360. Not the Wii though (yet).

Er, isn't the Xbox made by Micro$oft?

>> 4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??
> 
> Assuming you're vaguely serious I've got 14 buttons plus two analogue 
> joysticks, that's a standard pad.

Oh, OK. I've only seen a PS1. [Isn't that the one with the circle, 
square and triangle? Makes me feel like it should be a kids' toy...]

>> Yeah, but you can *never* find anything to throw when you actually 
>> want to use the gravity gun. Only when you're *not* trying to use it. 
>> That's why it's useless in any kind of battle. You can never find ammo 
>> in time, it takes 12 attempts to pick up the ammo, now you can't see 
>> where you're aiming... oh, NM, you're already dead.
> 
> The fixed POV is damn annoying with the gun, make the pick-up 
> semi-transparent to simulate looking around the thing. I'm so surprised 
> this got past the beta with no complaints.

All the weapons seem to have some kind of "drawback" to them. E.g., the 
crossbow is leathal and has a cool sniper scope (WTF?), but reloads 
painfully slowly and you aim extremely slowly while scoped. The SMG 
fires a continuous stream of death - but it's wildly inaccurate and 
delivers approximately 3% per damange per hit. And so on. And the 
gravity gun is an instant kill if you ever hit anything - but it's not 
possible to hit anything.

>> It does, however, reset the fuse on grenades. Note disable it, just 
>> reset it at the moment you pick it up. WTF?
> 
> Never noticed, I always assumed it wouldn't so I'd just run away from it 
> rather then switch and grab it or more often the loose board is happened 
> to passing at the time.

I once pluged keepy-uppy with the gravity gun and a grenade. If you pick 
up the grenade, drop it, pick it up, drop it, pick it up... each time 
you pick it up the fuse resets to 4 seconds. Just so long as you do it 
quickly enough, you can keep it from exploding indefinitely.

> I love the way that the Dog catch game is 
> supposed to teach you to catch thrown grenades except the objects thrown 
> by Dog are about four times larger and don't explode.

...you can catch thrown grenades??

I know you can pick them up off the floor, but mid-air? Hmm, I'll have 
to try that some day...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:20:42 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

>>> 1. There exists a PS3?
>>  Yes.
>
> I'd heard there was a PS2 out, but PS3 is news...

In the EU since Nov 2006.

>>> 3. EP2 is available for something other than PC?
>>  Even availble for the Xbox360. Not the Wii though (yet).
>
> Er, isn't the Xbox made by Micro$oft?

Yep both the Xbox and Xbox360 are made by the Devil's minions.

>>> 4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??
>>  Assuming you're vaguely serious I've got 14 buttons plus two analogue  
>> joysticks, that's a standard pad.
>
> Oh, OK. I've only seen a PS1. [Isn't that the one with the circle,  
> square and triangle?

and X, it's a standard PS joypad they've all had the same layout. The  
current rumbleless PS3 ones are a little lighter, but don't feel plastic-y

> Makes me feel like it should be a kids' toy...]

http://gameplanets.blogspot.com/2007/11/new-cod4-ps3-screenshots.html yup  
kiddie-stuff

>>> Yeah, but you can *never* find anything to throw when you actually  
>>> want to use the gravity gun. Only when you're *not* trying to use it.  
>>> That's why it's useless in any kind of battle. You can never find ammo  
>>> in time, it takes 12 attempts to pick up the ammo, now you can't see  
>>> where you're aiming... oh, NM, you're already dead.
>>  The fixed POV is damn annoying with the gun, make the pick-up  
>> semi-transparent to simulate looking around the thing. I'm so surprised  
>> this got past the beta with no complaints.
>
> All the weapons seem to have some kind of "drawback" to them. E.g., the  
> crossbow is leathal and has a cool sniper scope (WTF?), but reloads  
> painfully slowly and you aim extremely slowly while scoped. The SMG  
> fires a continuous stream of death - but it's wildly inaccurate and  
> delivers approximately 3% per damange per hit. And so on. And the  
> gravity gun is an instant kill if you ever hit anything - but it's not  
> possible to hit anything.

I enjoy combining it with the saw blades and slicing the zombies, takes a  
few more hits for those carrier zombies.

>>> It does, however, reset the fuse on grenades. Note disable it, just  
>>> reset it at the moment you pick it up. WTF?
>>  Never noticed, I always assumed it wouldn't so I'd just run away from  
>> it rather then switch and grab it or more often the loose board is  
>> happened to passing at the time.
>
> I once pluged keepy-uppy with the gravity gun and a grenade. If you pick  
> up the grenade, drop it, pick it up, drop it, pick it up... each time  
> you pick it up the fuse resets to 4 seconds. Just so long as you do it  
> quickly enough, you can keep it from exploding indefinitely.

