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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 139
General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Jun 2017, 01:57 »
As for how grown ups talk, perhaps you're hanging around the wrong grown ups. It's not acceptable, at least in the company I keep, to point out the X morons (where X is a race) for any reason.

I see no reason to be anything other than angry and flippant when addressing Trump. But our of respect for these hallowed forums, I would like to clarify:

I didn't mean that you were being childish, Gurok. I think you're wrong, but your tone is perfectly reasonable. I meant that Trump's cabinet were speaking in a disconcertingly facile, infantile manner.

The reason I'm not graciously backing down is that I don't believe I have been caught out. I didn't say 'white' by accident. I said it on purpose. They are white, and their whiteness is pretty of this story.

If Trump had filled his cabinet with black women, you can be sure I would have remarked on that. It is not racist to acknowledge race.

I'm the whitest man in England, so I'm not going to get into a debate about "reverse racism". They are white and they are morons. It follows that they are white morons. If they weren't white morons, they would not have been cast in this ludicrous pantomime.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Jun 2017, 10:00 »
Could everyone PLEASE not try to bring race into the room full of rich white blokes? Let's focus on the issues - that is not how grown ups talk. It's flipping insane.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Jun 2017, 02:09 »
It's like a school play, but with old, white morons.

I love seeing 3D stuff on these forums! Please do more! It may be too late for feedback but here are some thoughts:

The first ship model looks great - lots of detail. By comparison others look a bit smooth and plastic-y.

When the camera moves, the stars stay completely static - even when it's panning. This isn't realistic and the result is, when the camera pans it means the big ship looks like a 2D render sliding out of frame. This also means there's no sense of movement in the middle of the shot. You could try using a spherical sky texture.

It's hard to show an object moving though empty space, so you can use depth to create more dynamic movement - have the shuttle fly closer to the camera, towards and away from.

The trickiest thing - and this is something lots of 3D VFX fails to achieve - is a sense of scale. Because the shuttle moves fast, and the viewer has no frame of reference, it looks small. The BSG reboot's solution was to use documentary style operating - the cameras would whip around and crash zoom. Sometimes they'd nearly miss the shot they were trying to get - like a human operator would if they were trying to follow something huge moving fast. The Star Trek solution is to make their miniature shots very slow and grand - the slow movement of the camera helps imply the relative size of the vessels.

I'd like to repeat how grateful I am towards Crimson Wizard for his improvements to AGS. I'm sorry this has got so stressful for you. You've really helped me out.

BUT, I think this thread (and the others like it) demonstrate that a community-run, vote-for-the-feature you want system is unlikely to work.

I'm all for raising funds to support AGS, but without leadership and a plan for the future, how will that work? How much money will people be prepared to give with no understanding of what it will be spent on? Why should the entire community get to vote, when a smaller proportion is providing the funds? What if the most popular features are the least affordable? What if we can't agree what to do? Bad feeling and anger would build up quickly - even more quickly than they have in this discussion.

As I'm sure I said last time this came up, I don't think it helps for us to argue over our vision of AGS in the future, or who we think ought to take charge. I think it would make more sense for us to offer to help support AGS in whatever way we can.

When (and if) the time comes, I would be glad to help with raising funds and PR/copywriting in support of the project.

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.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 139