| View previous topic - View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
-SJ Zero
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 1:15 am Post subject: Re: dumbass. |
[quote] |
|
| Happy wrote: | | Quote: | Since it's blatantly obvious you haven't seen my code(and quite possibly haven't seen the game itself), I'd choose my words more carefully if I were you.
...
I'd much rather have a fast and elegant collision detection that doesn't have any glitches than a slow hack-job that was a bitch to maintain -- that's why I moved away from a system identical to the one you were proposing to the one I'm using now. |
Wow! Sorry, I was actually trying to be helpful. I have seen the game in action, and I was really trying my damnedest to be impressed. And actually, my method was fast, very fast. It wasn't a hack-job either. I took the bounding-box method and optimized it for my engine. I realize that the code I posted is a bit messy and such, but it worked without any glitches. It was when I tried to put my x and y sorters in that I had trouble, but that was only because I was stupid and optimized the whole thing before I was finished adding features.
| Quote: | | (and to the other guy who replied, I was going to write something like that, but after my particle system, dynamic water creation, and realtime shadows, I figured I didn't have the number crunching power left to be doing that for every sprite I encounter -- I want this to run on a lower end pentium!) |
Realtime Shadows? Where the fuck was that? (I even redownloaded it (as I had deleted it) to make sure I didn't miss the effect.)
Also, if you want that to run on a lower end pentium i'd suggest not doing it in BASIC. My engine ran on a lower end pentium (well, pentium 133 I think it was.(something like that)) at about 40+ fps. That was with full collision detection (on all (n)pc's(yeah, the npcs actually move) ) and 4 layers of tiles (you know; background, mid-ground, foreground, whether effects (I didn't really use the mid-ground, but it was there! (And eating up cycles displaying the same thing as the background..)). But! Oh yeah! It was written in C, so I'm sure you'll dismiss it as a "slow hack job" or some such nonsense like that. |
I call bullshit. You write a message with the topic of "dumbass", stating that I "would actually have to code a decent p*p engine", and expect me to believe that you meant to help me? Yeah. I don't want your kind of help. I'll just have to manage with the help of people like the others who have commented in this thread, who actually (GASP!!!) give helpful advice (and sometimes bad news about something I thought was working OK, which has happened many times in the years I've been trudging through this project) without being downright insulting and adverserial about it. In fact, that's the reason I asked for advice and comments here -- the comments in the review of Nietzsche, while not always portraying it in the best of lights, were always fair and helped me understand what I could have done better. Quest for a King has come from where it began because of the advice of people like him. About your code, I'd swear I saw at least 4 multiplies in there when I first read it. I read it again, and it's almost identical to what I was doing before, which I've moved away from for various reasons, but I've got object collision detection in mine and my LastUsed code, which I left in there (it's legacy code now, for the most part) because it's a useful thing to have for NPC AI. Anyway, observe:
| Code: |
STATIC SUB moveobject (psprite%, MinorX%, MinorY%)
DIM b AS LONG
DIM c AS LONG
DIM d AS LONG
scriptedobject = 0
hitsprite = 0
check3 = Objects%(psprite%, 3) 'accessing the array is actually fairly slow
'so I'll just put it into a 0d array (?)
BaseDetected = 0
IF MinorX% THEN
IF Objects%(psprite%, 4) + MinorX% > 20 THEN
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2)) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 2, Objects%(psprite%, 2)) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 2, Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
ELSEIF Objects%(psprite%, 4) + MinorX% < 1 THEN
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) - 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) - 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2)) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1), Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1), Objects%(psprite%, 2)) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
END IF
END IF
IF MinorY% THEN
'objects%(psprite%, 5) + Minory%
IF Objects%(psprite%, 5) + MinorY% > 20 THEN
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1), Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1), Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 2) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2) + 2) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
ELSEIF Objects%(psprite%, 5) + MinorY% < 1 THEN
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1), Objects%(psprite%, 2) - 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2) - 1) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1), Objects%(psprite%, 2)) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
IF map%(Objects%(psprite%, 1) + 1, Objects%(psprite%, 2)) > 7 THEN BaseDetected = -1
END IF
END IF
lastused = 0
'cdetect1 Check 1<*> Check 2<*>
IF MinorX% > 0 THEN
IF BaseDetected THEN lastused = 1
END IF
'cdetect 2 Check 1<*> Check 2<*>
IF MinorX% < 0 THEN
IF BaseDetected THEN lastused = 2
END IF
'Cdetect 3 Check1<*> Check2<*>
IF MinorY% > 0 THEN 'This was 0 before, but I disabled this one.
