Messages

So I had a quick try at parallaxing.

I paint the background (the sky) onto the room surface at the viewport but it seems to lag slightly and is especially noticeable if you jump.

Any ideas why that might be?

Code: ags

DrawingSurface *surface = Room.GetDrawingSurfaceForBackground();
surface.Clear();
surface.DrawImage(GetViewportX(),GetViewportY() , 14);

http://www.thethoughtradar.com/AGS/Platformer.zip

That looks realy cool. Did you draw these background graphics?

HAH! I wish kiddo.

Ramps!

http://www.thethoughtradar.com/AGS/woop.zip

mario assaults draculas castle.

But you'll notice that the ramps dont work.

Im using regions to define platforms.. so Region 1 defines the top of a platform and will not allow the character to fall through it and region 2 defines obstacles that cant be passed through horizontally. Obviously this means that slanted ramps dont work.

Any ideas?

Yeah, some people have bad experiences going on rollercoasters... so they dont go on one again.

I especially like how you made his hat flip up when falling down or decending from a jump... great job.

I stole the idea from somewhere... I wont say where... It's secret

For me this is quite funny... Most of "pro-legalise it", say "Alcohol is as bad as marijuana... Or even more!".

Nobody says: "Marijuana is as healthy as sport" or "Marijuana is as healthy as a good mediterranean diet".

Some "pro-pot" guys deffend marijuana saying that there are worse things legalised... Ain't it silly?

They should try to praise the healthy things marijuana has (of it does...).

If it has no positive effects, IMO, their efforts should go to try to ban alcohol, not trying to legalise pot. Otherwise we should finish saying thigs like: "Let's legalise freedom to amputate some other people's legs! It's not so bad as killing them!!!".

No? 

No, Thats bollocks.

We shouldnt illegalise things because they medically bad for us.

Rock climbing is dangerous... Cream cakes are bad for us... horse riding is dangerous... even driving is statisically dangerous.

The fact of the matter is that it is not up to the government to mandate what is good and bad for us. It is up to the government to educate us on the dangers and catch us when we fall.

Homeopathy should be illegal.

its medicine sold at very high prices with no proven effects.

It no you cant 'overdose on it' but you can fucking drown.

I know this has come up before but i just thought I'd share my attempt at a tiny little "Tech Demo"

How does it feel to play? I tried to add in acceleration and stuff like that.. Is it believable?

http://www.thethoughtradar.com/AGS/Platformer7.zip

Cannabis increases negative effects of tobacco... and 90% of people smoke weed along with it. "It is not worse than tobacco" is a big phalacy.

Fallacy is spelt with an F. Phalacy, if it was a word, would probably refer to a penis (Phallus).  

Though what you said is arguably true. Joints are smoked without a filter and thus the effects of the tar are increased.

However there are lots of ways to take THC into the bloodstream. Smoking is just a more social way of doing it

Anyway, I would legalise it. I would feel a bit sad for those weak people who can't live without it (as I feel sad by alcoholics) but it's okay, it's its life...

Thats quite a loaded statement you've got there. Not everyone who smokes weed is some junkie miscreant who will kill for his next fix. Weed is largely harmless and less addictive than nicotine by a long way.

I really see no argument for canabis to be illegal if cigerettes and alcohol are legal. If it were legal it could be regulated. The trade would be taken away from criminals. The tax revenue would be a much needed boost to the economy. plus many more benefits.

We need a dutch person in this discussion. Im fairly sure crime rates in the netherlands are actually quite alot lower than both the US and the UK and there arent drug crazed nutcases wandering the streets killing babies

So cannabis is to be reclassified as a Class B drug.

For those of you who dont know what that means, It opens up personal users to 5 years in jail and an unlimited fine.

The advisory body to the government on drug issues recommended against the reclassification arguing that it was far less dangerous than alcohol and cigerettes. The government ignored the scientific advice and sacked the head of the committee for "criticising not advising"

What are peoples thoughts?

Firstly should it be a Class B?

Secondly should the government ignore scientific advice and clamp down on dissent of government policy?

Well...
People like puzzling here.
Think as if it would be part of an adventure puzzle...

