🚀 go-pugleaf

"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
>
> As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> advisable
> that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> then and only then you should consider buying the game.
>
> What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there is
> a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> units, you name it.
>
> If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the game
> will be very, very slow.


if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c games
are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.


-- 
Margolis

>if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
games are great.<

I agree

-- 
The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
  Copyright ę 2003 Drinkenstein


"Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> >
> > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > advisable
> > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> >
> > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there is
> > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > units, you name it.
> >
> > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the game
> > will be very, very slow.
>
>
> if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
games
> are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
>
>
> -- 
> Margolis
>
>

I dont agree with the whole GamSpy being good - infact a large proportion of
the community call it GaySpy because of all the problems it has caused
people. Also they dont make an effort. I emailed the GameSpy admins to tell
them the Generals servers were down once - without even checking then
emailed me back saying it was impossible that they were down because EA
hadn't emailed them to tell them. Um... this was at like 3am Pacific time or
something like this so all the EA dudes would have been asleep.

As for buying the game... I will definitely buy the game. We've been giving
more input to the devs since Generals to tell them how to improve future
games for the fans - so they will be as good, if not better. Plus I own
every C&C game to date, including Sole Survivor and the console versions of
the games, so will continue buying them. I have so much C&C stuff its
unbelievable lol. Isn't having contacts fun :)

"Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message
news:vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com...
> >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> games are great.<
>
> I agree
>
> --
> The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
>   Copyright ę 2003 Drinkenstein
>
>
> "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > >
> > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > advisable
> > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > >
> > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there is
> > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > units, you name it.
> > >
> > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the game
> > > will be very, very slow.
> >
> >
> > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> games
> > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Margolis
> >
> >
>
>

First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
have any credibility at all.

Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
products.

My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
sights, this is what I was told.

What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.

Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.

Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
then is another LIE.

Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.

Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
due to the fact that individuals complained about it.

There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.

As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
the online version of the game is crap.
As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
capabilities of the game are crap.

If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
product.


"Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message news:<vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com>...
> >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> games are great.<
> 
> I agree
> 
> -- 
> The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
>   Copyright © 2003 Drinkenstein
> 
> 
> "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > >
> > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > advisable
> > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > >
> > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there is
> > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > units, you name it.
> > >
> > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the game
> > > will be very, very slow.
> >
> >
> > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
>  games
> > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > Margolis
> >
> >

"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> have any credibility at all.
>
> Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> products.
>
> My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> sights, this is what I was told.
>
> What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
>
> Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
>
> Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> then is another LIE.
>
> Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
>
> Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
>
> There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
>
> As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> the online version of the game is crap.
> As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> capabilities of the game are crap.
>
> If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> product.
>
>


the only lies here are the ones being spouted by  trolls like you

-- 
-- 
Margolis

I like C&C, plan on buying every new one too.
Hopefully one the first day they come out.

"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
>
> As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> advisable
> that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> then and only then you should consider buying the game.
>
> What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there is
> a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> units, you name it.
>
> If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the game
> will be very, very slow.

fuckchop

-- 
The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
  Copyright ę 2003 Drinkenstein

"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> have any credibility at all.
>
> Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> products.
>
> My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> sights, this is what I was told.
>
> What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
>
> Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
>
> Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> then is another LIE.
>
> Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
>
> Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
>
> There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
>
> As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> the online version of the game is crap.
> As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> capabilities of the game are crap.
>
> If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> product.
>
>
> "Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message
news:<vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com>...
> > >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> > games are great.<
> >
> > I agree
> >
> > -- 
> > The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
> >   Copyright ę 2003 Drinkenstein
> >
> >
> > "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> > news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> > > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > > >
> > > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > > advisable
> > > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> > > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> > > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > > >
> > > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there
is
> > > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > > units, you name it.
> > > >
> > > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> > > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the
game
> > > > will be very, very slow.
> > >
> > >
> > > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> >  games
> > > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> > >
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > Margolis
> > >
> > >

 I've been playing C&C since the very first game years back (what is it, ten
years now?) and have bought every game almost on the first day of release
since then, every single game and expansion disk. I have enjoyed all of
them, turning to them for an hour or two's gaming whenever at a  loose end
and always enjoying the challenge of the game and the differing gameplay
each time.

 Generals is in my opinion the pinnacle of the game, C&C has evolved into
the current offering and is everything I wanted it to be. Yes occasionally I
do get a slow down online but it always clears after a few seconds and many
times I've reconnected and found the lag glitch gone completely. I'm no
techy, I don't know what causes it but I really don't care, I paid my money
I play the game and I really rate Generals and Zero Hour as brilliant
entertainment for the money spent. I don't have anything else that has
provided such a good return on investmemt, DVD's / Videos etc, watch them
once or twice and they're as good as dead. This game has probably cost a
minute fraction of a penny per hour that I've played and is excellent value.

 I know you are only trolling, who knows why, who cares really. If you don't
like EA / Generals / Zero Hour / Gamespy then simple, don't support, don't
buy, don't use. I don't think anyone on these newsgroups is interested in
some rumour you've picked up about some government department who has
nothing better to do than investigate a computer game. Also, keep the
accusations of Liar to yourself, we don't all have some old computer that
struggles with the game, mine eats the game with all options and settings
running at full, no slow down, no memory block, no problems.

 I will continue to buy from EA, I will continue to buy C&C, Red Alert
whatever and I will continue to enjoy the finest games I've played over the
last 15 years on a PC.

