User information for Nicholas

Real Name
Nicholas
Nickname
Wazootyman
Email
Concealed by request
Description
Blue's News "subscriber" for ~5 years...
Homepage
None given.
Signed On
August 20, 2002
Supporter
-
Total Posts
637 (Apprentice)
User ID
13881
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
637 Comments. 32 pages. Viewing page 12.
Newer [  1    7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22    32  ] Older
17.
 
Ad at the top of Blue's...
Feb 11, 2004, 17:35
17.
Ad at the top of Blue's... Feb 11, 2004, 17:35
Feb 11, 2004, 17:35
 
I noticed a new political ad for Bush on the top ad banner today...
"In these uncertain times, America needs a president whose foreign policy works."

Yeah, look at all those dead bodies! Something must be working right!

18.
 
OMG
Feb 11, 2004, 12:52
18.
OMG Feb 11, 2004, 12:52
Feb 11, 2004, 12:52
 
A company said a game would come out at a certain time, then it was DELAYED! OMG, This has never happened before! That company and all the games it is making must suck! Rrr they have betrayed my trust and I'll never buy another of their games again!

My theory? Just like all delays of major games, this one will be forgotten a month after release (regardless if the game is any good).

3.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 9, 2004, 13:31
3.
Re: No subject Feb 9, 2004, 13:31
Feb 9, 2004, 13:31
 
Great game
...for me to POOP ON!

Hehe... Just kiddin', never played it.

1.
 
Next up:
Feb 9, 2004, 13:24
1.
Next up: Feb 9, 2004, 13:24
Feb 9, 2004, 13:24
 
Everquest: Makin' Magic and
Everquest: Bustin' Out

Also being released:
The Sims: Gates of Discord

3.
 
Gak...
Feb 9, 2004, 12:32
3.
Gak... Feb 9, 2004, 12:32
Feb 9, 2004, 12:32
 
First of all, I would not call Dark Corners of the Earth a “port”. This title is being developed with the Xbox in mind and we've been very conscientious about that fact and we try to take advantage of all the features that the Xbox has to offer.

Another one? Is this even being developed for the PC? If so, should I even care anymore... T_T

35.
 
Re: Don't add something for the sake..
Feb 9, 2004, 00:59
35.
Re: Don't add something for the sake.. Feb 9, 2004, 00:59
Feb 9, 2004, 00:59
 
CREATING A TRUELY 3D ENVIRONMENT HAS YET TO ADD ANYTHING TO ANY RTS GAME!

The Myth series - the range/melee bonus for elevated terrain was a major gameplay factor and added a lot to the game.

The Homeworld series - while some argue the 3rd dimention didn't really contribute that much to gameplay, I would definately say it added to immersion... imagine your all fleet on a single horizontal plane, flying around each other... It's just not as cool.

26.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 8, 2004, 19:23
26.
Re: No subject Feb 8, 2004, 19:23
Feb 8, 2004, 19:23
 
WaltC - All I was talking about in my original post were various advantages and disadvantages of 64 bit processing. My point was not to claim that 64 bit processing was a bad move, but rather, that this evolution of the hardware also carried disadvantages. I never claimed those disadvantages outweighed the advantages.

Also...
I don't think it's question of "if" anymore...
Yes, yes... As I said in my original post... 64 bit is the future... the question is how long it will take to become the standard. Personally, I would suspect it will not be a quick transition, considering the present investment in 32 bit hardware/software. Then again, I have been suprised by the speed of shifts in hardware standards in the past...

18.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 8, 2004, 18:01
18.
Re: No subject Feb 8, 2004, 18:01
Feb 8, 2004, 18:01
 
Which is the reason that the A64 has things in place like an on-die memory controller, greatly increasing memory access speed...

But does it double transfer rate? Of course, not everything the processor will be fetching from memory will by 64 bit instructions (x86 allowing variable length instructions... not to mention data), but, simply put, longer instructions = more memory transfer needed.

Since the cpu is designed natively to run 64-bit code, the hardware required is present and accounted for...

Which makes it no less of a disadvantage... CPUs are getting more and more complex and that trend seems unlikely to reverse itself, but that doesn't mean increased complexity cannot be considered a disadvantage.

I hate to be the one to tell you, but it's been a long, long time since x86 cpu hardware was strictly CISC.

Yes I'm aware of micro-ops, but that still doesn't change the fact that more steps will be required to reduce a 64 bit instruction with 4 arguments to micro-ops.

...where you'll find no less than eight (8) differently priced A64 cpu models, in stock and available, both in boxed and OEM packages.

