Messages

I don't remember your very first post, Evenwolf, but I remember when you first appeared here, and I think you made a very good first impression.

I believe you joined just shortly after AGA and Darkstalkey, and you managed to balance out their bastardness.

Just wanna insert a little advice here to always learn playing instruments as if you were a rightie, even though it feels weird in the beginning.
Learning to play left-handedly will prevent you from ever performing on 99% of all other instruments. I know lots of lefthanded guitarists who all chose to go with the "normal" string order, just to be able to pick up a guitar anywhere. Of course, you're not gonna come across loads of mandolins during your career, but still....

I couldn't find my first post after a brief search through some archives, but I remember my profile saying that my first post was in the end of June 2001.
I also know that it was the announcement of my first game, Tulles World (an utterly crappy game). Yes, I released a game before I joined
Furthermore, I distinctly remember that LasNaranjas was among the first who replied to my game's thread.

Strange how time flies. More than 6 years with AGS

I can't really play it, but I like to try it on whenever I feel my songs could use some more folkiness. I played it for this piece (which I uploaded to the cl some time ago).

His overly straight back, along with his bandy legs, give an almost constipated impression. Try to make him loosen up a bit! Also, in the diagonal view, I think he leans too much forward.

I think adding diagonal views is a very delicate decision. The straight side views and front/back views are very forgiving when it comes to perspective issues, but I think the diagonal views are more "exposed" in this respect. Also, we're talking doubling the amount of walk sprites.

What prize do I get?

For hacking her account? A slap in the face!

I love when people try their darnest to be smart instead of discussing the moralities of the specific question.

I think most people here said something like "it might be a hoax, but this is what I think of the deal, per see, be it a joke or not, which it probably is, but anyway...", so I don't know who needs to be lectured, really.
It's like every year in the April's fools thread - half of the posters are just hellbent on telling everyone how they didn't fall for it, as if anyone was actually interested.

She plays World of Warcraft and has a level 60 undead warlock, which made my boyfriend gasp in awe.

Gasp in awe? Wow stretches up to level 70!!!!!!

I think you've shown here that you can model out shapes and shadows, but the image on the whole could use a better composition.

In case the boxes to the left are supposed to be of the same height as those on the right, then your perspective  is quite wrong. I think you should construct a simple grid model of what you want your room to look like, so that you can get the perspective straight.

Also, I agree wholeheartedly with Loomy; I've never myself prefered to draw a background in b/w first, and then colour it. I think using colours from the start can help you develop a greater understanding of how colours define and build up shapes and shadows on their own - opposed to the idea that colours are only meant to "paint" allready modelled objects, as if you were decorating your room.
I hope this makes sense.

I think the room already has a very nice mystique atmosphere, which is why I hope you can make it justice by improving its composition.

Incredibly well executed background.
Really nice pixely feeling you've got there, along with a great desaturated, misty kind of atmosphere.

I think the torches are perfect. I know people are always tempted to increase the contrasts and the highlights, as well as reflected light-effects and whatnot, whenever there is a distinct light source in the image. However, torches of that size in an environment that bright probably don't cast much more light than that. So, the moderated contrasts here are quite appropriate. Also, they animate beautifully!

Hold your horses a bit, everyone.

Nobody will get hired professionally after having traced over another artist's background. There is no telling how skilled a person is by judging from a trace-over. All you can tell is that the person had a lot of time and patience, to dupcliate something more or less pixel by pixel.

I think you definitely need to work on shape and shadows, and try to achieve a better consistency when it comes to smudging/cell-shading and outlines.

I think the over-all impression of this picture is good, but that's mainly because it's copied. Looking at individual objects, I see a lot of things that need to be done.

A little update:
The rating panel is now about halfway through the 750+ non-demo titles in the database.

Along with ratings, games have been further classified, and their links have been fixed.

So far, work has proceeded extremely smoothly.

We played some poker during Mittens 2005, in between those numerous - and rather lengthy - sessions of 50000000 blank cards.

Oh, I see. I didn't know you were talking about that many pictures.
Nice program you've found there.

What about just increasing the canvas size in, for instance, Photoshop and paste in the new picture?
I don't see why you'd need a brand new application for this task?

I was, for reference, joking in my previous post.

Nacho, when you say that you have a sceptical mind, and don't believe "yellow press headlines", what part of

These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists is the only scientific society that rejects these conclusions.[4][5] A few individual scientists disagree with some of the main conclusions of the IPCC.[6]

Are you not understanding? It's from the same Wikipedia as you browsed in.

For the last time - the vast majority of the entire collective scientist and researcher community agree on this.
Do you think they have simply forgotten to account for climate variations? So despite their education, degrees and outstanding insight in weather and metereological engineering and whatnot, it just never occured to them that during the middle ages there was also a warm period, etc etc?

Please use this thread. This forum is not for personal advertisment.

People almost seem offended by how others can delight in theoretical discussions. Why write in this thread just to tell that you're not interested in it? It's not like we've come to your door like Jehovah's witnesses and shoved the arguments in your face.

At any rate, with the disastrously bad weather we have in Sweden right now - with perpetual, freezing rain - I think just a tad global warmth might be in place.

I'm not using this example to "prove" anything, besides show the similarities between two events where the media generated hysteria.

In the case of Y2K, media generated hysteria, in the case of global warming it's a scientific concensus, with the exceptions of some right-wing think-tanks.

The problem I have with the kind of reasong behind "bah, look at this and that scare campaign in the past, it was never real! We're all having a good laugh now!" is that it's doing a great job making people oblivious to anything that could ever happen in the future.

I remember when electricity (/radiation or similar) allergies were first discussed. Then a lot of conservative know-it-alls kept using the "but you remember when everybody thought ballpoint pens caused allergies, right? It was just hysteria! Stop being so hysterical about novelties all the time!"
The fact of the matter is that similar arguments have always been used, even when it came to asbestos, neurosedyn, or various pesticides, that in the end proved very dangerous to humans. But each time an alarming report appeared about the health issues and hazards of such substances/activities/phenomena, the same group of reactionaries would always chant "remember the ballpoint pens!"

You're debating? Isn't this your first post? Do I detect a snide, condescending tone? Will I have to choke a bitch?

I dunno, maybe it's pretty condescending to tell everyone here - along with the entire scientist community - that their worries are nothing more than another collective hysteria caused by irrational media. That sounds pretty darn condescending to me, truthfully.