1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  20  |   Order by default

Feb 26, 2001, 6:37pm

[View Quote] That's just your view on this discussion. It's not about "who is better".
Now shut up and look at how other people did it, and learn from it. Don't
hide behind "I don't care". You can actually learn a lot if you accept that
other people can do things better than you do, and want to look at it. Funny
thing is, if you look at it and learn how they did it, you can suddenly do
it as good as they do. Funny, eh?

Of course, you can also start bitching about how poor you are that everybody
is hounding you with questions about how and why you did something...

> I could care less who is better.. would you people
> like me to code in C++ instead?

I don't mind you coding in VB. That's your choice. But don't tell other
people to do so.

> Would it make your people's life a whole
> lot easier if I did?

Who cares... I don't use your bots anyway, so it prolly wouldn't influence
me.

> Why not tell Brant, 00RUSS, and Builderz to stop
> coding in VB too..

Why would I? I don't tell you to stop with it either.

> I can bet they know C++ or C or Delphi or Java too..

Do you? Did you actually code something in those languages? Did you get any
further than "let's try it - eex it looks too difficult - next"?

> BUT.. they prolly choose VB because it is so simple..

Prolly not. Each of those languages has a steeper learning curve than VB.
But *if* you get to know them, they are easier than VB. Each of them is more
flexible than VB. You can do more, and it's faster. But it requires more
knowledge, more time and more learning.

> see.. you all dont
> realize..

We do. You just don't see it.

> your not as smart as you say you are..

No, we are smarter.

> think before you speak..

If only you would do that... think, do some background research, listen to
us, etc.

> it helps a lot..

Yup. Now do it. Come on, you can do it. Prolly.

rolu

Feb 26, 2001, 6:47pm

[View Quote] Quoting you: "simple programs such as bots should be made in VB.."

so you are saying everybody who makes "simple programs such as bots" should
use VB.

> AOL is a program moron..

AOL, or America OnLine, is a company. A well known ISP. They surely have
programs, but AOL isn't one. Now who are you calling a moron?

> and Adobe is a company but they make programs..

no, really. As if I didn't knew so.

But if you do (as it seems): then say so the first time. Say what you mean.

> (Ex: Adobe Acrobat) there are a lot of programming languages.. create one
> urself.. I dont think u can.. can u?

Yes. As a matter of fact, I am doing so at the moment, it is part of my
comp. sci. education. Everybody around here gets to know how to do it.

> Exactly..

You have the very annoying habit of answering questions you just asked with
the wrong answer, and then basing your entire post on them. It makes you
look stupid. Don't base arguments on things you aren't 100% certain of.

> dont complain about what I
> use if u cant make a better one..

Bull shit statement. I may complain about everything I want to complain
about. Even if I can't fix it.

rolu

Feb 27, 2001, 8:23am

[View Quote] Translation: can't use it.

rolu

Feb 27, 2001, 2:29pm

[View Quote] Because it looks like one. And because they want it to be a game.

> gmes have points of some sort ie hit points in a rpg or guns that kill a
> player like unreal or some other sort of thing.

I don't see guns in patience. Also, unreal is 3D, just like AW. So, what's
your point?

> aw has none of this

AW is 3D, like a lot of games (in fact even all 3D games :-)

Also, you walk around with an avatar, just like in those 3D games.

Also, you can do this with a bunch of other people, just like in a lot of
multiplayer games.

Also, you can chat with those other players.

AW *does* look like a game.

> yeh some have made rpgs inside ow aw but that does not
> make aw a game in anyway.

AW isn't a game. If anything, it's a chat program. But that doesn't say you
can't compare it to a game.

rolu

Mar 4, 2001, 5:08pm

[View Quote] watch out - that changes *every* * in the world into nothing. Not only the
ones you don't want.

rolu

Mar 9, 2001, 12:52pm

[View Quote] maybe "borland (products) in general are/is good, but borland c++ builder
sucks"?

rolu

Mar 10, 2001, 12:58pm

[View Quote] then *tell* so next time. We can't read minds (at least I can't).

rolu

Mar 16, 2001, 8:23am

[View Quote] If he'd leave, it would surely be a relief. Or something.

rolu

Mar 16, 2001, 4:45pm

[View Quote] I'm not grimble, you idiot. Learn to read, and learn to reply to the person
you reply to.

rolu

Mar 16, 2001, 4:45pm

[View Quote] who, ananas? Or lanzerei? :-)

[View Quote]

Mar 16, 2001, 10:23pm

[View Quote] Nope. You replied to me, yet spoke to him. But since you can't even seem to
keep your brain cells inside your head, I think we can't expect you to reply
to the one you speak to.

It's a pity the human race contains people like this lanezeri-loser... let's
hope his citship indeed expires soon, then at least these newsgroups will be
free of the unworthy trash he dumps here...

rolu

Mar 17, 2001, 6:46pm

[View Quote] good - then your stupidity brings someone some fun.

> my cit expires in 8 days..

Yay.

> be glad..

will be

> I sure am..

You can leave now... pretend it expired now.

> only
> thing I will miss is the people who are smart..

You wouldn't even recognize a smart person if he was standing on you.

rolu

Mar 17, 2001, 6:47pm

[View Quote] Nah... just "this bug will be replaced by another one, and all the other
bugs will stay"

rolu

Mar 17, 2001, 8:57pm

[View Quote] Don't like you either.

