Well, my guess wasn't confirmed. and it still isn't.
Yay, the thread seems to have died. To keep it alive, I simply don't mind AudiBGs misunderstanding of the rules and say it's Star Wars Battlefront.
Then it must be Hover Car Racing... wow, never heard of that one. great choice for this thread!
looks like some kind of F-Zero remake, but other than that, I have no clue.
We have a winner!
Of course it's Terra Nova: Strike Force Centauri. A game I really whish for a sequel.... for almost 14 years now...
well, actually it wasn't easy. at least if you haven't played it ack in the late 80ies.
Nopw for something more modern... at least relatively
Nopw for something more modern... at least relatively
Oh man, people in here have a much too good taste... need to get more obscure next time. Yeah, M& is right.
sory for the delay again.
Here's the new game.
Here's the new game.
looks like Blizzard's or rather Silicon Graphic's Rock'n'Roll Racing to me. But I think we had that already.
Last edited by ColeusRattus, .
Thought it would take longer...
BlueFlame is correct.
BlueFlame is correct.
Thought it was my turn to post, but I guess it's okay as I forgot to check back in yesterday... And as the last one was guessed correctly, I feel free to post my game now:
Pah, I say fair game. And the "bros b4 hos" motto is stupid. A good friend will come over the jealousy. If a mere crush, which an affection towards a girl you both just met is, can ruin your friendship, you have to ask yourself how deep that friendship is.
I for one "fought" over a girl I loved with my best mate for more than two years, and we were both seriously in love. We even were both together with her at some time (not simultaniously), but the friendship prevailed.
I for one "fought" over a girl I loved with my best mate for more than two years, and we were both seriously in love. We even were both together with her at some time (not simultaniously), but the friendship prevailed.
I know it's off topic, but how can you ruin a GTR? It's not like it's a looker in the first place, even if you see one IRL.
Bad idea. For several reasons:
1) It would need time to add properly. With only one coder, the developement time can be spend on more importnat things, especially since there are means to achieve what you want be running an external program.
2) Most people don't have important things to say. Just look at the chats in game. Now take away the "barrier" of typing, and there would be even more nonsense. A mute option doesn't nullify that argument because if you don't use it, there would've been no reason to implement it in the first place.
3) It would take server bandwidth away from more improtant things. Again, muting has no effect on server load, thus it's not a valid counterpoint.
and lastly
4) It would be unrealistic. While radios are used for communication between cars and the pits, they're not used for drivers to communicate with each other. As the pit isn't operated by a human, simp,y pretend to talk to them by talking into your headset. No need for VoIP for that.
On a sidenote: Opening a thread in a discussion forum and then complaining about people who disagree is about as rediculous as it can get. If you don't like you idea being shot down, put it on a homepage with no comment function, or any other means to contact you.
1) It would need time to add properly. With only one coder, the developement time can be spend on more importnat things, especially since there are means to achieve what you want be running an external program.
2) Most people don't have important things to say. Just look at the chats in game. Now take away the "barrier" of typing, and there would be even more nonsense. A mute option doesn't nullify that argument because if you don't use it, there would've been no reason to implement it in the first place.
3) It would take server bandwidth away from more improtant things. Again, muting has no effect on server load, thus it's not a valid counterpoint.
and lastly
4) It would be unrealistic. While radios are used for communication between cars and the pits, they're not used for drivers to communicate with each other. As the pit isn't operated by a human, simp,y pretend to talk to them by talking into your headset. No need for VoIP for that.
On a sidenote: Opening a thread in a discussion forum and then complaining about people who disagree is about as rediculous as it can get. If you don't like you idea being shot down, put it on a homepage with no comment function, or any other means to contact you.
It's only his forum account. And that might be only temporal.
Well, those are exactly the reasons I bought it. I need something that gets me from a to b, is reliable and cheap to run.
If I had wanted fun, an option would have been a 15 year old 190 bhp Jaguar X for the same money. But then, I'd spend a fortune on insurance alone... not to mention the gas guzzling engine or the fact that it would most likely fall apart after three bends.