 Have a g'day

 Doc

PS       Sorry about the top post
PPS     No I don't work for EA or Gamespy either



"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> have any credibility at all.
>
> Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> products.
>
> My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> sights, this is what I was told.
>
> What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
>
> Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
>
> Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> then is another LIE.
>
> Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
>
> Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
>
> There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
>
> As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> the online version of the game is crap.
> As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> capabilities of the game are crap.
>
> If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> product.
>
>
> "Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message
news:<vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com>...
> > >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> > games are great.<
> >
> > I agree
> >
> > --
> > The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
> >   Copyright ę 2003 Drinkenstein
> >
> >
> > "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> > news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> > > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > > >
> > > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > > advisable
> > > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> > > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> > > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > > >
> > > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there
is
> > > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > > units, you name it.
> > > >
> > > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> > > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the
game
> > > > will be very, very slow.
> > >
> > >
> > > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> >  games
> > > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Margolis
> > >
> > >

"Dr.Seuss" <dr.seuss@thecatinthehat99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<bspvlv$g2l$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> I've been playing C&C since the very first game years back (what is it, ten
> years now?) and have bought every game almost on the first day of release
> since then, every single game and expansion disk. I have enjoyed all of
> them, turning to them for an hour or two's gaming whenever at a  loose end
> and always enjoying the challenge of the game and the differing gameplay
> each time.
> 
>  Generals is in my opinion the pinnacle of the game, C&C has evolved into
> the current offering and is everything I wanted it to be. Yes occasionally I
> do get a slow down online but it always clears after a few seconds and many
> times I've reconnected and found the lag glitch gone completely. I'm no
> techy, I don't know what causes it but I really don't care, I paid my money
> I play the game and I really rate Generals and Zero Hour as brilliant
> entertainment for the money spent. I don't have anything else that has
> provided such a good return on investmemt, DVD's / Videos etc, watch them
> once or twice and they're as good as dead. This game has probably cost a
> minute fraction of a penny per hour that I've played and is excellent value.
> 
 
 The government department which you are refering to is a consumer
watchdog.
As I have said, there will be idiots which will buy the game no matter
what, the fact of the matter is that while the game "line" might have
some originality, the performance of the product is what the posting
is about, like any other product it can have a good and nice package
but if the performace is shit,  then that product is junk, simple,
which is what Generals and Zero Hour games are shit products due to
the fact that they do not perform to the consumer's satisfaction and
cause problems, which none of you imbeciles, have cared to address,
thus, enforcing the accuracy of the original posting.

What I realy want is to get value for my money, and up to this point I
am still waiting, because, come New Year, there will be making a
posting a day regarding the shitty performance of the Generals and
Zero Hour, until I get my money back or they fix the games as such
that the online performance improves, better user interface and the
rest, because, bro, I PROMISE YOU THIS, if they do not fix it, as such
that I am satisfied with the product or give me the money back, 2004
will be the year in which Electronic Arts will go under, Generals and
Zero Hour are not the only games that are causing problems, do not
forget about the rest of the crap Electronic Arts puts on the market.

Let Electronic Arts prove me wrong with the statements that I have
made and show to contrary, here is a challange for Electronic Arts,
because every statement that I have made is a FACT that none of you
have been able to deny it.


>  I know you are only trolling, who knows why, who cares really. If you don't
> like EA / Generals / Zero Hour / Gamespy then simple, don't support, don't
> buy, don't use. I don't think anyone on these newsgroups is interested in
> some rumour you've picked up about some government department who has
> nothing better to do than investigate a computer game. Also, keep the
> accusations of Liar to yourself, we don't all have some old computer that
> struggles with the game, mine eats the game with all options and settings
> running at full, no slow down, no memory block, no problems.
> 
>  I will continue to buy from EA, I will continue to buy C&C, Red Alert
> whatever and I will continue to enjoy the finest games I've played over the
> last 15 years on a PC.
> 
>  Have a g'day
> 
>  Doc
> 
> PS       Sorry about the top post
> PPS     No I don't work for EA or Gamespy either
> 
> 
> 
> "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> > First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> > with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> > have any credibility at all.
> >
> > Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> > because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> > Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> > Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> > products.
> >
> > My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> > sights, this is what I was told.
> >
> > What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> > Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> > number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> > What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> > per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> >
> > Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> > in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> >
> > Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> > then is another LIE.
> >
> > Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> > online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> > that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> > the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
> >
> > Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> > due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
> >
> > There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> > the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> > consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> > Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
> >
> > As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> > capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> > the online version of the game is crap.
> > As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> > GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> > capabilities of the game are crap.
> >
> > If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> > of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> > flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> > product.
> >
> >
> > "Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message
>  news:<vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com>...
> > > >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
> > > games are great.<
> > >
> > > I agree
> > >
> > > --
> > > The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
> > >   Copyright © 2003 Drinkenstein
> > >
> > >
> > > "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> > > news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version of
> > > > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > > > >
> > > > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > > > advisable
> > > > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online capability,
> > > > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the product
> > > > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > > > >
> > > > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when there
>  is
> > > > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > > > units, you name it.
> > > > >
> > > > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy, my
> > > > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of the
>  game
> > > > > will be very, very slow.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all c&c
>  games
> > > > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Margolis
> > > >
> > > >

You're an idiot, welcome to my killfile.


"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312291912.608b9ae0@posting.google.com...
> "Dr.Seuss" <dr.seuss@thecatinthehat99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in

Gosh it must be true cuz I read it on the internet :-)

None of the command & conquer games have ever been able to touch starcraft
for load times.  I find building placement a bit annoying in generals - up
till now C&C games have made it easy to park your buildings in nice tight
blocks without any time wasting.  I'd also like to be able to get a top down
view of the battlefield sometimes.  There's a far few other things that I
think make the game less than it could be, some would be agreed with here,
and some would probably cause you to laugh me out of the group.

Having said that, the *most* annoying thing to me, is that I can't cut all
the bullshit intro sequences to missions and the odd bit within a mission.
That could be because I run generals without any major problems on my P3/550
with 128MB.  How many games do you know that run on a PC so far below the
minimum spec Mr Satan sir?  The only other game I know of is TIE fighter,
which needed a 486 DX2/66, and yet was quite happy on my 486 SX/33

EA have a lot of work to do on their next C&C game in my opinion, but
generals is certainly worth going into a shop and parting with hard earned
cash for.