Let's see if that's the same for the PS3.

>> I love the way that the Dog catch game is supposed to teach you to  
>> catch thrown grenades except the objects thrown by Dog are about four  
>> times larger and don't explode.
>
> ...you can catch thrown grenades??
>
> I know you can pick them up off the floor, but mid-air? Hmm, I'll have  
> to try that some day...

I've done it occasionally when I've had the grav-gun out and empty and  
spotted it in time, poinked it back where it came from and watched the  
combine go boom.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> > 4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??

> Assuming you're vaguely serious I've got 14 buttons plus two analogue  
> joysticks, that's a standard pad.

  FPS games cannot be played with a game controller. It's like trying to
play with the keyboard only (no, the analog joysticks don't make it any
easier, they actually make it harder). It's a royal pain in the ass.

http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/consolefps.html

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:
> standing', 'Yeah run around him and press that concealed switch to turn 
> off the invincibilty shield', 'How the hell I was I supposed to know that?'

Yeah, like in Half-Life, where some of the bosses can't be damaged 
except at certain times, and there's no indication of that.

At least in Undying, it's part of the story that the bosses are 
invulnerable to certain things. You could almost deduce what you needed 
to do.


-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> [Now Benny has one of those 1337 game keyboard with 40+ extra keys that 
> are programmable on a per-game basis to do whatever you want. Hmm...]

The one I liked was the one where the keys were (I think) RF-driven, and 
just post-it stickied to the keyboard wherever you wanted them, so you 
could space them exactly how you wanted.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> [Honestly, no matter how many zombies I killed, there always seemed to 
> be more of them... 

Isn't that kind of the point of zombies? :-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

In article <47a533e4$1@news.povray.org>, Sabrina Kilian <"ykgp at 
vtSPAM.edu"> says...
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> > In article <47a4c525$1@news.povray.org>, Sabrina Kilian <"ykgp at 
> > vtSPAM.edu"> says...
> >> Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> >>>>> I *still* haven't completed HL2:EP2 yet because it's too hard
> >>>>   It's not that hard. Destroy the hunters, then the strider, save.
> >>>> Go to the next strider and repeat.
> >>> It's the "destroy the hunters" part that I can't pull off. They're
> >>> almost indestructible. I mean, I managed to kill one of them, but now
 I
> >>> have almost no ammo left at all. I used all of it to kill just one hu
nter!
> >>>
> >> After beating it, I learned that hunters have a vulnerability to
> >> automobile tires moving at around 45mph / 72kph.
> >>
> >> First time through, I spent all the shotgun ammo on the first few
> >> hunters, then switched between the crossbow and any grenade/rocket on
> >> hand. That took more saves and restarts then I care to admit.
> >>
> > Wait... The hunters in 2 don't have the vulnerability where you can 
> > shoot them in the back to kill them? Useful when you have sniper rifle.
 
> > ;) But seriously, at least in Halo 1, they have *no* armor at all in th
e 
> > lower back, where you can see a patch of orange, sort of V shaped. Mind
 
> > you, haven't played 2, since a) I don't have an XBox and b) I don't hav
e 
> > fracking Vista. :p
> > 
> 
> Half-life 2 != Halo 2.
> 
Bah.. This is why I hate bloody acronyms... Dang people use them all the 
time in EQ2 too. Some dude goes, "I need an XYZ for a rain in GFG!", and 
all I can think is, "Why the heck do you expect 90% of the people 
playing to understand that?" lol

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>> 4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??
> 
>> Assuming you're vaguely serious I've got 14 buttons plus two analogue  
>> joysticks, that's a standard pad.
> 
>   FPS games cannot be played with a game controller. It's like trying to
> play with the keyboard only (no, the analog joysticks don't make it any
> easier, they actually make it harder). It's a royal pain in the ass.
> 
> http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/consolefps.html
> 

And yet, UT3 has sold 10x the number of units on the PS3 as on the PC...

-- 
...Ben Chambers
ben at pacific web guy dot com (no spaces)
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> standing', 'Yeah run around him and press that concealed switch to 
>> turn off the invincibilty shield', 'How the hell I was I supposed to 
>> know that?'
> 
> Yeah, like in Half-Life, where some of the bosses can't be damaged 
> except at certain times, and there's no indication of that.
> 
> At least in Undying, it's part of the story that the bosses are 
> invulnerable to certain things. You could almost deduce what you needed 
> to do.
> 
> 

Yeah, but in Deus Ex, the Bosses were just regular guys!

