Messages

That's some improvement, Eric - very nice!

I think the best thing about this image is the atmospherey and consistent coloring. Did you use any reference for it?

There are very few things that bother me in this image. One of the issues in my opinion are the mountains or hills on the background. I think they could use a bit of detail despite the fact that they are background. They somehow seem just a bit out of place. I think it might be enough to just add some subtle color variation. You know, not even try to make any shapes out of them. Just something to fill the flat area.

Another thing would be the wooden block on the gun (what's it called again?). I think you've used a bit too dark color on it as it kind of stands out. And additionally, you've used quite a small brush on the brighter lines. In other parts of the image you've used a brush-sized brushes. It's more like a drawing on that area rather than a painting.

A very little thing that kind of keeps getting my attention is the tip of the rocket. It doesn't look as round as it could, in my opinion. As I said, it's a little issue but little things collectively contribute to the image, in my opinion.

Finally, I think a bit more work might be advantageous on the sky. The colors are really good but the blending seems like it could be even better. Perhaps by using another brush or something.

Aanyways, great stuff. A major improvement from all your previous work. It's a big step towards seeing the overall image instead of the small details, in my opinion. Keep doing what you're doing cause it's working!

I've really got to start learning some more as well. I haven't done any digital painting in several months.  

Yeah, you've got a point, Annie. That's actually the reason I added the disclaimer in the end. I just wanted to let you know that I was just kind of thinking aloud. I was not trying to tell anyone they're wrong or right, just trying to figure it out. And one of the best ways to figure something out is by being proved wrong. I was kind of expecting that but I forgot this wasn't one of those debate threads. Sorry about that.  

The reason I wrote another long post was that lots of people were wondering how much this thing holds true and so on. I just thought I'd add my 2 cents or so, and well... If it wasn't for touch typing I would make shorter posts and keep it sincere as everyone else.

Anyway, mind if I join the demonstration?

Heh, I find lots of good matches from other people's names but only half of my name's description was kind of like me.

I don't know, I can't prove or disprove this. I'll just say that I personally think the described qualities are quite generic human traits. I can find something spot on from practically all descriptions here. I just basically read all of the descriptions as if they were for my name and most of them were a lot more accurate than mine - some even completely correct. You could get this kind of results with guessing. Making the guesses generic makes the odds a lot better, almost as if they weren't just guesses. Or something like that.

Anyway, it seems pretty commercial to me. Name reports, baby naming, name changes, courses, books, audio tapes and cycle charts. Prices from $10 to $375.

OK, here's what it said:

"The name incorporates a potential aptitude for concentration and patient, logical thought along mechanical or scientific lines. You tend to prefer to follow normal routine rather than cope with the disruption and uncertainty entailed in trying something new. You gravitate to situations where you have stability and the opportunity to make slow step-by-step progress, preferably in a technical field. Procrastination and lack of self-confidence may restrict your success."

About "logical thought along mechanical or scientific lines." It is true, I tend to think logically, perhaps more often than my peers - but the text only refers to potential. Doesn't everyone hold the potential for logical thought? However, I'm not really interested in figuring out scientific facts or matters related to mechanics (if that's even what the text means). I'm actually more interested in figuring out why people do certain things etc. The way I see it, the text was 50 percent correct. The first guess was right, the second wasn't.

If the text referred to mechanical as logic that isn't flexible or creative or something like that... Well, then I have no idea what they meant. I mean, the way I see it, logic is pretty definite.

"You tend to prefer to follow normal routine rather than cope with the disruption and uncertainty entailed in trying something new." Actually, lately I've started to question the normal routines. The way people want to live a "normal life", getting a house, settling down and so on. I don't want to elaborate on that, but as I'm trying to find an alternative way to live my life, probably move to another country or something like that, I don't think it qualifies for following a normal routine. So I think this is a very long shot. If it wasn't, I don't think they would put 'logic' and "normal routine" in the same paragraph.

Finally, about the "Procrastination and lack of self-confidence may restrict your success." In general: wouldn't those matters restrict anyone's success? Note the word: "may". On procrastination: In fact, I asked my friend yesterday why her parents wait until they get retired before they move to France. Why not do it right now when they're still umm... somewhat young? I apply the same logic on my own actions. On self-confidence: If I didn't believe in myself, would I know how to draw, even the little I can? Probably not. Would I know how to play drums the way I do - probably not. On the other hand, if this means lack of self-confidence when encountering other people, or a frightening situation - no luck there. But that's just my word. I don't know how I could exemplify that.