Ace

PS Sorry if my top posting offends, but I've never understood the sense in
scrolling through all the stuff that's previously been posted just to get to
a one line answer at the bottom.  Maybe I'm a rebel, or maybe I have a dial
up connection :-)

"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312291912.608b9ae0@posting.google.com...
> "Dr.Seuss" <dr.seuss@thecatinthehat99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<bspvlv$g2l$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> > I've been playing C&C since the very first game years back (what is it,
ten
> > years now?) and have bought every game almost on the first day of
release
> > since then, every single game and expansion disk. I have enjoyed all of
> > them, turning to them for an hour or two's gaming whenever at a  loose
end
> > and always enjoying the challenge of the game and the differing gameplay
> > each time.
> >
> >  Generals is in my opinion the pinnacle of the game, C&C has evolved
into
> > the current offering and is everything I wanted it to be. Yes
occasionally I
> > do get a slow down online but it always clears after a few seconds and
many
> > times I've reconnected and found the lag glitch gone completely. I'm no
> > techy, I don't know what causes it but I really don't care, I paid my
money
> > I play the game and I really rate Generals and Zero Hour as brilliant
> > entertainment for the money spent. I don't have anything else that has
> > provided such a good return on investmemt, DVD's / Videos etc, watch
them
> > once or twice and they're as good as dead. This game has probably cost a
> > minute fraction of a penny per hour that I've played and is excellent
value.
> >
>
>  The government department which you are refering to is a consumer
> watchdog.
> As I have said, there will be idiots which will buy the game no matter
> what, the fact of the matter is that while the game "line" might have
> some originality, the performance of the product is what the posting
> is about, like any other product it can have a good and nice package
> but if the performace is shit,  then that product is junk, simple,
> which is what Generals and Zero Hour games are shit products due to
> the fact that they do not perform to the consumer's satisfaction and
> cause problems, which none of you imbeciles, have cared to address,
> thus, enforcing the accuracy of the original posting.
>
> What I realy want is to get value for my money, and up to this point I
> am still waiting, because, come New Year, there will be making a
> posting a day regarding the shitty performance of the Generals and
> Zero Hour, until I get my money back or they fix the games as such
> that the online performance improves, better user interface and the
> rest, because, bro, I PROMISE YOU THIS, if they do not fix it, as such
> that I am satisfied with the product or give me the money back, 2004
> will be the year in which Electronic Arts will go under, Generals and
> Zero Hour are not the only games that are causing problems, do not
> forget about the rest of the crap Electronic Arts puts on the market.
>
> Let Electronic Arts prove me wrong with the statements that I have
> made and show to contrary, here is a challange for Electronic Arts,
> because every statement that I have made is a FACT that none of you
> have been able to deny it.
>
>
> >  I know you are only trolling, who knows why, who cares really. If you
don't
> > like EA / Generals / Zero Hour / Gamespy then simple, don't support,
don't
> > buy, don't use. I don't think anyone on these newsgroups is interested
in
> > some rumour you've picked up about some government department who has
> > nothing better to do than investigate a computer game. Also, keep the
> > accusations of Liar to yourself, we don't all have some old computer
that
> > struggles with the game, mine eats the game with all options and
settings
> > running at full, no slow down, no memory block, no problems.
> >
> >  I will continue to buy from EA, I will continue to buy C&C, Red Alert
> > whatever and I will continue to enjoy the finest games I've played over
the
> > last 15 years on a PC.
> >
> >  Have a g'day
> >
> >  Doc
> >
> > PS       Sorry about the top post
> > PPS     No I don't work for EA or Gamespy either
> >
> >
> >
> > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> > > First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> > > with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> > > have any credibility at all.
> > >
> > > Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> > > because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> > > Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> > > Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> > > products.
> > >
> > > My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> > > sights, this is what I was told.
> > >
> > > What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> > > Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> > > number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> > > What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> > > per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> > >
> > > Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> > > in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> > >
> > > Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> > > then is another LIE.
> > >
> > > Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> > > online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> > > that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> > > the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
> > >
> > > Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> > > due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
> > >
> > > There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> > > the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> > > consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> > > Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
> > >
> > > As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> > > capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> > > the online version of the game is crap.
> > > As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> > > GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> > > capabilities of the game are crap.
> > >
> > > If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> > > of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> > > flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> > > product.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message
> >  news:<vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com>...
> > > > >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all
c&c
> > > > games are great.<
> > > >
> > > > I agree
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
> > > >   Copyright ę 2003 Drinkenstein
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> > > > news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version
of
> > > > > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > > > > advisable
> > > > > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > > > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online
capability,
> > > > > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the
product
> > > > > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when
there
> >  is
> > > > > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > > > > units, you name it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy,
my
> > > > > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of
the
> >  game
> > > > > > will be very, very slow.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all
c&c
> >  games
> > > > > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Margolis
> > > > >
> > > > >

Why be sorry about top posting folks? Its all I ever do! *grins*

Now, as for you satan. Do you honestly think we care what you think? Seems
to me you're just a boy dealing with puberty. We really dont give a flying
fuck through a rolling donut what your opinions are, because thats all they
are- Opinions. They mean nothing to us, they are insignificant, they are
petty and juvenile. You should go and have some anger management therapy, I
think you need it. Why dont you go and bitch to your mother or something,
she will probably care more than us. Maybe she can get you a refund "my son
says this game sucks, now give me a refund" ""Uhh, sure. SECURITY""

You are nothing, and nothing gives you the right to drag names through the
mud. Look at Microsoft, look at Symantec. Microsoft railroad you into shit
you dont want, and Norton Util's just takes over your whole damn puter. But
that is just what I think of them, thats MY opinion. Just because ppl dont
agree with you, it does NOT give you the right to go off even more about
something you dislike. You are purely speaking from a biased point of view
because the game "isnt running the way you think it should run"
Well here's some free advice fuckstain. Go work for EA. See if you can do
any better.

