1  |   Order by index

Jan 6, 2001, 4:42am

[View Quote] > Oh for F**ks sake......
>
[View Quote] And that's the problem, dipshit: AW ISN'Ta game, which is why it continues to flounder. AW has MUCH potential to be MORE gamelike, but Rick, JP, Roland, et al still don't get it.

> You would be scared of what I know pal!

<yawn> You haven't impressed me so far...

> are
> environment
> supports
> imply, but impose restrictions on unconvered land, the ground zero building
> limit radius, whether or not the world has an object registry, eminent
> domain rights, etc, etc.
>
> You're getting pedantic now ... running out of sound arguments? ... and you
> CAN build with anything ... in your own world. MAKE the object, USE the
> object. Pretty simple to understand I would have thought. What game allows
> you to do that then?

Level editors do, which is basically what AW is.

> due
> AW's
> takes
> certain
> and
> put
> before
> that detailed enough physics, but I'm sure if a 3D bowling game had an
> "alley/lane editor", the pins could be knocked down from whatever angle the
> designer wanted.
>
> Guess what "Here's an example (of the point - don't take it too literally
> regarding AW)" meant? E-X-A-M-P-L-E ... meaning a method of demostrating a
> point and "don't take it too literally regarding AW" meaning not necessarily
> relating to AW ... because is was an E-X-A-M-P-L-E of the P-O-I-N-T.

Well the point wasn't made because the example doesn't apply. <shrug> Back to Argument 101 with you!

1  |   Order by index