Show Posts

You can view here all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas to which you currently have access.

Messages - Ali

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 134
This has been overdue for years, good work everyone for kicking it back to life.

However, I have to say: if the idea is to replace the default sierra template then I think these icons make too strong a colour statement. Blue and orange are pretty contrasty - they're not going to work well with low-saturated artwork. It could be very difficult to use this artwork for a horror game, or a mystery noir, for instance.

In an ideal world, no one would use the default graphics. But since people do, I think they should be as neutral as possible. I think buttons that use one easy-to-change colour, or greyscale would be more useful. Perhaps there should be neutral / monochrome / high contrast alternatives?

Thanks for the explanation, CW!

Ah! Thanks, that works.

I had assumed that IsTranslationAvailable() returned TRUE if a translation was... well, available.


I'm updating Nelly Cootalot: Spoonbeaks Ahoy using AGS 3.4.0. There are lots of scenes where I have to switch objects off or on based on the current translation.

Code: Adventure Game Studio
  1. if (Game.TranslationFilename == "") {
  2.   oSp1.Visible=false;
  3.   oFr1.Visible=false;
  4.   oGe1.Visible=false;
  5.   oPo1.Visible=false;
  6.   oF1.SetView (54);
  7.   oF1.Animate (0,  3,  eRepeat,  eNoBlock);  
  8.   }
  10. else if (Game.TranslationFilename == "Nelly_Spanish") {
  11.   oSp1.Visible=true;
  12.   oFr1.Visible=false;
  13.   oGe1.Visible=false;
  14.   oPo1.Visible=false;
  15.   oF1.SetView (93);
  16.   oF1.Animate (0,  3,  eRepeat,  eNoBlock);  
  17.   }

The other translations work (Spanish, etc.), but the script for no translation file (Game.TranslationFilename == "") doesn't happen. The same script works back in v3.2.1, but it doesn't work in 3.4.0. Has something changed?

General Discussion / Re: Our Ali wins a comedy thing
« on: 01 Mar 2017, 18:06 »
I just noticed this post. Thanks guys! Between you and me and the internet, the video wasn't very well edited. They didn't choose most people's best bits (possibly because of swearing) and they've under-recorded the audience so we all sound like we're dying.

Half my set was about the fact that I can't smile properly. And, if nothing else, that photo proves it.

Hey, I didn't know about that! Thanks for posting.

General Discussion / Re: Alternative Knowledge
« on: 28 Nov 2016, 18:08 »
Under President Trump all criminals will have names that reveal their crimes in French, and everyone will believe six impossible things before breakfast.

General Discussion / Re: Alternative Knowledge
« on: 27 Nov 2016, 11:39 »
I think there is a point where conspiracy theories are damaging in the real world (remember the real world?), and there is a point where many are dangerous and morally repugnant. To his credit, Jack hasn't been pushing the most unpleasant (e.g. Jewish people were warned about the 9/11 attack, the Holocaust was part of a Zionist plan, vaccines cause autism/cancer/Ebola/everything.)

But what makes me angry is how aficionados of conspiracy take such comfort in their 'alternative knowledge', as if they were worshipping a capricious old testament God.

I agree. The only piece of software I use regularly that has functions which are hard to replicate without a middle-mouse button is Blender. And Blender is not famous for it's user-friendly interface.

I'm co-writing an adventure game at the moment, and the lead writer/developer decided on single-click before I came on board. I'm writing most of the room interactions, and I thought that the lack of a look-at would be creatively limiting.

It isn't. What we have ended up doing is writing (at least) 2 lines of dialogue for each hotspot. The first one is usually a description that adds more detail than the artwork, and the second is an observation, musing, or joke off the back of the first. Maybe no one will click on the hospots twice... but I've watched people playing Nelly Cootalot: The Fowl Fleet (2-click interface) and people DO NOT right-click. Apart from hard-core adventure gamers, they just never right-click. So they miss out on loads of good* jokes, and get stuck when they need to know something contained in a look-at.

*I think.

Don't worry, Peder. I will be filming stuff and Adventure-Treff plan to record all the talks. We'll also be archiving the twitch feed.

I'm afraid the deadline for trailers has passed. If people still want to send more we will try our best, but we can't guarantee we'll be able to show them.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 16 Nov 2016, 23:58 »
Had she won, Clinton supporters would absolutely have had to accept that they supported the USA's appalling use of drones in Pakistan and elsewhere.
Would it be fair to say though that someone who voted for hillary for any reason at all, fully supports drone murder? That their intention is to kill syrians? That we should hate them for this?

It would be fair to say exactly what I said in that quote. They supported it. Would it be fair for a victim of a drone bomb to hate Clinton's supporters? I could certainly understand that. I haven't said that we should all hate Trump voters, I've said they have to accept their complicity in a most dangerous kind of bigotry.