Tard.


--
The J.

I like stuff, do you like stuff?
,,|,, (^_^) ,,|,,


PS: To the true WW and C&C fans out there: I hear ya, and I'm in with you
all.

Remove SUXORZ to email.
"satan" <vall...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:139ab587.0312291912.608b9ae0@posting.google.com...
> "Dr.Seuss" <dr.s...@thecatinthehat99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<bspvlv$g2l$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> > I've been playing C&C since the very first game years back (what is it,
ten
> > years now?) and have bought every game almost on the first day of
release
> > since then, every single game and expansion disk. I have enjoyed all of
> > them, turning to them for an hour or two's gaming whenever at a  loose
end
> > and always enjoying the challenge of the game and the differing gameplay
> > each time.
> >
> >  Generals is in my opinion the pinnacle of the game, C&C has evolved
into
> > the current offering and is everything I wanted it to be. Yes
occasionally I
> > do get a slow down online but it always clears after a few seconds and
many
> > times I've reconnected and found the lag glitch gone completely. I'm no
> > techy, I don't know what causes it but I really don't care, I paid my
money
> > I play the game and I really rate Generals and Zero Hour as brilliant
> > entertainment for the money spent. I don't have anything else that has
> > provided such a good return on investmemt, DVD's / Videos etc, watch
them
> > once or twice and they're as good as dead. This game has probably cost a
> > minute fraction of a penny per hour that I've played and is excellent
value.
> >
>
>  The government department which you are refering to is a consumer
> watchdog.
> As I have said, there will be idiots which will buy the game no matter
> what, the fact of the matter is that while the game "line" might have
> some originality, the performance of the product is what the posting
> is about, like any other product it can have a good and nice package
> but if the performace is shit,  then that product is junk, simple,
> which is what Generals and Zero Hour games are shit products due to
> the fact that they do not perform to the consumer's satisfaction and
> cause problems, which none of you imbeciles, have cared to address,
> thus, enforcing the accuracy of the original posting.
>
> What I realy want is to get value for my money, and up to this point I
> am still waiting, because, come New Year, there will be making a
> posting a day regarding the shitty performance of the Generals and
> Zero Hour, until I get my money back or they fix the games as such
> that the online performance improves, better user interface and the
> rest, because, bro, I PROMISE YOU THIS, if they do not fix it, as such
> that I am satisfied with the product or give me the money back, 2004
> will be the year in which Electronic Arts will go under, Generals and
> Zero Hour are not the only games that are causing problems, do not
> forget about the rest of the crap Electronic Arts puts on the market.
>
> Let Electronic Arts prove me wrong with the statements that I have
> made and show to contrary, here is a challange for Electronic Arts,
> because every statement that I have made is a FACT that none of you
> have been able to deny it.
>
>
> >  I know you are only trolling, who knows why, who cares really. If you
don't
> > like EA / Generals / Zero Hour / Gamespy then simple, don't support,
don't
> > buy, don't use. I don't think anyone on these newsgroups is interested
in
> > some rumour you've picked up about some government department who has
> > nothing better to do than investigate a computer game. Also, keep the
> > accusations of Liar to yourself, we don't all have some old computer
that
> > struggles with the game, mine eats the game with all options and
settings
> > running at full, no slow down, no memory block, no problems.
> >
> >  I will continue to buy from EA, I will continue to buy C&C, Red Alert
> > whatever and I will continue to enjoy the finest games I've played over
the
> > last 15 years on a PC.
> >
> >  Have a g'day
> >
> >  Doc
> >
> > PS       Sorry about the top post
> > PPS     No I don't work for EA or Gamespy either
> >
> >
> >
> > "satan" <vall...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> > > First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> > > with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> > > have any credibility at all.
> > >
> > > Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> > > because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> > > Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> > > Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> > > products.
> > >
> > > My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> > > sights, this is what I was told.
> > >
> > > What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> > > Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> > > number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> > > What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> > > per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> > >
> > > Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> > > in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> > >
> > > Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> > > then is another LIE.
> > >
> > > Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> > > online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> > > that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> > > the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
> > >
> > > Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> > > due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
> > >
> > > There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> > > the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> > > consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> > > Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
> > >
> > > As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> > > capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> > > the online version of the game is crap.
> > > As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> > > GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> > > capabilities of the game are crap.
> > >
> > > If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> > > of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> > > flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> > > product.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Drinkenstein" <vo...@beer.net> wrote in message
> >  news:<vutck3p...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > > > >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all
c&c
> > > > games are great.<
> > > >
> > > > I agree
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
> > > >   Copyright � 2003 Drinkenstein
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Margolis" <som...@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> > > > news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > > "satan" <vall...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version
of
> > > > > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > > > > advisable
> > > > > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > > > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online
capability,
> > > > > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the
product
> > > > > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when
there
> >  is
> > > > > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > > > > units, you name it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy,
my
> > > > > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of
the
> >  game
> > > > > > will be very, very slow.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all
c&c
> >  games
> > > > > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Margolis
> > > > >
> > > > >

In article <3ff2020d_3@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>, but only
after serious contemplation, Ace <flib@lineone.net> put finger to
keyboard and produced the following;
>PS Sorry if my top posting offends, but I've never understood the sense in
>scrolling through all the stuff that's previously been posted just to get to
>a one line answer at the bottom. 

Then allow me to enlighten (educate?) you. ;=}

---- The Aglami Top-Posting FAQ ----
 By Luke T. Whitmore the Nth, Esq.

1) What is top-posting?
2) Why shouldn't I top-post?
   i) Continuity
   ii) Ease of editing.
3) The Laziness Defence
4) Additional problems

--
1) What is top-posting?