IF BaseDetected THEN lastused = 3
END IF
'cdetect 4: Check1<*> Check2<*>
IF MinorY% < 0 THEN
IF BaseDetected THEN lastused = 4
END IF
'This is the sprite detection. Fix it later for the better.
HitaScript = 0
here% = 0
FOR a = -100 TO 140
'IF psprite% <> a THEN
IF Objects(a%, 7) <> 100 THEN
'sprite collision detection
'until further notice, all sprites are checked.
'Checks to see if it's even worth checking first.
BigAdifference = ABS(Objects(a, 1) - Objects(psprite%, 1))
bigBdifference = ABS(Objects(a, 2) - Objects(psprite%, 2))
IF (BigAdifference < 3) AND (bigBdifference < 3) THEN
b = MultByTileSize(Objects(a, 1)) + ((Objects(a, 4))) - 20
c = MultByTileSize(Objects(psprite%, 1)) + ((Objects(psprite%, 4) + (MinorX%)))
'd = (objects(psprite%, 1) * 20) + ((objects(psprite%, 4) + MinorX% + 17))
'OR b = d
d = c - (b + 20)
IF ((c - b) > 0) AND d < tilesize THEN
b = MultByTileSize(Objects(a, 2)) + ((Objects(a, 5))) - 20
c = MultByTileSize(Objects(psprite%, 2)) + ((Objects(psprite%, 5) + (MinorY%)))
'd = (objects(psprite%, 2) * 20) + ((objects(psprite%, 5) + MinorY% + 17))
'OR ((b - d) < 20)
d = c - (b + 20)
IF ((c - b) > 0) AND d < tilesize THEN
HitaScript = 1
IF Objects(a, 3) <> -30 THEN
IF Objects(a, 3) <> 50 AND Objects(a, 3) <> 0 THEN
IF lastused = 0 AND a <> psprite% THEN
lastused = a
scriptedobject = a
END IF
END IF
END IF
END IF
END IF
'The script detection. now I (hope I :)) save a lot of CPU time by just
'skipping the second check!
IF psprite% = 1 THEN 'The script detection.
IF HitaScript = 1 THEN
IF Objects(a, 3) = -30 THEN
ResetKeys
Script Objects(a, 6)
END IF
END IF
HitaScript = 0
END IF
END IF
END IF
NEXT a
IF lastused = 0 THEN
IF MinorX% THEN
CachedPos% = MinorX% + Objects%(psprite%, 4)
IF CachedPos% > 20 OR CachedPos% < 0 THEN
temp = MultByTileSize(Objects%(psprite%, 1)) + CachedPos%
Objects%(psprite%, 1) = temp \ tilesize
Objects%(psprite%, 4) = temp MOD tilesize
ELSE
Objects%(psprite%, 4) = CachedPos%
END IF
END IF
IF MinorY% THEN
CachedPos% = MinorY% + Objects%(psprite%, 5)
IF CachedPos% > 20 OR CachedPos% < 0 THEN
temp = MultByTileSize(Objects%(psprite%, 2)) + CachedPos%
Objects%(psprite%, 2) = temp \ tilesize
Objects%(psprite%, 5) = temp MOD tilesize
ELSE
Objects%(psprite%, 5) = CachedPos%
END IF
END IF
END IF
IF psprite% = Focus THEN CameraFocus Focus
END SUB
|
Except for the object detection, which you didn't include in yours, our optimization and technique is almost identical, so you telling me how to write it is kind of redundant, at the very least. The only difference now that I can see is that I have philisophical problems with simply incrementing the map variable, so I recalculate whenever I hit the offet limits.