I had a habit of killing them before they even tried to talk to me :) 
There weren't that many that were scripted as invulnerable!

-- 
...Ben Chambers
ben at pacific web guy dot com (no spaces)
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> Yeah, but in Deus Ex, the Bosses were just regular guys!

As much as anyone in that game was "regular", yah.

> I had a habit of killing them before they even tried to talk to me :) 

Better to get the drop on you.

> There weren't that many that were scripted as invulnerable!

Those that were made it pretty obvious, with the glowing force-fields 
and such. Oh, I guess some characters were invulnerable if killing them 
would mess up the story at that point, but you found out that by dying 
for no reason when you attacked them.


-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> >   Stop talking about "it seems impossible", and just do it, because
> > it's not impossible.

> Just annoying, repetitive and boring. Hey look it's a Strider, oo and  
> another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another,  
> and another, and oh wait we're done. Nope silly me here's another Strider,  
> and another, and another, and another, and another. Gee wasn't that fun?

  That doesn't make what I said any less true.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> Bah.. This is why I hate bloody acronyms...

  I don't see how "HL" would be an acronym for "Halo".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 05 Feb 2008 06:18:08 -0000, Chambers  
<ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> did spake, saying:

> Warp wrote:
>> Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>>> 4. OMG, how do you *play* with only 3 buttons??
>>
>>> Assuming you're vaguely serious I've got 14 buttons plus two analogue   
>>> joysticks, that's a standard pad.
>>    FPS games cannot be played with a game controller. It's like trying  
>> to
>> play with the keyboard only (no, the analog joysticks don't make it any
>> easier, they actually make it harder). It's a royal pain in the ass.
>>  http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/consolefps.html
>>
>
> And yet, UT3 has sold 10x the number of units on the PS3 as on the PC...

But IIRC you can use a keyboard/mouse with UT3.

That's not the point though

 From Warp's link

"You want to quickly look to the right and then to the left to see if  
there's anyone there. Additionally you want to quickly also look back the  
way you came to see that you have not been followed. With a mouse this can  
be done really fast, in under 1 second. With a game controller (or  
keyboard) it takes a horrendous amount of time."

I agree a 180 is slower (note though that even some PC games had a quick  
180 button), but looking left/right is just as quick as a mouse. Again I  
agree aiming at something small (or at a distance) is trickier then with a  
mouse.

Besides the sluggish aim actaully makes it more realistic, take using a  
sniper rifle in Killzone for the PS2. The more you zoom in the more small  
movements of the stick translate into large alterations, the sight also  
moves slightly in game to simulate the person's own movements.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> Besides the sluggish aim actaully makes it more realistic

  Realism doesn't always make it fun, but a pain.

  If FPS games were about realism, they would fix all these:
http://warp.povusers.org/fpscliches.html

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 05 Feb 2008 09:25:22 -0000, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did  
spake, saying:

> Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>> Besides the sluggish aim actaully makes it more realistic
>
>   Realism doesn't always make it fun, but a pain.

Again I agree, but there is a strive for greater realism which the fuzzy  
sticks naturally provide.

>   If FPS games were about realism, they would fix all these:
> http://warp.povusers.org/fpscliches.html

Some have - Deus Ex, Oblivion (though not technically an FPS) Resistance:  
Fall of Man, System Shock. All these feature either ammo you have to pick  
up, limited weaponry, degrading weapons, knock-back, targeted body parts,  
non-instantaneuous health etc. Admittedly I've not seen one single game  
that features all these reality points; I wonder what Call of Duty 4 is  
like on that score?

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:

> Some have - Deus Ex, Oblivion (though not technically an FPS) 
> Resistance: Fall of Man, System Shock. All these feature either ammo you 
> have to pick up, limited weaponry, degrading weapons, knock-back, 
> targeted body parts, non-instantaneuous health etc. Admittedly I've not 
> seen one single game that features all these reality points; I wonder 
> what Call of Duty 4 is like on that score?

Ever tried playing Insurgency? (It's a Steam mod somebody made. It's 
quite good.)

It's supposed to be the US Marines vs the Iraqi insurgents. And it's 
ment to by hyper-realistic.