Top-posting is when you put your reply to a post above the quoted
text, as seen here:
--

It's spelt "Cthulu", IIRC.

Yast <yast@aglami.com> wrote:
>
>>>>All top-posters should be disembowelled!
>>>
>>> I agree with this post.
>>
>>Me too. And after the disembowelling, their bodies should be 
sacrificed to Satan.
>
>Wouldn't C'fulu be more appreciative?

--

2) Why shouldn't I top-post?

i) Continuity

During a long thread on a newsgroup, several conversations can
develop, therefore it's necessary for people to have a bit of quoted
text when reading messages in order for them to get the context of the
replies. With any normal, healthy newsgroup, consisting entirely of
bottom-posters, such a thread, properly edited, would look like this:
--

Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Yes, I do believe in some kind of God.
>>>
>>>The concept of God is just a useless relic of an outmoded belief 
system.
>>>
>>I disagree. Even if there is no actual 'God' that can be defined in 
physical terms,
>>the concept of God and the church can be a metaphor for the kind of 
caring society
>>that we should try to achieve.
>
>Ridiculous. How do you justify the Church's claim that black people 
were soulless,
>merely as a way of justifying slavery? Religion is just a way of 
keeping the masses
>under control.

Waah! Shut up!

--
As you can see, the conversation is easy to follow and readable.
However, were this group to consist of top-posters, the same
conversation would look like this:
--

Waah! Shut up!

Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:
>Ridiculous. How do you justify the Church's claim that black people 
were soulless,
>merely as a way of justifying slavery? Religion is just a way of 
keeping the masses
>under control.
>
>>I disagree. Even if there is no actual 'God' that can be defined in 
physical terms,
>>the concept of God and the church can be a metaphor for the kind of 
caring society
>>that we should try to achieve.
>>
>>>The concept of God is just a useless relic of an outmoded belief 
system.
>>>
>>>>Yes, I do believe in some kind of God.

--
Unless you speak a variant of English which involves reading from
bottom to top, the thread is difficult to follow and makes little
contextual sense.
--

ii) Ease of editing

People, as you may have noticed, are faulty. Sometimes, in the
adrenaline rush which accompanies posting to a thread on Usenet, they
forget to edit their headers and the quoted text. (The header is the
part of the message which states who wrote the most recently quoted
piece of text - for example, "Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:".)
Eventually you end up with a whole screen full of who wrote what, and
quoted text going a long way back; it's unnecessary, unsightly,
inconvenient and encourages the spread of infectious diseases. Of
course, when somebody who has fully operational common-sense glands
comes along and wishes to reply, they usually edit out the headers and
excess text and the good citizens of the newsgroup sleep safely in
their beds again. Of course, the people who do this editing are kind,
gentle folk, and we should try to aid them in every way possible.
People who post at the bottom of messages make this very easy; an
unedited thread would look something like this:
--

Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:
>
>Yast <yast@aglami.com> wrote:
>
>>Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:
>>
>>>A. Looney <not@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jesus <son@god.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Foghorn Leghorn <babababoy@warner.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Textual intercourse is the most fun you'll ever have.
>>>>>
>>>>>I forgive thee all.
>>>>
>>>>You're going to get your head kicked in.
>>>
>>>No, we're all pacifists in here.
>>
>>And anarchists.
>
>And athiests.

Yes, let's lose the Jesus guy, shall we?

--
As you can see, all the good, kind person has to do is highlight all
of the headers except their own and a reasonable part of the quoted
text below it and hit delete. Not so on a group full of top-posters.
The same thread would look like this:
--

Yes, let's lose the Jesus guy, shall we?

Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:
>
>And athiests.
>
>Yast <yast@aglami.com>
>
>>And anarchists.
>>
>>Frook <frook@aglami.com> wrote:
>>
>>>No, we're all pacifists in here.
>>>
>>>A. Looney <not@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You're going to get your head kicked in.
>>>>
>>>>Jesus <son@god.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I forgive thee all.
>>>>>
>>>>>Foghorn Leghorn <babababoy@warner.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Textual intercourse is the most fun you'll ever have.

--
Editing the headers is now far more difficult, since you have to
highlight them individually and delete them. The same is true for the
overquoting of the text. Therefore, most people will end up not
bothering with editing, or deleting the whole collection of quoted
text and headers, losing all of the contextual information. Idiocy,
and a kind that can be so easily avoided.
--

3) The Laziness Defence

"But it's too much effort to put replies at the bottom!" (said in a
whiny monotone)

Now that's just silly. Do you eat meat raw because it's too much
effort to cook it? Do you urinate wherever you're sitting because it's
too much effort to get up and go to the bathroom? I only know one
person who does these things, and Atob's not a top-poster. Seriously,
though, as shown in the earlier examples, by not bothering to put your
replies at the bottom, you're just causing other people problems when
replying, so why not put in that extra bit of effort? It's not too
difficult to push the <Page Down> key, is it? (Don't answer
that, it's rhetorical.)
--


---- END FAQ ----

-- 
Cheers,

Chas.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?

"Stealthy J." wrote:

> Why be sorry about top posting folks?

Because it marks you as a moron.

N.

"satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote

> every statement that I have made is a FACT that none of you
> have been able to deny it.

Bwaawww-haw-haw!

What an illiterate buffoon.

N.