Secondly: Bring up the console ('~' key) and type 'ObjectShadows 1'. I haven't put it anywhere because I want to use it as a dramatic device, rather than just as eye candy, but it looks really good in town, since all the fence objects cast a shadow.
Thirdly:
The JRPG engine is a fine p*p engine by any benchmark. It's problems lie elsewhere(in the multiple scripting systems I use to do everything, for instance). It uses a hand-coded ModeX graphics renderer to allow for over 60FPS on a P2 233, and in maps that use sprites sparingly(admittedly the first map is a very bad example of that), it's quite playable on a low to mid-range Pentium. After I added the -novsync parameter, rel, who has a p233 at home, was able to play even on the new maps(where I go a bit wild with sprites because I love their versatility). Quit making assumptions about the engine. It's almost three years old now; I've put a few more tricks in there than you give me credit for, in spite of a couple lingering bugs. I've had walking NPCs in there forever(I believe one of the SCRP demos back in 2k had the code first), but I never used it(Actually, I used it once, thought it was stupid, and took it out) because I hate random walking -- it's out of place in an otherwise chronotrigger style game engine. I'm coding up something that hasn't been done in FF-style RPGs before instead. Even then, the behaviour code is still in place. When you walk into the bar and see the three piece band playing, that's a set behaviour. It's not a far leap to assume movement would also be possible through behaviours (and Jeremy would be proof of this, seeing as he can move -- I coded an exemption in collision detection for that kind of sprite behaviour though, since running into your sidekick would be fruitless, and Xans walking is also an object behaviour, because I felt it would be more elegant than trying to cram all the movement stuff into the control mechanism). Since all the characters are objects, they're all capable, with a single click of a mouse in the editor, of walking freely, while maintaining their script binding.
Fourthly: I don't think anyone thinks that basic code is more efficient or faster than C code. I don't use C for a variety of reasons, one of them being that it's a PMS'in programming language(See QBXL Issue 2 when it comes out for an explanation of THAT one! :) ), but don't assume that I'm some sort of super-zealot just because I disagreed with you and happen to use QB. I've taken -- hell, I've TAUGHT -- more C classes than the average C user, and I'm quite aware of it's highlights, and it's flaws. I use QB in part to alieviate these faults, and in part, because I really like the challenge of optimizing what has to be the fastest non-PUT, pure QB RPG engine out there, and adding new and cool features to it. It makes me a far better programmer than I'd be letting Windows handle things like dynamic sprite loading(Which the JRPG engine does seamlessly).
Anyway, Later.
Sj Zero
Powerusrs Gaming
http://powerusr.sphosting.com/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 1:21 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| white_door wrote: |
the only thing that seemed weird about the combat... is it just me or as you go up levels the combat gets harder and harder instead of easier.. which is kind of different but interesting in its own right. I loved the combat, normal turned based combat is getting real old. I perfer to think on my feet. I didn't end up using any of the special combat moves though.. just attack attacked attacked until the final boss where I used that one move that killed the boss in one hit. |
LOL... I guess I have the curve a bit steep there. Battles start hard and progressively get harder because it doesn't make sense for them to be all the same strength, and you become more powerful thanks to the items as you go. I am going to drop the difficulty level of that dungeon somewhat though, since most people die on the boss, regardless of the number of clues I include. :)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoDraco
Demon Hunter
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 584
Location: Riverside, South Cali
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 1:30 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| -SJ Zero wrote: | | LeoDraco wrote: | | I would comment upon it; however, as I couldn't get the fucker to run on my system, I cannot. |
WHAT?! Please, let me know which operating system you're running, along with any error messages it gives you! Also, try just running JRPG.EXE, not the batch file, and tell me if that makes any difference! |
I'm running Win2k. I really didn't get any error messages. (Well, it did tell me that it wouldn't be able to give me any sound.) It just hung there. Not doing anything.