- You walk at around 2 miles per hour. (So it takes forever to get 
anywhere.)
- There are no crosshairs on your screen.
- You can shoot from the hip and try to *guess* where the bullets will go.
- You can look down the barrel of the gun. The barrel has sights on it. 
However, you now cannot see most of what is in front of you.
- You can't hold the gun very steady unless you're lying down. Even 
then, it wobbles a fair bit.
- All the guns have insane recoil.
- It takes about 10 minutes to reload.
- You run at abour 4 MPH.
- You get breathless if you run too long.
- When you try to look down the barrel, if you're breathless it wobbles 
around all over the place. Until you catch your breath.
- If you fall more than about 6 feet, you get injured.
- If you fall more than about 12 feet, you die. Instantly.
- There is no "health bar", or any other kind of HUD.
- Friendly fire kills you. Immediately.

The game is... utterly boring. You spawn. You walk around an apparently 
empty map for 20 minutes. Suddenly you drop dead. Somewhere 25 miles 
away there's a guy with a sniper rifle. He shot you long before you can 
possibly see him.

In short, the game is impossibly difficult.

It does, however, have one redeeming feature. When you play as the US 
Marines, if you hit the reload key a gaunt voice mumbles "changing mags" 
while your character reloads the gun. However, when you play as the 
Iraqi insurgents, a high-pitched Arabic voice yells "rrrrrreloading!" 
It's the funniest God damn thing *ever*! :-D

I played one time, and we all spawned in the spawn room, and some guy on 
my team clicks his mouse button. This causes his rocket launcher to 
spawn-kill the entire ****ing team, right there. Eventually, it's that 
kind of thing that made me stop playing the game. I mean, apart from it 
being no fun at all, anyway...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:57:24 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>> Some have - Deus Ex, Oblivion (though not technically an FPS)  
>> Resistance: Fall of Man, System Shock. All these feature either ammo  
>> you have to pick up, limited weaponry, degrading weapons, knock-back,  
>> targeted body parts, non-instantaneuous health etc. Admittedly I've not  
>> seen one single game that features all these reality points; I wonder  
>> what Call of Duty 4 is like on that score?
>
> Ever tried playing Insurgency? (It's a Steam mod somebody made. It's  
> quite good.)
>
> It's supposed to be the US Marines vs the Iraqi insurgents. And it's  
> ment to by hyper-realistic.
>
> - You walk at around 2 miles per hour. (So it takes forever to get  
> anywhere.)
> - You run at abour 4 MPH.

Apparently the original Doom tried this until the testers complained it  
was too slow

> - There are no crosshairs on your screen.

A number of games allow you to turn them off.

> - You can shoot from the hip and try to *guess* where the bullets will  
> go.
> - You can look down the barrel of the gun. The barrel has sights on it.  
> However, you now cannot see most of what is in front of you.

Hmm that's a good idea.

> - You can't hold the gun very steady unless you're lying down. Even  
> then, it wobbles a fair bit.
> - When you try to look down the barrel, if you're breathless it wobbles  
> around all over the place. Until you catch your breath.

Again a good idea

> - All the guns have insane recoil.

Insane? Again a lot of FPSs I've played the guns have recoil or wander if  
automatic.

> - It takes about 10 minutes to reload.

Um?

> - You get breathless if you run too long.

Silent Hill (though not an FPS - yet) has a similar feature

> - If you fall more than about 6 feet, you get injured.
> - If you fall more than about 12 feet, you die. Instantly.

Well that's not realistic

> - There is no "health bar", or any other kind of HUD.

http://www.2kgames.com/thedarkness/screenshots/5xx.jpg

> - Friendly fire kills you. Immediately.

Again unrealistic, though more so then others.

> The game is... utterly boring. You spawn. You walk around an apparently  
> empty map for 20 minutes. Suddenly you drop dead. Somewhere 25 miles  
> away there's a guy with a sniper rifle. He shot you long before you can  
> possibly see him.

So IOW more like a realistic situation where you don't just wander along  
the middle of a street in a warzone, but instead use cover regardless of  
the visibilty of the enemy.

> In short, the game is impossibly difficult.

At which point Warp will find stats showing how many people play it thus  
'proving' it is possible to play

> It does, however, have one redeeming feature. When you play as the US  
> Marines, if you hit the reload key a gaunt voice mumbles "changing mags"  
> while your character reloads the gun. However, when you play as the  
> Iraqi insurgents, a high-pitched Arabic voice yells "rrrrrreloading!"  
> It's the funniest God damn thing *ever*! :-D

Wonderful how um non-realistic.

> I played one time, and we all spawned in the spawn room, and some guy on  
> my team clicks his mouse button. This causes his rocket launcher to  
> spawn-kill the entire ****ing team, right there. Eventually, it's that  
> kind of thing that made me stop playing the game. I mean, apart from it  
> being no fun at all, anyway...