"Stealthy J." <stealthpc@westnetSUXORZ.com.au> wrote in message news:<3ff3881a@quokka.wn.com.au>...
> Why be sorry about top posting folks? Its all I ever do! *grins*
> 
> Now, as for you satan. Do you honestly think we care what you think? Seems
> to me you're just a boy dealing with puberty. We really dont give a flying
> fuck through a rolling donut what your opinions are, because thats all they
> are- Opinions. They mean nothing to us, they are insignificant, they are
> petty and juvenile. You should go and have some anger management therapy, I
> think you need it. Why dont you go and bitch to your mother or something,
> she will probably care more than us. Maybe she can get you a refund "my son
> says this game sucks, now give me a refund" ""Uhh, sure. SECURITY""

Imbecile, as I have said, the posting is not aimed to individuals like
you, it
is aimed to individuals considering buying EA games that what to be
able to make an informed decision. When you will be able to prove my
bitching wrong and
unfounded, then I will stop the postings, but you cannot do so,
cretin, thus, shut the fuck up.
Cretin, address the issues raised with respect to the game's
performance are they wrong and unfounded? Be prepared to backup your
statements.

Tell us imbecile, is the game not freezing from time to time?

Tell us imbecile, is the online performance of the game satisfactory
when Electronic Arts has made the point in acknowledging that "Online
experience may change" and to translate it for you imbecile, means
"Online performance of the game is crap".

Tell us imbecile, through how many splash screens you have to go in
order to play the game?

Tell us imbecile, upon exiting the game, does it leave crap in the
memory or not?

Tell us imbecile, how GameSpy borders on individual's privacy?

As I have said, address the issues or shut the fuck up.



> 
> You are nothing, and nothing gives you the right to drag names through the
> mud. Look at Microsoft, look at Symantec. Microsoft railroad you into shit
> you dont want, and Norton Util's just takes over your whole damn puter. But
> that is just what I think of them, thats MY opinion. Just because ppl dont
> agree with you, it does NOT give you the right to go off even more about
> something you dislike. You are purely speaking from a biased point of view
> because the game "isnt running the way you think it should run"
> Well here's some free advice fuckstain. Go work for EA. See if you can do
> any better.
> 
> Tard.

I have earned the right to bitch and complain about the Generals and
Zero Hour the very moment I have received the receipt for the purchase
of the shittiest game ever put on the market - C&C Generals and C&C
Generals:Zero Hour.

The fact that Electronic Arts put a shit product on the market, and
hope to get away with it, that is another matter, EA has ignored all
customer's complaints, ignored the feedback that it received by e-mail
and the rest, EA has made a choice, and apparently it was the wrong
one, and I will not let them get away with it.

Now as far as I am concerned with respect to go working for EA, first
and foremost Electronic Arts will have to stop making chief designers
and chief programmers out of dickheads and imbeciles, then I will
consider it.


