Java was too slow to support our feature set so we rewrote it in HTML
-
@The_Assimilator said:
@morbiuswilters said:
my pretend laser gun
Is this yet another euphemism for your penis?
There's nothing pretend about my penis, as can be attested to by a long string of women with low self-esteem.
-
@KillaCoda said:
I'm not saying "Never play survival mode!". I'm saying if you want infinite resources why not just pick that mode?
Because Creative mode operates differently from Survival, in way that boils down to "Survival is fun, Creative is not."
So.
Fun.
Remember fun?
No seriously, anyone remember it?
Because I've been playing Diablo III.
Need some help here.
-
@dhromed said:
Got the two modes backward, kiddo...@KillaCoda said:
I'm not saying "Never play survival mode!". I'm saying if you want infinite resources why not just pick that mode?
Because Creative mode operates differently from Survival, in way that boils down to "Survival is fun, Creative is not."
So.
Fun.
Remember fun?
No seriously, anyone remember it?
Because I've been playing Diablo III.
Need some help here.
-
@drurowin said:
Okay, you have the choice between already having everything you could ever want or being able to adventure and get everything you could ever want. Which is more satisfying?@dhromed said:
Got the two modes backward, kiddo...@KillaCoda said:
I'm not saying "Never play survival mode!". I'm saying if you want infinite resources why not just pick that mode?
Because Creative mode operates differently from Survival, in way that boils down to "Survival is fun, Creative is not."
So.
Fun.
Remember fun?
No seriously, anyone remember it?
Because I've been playing Diablo III.
Need some help here.
-
@Ben L. said:
Okay, you have the choice between already having everything you could ever want or cheating the system and get everything you could ever want. Which is more satisfying?
FTFY
-
@blakeyrat said:
Man. Nobody reads my posts, do they? I made that exact point yesterday, you could at least name-drop me.
I'd drop you any time :D
@Snooder said:
Because spending those 20 hours makes it worth more.
Lol no. Wasting more time makes it worth far less. Is digging a hole with a toothpick worth more then with a shovel, simply because it takes longer? Aren't we coders? Don't we like efficiency? The guy who spends time figuring this out in the first place I understand. He was poking around, discovering things and seeing how far he could go within the game rules. Sounds kinda fun. The people who just mindlessly copy his work? I don't understand, and I don't think I ever will.
@FrostCat said:
The thing about a golem farm is that once you have built it you DO have all you need, in survival, without cheating.
To me, I see infinite iron in 1 second or infinite iron in 20 hours. I simply don't understand why people are picking option b is all. And likely never will.
@blakeyrat said:
I 100% agree with that. I was talking about the cheat that this entire topic was about until sometime in the last 4 posts when it magically turned into a topic about something else entirely.
I was just saying if you're going to cheat, do the 5 minute cheat and not the 20 hour cheat.agreement hug
-
@Ben L. said:
@drurowin said:
Okay, you have the choice between already having everything you could ever want or being able to adventure and get everything you could ever want. Which is more satisfying?@dhromed said:
Got the two modes backward, kiddo...@KillaCoda said:
I'm not saying "Never play survival mode!". I'm saying if you want infinite resources why not just pick that mode?
Because Creative mode operates differently from Survival, in way that boils down to "Survival is fun, Creative is not."
So.
Fun.
Remember fun?
No seriously, anyone remember it?
Because I've been playing Diablo III.
Need some help here.
No ones arguing against the adventuring in survival mode. That shits fun.I'm arguing against spending a huge chunk of time recreating creative mode in survival mode, when you could just pick creative mode in the first place.
When I want to create some mad contraption with thousands of blocks, I pick creative. When I want to wander and forage and build and fight off monsters with limited supplies of just what I find, I pick survival.
Having infinite supplies from an obvious exploit in survival breaks that mode imo and turns it into "creative lite".
But apparently I'm in a minority. I'd never want to ruin anyone's fun. I just want to learn and understand WHY it's fun!
-
@KillaCoda said:
That shits fun.
I shat fun once.
And I don't mind telling you, it was anything but.
-
@KillaCoda said:
I just want to learn and understand WHY it's fun!
You're confusing the before and after.
Finding out how the game mechanic works, designing and building a contraption, like a farm with a water-based harvester, is fun. After that, mission complete: no worries about food.
Creative works differently, too. You can't mine a resource in creative: you just break the block. So that avenue of gameplay is unavailable. And on top of that, a properly enchanted diamond pickaxe or shovel is far more powerful than your creative hand (except for bedrock, of course).
In other words, I repeat myself, Survival is fun, Creative is not. Or less so, anyway.
What games do you play, if any, Mr. Killa?
-
@dhromed said:
In other words, I repeat myself, Survival is fun, Creative is not. Or less so, anyway.
I think we should argue something less subjective: Whitewall tires are the classy option.
-
@boomzilla said:
I think we should argue something less subjective: Whitewall tires are the classy option.
Oh absolutely.
If you're driving a car in the 1930s.
-
@dhromed said:
@KillaCoda said:
I just want to learn and understand WHY it's fun!
You're confusing the before and after.
Finding out how the game mechanic works, designing and building a contraption, like a farm with a water-based harvester, is fun. After that, mission complete: no worries about food.
Creative works differently, too. You can't mine a resource in creative: you just break the block. So that avenue of gameplay is unavailable. And on top of that, a properly enchanted diamond pickaxe or shovel is far more powerful than your creative hand (except for bedrock, of course).