Fair enough. I accept your challenge!

Have at thee!

wow you dont fuck around.

Are you kidding?

How many people do you think can read Neumatic notation?

you know im not going to keep entering these things unless someone can guarantee i'm going to win.

Who do i have to tip to make that happen?

I find lockview to be useful from an organisational standpoint.. they keep the animations seperate and easy to access... Though you are right they are not needed.

I wouldn't say they were wrong.

I would say they are unsupported by the evidence. If they accept that then fine.

I do truly believe the world would be a better place without religion and since i believe religion to be incorrect i would feel disingenuous if i didnt attack religion in the same way i would attack any theory which was incorrect and threatened the education and furtherment of mankind.

where everything that is made has a maker, you eventually have to get to something which didn't have a maker.

I would argue MOST things in this universe DON'T have a maker and can demonstrated to be products of natural processes. Evolution gives us life, Stellar phonomona(sp?) give us stars etc etc.

There is no reason to believe that the universe is any different.

The argument from first cause is just another example of the God of the Gaps.

There's no reason why that first cause has to be Yahweh.

I think that for any argument for the existence of God to be successful in any utilitarian way it must not only demonstrate that there is a god but also WHICH god it is.
If i could mathematically prove right now that god exists to the same level of certainty that 2+2=4 it would not help us at all. Atheism (or at least non-theism) would still be the most rational position to hold since the existence or not of god says nothing about the traditional religions held by mankind. You still wouldnt know who to worship.

Personally my money is on Odin because he has the biggest sword.

Vaccine paranoia frightens me.

Vaccines have saved more lives than ANYTHING else... probably even more than antibiotics

We are supposed to be living in an enlightened age.. I feel a second Dark Age coming on.

The CDC said its not a pandemic? The WHO disagree.

As i said, If Swine Flu continues as it is then it will end up being relatively harmless. Killing only a few hundred thousand people.

If it mutates in the second wave.. anything could happen.

My point was more about dismissing pandemics out of hand as 'media hype'. The same thing happened in the 70s and it turned out to be more or less harmless. However if this was Bird Flu and not Swine Flu (and its only a matter of chance that it isnt) everyone on earth would have roughly a 1 in 8 chance of dying within the next two years.

I use 320x200 mainly because i like the letterboxing it gives on square monitors when the 'force alternate letterbox' setting is on.. but thats easy to replicate in 320x240 anyway...

Comparing God to a unicorn doesn't get you anywhere because there's nothing on this earth to suggest that they do. With god however, there's the bible, and the fact that the universe exists (which is not enough for me, but more than enough for many).

Nope, I disagree.

The existence of the bible is irrelevant. We have the Illiad for the existence of Zeus and the Oddysey for the existence of Minotaurs and yet they are still disregarded as fiction or "something for a more primitive time"

The existence of the universe is NOT evidence of god. It is evidence of the universe. We should distance ourself from that assertion as much as possible.

Ok sources.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/world/africa/03exodus.html

You'd think if millions of jews were wandering through a desert SOMEONE wouldve written something about it and the egyptians might have mentioned SOMETHING about their millions of jewish slaves.

As for the nativity the story is all over the place depending on which gospel you read (of the arbitrary ones chosen by some medieval guys to include in the bible)

Ok so Luke says that Mary and Joseph have to travel to Bethlehem for a census (the census of Quirinius, a roman, in AD 6 and 7 many years after the birth of jesus)
Why do they have to travel to Bethlehem? No idea... the romans did not ever demand that people had to travel to their ancestrals homes over 100 miles away for a census.. it would have been anarchy.
The real reason they had to travel the bethlehem was so that the biblical prophecy of the messiah being born in the town of King David could be fulfilled.. Luke lied.

Matthew however says they lived in Bethlehem anyway and moved to Nazereth afterwards... which is not supported by anything.
He also says they have to flee to Egypt to escape King Herod... Who died in about 4BC. So Mattyboy dates the birth of jesus at least a decade earlier. Matthew also mentions Angels, wise men and ofcourse the massacre of the innocents.. all of which are missing from luke and the nativity is entirely missing from Mark and John.