186 replies to this topic

[ComradeJ]

Ah, he's here! Time to talk things over.

First of all, ReGen's and RenA/APB's style are quite different. I have played both ReGen and RenA, and I must say that I like ReGen's style better. It brings back the cheesy stuff that I thought Red Alert was, instead of RenA over-correct stuff that made the units look rather poor. I bought RA when I was quite young, and I fantasised stuff. I never really did care much for the FMVs, I played more skirmish than I watched movies, and the units were totally different in my mind than they were there. I 'coolified' the units in my mind. Why? Because Red Alert is graphics-wise, both ingame and in the FMVs, extremely crappy. So what if a wheel has a lot of polies? It looked ugly.

Which brings me to the point, why are you perfectly recreating RA? Red Alert wasn't perfect, nor were WW's artists. In fact, only the gameplay designers and such actually had some skill.
What's the use of a mod? To have fun. So why are you making three-legged SAM Sites if four-legged SAM Sites give more fun? Is the imperfection of Red Alert really more important than pleasure?

Rather off-topic, but why was I dumbfucked on the APB forums? I don't recall doing anything negative under the name of Doomsdaykiller (even if that were the case under the name of Ascanius)...

[BlckWyerve]

I've given this some thought, and have come up with a really simple solution. Since neither side is willing to give an inch to compromise, why not just completely ignore each other? No one from either mod talks to the other on cncden. Outside of there, the contact is nill since apparently most ReGen members are banned from the APB forum.

[Aircraftkiller]

They would not have been banned had they observed forum rules. I have absolutely no problem with people not liking me there, but when it comes to the point where that's all you post and you spam it everywhere, I will give you a few chances and then finally ban you.

You can ask the three people I banned last week that did nothing but what I just described for about a year. I gave them many chances to start being productive to the forum's existence and they refused each time, so after about... the 15th time I just banned them and left it.

[jakeydude666]

but then some say they did nothing, just didnt have the same opinion that you did.
ComradeJ for example, i cant see him spamming...
Take a kick in the balls like a real man (or shemale if you are like that, not meant to be offensive) and admit you banned them because maybe 1 stepped out of line

[Allied General]

Besides ACK wouldn't your intelligent and balanced comments make them look an fool and hence everyone would ignore them.

If they are flaming new posts then ban otherwise just laugh as everyone ignores them.

[Aircraftkiller]

My name isn't ack, and I don't like wasting my time with replies when I can simply ban someone for violating my forum rules. They're placed for a reason, and it shows that I don't like it when people break them.

If you want to challenge me, do it somewhere else instead of giving me the spam challenge... Like it's that hard for me to delete all of your posts with one mouse click when all you did was write "OMFGR USUX" for 10 pages...

[jakeydude666]

no, you just over react dude. And no-one types "Aircraftkiller", ACK is easier. and dont you even have abit of resistance? i mean no1 just goes "i think ill ban him for doing 1 thing wrong, and wont warn him". So why not give people warnings, and come on, who reads forums rules?
And if you say you will keep banning people for 1 offense, then i will have to call you "Stalin" as u banning people on the spot is like Stalin sending people off to Gulags for saying 1 ill thing of him
Stop being a baby and whining whenever someone "breaks" the rules

[Aircraftkiller]

... I don't know why I bother, but had you read anything I wrote at *all* you would notice that I said I give people many chances before I remove them.

[jakeydude666]

and I don't like wasting my time with replies when I can simply ban someone for violating my forum rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well you state here you cant be bothered to even reply to warn them, but that u ban them straight away.
Stop talking out of your arse and stop contradicting yourself

Edited by jakeydude666, 13 April 2005 - 10:04 PM.

[Aircraftkiller]

Again, you don't read what I'm writing... Grow up a bit, kid, and learn some English comprehension. They told me to leave them there so that they could constantly harass me and my community and just respond to them instead of banning them... I'm not going to do that, and I have no fucking idea why I have to reiterate myself because you can't read well enough to understand what others are saying.

[FK47]

Picking at spelling is the worst kind of flame you can get ACKKK. Pathetic.

Edited by - FlaK -, 13 April 2005 - 10:51 PM.

[Mishkin]

I've given this some thought, and have come up with a really simple solution.  Since neither side is willing to give an inch to compromise, why not just completely ignore each other?  No one from either mod talks to the other on cncden.  Outside of there, the contact is nill since apparently most ReGen members are banned from the APB forum.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's the problem. We never post in his mod updates, but when we unveil a render, he goes babbling on about how imperfect we are. Then, like always, it turns into a flame war... every single fucking time on Lion's site. When asked not to post in our news section, he exclaimed that he can do whatver the hell he wants and will ALWAYS tell us the errors we've made when comparing stuff to orignal RA.

Ack please, if you don't like stopping posting in our update thread at Lion's, then think how much you would help Lion by not igniting yet another flame war.