_________________
"...LeoDraco is a pompus git..." -- Mandrake
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 2:40 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
|
Try hitting a key.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoDraco
Demon Hunter
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 584
Location: Riverside, South Cali
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:57 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| Anonymous wrote: | | Try hitting a key. |
[SARCASM] Oh, I'm sorry: I'm used to the programs I run to automatically start up, or barring that, to actually inform me that they are waiting for a key-press.
[/SARCASM]
_________________
"...LeoDraco is a pompus git..." -- Mandrake
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Happy
JonA's American snack pack
Joined: 03 Aug 2002
Posts: 200
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 4:25 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| -SJ Zero wrote: | | I call bullshit. You write a message with the topic of "dumbass", stating that I "would actually have to code a decent p*p engine", and expect me to believe that you meant to help me? Yeah. I don't want your kind of help. I'll just have to manage with the help of people like the others who have commented in this thread, who actually (GASP!!!) give helpful advice (and sometimes bad news about something I thought was working OK, which has happened many times in the years I've been trudging through this project) without being downright insulting and adverserial about it. In fact, that's the reason I asked for advice and comments here -- the comments in the review of Nietzsche, while not always portraying it in the best of lights, were always fair and helped me understand what I could have done better. |
I'm truely sorry for the misunderstanding, I wasn't really trying to offend or insult your glorious engine. By "decent p*p engine" I simply meant "a p*p engine that is of some quality". I'm not trying to poke fun or get you all riled up. You had said that "... walking through those passages is mathematically impossible." Which was quite absurd, and prompted my posting. The "dumbass" remark was more implied towards LeoDraco (because, well, he's a dumbass) but it could be applied to you as well. As it certainly isn't mathematically impossible. In short: I was simply disproving your statement.
Also, to justify my comments (all of them) your orginal post was this:
| -SJ Zero wrote: | Could someone take a look at Quest for a King?
I posted it hoping people would compare it to Nietzsche, but it seems that hasn't happened... Any takers? |
Implying that you wanted us to post our criticism (constructive or not) about your demo/game. To quote Mandrake, "If you can't take the heat, don't post the flame bait.". By that I mean, next time you post wanting some criticism or thoughts on your game, be more specific on what you want to hear, or be ready to hear people's critism or thoughts.
| LeoDraco wrote: | | Anonymous wrote: | | Try hitting a key. |
[SARCASM] Oh, I'm sorry: I'm used to the programs I run to automatically start up, or barring that, to actually inform me that they are waiting for a key-press.
[/SARCASM] |
I concur. It would certainly provide a more polished feel, wouldn't it? (Also: You're a dumbass.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 11:16 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| Happy wrote: | | -SJ Zero wrote: | | I call bullshit. You write a message with the topic of "dumbass", stating that I "would actually have to code a decent p*p engine", and expect me to believe that you meant to help me? Yeah. I don't want your kind of help. I'll just have to manage with the help of people like the others who have commented in this thread, who actually (GASP!!!) give helpful advice (and sometimes bad news about something I thought was working OK, which has happened many times in the years I've been trudging through this project) without being downright insulting and adverserial about it. In fact, that's the reason I asked for advice and comments here -- the comments in the review of Nietzsche, while not always portraying it in the best of lights, were always fair and helped me understand what I could have done better. |
I'm truely sorry for the misunderstanding, I wasn't really trying to offend or insult your glorious engine. By "decent p*p engine" I simply meant "a p*p engine that is of some quality". I'm not trying to poke fun or get you all riled up. You had said that "... walking through those passages is mathematically impossible." Which was quite absurd, and prompted my posting. The "dumbass" remark was more implied towards LeoDraco (because, well, he's a dumbass) but it could be applied to you as well. As it certainly isn't mathematically impossible. In short: I was simply disproving your statement.
Also, to justify my comments (all of them) your orginal post was this:
| -SJ Zero wrote: | Could someone take a look at Quest for a King?