Given that, I'd say it's fair to say that you support the continued use of drones to commit targeted killings if you support Clinton.

Yes, of course you do. If you hold your nose and vote for someone, you have to take the bad with the (in Clinton's case) less bad. But you can't make the 'lesser of two evils' argument when the candidate you're defending is, by any historical comparison, the greater evil.

I would have more sympathy if criticism of Clinton had focused more on her foreign policy and less on her bloody eeeeeeeeemails.

Here's Trump saying some stuff about nuclear weapons. I said he wanted to nuke ISIS - I apologise for that overstatement*. In fairness, he's at pains to make it clear that nuclear would be a last resort. In context he merely said he wouldn't rule it out for the Middle East, or Europe:

He was subsequently pressed on these issues and stood by his insistence that "Europe is a big place. I’m not going to take cards off the table.", and boasted of his unpredictability as a businessman.

That's not as clear cut as I made out. But it's hardly a case of warmonger versus peacemaker.

*or to put that apology in Trump's voice: "I never said that. Huge lie. It's really terrible this lying media, folks. Real shame."

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 16 Nov 2016, 00:57 »
Jack has said something I sort of agree with. Had she won, Clinton supporters would absolutely have had to accept that they supported the USA's appalling use of drones in Pakistan and elsewhere. If a Pakistani American told me they couldn't support Obama or Clinton because of this, I would disagree but understand. If they told me that's why they voted for Trump, I would disagree and not understand. I would argue, as others have extensively in this thread, that there's no reason to imagine that Trump's foreign policy will be any less bloody than Clinton's would have been. An allegiance with Putin's repressive regime may not prove to be as delightful as some Trump supporters imagine. Trump said he wanted to attack ISIS with nuclear weapons and that US soldiers should target the families of terrorists (a war crime).

Darth - as Scavenger says, you're asking us to weigh a substantial threat to the equality of gay people against a generalised feeling that something Clinton was going to do would have been bad. You must see how the specifics matter.

EDIT: Darth, on that one you're  gent.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 16 Nov 2016, 00:21 »
Let's say a Trump supporter was to tell you that he sees Clinton's policy of "ABC" (whatever) as a direct threat to his family's future and that's why he's voting for Trump.

No, not "ABC" (whatever), we're discussing real threats to women and minorities. Things that actually might happen. You can't draw a parallel between homophobia and a detail-free hypothetical.

What is the compelling fear that motivated this Trump voter? Can you argue that it's just as rational and substantial as the fear Scavenger is expressing?

You need to engage with the issues and do that if you're going to argue that the two candidates were as bad as each other.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Nov 2016, 14:46 »
Unshakeable belief is not synonymous with bigotry. I think fire burns and rain falls and you won't convince me otherwise. That's not bigotry; it has no victims.

While I have criticised people for defending Trump and Trump voters - there is a difference between belonging to a racial or ethnic group and being (for example) a Trump supporter. You're not born a Trump supporter, you decide to be one and criticism is legitimate.

I don't think I've demonstrated obstinate devotion to any prejudices. If I'm wrong, I'd love to be corrected.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Nov 2016, 14:05 »
I'm sorry you're sad. But the google definition of a word is not the "actual" definition of a word. That's not how the English language works.

Compassion yes, tolerance no. I feel compassion for the poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised, under-educated, blinkered and misled Americans who voted for Trump. Tolerance of their jingoistic racism and misogyny? Never.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Nov 2016, 13:41 »
I am not going to give in to the mass hysteria. It'll calm down in a few months like it always does. The people will forget about for about 3 years.

*Bookmarks thread and waits*

Also, Merriam Webster's definition of bigot more closely reflects contemporary usage:

"a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)"

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 20:51 »
So considering everyone is treating this like it's the end of the world, newspapers and all, means that there's hope that it isn't all that bad. ;-D

Yes, this time we're better prepared.

Writer of ‘Taxi Driver,’ ‘Raging Bull’ Pens Post-Election ‘Call to Violence’

The mask drops.

That proves it!

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 20:24 »
Come on, people. It'll be ok. Nothing will change. Every politician ever has been a corrupt piece of shit, we just didn't get a chance to fight about it on social media so it wasn't as interesting as it is now, and the dirt didn't spread around the globe faster than light, so we lived in sweet ignorance.

I hope you folks who think this is business as usual are right. I will say this though: When students in Nazi Germany held book burnings in universities, what was the international reaction? Presumably revulsion, horror? Fear of what it might foreshadow?

Not really. People thought it was crass, a little uncivilised. A few leftist intellectuals got very wound up, but most newspapers didn't pay it much heed. Business as usual, nothing really changes...

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 134