Oh fantastic I bet he was popular.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:

>> - You walk at around 2 miles per hour. (So it takes forever to get 
>> anywhere.)
>> - You run at abour 4 MPH.
> 
> Apparently the original Doom tried this until the testers complained it 
> was too slow

Yes, I think I recall hearing that before...

>> - There are no crosshairs on your screen.
> 
> A number of games allow you to turn them off.

Which is different to being unable to turn them on. ;-)

Seriously though, it makes CSS feel just a tad unrealistic. Hey, I'm 
running around with an AK47 on my hip and I can still hit people 2 miles 
away in a single shot - hmmmm. ;-)

>> - You can shoot from the hip and try to *guess* where the bullets will 
>> go.
>> - You can look down the barrel of the gun. The barrel has sights on 
>> it. However, you now cannot see most of what is in front of you.
> 
> Hmm that's a good idea.

As I say, it makes you realise just how unrealistic most other games are.

>> - All the guns have insane recoil.
> 
> Insane? Again a lot of FPSs I've played the guns have recoil or wander 
> if automatic.

As in, fire a shot and the gun jumps about 4 feet to the side. If you 
hold the trigger down, the gun will just stray bullets around completely 
at random with no semblence of control.

>> - It takes about 10 minutes to reload.
> 
> Um?

OK, not *literally* 10 minutes. But a damn long time - especially 
compared to the split second it usually takes in other games.

>> - If you fall more than about 6 feet, you get injured.
>> - If you fall more than about 12 feet, you die. Instantly.
> 
> Well that's not realistic

Really?

You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12 feet?

>> - Friendly fire kills you. Immediately.
> 
> Again unrealistic, though more so then others.

Why? Being shot kills the enemy instantly, so why not your teammates?

>> The game is... utterly boring. You spawn. You walk around an 
>> apparently empty map for 20 minutes. Suddenly you drop dead. Somewhere 
>> 25 miles away there's a guy with a sniper rifle. He shot you long 
>> before you can possibly see him.
> 
> So IOW more like a realistic situation where you don't just wander along 
> the middle of a street in a warzone, but instead use cover regardless of 
> the visibilty of the enemy.

Well perhaps it's because I've only played the game with a bunch of 
Internet n00bs who don't know what they're doing, but everything is just 
milling around at random trying to figure out what you're supposed to be 
doing. And getting shot down.

The maps are pretty huge...

>> In short, the game is impossibly difficult.
> 
> At which point Warp will find stats showing how many people play it thus 
> 'proving' it is possible to play

Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, thus 
*proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?

>> I played one time, and we all spawned in the spawn room, and some guy 
>> on my team clicks his mouse button. This causes his rocket launcher to 
>> spawn-kill the entire ****ing team, right there. Eventually, it's that 
>> kind of thing that made me stop playing the game. I mean, apart from 
>> it being no fun at all, anyway...
> 
> Oh fantastic I bet he was popular.

Bless. He's probably only 12...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:48:02 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>>> - There are no crosshairs on your screen.
>>  A number of games allow you to turn them off.
>
> Which is different to being unable to turn them on. ;-)

True

> Seriously though, it makes CSS feel just a tad unrealistic. Hey, I'm  
> running around with an AK47 on my hip and I can still hit people 2 miles  
> away in a single shot - hmmmm. ;-)

Not to mention asking what's the drop on this weapon?

>>> - All the guns have insane recoil.
>>  Insane? Again a lot of FPSs I've played the guns have recoil or wander  
>> if automatic.
>
> As in, fire a shot and the gun jumps about 4 feet to the side. If you  
> hold the trigger down, the gun will just stray bullets around completely  
> at random with no semblence of control.

One assumed as the game featured supposedly trained and fit people that  
wouldn't be completely the case.

>>> - It takes about 10 minutes to reload.
>>  Um?
>
> OK, not *literally* 10 minutes. But a damn long time - especially  
> compared to the split second it usually takes in other games.

Depends on the weapon, some take longer then others; some are designed for  
quick reloading.

>>> - If you fall more than about 6 feet, you get injured.
>>> - If you fall more than about 12 feet, you die. Instantly.
>>  Well that's not realistic
>
> Really?
>
> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12  
> feet?

Uh yes. I'm not saying uninjured and it depends on what they're landing on  
and how they're landing. Check the news about parachutists surviving falls  
 from a lot higher then 12 feet.

>>> - Friendly fire kills you. Immediately.
>>  Again unrealistic, though more so then others.
>
> Why? Being shot kills the enemy instantly, so why not your teammates?