> ur dumb..

Why? Because I don't like you? Weird.

> u make no sence..

nooo... you should say "I don't get what you say".

> and I kno a lot of smart
> people..

ah, sure, just look in any history book.

rolu

Mar 17, 2001, 6:50pm

[View Quote] Yeah, sure.

> I make bots and I have made a paintball
> bot..

Woo. We are impressed. Not.

> I am working the bugs out of it..

or into it, which would be about the same in your case.

> how stupid am I?

Very. Or at least an arrogant twit.

> Maybe I should
> make everyone ELSE do it for me..

As if they would.

> how dumb is that?

Bwahaha. You couldn't.

> and get a job.. cuz..
> my bot will be bugless

nah...

> and I will be looking forward to Disney World..

and it will prolly not go any further than "looking forward to".

rolu

Mar 17, 2001, 6:52pm

[View Quote] Keep on handing out your scripts. I'm sure people will appreciate it.

rolu

Mar 17, 2001, 8:57pm

[View Quote] ey - don't reply to me when you talk to someone else :-)

rolu

Dec 24, 1998, 12:14pm

that's what he said...

[View Quote]

Sep 5, 1998, 12:48pm

Hi,

Is it possible to force the visibility to a given distance? I have a
P200-MMX with a stingray 128/3D, with minimum visibility set to 40m and
framerate to 30fps. Most of the time, my framerate just exceeds 30, so
visibility starts to increase. But when I start walking or looking around,
the framerate drops and the visibility decreases again. This is quite
annoying, because every time the viewing distance changes, AW stops
responding for a few tenth of a second. And, when I enter AW at GZ, or
AWGate, it takes a while before the visibility drops down to around 40-50
again. I just want to set the visibility, no matter what the framerate. Is
this possible to do, or if not, is it on The List?

Rolu

Sep 7, 1998, 11:49am

This won't work. The visibility still increases. Am I doing something wrong?

Rolu
[View Quote] [performance]
framerate=14
force_visibility=1
visibility=60

Paul

[View Quote]

Sep 7, 1998, 7:21pm

I can't get the fps before increasing visibility any higher than 30. Not
with force_visibility=1 and not without it. I tried in options_settings, and
it won't go higher, and when I change the aworld.ini file, awbrowser resets
it to 30 when started up. Is this force_visibility working for other people?

[View Quote]

Sep 8, 1998, 6:08am

In that case I would like to see an option to disable the visibility/fps
algorithm, so that if I set my minimum visibility to 40, it stays that way,
no matter what the fps (that is what wishlist is for, isn't it?).

Anyway, thanks for the help.

Rolu

[View Quote]

Sep 23, 1998, 3:36pm

I'll betatest everything that sounds usefull to me. Keep on programming, AW
needs it.

Rolu

[View Quote]

Sep 26, 1998, 7:49am

Super Mario World 3D Alpha World :)

[View Quote]

Sep 16, 1998, 4:14pm

Something I would like to see, and what would save a lot of money, is a way
to offline build things, and then, when online, "paste" them in a world.

I think of it like this: when you want to build something, like a small
house, you start up your AW browser, build your house, completely select it
(using Ctrl-Shift), and then select File-Save selection to disk. Now, the
combination of objects and their relative position to each other is saved to
disk in some sort of file format. Preferably plain text so you can edit it
when you like.

Now, when you go online next time, you start your AW browser and go to where
you want your house. Then, you select File-Open selection file (or something
better suited), and your house will be put into the world, a few metres in
front of you, completely selected. Now you can move your creation to where
you want it to be, and further decorate/finish it.

I think this would be a very handy feature. You can offline create things,
what would save a lot of money, and you can very easily move some of your
projects to a completely different place. Also, you can E-mail cool
pre-constructed creations to one of the newsgroups, or your friends. And
this will save bandwith and processor capacity on the world server, because
people will be able to build lots of things offline. Just imagine what would
be possible.

Rolu

Sep 17, 1998, 10:08am

That zipped packed idea is a very good idea. But about the land hogs, they
will cover up AW anyway. It is currently prohibited to use RoboBuilder or
things like it, but it is still possible. No-one is checking if someone is
using a building tool. So, if a land hog wants to cover up a big lot of
land, he will do it anyway. I think that there should be some sort of limit,
like that you can only send one object change per second or so. If you are
building from within the browser, you probably wouldn't even notice, because
it will take you more than one second to generate another object change.
And, if you want to use robobuilder to build something that is really
boring, like some ground cover, you can still do so, it will just take you
one second per object. Covering really big lots will be harder to do, but
regular users will still have the benefits of RoboBuilder.

Rolu

[View Quote]

Sep 24, 1998, 4:11pm

Sounds like a very cool program... Where can I get it?

Can I get it?

Rolu

[View Quote]

Sep 26, 1998, 6:05pm

That are cool ideas. I think that the possibility to create games will draw
a lot more users to AW.

[View Quote]

Oct 6, 1998, 6:59pm

Hey, grover, that is a very good point you make there.

Rolu

[View Quote]

Oct 8, 1998, 10:46am

Sounds like a nice idea to me.

Rolu

[View Quote]

1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  20  |   Order by default