[Aircraftkiller]

If you don't like it, ignore it. C&C Den is an open forum for discussion threads when a news item is posted. If you can't accept that others will not like your work, I suggest you find something to do that won't put it into the public eye.

Hal doesn't really care about the comments until they turn into nothing but actual slander and threats. Do you honestly think he was bothered by those comment threads? I don't, because if he was, he'd tell me. He's a very up front person.

[Lynx]

If you don't like it, ignore it. C&C Den is an open forum for discussion threads when a news item is posted. If you can't accept that others will not like your work, I suggest you find something to do that won't put it into the public eye.

Hal doesn't really care about the comments until they turn into nothing but actual slander and threats. Do you honestly think he was bothered by those comment threads? I don't, because if he was, he'd tell me. He's a very up front person.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey ACK remember those massive dildos strung up to parachutes in your news update?
Well you couldnt accept what people were saying about them there so you infact just contradicted yourself.


Just think about what your saying ok, all of Regens work is exactly like its ingame counterpart. It all looks fantastic! if you cant find much else to slander their work about than the amount of legs on a SAM site then dont slander at all. Seriously the ingame SAM site looked as if it had 2 legs so I dont really give two flying shits.
And the only possible reason you can link this SAM with the TD SAM is the hazard paint on the base which, in my mind, makes the texture much better.

You are one of the most childish of people I have ever seen in the modding community, you come down to random crappy threats when you see you arent going to win a fight.
Just grow up and take critisism correctly.

Monkey

[Aircraftkiller]

I accepted it without a problem; however that does not mean I won't dispute what was written. Although I must wonder if you consider all bombs to be "massive dildos" because they're all shaped in the same general way, a cylinder full of explosives.

You don't even pay attention to the in-game artwork of RA because when the SAM turned around to fire, you could clearly see that it had three legs... Your attention to detail leaves much to be desired. You tell me that our bombs look like "massive dildos" and yet I'm the childish one.

I see the thread is beginning to fall short of the challenge I was hoping to get out of it... sigh. Can at least one of you provide some kind of argument I can't refute? This does start to get boring when it's just not challenging anyore.

[The_Hunter]

they may not look like dildo's but they are no way up to the BattleField 2 standards which is his point..

[The End 007]

I accepted it without a problem; however that does not mean I won't dispute what was written. Although I must wonder if you consider all bombs to be "massive dildos" because they're all shaped in the same general way, a cylinder full of explosives.

You don't even pay attention to the in-game artwork of RA because when the SAM turned around to fire, you could clearly see that it had three legs... Your attention to detail leaves much to be desired. You tell me that our bombs look like "massive dildos" and yet I'm the childish one.

I see the thread is beginning to fall short of the challenge I was hoping to get out of it... sigh. Can at least one of you provide some kind of argument I can't refute? This does start to get boring when it's just not challenging anyore.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your attention to detail also leaves a lot to be desired if you look at the purchase icon for the parabombs:



You can clearly see there are more then four cords holding the bomb to the parachute.

If we take a close look at the refinery you can clearly see a thick lighter grey line along the top, probably some from of concrete roof for the refinery which your version lacks:




I have even brightend the image for you so you can see more clearly the line I speak of.

And finally the purchase icon for the SAM site is clearly the C&C95:



Which firstly means that your arguement about WW's attention to detail fails since both this and the use of the C&C95 helipad SHP and a new purchase icon means they can't have been paying that much attention. But it also shows the SAM site we use IS in Red Alert much like the Helipad you chose (ie. the pruchase icon one) is in Red Alert.

Edited by The End 007, 14 April 2005 - 07:47 AM.

[Aircraftkiller]

they may not look like dildo's but they are no way up to the BattleField 2 standards which is his point..

And what are these so-called standards that you speak of? I'm just curious considering it looks like you know nothing about the "standards" you keep trying to pass off for fact. Remember kid, there's a difference between your subjective opinion and what an engine can handle.

If you don't like something, come out and say it. Don't just say "it's not up to <insert engine here>'s standards" without any evidence whatsoever. Dice themselves said barn-sized buildings should be 800 polygons... It stands to reason that something the size of a bomb, which is invariably smaller than a barn, would be capped around 200-400 polygons.

Of course logic probably doesn't suit you too well, so keep on assuming!

[ComradeJ]

"It's not the size that matters, it's how you use it"

Now that originally wasn't about polygons, but it can be applied to that. From the BF2 screens, there seems to be urban combat, meaning there's lots of buildings. Of course, that means their polycount has to be low. But your polycount on a Gap Generator, a building of which only one would exist at a time, shows a lack of polygons, engine-wise, it could've done with thrice the amount you used. Or 10 times the amount, that would've worked, but that unnecessarily high. Your model however, lacked polygons to a great degree.

About me being dumbfucked (it's somewhat the same as being banned), I always tried to be constructive - always said what was wrong with it and how to fix it. If I'm correct, you actually followed my advice on having more contrast in the bricks on the Power Plant. So what have I done wrong?