Except it depends on where you're being shot, a leg shot won't instantly  
kill you (might make you black out) even a head shot might not instantly  
kill you though that's the much more likely outcome.

>>> The game is... utterly boring. You spawn. You walk around an  
>>> apparently empty map for 20 minutes. Suddenly you drop dead. Somewhere  
>>> 25 miles away there's a guy with a sniper rifle. He shot you long  
>>> before you can possibly see him.
>>  So IOW more like a realistic situation where you don't just wander  
>> along the middle of a street in a warzone, but instead use cover  
>> regardless of the visibilty of the enemy.
>
> Well perhaps it's because I've only played the game with a bunch of  
> Internet n00bs who don't know what they're doing, but everything is just  
> milling around at random trying to figure out what you're supposed to be  
> doing. And getting shot down.

Sounds like fun

> The maps are pretty huge...

All the better for long distance sniping of people milling around in the  
street.

>>> In short, the game is impossibly difficult.
>>  At which point Warp will find stats showing how many people play it  
>> thus 'proving' it is possible to play
>
> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, thus  
> *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?

To be fair to Warp I think he was more concerned with how you keep saying  
something is impossible when it's clearly not. Now I know what you mean  
when you say that - you mean it's a right PITA designed by 22-hour a day  
gamers with twitch reflexes for other 22-hour a day twitch gamers.

>>> I played one time, and we all spawned in the spawn room, and some guy  
>>> on my team clicks his mouse button. This causes his rocket launcher to  
>>> spawn-kill the entire ****ing team, right there. Eventually, it's that  
>>> kind of thing that made me stop playing the game. I mean, apart from  
>>> it being no fun at all, anyway...
>>  Oh fantastic I bet he was popular.
>
> Bless. He's probably only 12...

Gods makes you feel old :-)

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:48:02 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12  
> feet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Vulović


-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:48:02 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>> - If you fall more than about 6 feet, you get injured. - If you fall
>>> more than about 12 feet, you die. Instantly.
>> 
>> Well that's not realistic
> 
> Really?
> 
> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12
> feet?

Actually, yes.  There was a story in the news recently about a guy who 
fell some 40 stories (IIRC) and survived.  He was injured, of course, but 
he did survive.

I also know at least two people who survived parachute failures while 
skydiving (both in the military).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47a85b04$1@news.povray.org...

>
> Really?
>
> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12
feet?

12 feet isn't that far. Around 4 meters, if my conversion is correct. That's
maybe a bit higher than the 1st floor of a building. Depends what the person
falls onto and how they land how bad they'll be hurt.

I've fallen just over 2 metres from a wall onto grass (fairly short grass)
Walked away with a bruised elbow and hip and a bit of friction burn

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:48:02 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>
>OK, not *literally* 10 minutes. But a damn long time - especially 
>compared to the split second it usually takes in other games.
>
>>> - If you fall more than about 6 feet, you get injured.
>>> - If you fall more than about 12 feet, you die. Instantly.
>> 
>> Well that's not realistic
>
>Really?
>
>You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12 feet?

10 meters into water, that is the highest recommended distance for offshore
structures. 

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Really?
> 
> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12 feet?

I've jumped 12 feet off a building, not even a bruise from it.

And no, I didn't land on a trampoline :)

> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, thus 
> *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?

Climbing Everest *isn't* impossibly difficult.  Extremely hard, yes, but 
not impossible, nor even unthinkable.

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   If FPS games were about realism, 

... then you'd be out of the game the first time you got shot, and you 
wouldn't get to start over any more either.  ;-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

In article <47a82845@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> > Bah.. This is why I hate bloody acronyms...
> 
>   I don't see how "HL" would be an acronym for "Halo".
> 
You never know.. You get some damn stupid acronyms some times. What 
would it be then "H"? lol

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

> (Obviously the "simplest" thing to do would be to assume one level of 
> DirectX and fail if any other level is present. It also seems likely that 
> it wouldn't be that hard to check and use until available features - I was 
> just checking whether that is what they actually did.)

It is complicated to make a DX9 game work with a large variety of hardware. 
For every single "technique" you use in your game code you must check the 
driver to see if the installed hardware supports it, and if it doesn't 
whether DX can supply some software emulation at a reasonable enough speed 
to support it.  It very quickly gets very messy as you need to code 
different ways to do the same effect.  Add to that you'll probably need 
several different versions of your shader code for each "generation" of 
graphics card.  It's a mess and almost impossible to get things working 100% 
correctly on 100% of "DX9-compatible" hardware.