Regardless of chip avaliability, 64 bit processing won't become a standard untill software developers jump on board. Like I said: 64 bit is the future, but how close is that future? I'm not really sure.

A64 was in stock and available through the retail channel as early as last year...

Yeah, I haven't really kept up with this chip's release. I'm just referring to past trends...

12.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 8, 2004, 16:13
12.
Re: No subject Feb 8, 2004, 16:13
Feb 8, 2004, 16:13
 
Anyone who thought 64 bit processors would be twice as fast as 32 bit processors is 100% corn fed retarded.

While I wouldn't go so far as "retarded", this is true.

Those bit ratings have nothing to do with anything except how much memory they can acess.

Now this is simply incorrect. 64 bit refers to instruction length, and while higher memory addressing is possible with a longer instruction, that is certainly neither the only, nor the main advantage to 64 bit processing. Currently, with a maximum 32 bit address, (any byte-addressable memory) the maximum amount of memory that a 32 bit machine can access is 4 gigs, much more than we currently need/use anyway. A 64 bit processor will allow 16 exabytes (16,000,000,000 gigs) of memory... clearly enough for a while, but this is hardly the main advantage of 64 bit processing.

The advantages of a longer instruction length are complex and numberous, but I'll list a few of the main ones here:
  • More instructions possible (offers more higher level processor functionality for CISC fans)
  • More complex instructions possible (more arguments, more and longer immediate values) - this will allow combining multistage operations into single instructions and reduce demands on registers, cache (imagine a full precision floating point number as an immediate O_O... that means you will only need one register for these ops). Again, CISC fans rejoice... RISC devotees are rolling their eyes, but even they stand to benefit from this.
  • Presumably faster large scale data manipulation (64 bits at a time, rather than 32). This, of course, depends on 64 bit data channels in the bus...
  • Greater percision data primatives can handled by the processor more directly (I can really only see two big advantages to this: scientific software will get a speed increase and perhaps better calculations at increased color depth in graphics... then again, that's mainly handled by the graphics card...

There are, however, many disadvantages as well, as I mentioned in a previous post. I'll just touch on them again:
  • More overhead in instrucion transfer (32 extra bits...)
  • Instruction cache either gets bigger and eats up more of the die, or stays the same and holds fewer instructions...
  • Hardware complexity!!! Yikes, a floating point immediate??? More arguments = more hardware needed...
  • Instruction complexity!!! x86 64 bit edition eh? RISC people are again rolling their eyes... even the CISC hardware designers I know are getting fed up with regular ol' x86... However, I'm not sure. Will the 64 bit edition still have the same legacy 32 bit instructions or are they emulated? If they still have the legacy instructions, expect even more headaches... If they are only emulated, then perhaps this is the rebirth x86 has needed for a while (then again, if they are emulated, 32 bit software takes another performance hit...)

And more of both of course...
64 bit is probably the future, but is it the near future? That's a tough one... We'll have to see how fast the software community hops on board.

Then again, AMD is notorious for releasing processors to the press at clock speeds they can't make yet! They manage to make a dozen or so and send em out to benchmarking sites months before the consumer can get their hands on em. Can they even mass fabricate this chip yet?!? Who knows??? (If you don't understand why this is an issue and want to know, post here and I will try to follow up. This post has gotten too long and off-topic already).

4.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 8, 2004, 14:21
4.
Re: No subject Feb 8, 2004, 14:21
Feb 8, 2004, 14:21
 
Obviously 32 bit games run on a 64 bit processor will be slower. Where did they think the speed was going to come from?

Doubling instruction length imposes all kinds of overhead on processing (fewer instructions in cache, fewer full length registers, longer ALUs, more complicated decoding). The payback, then, comes with the wider range and greater precision offered by 64 bit instructions. When none of this potential is used by the program being tested, the result is obviously slower.

Oh, and why, then, is encoding faster, even with 32 bit software? Because the OS is 64 bit, system calls (file reading, file writing, etc) will benefit from the 64 bit instructions. Because encoding obviously requires a lot of reads, writes and memory transfers, the program gets and overall speedup.

ps- Does anyone know if the A64 was tested on a mobo with 64 bit data/instruction channels on its bus? If not, that's another hefty performance hit...

19.
 
Re: Ideas
Feb 8, 2004, 01:40
19.
Re: Ideas Feb 8, 2004, 01:40
Feb 8, 2004, 01:40
 
Ok, how about a section for those tiny "unobtrusive" link buttons...? but put so many in, so close together, that all it looks like is one giant, seething, pulsating mass of pixels.