I posted it hoping people would compare it to Nietzsche, but it seems that hasn't happened... Any takers? |
Implying that you wanted us to post our criticism (constructive or not) about your demo/game. To quote Mandrake, "If you can't take the heat, don't post the flame bait.". By that I mean, next time you post wanting some criticism or thoughts on your game, be more specific on what you want to hear, or be ready to hear people's critism or thoughts.
| LeoDraco wrote: | | Anonymous wrote: | | Try hitting a key. |
[SARCASM] Oh, I'm sorry: I'm used to the programs I run to automatically start up, or barring that, to actually inform me that they are waiting for a key-press.
[/SARCASM] |
I concur. It would certainly provide a more polished feel, wouldn't it? (Also: You're a dumbass.) |
If you take a look at my code, it IS mathematically impossible to walk through 1-tile openings. No amount of squirming will get you in there. My code was different before and allowed it, but right now, I am absolutely right. If I did it differently, you could squirm in there(anything is possible, I'm the programmer. Nothing is mathematically impossible in the grand scheme of things, because I can just change it).
As for "a p*p engine that is of some quality", in my eyes you're just digging a deeper hole. You're beginning to look like someone who is trying to be moderate without actually having to take a moderate point of view. ("I'm not saying your game engine sucks, it's just that it's terrible...wait, I mean it's not that it's terrible, it's that it's of extremely substandard quality...wait, It's not that..."). Considering how laced with sarcasm your entire message was, maybe you're just trying to get a rise out of me altogether. Considering how thin some of your reasonings are, maybe you don't really realize how you sound.
Regardless, before I continue this coversation, which seems to hinge on the idea that because my collision detection doesn't work the way you'd like it to work and because I have a single bug in by battle scripting engine, the whole engine is terrible, I'd really like to see this superior piece of art that is your game engine. Link?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoDraco
Demon Hunter
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 584
Location: Riverside, South Cali
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 11:49 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
Oh come on: real coders don't write code; they sit around and bitch on obscure dev boards. Get with the times.
_________________
"...LeoDraco is a pompus git..." -- Mandrake
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Happy
JonA's American snack pack
Joined: 03 Aug 2002
Posts: 200
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 12:24 pm Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| Anonymous wrote: | | Regardless, before I continue this coversation, which seems to hinge on the idea that because my collision detection doesn't work the way you'd like it to work and because I have a single bug in by battle scripting engine, the whole engine is terrible, I'd really like to see this superior piece of art that is your game engine. Link? |
Actually, that won't be necessary as this conversation was over the moment you mis-interpreted my helpful response.
p.s. I wasn't being sarcastic in my previous post, asshole.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:36 pm Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| Happy wrote: | | Anonymous wrote: | | Regardless, before I continue this coversation, which seems to hinge on the idea that because my collision detection doesn't work the way you'd like it to work and because I have a single bug in by battle scripting engine, the whole engine is terrible, I'd really like to see this superior piece of art that is your game engine. Link? |
Actually, that won't be necessary as this conversation was over the moment you mis-interpreted my helpful response.
p.s. I wasn't being sarcastic in my previous post, asshole. |
That's it. In real life, I probably would have smacked you with your initial "you might have to actually write a decent P*P engine" bullshit(And 'misunderstood' my foot. If you've been misunderstood, then you have a major problem communicating with other human beings on a fundamental level that transcends mere language barriers and should seek some professional tutoring in the subject.), followed by me beating the crap out of you for the "dumbass" subject-line. You can pull all that "oh, I was talking to the guy behind you" crap all you like, but it's just that -- crap. I've met people like you before, and don't think you're fooling anyone with your "innocent guy" routine. It just doesn't work on-line. Hell, it barely works in real-life. You said what you said, and you're not going to somehow clear things up by acting like I have no right to be upset because apparantly you can't even practice basic communication skills. I mean, later on, you say "I wasn't really trying to offend or insult your glorious engine. By 'decent p*p engine' I simply meant 'a p*p engine that is of some quality'.", and never thought that this might be taken somewhat badly?! You're in fact, insulted to curses that I might ever consider that sarcastic? Looks to me like you're just being assinine and sarcastic on purpose! It would to most people. Now you're heading out and casting fuel into the fire by calling me an asshole. Great.