In other words, I repeat myself, Survival is fun, Creative is not. Or less so, anyway.
What games do you play, if any, Mr. Killa?
Fair enough. I'll never argue "Your fun is wrong!". My not understanding why is my issue!
I tend to have more fun making giant silly castles in Creative m'self.
I play a lot of random stuff, mostly single player. Minecraft, strategy games such as Total War, Civ and Sim City, action adventure games such as the Arkham Asylum series, single player FPS games like Bioshock, and older SNES/Megadrive games as well. Have a 360/PS3/Wii/Gaming PC but am mainly PC. Consoles are for drunk split screen with friends!
-
@dhromed said:
@boomzilla said:
I think we should argue something less subjective: Whitewall tires are the classy option.
Oh absolutely.
If you're driving a car in the 1930s.
Also harder to clean orphan blood off of.
-
@KillaCoda said:
Minecraft
I could not get truly into minecraft if it wasn't for my friend's server & multiplayer. Once you get to the stage where you have some coal and picked a staircase to bedrock and set up some food, you can do anything you want, and then I feel like I've beaten Survival. Playing with friends is different though.
-
@dhromed said:
@KillaCoda said:
Minecraft
I could not get truly into minecraft if it wasn't for my friend's server & multiplayer. Once you get to the stage where you have some coal and picked a staircase to bedrock and set up some food, you can do anything you want, and then I feel like I've beaten Survival. Playing with friends is different though.
It's a big lego kit for me, rather than a challenging game. Survival wasn't challenging for me, it just limited my lego!
Agreed, friends make every game better. I played through and honestly enjoyed "50 Cent: Blood On The Sand" in co-op...
-
@KillaCoda said:
Agreed, friends make every game better.
Also Batman games?
I imagine 5 Batmen prowling the streets on screen.
I heard a story fragment at the bar of a TF2 team consisting solely of medics, shouting things like JA JA OKTOBERFEST.
-
@dhromed said:
@KillaCoda said:
Agreed, friends make every game better.
Also Batman games?
I imagine 5 Batmen prowling the streets on screen.
I heard a story fragment at the bar of a TF2 team consisting solely of medics, shouting things like JA JA OKTOBERFEST.
Well obviously the solution there is to make the players not actually Batman, but instead wanna-be Batman vigilantes dressed up in wacky tribute outfits.
Oh wait, whatever happened to Gotham City Impostors? I thought it looked like it might be fun.edit: Also, the plural of Batman is Batmans.
-
@Snooder said:
Oh wait, whatever happened to Gotham City Impostors? I thought it looked like it might be fun.
It's in the free-to-play ghetto.
The game concept doesn't sound awful, but what I don't get is why they paid Warner Bros. through the nose for a Batman license when they don't use ANY Batman characters.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Snooder said:
Oh wait, whatever happened to Gotham City Impostors? I thought it looked like it might be fun.
It's in the free-to-play ghetto.
The game concept doesn't sound awful, but what I don't get is why they paid Warner Bros. through the nose for a Batman license when they don't use ANY Batman characters.
Looks like it was published BY Warner Bros. So, no need to pay anyone else for the license. Makes sense then to publish a generic fun free-to-play shooter, but leave enough tie-ins to Batman to get some brand recognition. And the basic premise was cool enough to spawn a story arc in Detective Comics.
-
@Snooder said:
And the basic premise was cool enough to spawn a story arc in Detective Comics.
That was from one of the Nolan movies, I'm 95% sure, but the dumb video game nobody's heard of.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Snooder said:
And the basic premise was cool enough to spawn a story arc in Detective Comics.
That was from one of the Nolan movies, I'm 95% sure, but the dumb video game nobody's heard of.
Not according to Wikipedia. And the whole "Joker only exists because of Batman" theme isn't a Nolan original. I can't remember what story arc it came from, I think one of the Frank Miller arcs, but I know I definitely had heard of it before Dark Knight Rises. I remember an episode of BTAS where Joker taunts Batman that the real reason he's never killed him is because they couldn't exist without each other and subconciously Batman knows it.
What's more interesting/original is the idea of competing gangs of vigilantes/hoodlum.And that's certainly not in a Nolan movie.
-
@Snooder said:
And that's certainly not in a Nolan movie.
Well whether the comic book plot was based on it or not, there definitely was a subplot in one of the Nolan movies about vigilantes dressing up like Batman and trying to fight crime and getting hurt as a result. My memory's not THAT bad.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Snooder said:
And that's certainly not in a Nolan movie.
Well whether the comic book plot was based on it or not, there definitely was a subplot in one of the Nolan movies about vigilantes dressing up like Batman and trying to fight crime and getting hurt as a result. My memory's not THAT bad.
Oh, you were referring to that brief scene with Sandman at the opening of Dark Knight Rises. Maybe. But I doubt anyone else even remembered that.
-
@dhromed said:
@KillaCoda said:
Agreed, friends make every game better.
Also Batman games?
I imagine 5 Batmen prowling the streets on screen.
I heard a story fragment at the bar of a TF2 team consisting solely of medics, shouting things like JA JA OKTOBERFEST.
Hell yes to a bunch of weaker, but more brutal and murdery Batman wannabes roaming the streets, fighting scumbags. That'd be great. Having said that Gotham City Imposters wasn't very good...