DX10 on the other hand is much simpler.  If a card supports DX10 then it 
supports DX10.  There are a list of things that the card must support to be 
DX10 compatible, and you can just use them all without going through any 
stupid checking procedures or having 4 different code versions.  There is no 
such thing as running DX10 on a card with limited functionality (like you 
can with DX9).  DX10 also makes lots of common things (like rendering 
cube-maps, shadows etc) much simpler and faster than on DX9.

As you can imagine, writing a game that supports DX10 *and* DX9 is even 
worse.  It's a shame that DX10 doesn't work on XP or older GFX cards, but 
they had to make it that way so that in future things will be way simpler. 
Just wait a year or two and you'll probably start seeing games that are DX10 
only.

Post a reply to this message

>>       FarCry, Crysis - great games!  :)

I played FarCry 3 or 4 times now through to the finish.  If you play it on 
easy and have even an ounce of FPS experience you'll be fine.  The only 
problem for me was the very last level in that circular arena place - took 
several tries to get through that one alive.

> I only have a lowly 2.2 GHz dual-core AMD Athlon X2 4200+ with 3 GB 
> DDR-400 RAM and an nVidia GeForce 7900GTX 512 MB. It'll probably not run 
> at all...

FarCry will run fine - Crysis will struggle sometimes even at mid graphics 
options.  I have a pretty similar rig to you (except Intel Core2Duo and only 
2GB RAM) and it was certainly playable.

> BTW, I'm a little confused here. Benny seems to think that DirectX 10 is 
> available for WinXP, while I was under the impression that it's for Vista 
> only. [Part of of the M$ plan to force everybody to upgrade.] However, 
> Wikipedia at least seems to suggest that Crysis works on XP, despite using 
> DirectX 10... so... er... wuh?

DX10 will only run on Vista, the Vista display driver model is totally 
different to XP so there is now way it will ever work on XP.

Games can be written to use DX9 or DX10 if they want...

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
> Just wait a year or two and you'll probably start seeing games that are DX10 
> only.

  Which is a pitty, really, because I won't be able to play them.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> >   I don't see how "HL" would be an acronym for "Halo".
> > 
> You never know.. You get some damn stupid acronyms some times. What 
> would it be then "H"? lol

  "Halo" doesn't need to be acronymified because it's short already.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, 
>> thus *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?
> 
> Climbing Everest *isn't* impossibly difficult.  Extremely hard, yes, but 
> not impossible, nor even unthinkable.

Hmm, let me see now... And how many people have actually achieved this 
in all of human history? 6? 8? It's a pretty small number, given how 
many millions of humans are out there. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12 feet?

I rephrase:

There are people who have eaten broken glass and lived. There are people 
who have been drowned for 35 minutes and survived without brain damage. 
And there are people who have survived cyanide poisoning. However, 
*normally* all of these are fatal.

Are you telling me it's *normal* for a human being to survive a 4-story 
drop?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> Just wait a year or two and you'll probably start seeing games that are 
>> DX10
>> only.
>
>  Which is a pitty, really, because I won't be able to play them.

Yeh, I wish I could play games like Crysis on my 386 running DOS too :-) 
Would never need to upgrade then!

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, 
>>> thus *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?
>>
>> Climbing Everest *isn't* impossibly difficult.  Extremely hard, yes, 
>> but not impossible, nor even unthinkable.
> 
> Hmm, let me see now... And how many people have actually achieved this 
> in all of human history? 6? 8? It's a pretty small number, given how 
> many millions of humans are out there. ;-)

Rubbish! You get more than that on the summit at once if the weather's 
good, these days.

:)

PS I'm not joking.

Post a reply to this message

>>> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, thus 
>>> *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?
>>
>> Climbing Everest *isn't* impossibly difficult.  Extremely hard, yes, but 
>> not impossible, nor even unthinkable.
>
> Hmm, let me see now... And how many people have actually achieved this in 
> all of human history? 6? 8? It's a pretty small number, given how many 
> millions of humans are out there. ;-)

How many people have sat in my desk chair?  Only 2 or maybe 3 of the 6 
billion people in the world - it must be *really* difficult!

Anyway, to quote from Google:

"Because of the extreme conditions experienced on Mount Everest, fatalities 
are commonplace. To date, 179 people have died trying to reach the summit, 
which sets the fatality rate at around nine percent. Most of these 
fatalities happened before 1990. In the last ten years, advances in climbing 
equipment and more experienced guides have resulted in a steep drop in 
fatality statistics: from 37% in 1990 to 4.4% in 2004."