Anyway, I shall leave this with my initial advisement: "I'd choose my words more carefully if I were you". If you really didn't mean to offend anybody, which might possibly be true, think a little harder about how things like that will be interpeted. This is the internet, and it's critical to remember that some things just won't be taken well. Like telling me that I "Might have to actually code a decent P*P engine". Or calling that guy a dumbass using the subject-line of a message addressed directly at me. Or using obviously insincere words like "glorious" when you're trying to straighten things out. Perhaps I completely misinterpeted every post in this thread by you. Perhaps I've been too harsh on you because you decided to start your first post to me with the subject line of "dumbass" and the insinuation that the last three years of my life haven't even resulted in a "decent P*P engine". If it is the case, please; prove me wrong. Actions speak louder than words, and insincere appologies are rarely even whispered.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
white_door
Icemonkey
Joined: 30 May 2002
Posts: 243
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2003 11:13 pm Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
I didn't think the original post was that rude, but I think we all have to be careful when reading and when writing, since there is a lot of verbal and non-verbal communication that is lost when putting our thoughts to paper. Its natural to read things in to people's writing that wasn't intended. In more general terms also remember not everyone has english as a first language either, so that adds another complacation to the issue. I do think most of the posts on this thread were write with extremely good english, non the less the point is.. its better to read everything with rose tinted glasses and assume the best out of every post. Unless the reader can see in to minds, they can't possibly know what the writer was thinking when they wrote something.
Sometimes people will offend us, but its better to assume they didn't mean to.
I think sensitive people also get offended more easily than those of us that have had all emotion and feeling beaten out of us through the public school system. ;)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 12:41 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
| white_door wrote: | I didn't think the original post was that rude, but I think we all have to be careful when reading and when writing, since there is a lot of verbal and non-verbal communication that is lost when putting our thoughts to paper. Its natural to read things in to people's writing that wasn't intended. In more general terms also remember not everyone has english as a first language either, so that adds another complacation to the issue. I do think most of the posts on this thread were write with extremely good english, non the less the point is.. its better to read everything with rose tinted glasses and assume the best out of every post. Unless the reader can see in to minds, they can't possibly know what the writer was thinking when they wrote something.
Sometimes people will offend us, but its better to assume they didn't mean to.
I think sensitive people also get offended more easily than those of us that have had all emotion and feeling beaten out of us through the public school system. ;) |
That's why my original advice was to choose his words more carefully, rather than "YOU IS STUPID!!!! WHAT YOU SAY!!! ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO STUPID!!!" or something similar. :D
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 12:42 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
|
On the other hand, I looked at the message again, and saw "dumbass" as the subject...well, you do the math. I was willing to shrug off one insult. After two, that's the end of the line. Especially when they're both before the first paragraph ends.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Barok
Stephen Hawking
Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 248
Location: Bushland of Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 8:54 am Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
hmmm... the shadows hack doesn't seem to work on my comp. i type it in, it says a bunch of text and numbers, but it doesn't show shadows.
btw, when i use vampire slash, it freezes just when i attack.
edit: i use discipline outside of battle and the game froze...
_________________
Adosorken: I always liked slutty 10th graders...
Rhiannon: *Slap!*
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
korndog
I wanna be a ballerina!
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 24
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 2:12 pm Post subject: |
[quote] |
|
Hey man, don't let the negativity get to you. It's cool to see someone else working on an engine w/Chrono-style battles. I do have another suggestion, though. I read *a lot* faster than the text displays, so I find myself holding down a key to make it go faster. But at the end of the textbox, it clears and goes to the next w/o stopping.
It might be better if you have to lift your finger and then hit the key again before the next textbox displays. This way I can hold it down the whole time.
Last edited by korndog on Mon Sep 08, 2003 2:19 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
