User information for Jason

Real Name
Jason
Nickname
Honig
Email
Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage
None given.

Supporter

Signed On
August 2, 2005
Total Posts
9 (Suspect)
User ID
23579
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
9 Comments. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older
5.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 20, 2006, 19:02
5.
Re: No subject Feb 20, 2006, 19:02
Feb 20, 2006, 19:02
 
If a World War II sim is released in the woods does anybody care any more?

10.
 
Re: Grand Theft Racing
Jan 12, 2006, 17:26
10.
Re: Grand Theft Racing Jan 12, 2006, 17:26
Jan 12, 2006, 17:26
 
San Andreas has a HUGE world to drive/fly/boat/bike/walk around in as well. That and running from The Man aspect might make GTA:SA the closest successor in a while. Still, a proper simulation it is not.
Of course TD3 was pretty crappy physics wise, but what do you expect from 3 floppy disk?

Wonder if the Half Life 2 Engine would be up to the task of making a proper simulation?

8.
 
Re: Grand Theft Racing
Jan 12, 2006, 15:44
8.
Re: Grand Theft Racing Jan 12, 2006, 15:44
Jan 12, 2006, 15:44
 
A well done Test Drive 3 replacement with stealing.

For those not as old as the hills like I, TD3 had a pretty damn big area that you could drive in. It was not limited to the road and the 30feet on either side like most rally games. The graphics were primitive polygons, like most everything else from 1990. Some screenshots can be seen at
http://www.popularracinggames.com/test-drive-series/td-3.htm

There were all kinds of shortcuts on the maps, which usually had two primary roads that you could choose. It would be a lot of fun with some cities, a GTA:SA or Grand Turismo 4 sized list of vehicles, and some damn good realistics physics.

3.
 
Re: Xrays
Jan 12, 2006, 01:21
3.
Re: Xrays Jan 12, 2006, 01:21
Jan 12, 2006, 01:21
 
Sounds like someone slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

22.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 19, 2005, 02:29
22.
Re: No subject Dec 19, 2005, 02:29
Dec 19, 2005, 02:29
 
The Chappelle thing was good, but it went to BS at the mention of the Omni hotel in Buckhead...it not in Buckhead but downtown at the CNN Center. There is no Omni hotel in Buckhead.

UPS will deliver on Sunday, but it cost a freakin fortune. It is the SonicAir service http://www.ups.com/content/us/en/resources/select/sending/services/sonic_air.html

7.
 
Re: Google Talk
Aug 24, 2005, 14:40
7.
Re: Google Talk Aug 24, 2005, 14:40
Aug 24, 2005, 14:40
 
Google OS: $49.95

One does wonder that some where in the basement of Google HQ in Mountain View if there are not some desktop PCs running the GoogleOS right now....

6.
 
Re: Google Talk
Aug 24, 2005, 14:35
6.
Re: Google Talk Aug 24, 2005, 14:35
Aug 24, 2005, 14:35
 
What's lacking for you? Of all the webmails I've ever used, it's by far the best IMO... I'm sure it's missing stuff, I'm just failing to think what right now

A calender would rule.

GoogleTalk is pretty nice. Need the ability to minimize to the task icons in the bottom right of the taskbar, near the clock, but that is a minor quibble. The voice stuff works pretty good too actually.

EDIT: damn I use too many boards to remember all the different codes for italicizing text....
This comment was edited on Aug 24, 14:38.
54.
 
Re: New NASA vehicles
Aug 2, 2005, 21:52
54.
Re: New NASA vehicles Aug 2, 2005, 21:52
Aug 2, 2005, 21:52
 
Space elevator: most obvious terrorist target... EVAR!!!11One

Ever read the Mars trillogy by Kim Stanley Robinson?

34.
 
Re: New NASA vehicles
Aug 2, 2005, 16:48
34.
Re: New NASA vehicles Aug 2, 2005, 16:48
Aug 2, 2005, 16:48
 
<i>You mean the big cargo capsule opens to allow the maneuverable capsule to come out?
That would work I guess. Seems mighty expensive though. </I>

Worked for Apollo missions. In the Saturn V, the Command Module, would undock from the top of the rocket, turn around and connect to the top of the lunar landing module, then fire the rockets just a touch to back it out of the Saturn V segment.

As far as moving 100 tons in space, well you can move 100 tons in space with your finger tips, if you can fine a platform to stand on. Good Ole Newtonian physics.

They might have to break the cargo down into smaller segments, but if they wanted to, I do not see why they could not dock 100 tons to the ISS. In low earth orbit like they are it might be an issue with having to speed up the station a bit to compensate for the added mass, but that is not a major issue.

Getting things off the surface of the Earth is stage one of any mission, so the ablity to lift 100 tons to orbit, or further is a good start.

Removing the stuff from the packed container, then reuseing the container as part of a larger interplanitary ship is a concept that I am sure they are looking into.

9 Comments. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older