All this in mind, I think this uh, thingabob is fun. But that's all there is for me. And even the fun stops when you start paying for it. If anyone thinks I'm wrong, it's alright. Just give me your reasons and hopefully you'll prove me wrong. And I'd just like to say that as always, I mean no harm to anyone by this post. This was not directed at anyone especially, this is just my opinion which hopefully will be proved wrong. If anyone feels that Kabalarian Philosophy is correct - your opinion is as good as mine.

I pretty much dislike winter as well. Most of all the fact that it's so cold and dark. I don't really have a problem with snow though. I think it's one of the few positive things in winter as far as weather is concerned.

It seems stupid to me to go to work or school at 8 AM when it's completely dark outside and come home for example at 2 PM when it's equally dark. There's only about 5 hours of what one might call daytime. And what you see when you look outside at that time is gray sky, trees without leaves and probably a bit of rain. Usually, at this time of year we have snow though - which would make the issue a whole lot better. I should mention though, it gets a lot better after a couple of months. The sun shines pretty often and the daytime is way longer.

Nonetheless, the thing I dislike the most is that it's so cold sometimes. I can't do anything outside because most of the time it's too cold to actually enjoy what you're doing. The weather forces people to stay indoors and it's something that I definitely don't like. I'd like to spend my days out in the sunshine with my friends. And I don't necessarily mean running around like a bunch of kids (which isn't a bad thing, of course) but just sitting outside and listening to birds sing. You know, enjoying the nature instead of sitting in front of the computer or TV all day trying to ignore the fact that it would be pitch black if there weren't any lights on.

Anyway, as I said, it gets better but I still don't like the fact that it's like this for several months every year. I'm really considering moving somewhere sunny when I get some money. Which might be after quite a while.

I don't think there's much wrong with speeding unless one is putting others in danger.

Just a couple of days ago some youngsters were speeding at nighttime in the middle of the city I live in. They hit each other at a great speed on an intersection and the cars crashed on a building. The drivers didn't get hurt much, nor did the people who were in the backseat. However, there was one guy walking on the sidewalk who was hit by one of the cars in the head.

It's just sad how the one who got hurt was someone who didn't choose to take the risk.

InCreator, you might want to take that "documents look awful" bit back. I've seen lots of electronic books that are exact copies of the originals. You can use vectors and images in PDF documents, for example. I don't understand why the documents should look awful. Please, elaborate.

For a reasonable readme or how-to-play document, the file size shouldn't be too big an issue, I reckon. For example, RodeQuest 2's Armbot Manual that has graphic content and text is 8 pages long and takes 400 kilobytes. I don't think that's an unreasonable size, even for a small game. It really added to the experience and in my opinion, was something that could not have been done with Notepad.

However, it's not to say that PDF is the way to go in all cases. I'm just saying you might be a bit unfair with judging PDF format. I think it's great for professional look and generally, any representation is more effective with some graphics. Notepad is great for small bits of instructions, bug fix documents, how to install documents and license agreements, for example. But I do believe PDF beats it when it comes to professional how-to-play documents and other perhaps more extensive representations.

HTML is also a very good idea, but it might not quite convey equally professional image.

That's a good observation, Farlander. However, if it's only one guy who's making the short posts - perhaps you could have just send him a notification as a private message. I think posting here would be necessary only if lots of people are doing it, as was the case at one point. Fortunately a long time ago.

It's such a shame to lose such a thoughtful person over this.

But as you put it, Guest, it does reflect the way of this forum like that. Nonetheless, as a defense, I'd like to say that it has always been this way with threads dealing with religion. It's not the way it's supposed to be but I suppose no one is perfect. I personally haven't found this kind of atmosphere in practically any other kind of threads. If you ever come across problems, check out the Techical Discussion forum or the Critic's Lounge. They're bound to be helpful as personal issues don't get to limit anyone's good will.

I think it was the soul hurt part that got people mad, by the way.

And Scavenger, I think you have a really good point. I also think there are basically as many religions as there are people.