> 
> 
> --
> The J.
> 
> I like stuff, do you like stuff?
> ,,|,, (^_^) ,,|,,
> 
> 
> PS: To the true WW and C&C fans out there: I hear ya, and I'm in with you
> all.
> 
> Remove SUXORZ to email.
> "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:139ab587.0312291912.608b9ae0@posting.google.com...
> > "Dr.Seuss" <dr.seuss@thecatinthehat99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>  news:<bspvlv$g2l$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> > > I've been playing C&C since the very first game years back (what is it,
>  ten
> > > years now?) and have bought every game almost on the first day of
>  release
> > > since then, every single game and expansion disk. I have enjoyed all of
> > > them, turning to them for an hour or two's gaming whenever at a  loose
>  end
> > > and always enjoying the challenge of the game and the differing gameplay
> > > each time.
> > >
> > >  Generals is in my opinion the pinnacle of the game, C&C has evolved
>  into
> > > the current offering and is everything I wanted it to be. Yes
>  occasionally I
> > > do get a slow down online but it always clears after a few seconds and
>  many
> > > times I've reconnected and found the lag glitch gone completely. I'm no
> > > techy, I don't know what causes it but I really don't care, I paid my
>  money
> > > I play the game and I really rate Generals and Zero Hour as brilliant
> > > entertainment for the money spent. I don't have anything else that has
> > > provided such a good return on investmemt, DVD's / Videos etc, watch
>  them
> > > once or twice and they're as good as dead. This game has probably cost a
> > > minute fraction of a penny per hour that I've played and is excellent
>  value.
> > >
> >
> >  The government department which you are refering to is a consumer
> > watchdog.
> > As I have said, there will be idiots which will buy the game no matter
> > what, the fact of the matter is that while the game "line" might have
> > some originality, the performance of the product is what the posting
> > is about, like any other product it can have a good and nice package
> > but if the performace is shit,  then that product is junk, simple,
> > which is what Generals and Zero Hour games are shit products due to
> > the fact that they do not perform to the consumer's satisfaction and
> > cause problems, which none of you imbeciles, have cared to address,
> > thus, enforcing the accuracy of the original posting.
> >
> > What I realy want is to get value for my money, and up to this point I
> > am still waiting, because, come New Year, there will be making a
> > posting a day regarding the shitty performance of the Generals and
> > Zero Hour, until I get my money back or they fix the games as such
> > that the online performance improves, better user interface and the
> > rest, because, bro, I PROMISE YOU THIS, if they do not fix it, as such
> > that I am satisfied with the product or give me the money back, 2004
> > will be the year in which Electronic Arts will go under, Generals and
> > Zero Hour are not the only games that are causing problems, do not
> > forget about the rest of the crap Electronic Arts puts on the market.
> >
> > Let Electronic Arts prove me wrong with the statements that I have
> > made and show to contrary, here is a challange for Electronic Arts,
> > because every statement that I have made is a FACT that none of you
> > have been able to deny it.
> >
> >
> > >  I know you are only trolling, who knows why, who cares really. If you
>  don't
> > > like EA / Generals / Zero Hour / Gamespy then simple, don't support,
>  don't
> > > buy, don't use. I don't think anyone on these newsgroups is interested
>  in
> > > some rumour you've picked up about some government department who has
> > > nothing better to do than investigate a computer game. Also, keep the
> > > accusations of Liar to yourself, we don't all have some old computer
>  that
> > > struggles with the game, mine eats the game with all options and
>  settings
> > > running at full, no slow down, no memory block, no problems.
> > >
> > >  I will continue to buy from EA, I will continue to buy C&C, Red Alert
> > > whatever and I will continue to enjoy the finest games I've played over
>  the
> > > last 15 years on a PC.
> > >
> > >  Have a g'day
> > >
> > >  Doc
> > >
> > > PS       Sorry about the top post
> > > PPS     No I don't work for EA or Gamespy either
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:139ab587.0312281830.124f94e7@posting.google.com...
> > > > First of all you three imbecils will have to disclose your association
> > > > with Electronic Arts and GameSpy network if you want your comments to
> > > > have any credibility at all.
> > > >
> > > > Now, let Electronic Arts put another faulty product on the market,
> > > > because in Australia we have something called ACCC (Australian
> > > > Competition and Consumer Commision), because we can deal with
> > > > Electronic Arts in this way, it goes under faulty and unsatisfactory
> > > > products.
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is that Electronic Arts is already in the ACCC's
> > > > sights, this is what I was told.
> > > >
> > > > What are you three saying, that you did not have problems with
> > > > Generals and Zero Hour? Then this is an outright LIE, just look at the
> > > > number of patches released by Electronic Arts.
> > > > What are you saying that the game never slowed to less than a frame
> > > > per second, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> > > >
> > > > Are you saying that after you quit the game does not leave "garbage"
> > > > in the memory, because if you do, then this is another LIE.
> > > >
> > > > Are you saying that the user interface is not crap, because if you do,
> > > > then is another LIE.
> > > >
> > > > Are you by any chanced suggesting that there are no problems with the
> > > > online game performance when Electronic Arts has acknowledged the fact
> > > > that due to poor development practices they did not take into account
> > > > the internet infrastructure, then again you three are telling LIES.
> > > >
> > > > Electronic Arts has added the "quickstart" option at the executable
> > > > due to the fact that individuals complained about it.
> > > >
> > > > There will be idiots that will buy the crap no matter what, but by far
> > > > the majority of individuals will display more common sense and
> > > > consider the recent performance of the products put on the market by
> > > > Electronic Arts and make an informed decision.
> > > >
> > > > As I have said, try before you buy, if does not have the online
> > > > capability in the trial version, dropped like a hot potato, because
> > > > the online version of the game is crap.
> > > > As I have said, if anywhere on the package is mentioned the word
> > > > GameSpy, again dropped like a hot potato, because the online
> > > > capabilities of the game are crap.
> > > >
> > > > If you have to go throught more than two screens to play any feature
> > > > of the game again, dropped like a hot potato, because they are using
> > > > flashy splash screens to cover up for the poor performance of the
> > > > product.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Drinkenstein" <vodka@beer.net> wrote in message
>  news:<vutck3ptnmak93@corp.supernews.com>...
> > > > > >if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all
>  c&c
> > > > > games are great.<
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > The Anonymous Alcoholic! Drink 24:7
> > > > >   Copyright © 2003 Drinkenstein
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Margolis" <someone@somewhere.org> wrote in message
> > > > > news:vutbj253rjdnd2@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > > > "satan" <vally1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:139ab587.0312271758.88b9bfa@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > > Soon Electronic Arts will try to put on the maket a new version
>  of
> > > > > > > Command And Conquer: Red Alert 3.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As a owner of the bullshit games, Generals and Zero Hour it is
> > > > > > > advisable
> > > > > > > that before you buy any more shitty games put on the market by
> > > > > > > Electronic Arts, try to get a playable demo with online
>  capability,
> > > > > > > and if you are satisfied with the overall performance of the
>  product
> > > > > > > then and only then you should consider buying the game.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What you should look for, memory leaks, game performance when
>  there
>  is
> > > > > > > a multitude of units on the map, user interface, balance between
> > > > > > > units, you name it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If there is mentioned anywhere on the package the word GameSpy,
>  my
> > > > > > > advice is to stay away from it, because the online version of
>  the
>  game
> > > > > > > will be very, very slow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if red alert 3 comes out I will most definately buy it because all
>  c&c
>  games
> > > > > > are great.  And if it uses gamespy, all the better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Margolis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >

In a bid to not upset the bottom posters, Ace cleverly, nay ingeniously,
deleted the whole of the previous post before typing his reply..... :-)

Has anybody bothered to report this prat (satan) to his provider?  Just
wondered as I might do it.  I'm all for constructive criticism of the game,
but the name calling is getting silly now.  Besides, if mr satan bothered to
read the posts before he opened his mouth, he'd see that pretty much
everyone in here already owns the game.  Not really the ideal place to post
a message aimed at those who are thinking of buying it.

Ace

"Ace" <flib@lineone.net> wrote in message news:<3ff77ca0$1_2@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>...
> In a bid to not upset the bottom posters, Ace cleverly, nay ingeniously,
> deleted the whole of the previous post before typing his reply..... :-)
> 
> Has anybody bothered to report this prat (satan) to his provider?  Just
> wondered as I might do it.  I'm all for constructive criticism of the game,
> but the name calling is getting silly now.  Besides, if mr satan bothered to
> read the posts before he opened his mouth, he'd see that pretty much
> everyone in here already owns the game.  Not really the ideal place to post
> a message aimed at those who are thinking of buying it.
> 
> Ace

Are you suggesting that my ISP should consider trespassing on my
implied rights
to freedom of speech?
You may or not be aware of the fact that due to unsatifactory
performance of "out of the box" products such as games quite a lot of
individuals read the newsgroups in order to get some sort of feedback
with respect to their performance and value for money which they do
not get with Electronic Arts games.
On the other hand, if there are no individuals reading the newsgroups
Electronic Arts and GameSpy has nothing to worry then, isn't it.