So it seems that if you are well prepared then you can expect a 90 - 95% 
chance of success.  Still pretty low compared to most other mountains, and I 
don't think I would like to go somewhere with even a 5% chance of not coming 
back.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
47a9857a$1@news.povray.org...
> Hmm, let me see now... And how many people have actually achieved this in 
> all of human history? 6? 8? It's a pretty small number, given how many 
> millions of humans are out there. ;-)

Actually more than 2000 people have done it. One guy even did it 17 times, 
another did it 3 times last year.

G.

-- 
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:03:09 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Invisible wrote:
>
>> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12  
>> feet?
>
> I rephrase:
>
> There are people who have eaten broken glass and lived. There are people  
> who have been drowned for 35 minutes and survived without brain damage.  
> And there are people who have survived cyanide poisoning. However,  
> *normally* all of these are fatal.
>
> Are you telling me it's *normal* for a human being to survive a 4-story  
> drop?

Apparently the cut-off point is 30ft.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:57:06 -0000, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did  
spake, saying:

> scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
>> Just wait a year or two and you'll probably start seeing games that are  
>> DX10 only.
>
>   Which is a pitty, really, because I won't be able to play them.

^pity - you've been reading Andy's posts to often :-)

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:47a985de$1@news.povray.org...
> Invisible wrote:
>
>> You're telling me a human being can survive falling from more than 12 
>> feet?
>
> I rephrase:
>
> There are people who have eaten broken glass and lived. There are people 
> who have been drowned for 35 minutes and survived without brain damage. 
> And there are people who have survived cyanide poisoning. However, 
> *normally* all of these are fatal.
>
> Are you telling me it's *normal* for a human being to survive a 4-story 
> drop?
It depends on how you land.
A few cases at buildings where I used to live:
A drunk fell off a second story ledge and his brains were scatrtered all 
over.
Some-one else jumped off the 7th floor and lived.

-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:48:00 -0000, Phil Cook  
<phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> did spake, saying:

> And lo on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:57:06 -0000, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  
> did spake, saying:
>
>> scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
>>> Just wait a year or two and you'll probably start seeing games that  
>>> are DX10 only.
>>
>>   Which is a pitty, really, because I won't be able to play them.
>
> ^pity - you've been reading Andy's posts to often :-)

^too often damnit :-)

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

>>>   Which is a pitty, really, because I won't be able to play them.
>>
>> ^pity - you've been reading Andy's posts to often :-)
> 
> ^too often damnit :-)

^ 0wned >:-D

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47a985de$1@news.povray.org...

> Are you telling me it's *normal* for a human being to survive a 4-story
> drop?

12 feet is not four stories. If it was, the ceiling of each floor of that
building would be less than a metre from the floor.

12 feet = four meters. Here a story is around 3-3.5 metres. Therefor 12 feet
= 4 metres = just over 1 story. Not exactly difficult.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
>> Just wait a year or two and you'll probably start seeing games that are DX10 
>> only.
> 
>   Which is a pitty, really, because I won't be able to play them.
> 

Yeah, and it's a pity that I can't play Zelda: Twilight Princess on my 
PC, too!

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, 
>>> thus *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?
>>
>> Climbing Everest *isn't* impossibly difficult.  Extremely hard, yes, 
>> but not impossible, nor even unthinkable.
> 
> Hmm, let me see now... And how many people have actually achieved this 
> in all of human history? 6? 8? It's a pretty small number, given how 
> many millions of humans are out there. ;-)

Actually, no. Getting up there the first time is hard. The second time, 
you hand-over-hand up the ropes the first team left.

Nowadays, I understand the trail guides are thinking it's too crowded, 
and that someone is going to get hurt by someone above falling.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>>>> Isn't that rather like siting how many people have climbed Everest, 
>>>> thus *proving* that it's not impossibly difficult?
>>>
>>> Climbing Everest *isn't* impossibly difficult.  Extremely hard, yes, 
>>> but not impossible, nor even unthinkable.
>>
>> Hmm, let me see now... And how many people have actually achieved this 
>> in all of human history? 6? 8? It's a pretty small number, given how 
>> many millions of humans are out there. ;-)
> 
> Actually, no. Getting up there the first time is hard. The second time, 
> you hand-over-hand up the ropes the first team left.
> 
> Nowadays, I understand the trail guides are thinking it's too crowded, 
> and that someone is going to get hurt by someone above falling.

Litter is a problem too, especially items like oxygen bottles. I 
remember reading something about the Nepalese government paying a sort 
of 'bounty' on discarded items brought down off the mountain by guides etc.

Post a reply to this message