3.
 
Hey.
Feb 7, 2004, 16:57
3.
Hey. Feb 7, 2004, 16:57
Feb 7, 2004, 16:57
 
Does Sonic run really fast in this one?

5.
 
Re: Agreed
Feb 5, 2004, 23:49
5.
Re: Agreed Feb 5, 2004, 23:49
Feb 5, 2004, 23:49
 
<Me:> Using DC++ - Hmm... Direct connect doesn't recognize realplayer files as actual video files...
<Roommate:> Well, do you?
<Me:> ... Good point.

13.
 
It's the truth...
Feb 5, 2004, 21:43
13.
It's the truth... Feb 5, 2004, 21:43
Feb 5, 2004, 21:43
 
Zombies make any game better.

4.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 2, 2004, 22:51
4.
Re: No subject Feb 2, 2004, 22:51
Feb 2, 2004, 22:51
 
Bah.. Wasn't Black and White 1 punishment enough!

No no! More punishment! Yes... more sweet, sweet pain...

=D

9.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 2, 2004, 21:43
9.
Re: No subject Feb 2, 2004, 21:43
Feb 2, 2004, 21:43
 
...if the ISP were to impose a simple math problem on the email for the senders machine to work out, then that would stop bulk mailers in their tracks...

Too easy to automate.

8.
 
Re: Winamp...
Feb 1, 2004, 17:27
8.
Re: Winamp... Feb 1, 2004, 17:27
Feb 1, 2004, 17:27
 
2.9x was the old version that made Winamp popular. It was light and functional.

3 was a bit of a disaster. Instability, incompatability with older plugins and slow load times led many to stick with 2.9x or use a different player. There were a few new features, including nonstandard skins.

5 = 2+3, supposedly. They say they have kept the features of 3 and the speed/stability of 2... I can't really say, I haven't tried 5 out. I have, however, heard good things about the streaming TV feature in 5.

1.
 
Winamp...
Feb 1, 2004, 14:49
1.
Winamp... Feb 1, 2004, 14:49
Feb 1, 2004, 14:49
 
...and Winamp 5 is required to view the proceedings...

Whaa...?

7.
 
Re: Great game
Jan 31, 2004, 23:53
7.
Re: Great game Jan 31, 2004, 23:53
Jan 31, 2004, 23:53
 
Definately an awsome game, though you should realize two things:
1) With 3.0 came "combat", an entirely different gametype within NS... if the map starts with co_, then it is combat. Combat is faster paced, more focused on action and a bit "dumbed down".
2) Read the manual. Especially if you plan to play traditional NS (not combat). It is not a very newbie friendly game (though the documentation and ingame help are excellent, it is just a complicated game).

5.
 
Re: Great game
Jan 31, 2004, 18:24
5.
Re: Great game Jan 31, 2004, 18:24
Jan 31, 2004, 18:24
 
I think it should be a balance of both, ie it is based on team size * level.

Oops I misread that one. Yeah, respawn should definately depend on both level and team size. I usually save up my points so I can spawn almost instantly, and the default skulk is strong enough to do quite a bit of damage if used properly.

As for not getting kills when going against 20 marines... well, that's when you get together with your 20 alien buddies =D... you still get experience so long as the kill happens near you.

...webbing up your hive it makes it really really hard for Marines to win in Combat...

Ouch, I hadn't thought of that... though aliens need some way to speed the hive's regeneration, web + jetpacker = dead jetpacker. However, though marines can gain the ability to heal a base for only one level point and can still participate in combat, aliens have to sacrifice all combat for the rest of the game if they want to gorge... x_x

Too bad if you drop a sensory first, there's still a good chance the aliens on your team will be so mad at you they'll attempt to get you kickbanned.

Dammit. As you say, way too many people try to play NS like a formula. When someone doesn't do something exactly according to that formula they act like it's the end of the world. "You got double before a hive", "You got a hive before double", "You got move before def", "You got def before move", "You got sense first", "You got put down a chamber before an RT", "You only built one IP", "You built two IPs", "You upgraded weapons before armor", "You upgraded armor before weapons"... and on and on.

Granted there are stupid things you can do ("why am I the only one on my team of 10 who dropped an RT?!?"), but many times people are just too set in their ways. Also, the suprise of an unusual expansion can frequently throw off an opposing team expecting a more conventional plan.

637 Comments. 32 pages. Viewing page 12.
Newer [  1    7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22    32  ] Older