Well, I don't want to demotivate you, as practice and effort are as, if not more important than talent.
Still, the small wireframe suggests a) a badly optimized model with loads of unneccessary triangles and b) areas which should've been modeled out but weren't, like the basic shape of the haircut.
Also, again, your texturework seems subpar.
If I might give an advice: start drawing and painting, read up on it to get a feeling for proportions and shapes. As it is, your work has a certain childlike naivité to it, which basically is a result of not knowing how something actually looks like. It helps if you alter the way you see things. Don't try to see them as what they are, but try to see only the lines and shapes that define an object.
And for the research work: I think I spotted your problem. If you do visual work, research visually. WHat things do is less important than how they look. Your work suggest you do it the other way round: you try to incorporate things by function, but care little for how they look. A prime example is the space station. It has a tubic shape and solar panels, so that roughly, it is right. Still, how the solar panels are attached, and how the sections are connected are totally off from how they look in real life, thus creating the already mentioned childlike visuals.
But keep up and don't let yourself get shot down by people like becky and me (even though I hope we give a tad of constructive criticism too).
They all look rushed.
no.
no
You were obviously after a simple, comic style look. Still, the whole package looks very badly crafted, with no research whatsoever on how the parts actually look like in real life. Your style strongly resembles children's doodlings, and not in the desired way.
Cheap textures, horrid UV mapping. Even if you go after a comic like look, don't rush these things. Also, don't use fine structures for bump mapping or on textures, because they make obvious how badly the textures are wrapped around the models. You see pixels being stretched verywhere.
The general ideas is good, but the realisation is lacking in almost every way possible.
They all look rushed.
no.
Thought it was about characters this time? Actually, I think the characters have about as much thought and research in them as this particular question.
You were obviously after a simple, comic style look. Still, the whole package looks very badly crafted, with no research whatsoever on how the parts actually look like in real life. Your style strongly resembles children's doodlings, and not in the desired way.
Cheap textures, horrid UV mapping. Even if you go after a comic like look, don't rush these things. Also, don't use fine structures for bump mapping or on textures, because they make obvious how badly the textures are wrapped around the models. You see pixels being stretched verywhere.
The general ideas is good, but the realisation is lacking in almost every way possible.
If you do something, do it properly. I know it's hard and timeconsuming, but that job you did looks either so desperately rushed, or you simply lack talent. As I am in a friendly mood today, I think it's the former.
no.
Guess not, especially since I don't know anything about the gamplay. I usuall rank that before visuals, but as visuals are the only thing I got, I have to judge by them. And I am underwhelmed.
Lastly: if you do make qestionnaires, also spend more time on them.
No, it would not. It would cause realism problems. The animation cannot start before you actually changed the gear. Thus, it creates following paradox: If the gear change occurs when you yourself change gears, the animation would be played afterwards and would in fact not correlate with whats happening with the car, as there would be no gear change when the animations are played.
But if the gearchange is made in snychronisation with the animation, you would actually have to wait for the change to take playe, which would make timing of gear changes more difficult and would connect the player even more from the simulated car. The problem is even moer obvious if you use a H-gate shifter. There you'd change gear, just to observe the animation then change the gear for real afterwards.
Money is a funny thing. It's just one of the great fictions the world as a whole has subscribed to, much like religion.
I for one don't care for money (and I am not rich. ATM, I would even suggets that I'm rather poor, at least relatively).
Still, money is what keeps the world turn round, so I have to play by the rules. But I am no less happy when I have little money than when I have more of it. At least as long as I can afford the luxury of having a roof over my head and a meal every day.
I for one don't care for money (and I am not rich. ATM, I would even suggets that I'm rather poor, at least relatively).
Still, money is what keeps the world turn round, so I have to play by the rules. But I am no less happy when I have little money than when I have more of it. At least as long as I can afford the luxury of having a roof over my head and a meal every day.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG