Uranium - 235

[quote]Wow... Um it was PRETTY, but uh... "Smarter" than most console games? With its OMG KOREANS AND ALIENS! story? I think there is a long list of games that started thier existance on consoles that might take offence to such a statement.[/quote] Did you even play Crysis? I'm sure your experience with shooters is limited to the corridor-crawling of Gears of War and Halo, but they've never had a game like Crysis. Go ahead and drop a name if you can. Besides it's testa

[quote]The mind of a PC elitest at work, notice the complete dismissial of any concept of tolerance and immensly biggoted attitude it displays[/quote] I am a PC elitist. Oh I wasn't always, it wasn't until around 2005 or so when the Xbox had finished completely raping and destroying my hobby, and my hobby became "accessible" to every retard who [u]never gave a shit about gaming before in their lives[/u]. Prior to dumbing-down every single aspect of gaming, even down to the cont

[quote]Which platform was Crysis released on again? That would be the PC, wouldn't it? And don't forget how amazingly creative, imaginative, and smart Crysis is compared to, say, Mass Effect.[/quote] The sad thing is, Crysis was still smarter than the best console FPS.

[quote]However, I have NEVER seem any console community be nearly as unwelcoming to PC gamers as most PC game communities are to console gamers.[/quote] That's because the "console community" is composed of frat-boys, morons, and is pretty much the 'catch-all' of any retard who's never played a video game before in their life. A condescending console community is pretty much the lowest you can get. Besides, what are the console gamers going to complain about? How 'smart' PC games ar

[quote]Its from Walmart and for some reason those keys don't work[/quote] "those keys"? So you have multiple keys? From 'Walmart'? Nice try pirate.

[quote]This thread is starting to feel like a countdown to a big UFC fight-night event.[/quote] Reminds me of professional wrestling 'rivalries'. And just like wrestling, it's just two sweaty, nasty, untalented Neanderthals pointing and yelling a lot, whose self-importance is hinged completely on the opinions of idiots.

[quote]Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor is the final expansion pack planned. After that, there will be a few months of additional updates as is our policy (including a Galactic Civilizations II 2.0) but then that's pretty much it. If players want new features (such as more diplomacy features, a better United Planets, more ship components) there will have to be a way to pay for those things.[/quote] Can I ask what's the biggest difference between say, a full-size

[quote]With no plot or storyline to follow, there is only one reason to play single player: you just bought the game and have no idea yet how anything works.[/quote] Because playing with whining, socially retarded ADHD competitive whiners like you is clearly a superior experience. Last time I checked, the AIs weren't as annoying as you.

"...There hasn't been that many [RPGs in that style]," he said. "I don't understand it, because I think there's still a market," he said, adding that a well-produced RPG in that vein could sell 200-300,000 units worldwide on a budget of $6-8 million. ... I suddenly want to work at Stardock as a writer :p

Press and hold 'D'. Tadah.

[quote](10) I'm gonna have to mark you -1 for this example. Any team-oriented game is gonna be exponentially more competitive than a one-man oriented game. From this, it follows loosely that a game that's more team-oriented than player-oriented is gonna require more skilldiff. This is only in general, obviously. You can add in factors to make one-man games require way more skilldiff and so on.[/quote] You'd have a point, but from what I've seen, 1v1 Starcraft games, Quake 3 deathmatches

[quote](8) Maybe some people want that, but I wouldn't paint all those people with the 'competitive gamer' brush. Most of the progamers in Starcraft are looking forward to the changes in SC2, though there are some debates on specific points. It keeps things fresh. I could simply counter-argue by saying that all the 'casual' gamers wanted this game to be MoO in 3D. It wouldn't be any more or less true.[/quote] They are? Looking at Starcraft 2, I've yet to see anything original i

[quote]If this game is so good, why isn't it released for Ubuntu or Linux in general? Hello stardock. Can you please release this game for Linux? Thanks![/quote] Because nobody cares.

[quote]I paused a while when i was making that list on this ability. 800 damage is nice, but you're right it's really doing about 350. It does underperform earlier on, definitely. BUT it has a really short cooldown. (800[minus mitigation] every 6 seconds!) What really limits the ability is the AntiMatter cost. If you combine it with Flux Field and/or finest hour and/or am upgrades it can be insanely devastating. Its just early on that it's weak. So i'd be weary of making it too

[quote](6) Where'd you get this number from? Of course an arbitrary amount of capital ships can have an arbitrarily high cost, but more than 10 is pushing it even in the biggest games possible.[/quote] The cost of the logistics + the cost of supply + the cost of the ship + the cost of training, you can even add the cost of the research tech for more training to boot. And then, the incalculable cost of time. Depending on what point in the game it is, at the midpoint, it can cost you over

As I said, run a 9-star 9-AI game with large fleets, so how the works out for you.

[quote]Never is a long time, by the way[/quote] As I said, Starcraft's popularity was driven by a lot of factors, far more than because it was 'competitive based' or something. Even two things like Battle.Net and the Custom Rules Maps. Prior to Starcraft, matchmaking had to be done via clunky IP-based lobby systems, like Westwood Online. Custom Maps really drove multiplayer's success as well - back in the day, over half the games were custom rule sets (90% of them being *********DRAGONB

[quote](10) A lot of the conflict just proves that people care about the game. There's a lot of noise for sure, but that happens anywhere. A game staying alive longer is pure proof that the community is invigorated. There is a certainly a lot of crap and noise going on, but the game is better for surviving it.[/quote] I don't think so. Let's take two old games off the top of my head - Allegiance and Natural Selection. Both of them still have players, but 'died' long ago. How ma

In before tl;dr :D By the way, I should mention the Gauss Rail Gun is NOT fine. It's affected by shield mitigation, and a SINGLE blast of the Kol's main beam array is enough to put any ship at max shield mitigation (or damn near). The Kol is pretty much guaranteed to fire this weapon at the target ship as it slowly turns to be in-line, meaning 90% of the time you use the Gauss, it's going to do less than half damage. For this reason, Gauss is among one of the worst Kol abilitie

[quote]Heya to all! Just wanted to thank Uzii for his great mod. Thank ye very much. Keep up the good work.BTW. Have you found out the problem behind CPUs fear of ship graveyards or have you just deleted them from the next version. Waiting for it with great interest.[/quote] The CPU never colonizes neutral mining bases either. That it avoids ship graveyards isn't something of a surprise.

[quote]Uranium - a theory on why 8x seems to use lower CPU than 1x: you're likely zoomed out more? [/quote] Nope, I took that sample without doing a thing, except changing the speed (was all the way zoomed out at any rate). The trend is pretty much the same no matter what zoom I'm at anyway.

Heyo! For some reason, Uzii, I cannot modify star_yellow.entity. None of the changes have any effect in-game. However, star_blue.entity plays nice, and I was able to make the corona white and everything! <a href="http://img143.imageshack.us/my.php?image=

As I mentioned Tribes 2, and you brought up re-releasing, there's something I think more publishers should do with 'good' games. Go in, update the engine to take advantage of new hardware, make sure it *RUNS* on newer hardware, pretty up the graphics, dust off old bugs, add in new features, and re-release that sucker. Imagine if Bioware did that with Baldur's Gate 2.

I reloaded an old, old save from that game, where fleets are still getting enormous and performance is beginning to degrade. My CPU speeds and associated performance with speed changes. Seems odd that CPU usage drops at 8X, but performance is the worst then. <br/

XP right now, might try on Vista to use all my RAM. I'd posit that using Sins+ could be part of my problem, but Sins+ doesn't really do anything to the game in any way that'd affect performance, except eating up a bit more VRAM. Actually I just noticed that CPU usage drops to around 10% on all cores when I go to 8X speed, but performance completely sucks.