Which proves that asking on Tierra's forums would not help proving your point, right? So... What is it exactly you're trying to say?

I don't understand how you can claim King's Quest 1 to be timeless even though Barcik just gave very good reasons for the contrary. We understand you like the game a lot - but unfortunately it doesn't make the game timeless for everyone else. If someone can't enjoy a game without knowing its background - is it really a timeless game?

What really intrigues me though, is, what did you mean by the members of Tierra's forum being far more than AGSers? If you decide to give another short, self-confident answer, please pick this question because I wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions.

I totally agree with Peaceman, with all due respect to WanderLady. I think it's indeed fair for her to ask us not to do something that she finds offending. However, in this case, I think it's not so much of an offense than it might seem - it's just a joke. No one really thinks CJ is Jesus Christ. It's just a funny (in my opinion) coincidence - nothing more.

I don't think that is blasphemous. I mean, playing around with practically meaningless words and letters. Blasphemous would be assuming that God isn't intelligent enough to see we're only joking. Or something.

I think it's all good as long as they remain innocent like they have been so far.

Bodyart, how about being a bit more subtle?

I like the review, Interference. I completely agree with you on the dying part. That's one of the reasons I enjoy Lucasarts' games a lot more. However, I don't really think it means the feature (or flaw for that matter) is bad. I think it means that it doesn't really entertain everybody. On the other hand, that kind of an issue should have been taken into account when making a game for a big audience. Then again, perhaps it didn't even need to be perfect because it was something NEW.

However, I must criticize the review on one thing: bulk of the review is about the gameplay even though it's the fault of the original game, not really the remake's. I think a bit different methods should be used when reviewing an original game, and a remake. Nonetheless, I suppose they could have changed the gameplay but I'm sure they would have got negative comments tenfold if they had. People often expect the same gameplay from remakes, even though the word 'remake' doesn't really imply that.

Vel, I think you slightly misunderstood Interference's point. I think he means that King's Quest 1 should be appreciated, as you said, as the first game with graphics, animations, etc. Nevertheless, it perhaps shouldn't be as appreciated as an adventure game among the others. It is logical after all, for it to have poor qualities because of the fact that it was the first in the genre.

Anyway, personally I really like what Tierra did with the game. If I was to play King's Quest 1, I would play the remake.

My friend just visited Stockholm and told me the chicks there were incredibly hot. I previously wondered if it was just a legend with no reality basis but obviously it is true. But I'd rather go to Sweden to make the final conclusion.

I don't think Eric's tutorials have too great an impact on our art. However, I agree with Andail on the fact that tutorials shouldn't be compared with each other. Some of them are targeted at beginners and some for advanced - it's a bit unfair to compare them.

Anyway, I think the tutorial is great. Keep it up - there's always room for tutorials!

I'm from Finland.

I think you can get a good idea of how many there are if you check the AGS World Map. Could someone help out with the URL for it?

I personally think Adware is a much greater risk to my computer than the removal or blocking programs. To date, I've had no problems with them. Should there be any problems, I take the consequenses as they are. At least I made the choice to install the program that screwed up my computer.

Thanks for sharing, Minimi!

I've been thinking it would be nice to have an application to prevent the Adware from getting on my computer but obviously I never actually searched for it. SpyWareBlaster seems to be exactly what I was thinking about - thanks!

I'd be really interested in seeing something like that! A movie might be even cooler - you could put more effort on it.

Any kind of a show would be an AWESOME idea. I hope someone goes for it.

Petteri, I'm planning to go, once again.

This time I'm hoping to really really make it. I've always wanted to go to the USA and there isn't a better moment for it than this. I will try and raise enough money for the trip this time. I'm on the lookout for a job right now. Whoo.

Rock on, FruitTree! That is really valuable work.

At first read I thought you were going to Niagara. Well, close enough - have fun!

I think you're doing good! However, I think you would attain a more professional look if you used vectors. The lines are a bit inaccurate right now and it could easily be improved with vectors. Also it would give you the resolution independence which is often a good thing with logos.

Basically, the best advice I can give is that, plus that you perhaps shouldn't use any distinct shading with brushstrokes, just base the logo on the shapes and use very little color tricks. But that's just my preference.

Hope to see progress soon!