Address the issues or let Electronic Arts & GameSpy deny the fact that
the product is not causing problems and let them deny the fact that
with 512k ADSL the game play online is not causing problems and for
that matter is not crap.

What because I have raised pertinent issues which you and Electronic
Arts did not address, I should be silenced, ha, go check the posting
header and e-mail my ISP and bitch about it, because,  then bro, I
will have to seek protection under the existing Australian Consumer
Law.

Electronic Arts Fix your shitty game C&C Generals and C&C Generals
Zero Hour or make arrangements to give me my money back, because, you
will not like it, I promise you.

"Ace" <flib@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3ff77ca0$1_2@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> In a bid to not upset the bottom posters, Ace cleverly, nay ingeniously,
> deleted the whole of the previous post before typing his reply..... :-)
>


I don't mind top posting, as long as most of the extraneous garbage is
trimmed so that it is clear what you are replying to.  It just makes it hard
to follow what someone is replying to when there is a lot of different
messages in a post, and some are top and some are bottom posts.  But of
course that goes both ways, everybody should trim the parts of the post out
that they are not replying too.

-- 

Margolis

In article <3ff77ca0$1_2@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>, but only
after serious contemplation, Ace <flib@lineone.net> put finger to
keyboard and produced the following;
>In a bid to not upset the bottom posters, Ace cleverly, nay ingeniously,
>deleted the whole of the previous post before typing his reply..... :-)

I'd usually follow such an "ingenious" ploy by asking what (and who) you
were replying to - but I'll let you off ....... this time. ;-}

>Has anybody bothered to report this prat (satan) to his provider?  Just
>wondered as I might do it.  I'm all for constructive criticism of the game,
>but the name calling is getting silly now.  Besides, if mr satan bothered to
>read the posts before he opened his mouth, he'd see that pretty much
>everyone in here already owns the game.  Not really the ideal place to post
>a message aimed at those who are thinking of buying it.

He's either extremely unhappy with his C&C experience(s) or he's a
troll.

(Guess which my money's on). :-}

-- 
Cheers,

Chas.

"Reality leaves a lot to the imagination".

In article <vvgh4goo0e372b@corp.supernews.com>, but only after serious
contemplation, Margolis <someone@somewhere.org> put finger to keyboard
and produced the following;
>
>I don't mind top posting, as long as most of the extraneous garbage is
>trimmed so that it is clear what you are replying to.  It just makes it hard
>to follow what someone is replying to when there is a lot of different
>messages in a post, and some are top and some are bottom posts.  But of
>course that goes both ways, everybody should trim the parts of the post out
>that they are not replying too.

I half agree with you here.

One of the problems with top-posting is that it encourages people to
"forget" to snip - after all, everything off the bottom of the screen is
someone else's problem ........... right?

The (lost?) art of snipping is a separate (although often related)
issue.

-- 
Cheers,

Chas.

"Reality leaves a lot to the imagination".

"Ace" <flib@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3ff77ca0$1_2@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> In a bid to not upset the bottom posters, Ace cleverly, nay ingeniously,
> deleted the whole of the previous post before typing his reply..... :-)
>
> Has anybody bothered to report this prat (satan) to his provider?  Just
> wondered as I might do it.  I'm all for constructive criticism of the
game,
> but the name calling is getting silly now.  Besides, if mr satan bothered
to
> read the posts before he opened his mouth, he'd see that pretty much
> everyone in here already owns the game.  Not really the ideal place to
post
> a message aimed at those who are thinking of buying it.
>
> Ace

You can report him if you wish but I doubt it will accomplish anything.
Providers hate to lose customers and will only take action for major
offences, the kind that results in lots of complaints and may lose them good
customers if they don't act.
Just ignore him and he'll go away, trolls need lots of attention to survive.

"The Arcane Chas" <Chas@the-arcane.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:38VoZgAzDG+$Ewxf@the-arcane.demon.co.uk...
> In article <vvgh4goo0e372b@corp.supernews.com>, but only after serious
> contemplation, Margolis <someone@somewhere.org> put finger to keyboard
> and produced the following;
> >
> >I don't mind top posting, as long as most of the extraneous garbage is
> >trimmed so that it is clear what you are replying to.  It just makes it
hard
> >to follow what someone is replying to when there is a lot of different
> >messages in a post, and some are top and some are bottom posts.  But of
> >course that goes both ways, everybody should trim the parts of the post
out
> >that they are not replying too.
>
> I half agree with you here.
>
> One of the problems with top-posting is that it encourages people to
> "forget" to snip - after all, everything off the bottom of the screen is
> someone else's problem ........... right?
>
> The (lost?) art of snipping is a separate (although often related)
> issue.
>

Unfortunatly 99% of bottom posters neglect the snippage as well, which makes
it even harder to find the response.

In article <vvh20q5o019r1d@corp.supernews.com>, but only after serious
contemplation, The Ancient One <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> put finger
to keyboard and produced the following;
>
>"The Arcane Chas" <Chas@the-arcane.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:38VoZgAzDG+$Ewxf@the-arcane.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> The (lost?) art of snipping is a separate (although often related)
>> issue.
>>
>
>Unfortunatly 99% of bottom posters neglect the snippage as well, which makes
>it even harder to find the response.

Agreed.

-- 
Cheers,

Chas.

"Reality leaves a lot to the imagination".

I guess I'll leave it then, but purely as a means of denying him the
attention he craves.  Maybe if he's ignored long enough he'll read the terms
of service, the contract, that he has with his ISP, and with his email
provider, hotmail.  You know, then one that says they can terminate your
account for a whole bunch of reasons :-)

On a completely unrelated topic, is it possible, and if so how easy is it,
to add new units to generals?  I know that there were units in TS that
weren't used in the game, but I'm pretty sure people were creating their own
and adding them in.  If I'm wrong, just tell me to shut up :-)

Ace