搜索结果: *

17 big men so far! Nearly enough for a George Michael orgy...

Whoa, I posted a poll AND voted for the most chosen option?

First time that's ever happened...

Ah well, people will know what I mean.

No game as good as M&B deserves the adjective "light-weight." No way, no how. If you disagree, you are wrong.

I take light-weight to mean (when applied to a game) "easy to get good at", and I put to you that the previous definition in no way fits M&B.

With no disrespect intended whatsoever to the creators of the other great mods, The Last Days (IMO) stands head and shoulders above the rest.

Has anyone else found the "Plasma Coated Titanium Armor" easter egg yet?

Just me then?

Here's a cd key for you:

G0-AW4Y-Y00-P1RAT3

Archonsod 说:

Anyone with that short an attention span would be better off with a console. Then again, anyone with that kind of attention span would be better off removed from the gene pool.

点击展开...

I wouldn't have bothered replying to this if it wasn't a mod who said it, but frankly this kinda attitude pisses me right off.

So somebody with a short attention span for SP games should be removed from the gene pool should they? If you truly believe that, YOU should be removed from the gene pool for being an intolerant twit.

Seriously, how can we have mods in this forum who post moronic crap like that?

Civilization 4 with Warlords expansion.

America's Army.

Free to play and still one of the best.

Civ 4. Easy.

I think Eogan has pretty much suggested exactly what I would want from a road system.

Still, there's really no need for the D3D, is there? I've programmed using D3D extensively (well, OK, a bit anyway) and I never felt the need to advertise that I was using it. It's not like replacing it with the windows standard cursor would be hard.

Still, this is pretty trivial. God I can be a picky sod sometimes. 

The original (i.e. 1992) "The Settlers" (known in some countries as Serf City)

Every version of Settlers since has been a pale, pale imitation.

Volkier 说:

SoxSexSax 说:

My only point was that, wouldn't it be horrid to put in hours of work training a horse only to lose him when you get knocked out?

(Obviously I'm assuming that most people play with realistic saving...an assumption that could well be wrong).

Like I said, I'm not really anti the idea, but I do feel that getting kniocked out should have a very high (near certain) chance of losing your horse, which will be more annoying if you've put tons of time into it.

点击展开...

Ahh but do you really think thats a good reason not to impliment something? What about loosing your spirited charger and thick black armor that cost you over 25k deniar total, not to mention took you weeks of playing to get and to find on a merchant? Isn't that pretty much the same thing?

Plus, the ability to recover the horse at the end, or the ability to train him in the same way to avoid this all-together provides a good 'counter-measure' against this, solves the problem you state, and improves gameplay overall - or am I missing something? :

点击展开...

I don't particularly agree with the "recovery" thing myself. If you can turn horses into meat, why can't the bandits? If you can have your horse killed in battle, why can't the bandits? If you can sell your horse for cash, why can't the bandits? There should be no guarantee whatsoever that your horse survives the capturing process IMO.

Regarding your comparison between the trained horse and the spirited charger/black armor, no they're not the same, for reasons you yourself give in the OP: RPG players get an attachment to something they have invested time in. Additionally, if you can train a horse to the tippy-top level in less time than it takes to get back the ~4500 you'd need to replace those items, training horses would be faaaaar too easy IMO.

As I've said (3 times now) I wouldn't be upset if this went in, but if the horse you trained was unlosable, or even significantly harder to lose than any "normal" horse,  I would find it very...gamey, which isn't what I want to feel about a game that currently feels so authentic.

My only point was that, wouldn't it be horrid to put in hours of work training a horse only to lose him when you get knocked out?

(Obviously I'm assuming that most people play with realistic saving...an assumption that could well be wrong).

Like I said, I'm not really anti the idea, but I do feel that getting kniocked out should have a very high (near certain) chance of losing your horse, which will be more annoying if you've put tons of time into it.

Yes, M&B doesn't use clipping, but the game is still processor intensive.

There's a very simple test: use a software overclock to temporarily increase your video card speed and see if your fps goes up.

I have done this. It does not. Hence, the game is processor intensive.

Before we go getting too excited, I have to say that a physics engine capable of even remotely accurately modelling the sort of collisions, slices, deflections etc. in a mount and blade battle would require a computer far more powerful than the average home user currently has. Physics engines are PROCESSOR intensive. Mount and blade is already PROCESSOR intensive. See the issue?

Most games that include physics engines are, on the whole, VIDEO CARD intensive, hence the extra strain on the processor doesn't make much difference. That is not the case with M&B. Adding any (even a really ****ty) physics engine will seriously reduce the game speed, which is already only acceptable (i.e. not great) when using the battlesizer mod (which, IMO, is almost essential to enjoy the game to its fullest).

At best, any physics engine would need to be an extremely cut down version of reality. An EXTREMELY cut down version. And considering what we have in game (with some little tweaks needed to charging and "bunching") already feels like a cut down version of reality, coupled with the degraded performance we will see if it is added, I question the need for a physics engine.