🚀 go-pugleaf

On or about Fri, 06 Feb 2004 05:32:43 GMT, some person or persons unknown
calling themselves turk ", did cause <_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54> to
appear on my glass typewriter and spake thus:
>
>Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
>
>http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html

Justice 1  Derek K. Smart 0

On 5 Feb 2004 22:05:59 -0800, pjl <do$feratu@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On or about Fri, 06 Feb 2004 05:32:43 GMT, some person or persons unknown
>calling themselves turk ", did cause <_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54> to
>appear on my glass typewriter and spake thus:
>>
>>Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
>>
>>http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
>
>Justice 1  Derek K. Smart 0
With all the talk from Derek about his super legal team over the years
I find it rather funny that the first time they actually try to do
something they fail.

BH I think you can relax now. ;)

"turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54...
> Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
>
> http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
>
> Now where's the first review...

I may get flamed here, but im not sure why people feel good that DS got
shafted? Sure its great to have a cheaper game, I aint arguing with that.
But it does sound like he would be losing alot of money? He spent the time
and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the chance to reap the
rewards too?

Ceo-

Ceowulf wrote:
> I may get flamed here, but im not sure why people feel good that DS
> got shafted? Sure its great to have a cheaper game, I aint arguing
> with that. But it does sound like he would be losing alot of money?
> He spent the time and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the
> chance to reap the rewards too?
>
> Ceo-

I'm sure Derek will eventually get just exactly what he deserves from his
gaming efforts.
-- 
chainbreaker

If you need to email, then chainbreaker (naturally) at comcast dot
net--that's "net" not "com"--should do it.

"bp" <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:f8v620h8br622ubjc7cg6h70sodh0m2fjv@4ax.com...
> On 5 Feb 2004 22:05:59 -0800, pjl <do$feratu@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On or about Fri, 06 Feb 2004 05:32:43 GMT, some person or persons unknown
> >calling themselves turk ", did cause <_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54> to
> >appear on my glass typewriter and spake thus:
> >>
> >>Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> >>
> >>http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> >
> >Justice 1  Derek K. Smart 0
> With all the talk from Derek about his super legal team over the years
> I find it rather funny that the first time they actually try to do
> something they fail.

Yea but Derek and the fanboys are crowing like he won because he has a sure lock
on damages from DC. The fools don't seem to realize that the judges ruling is
just the normal stuff that you'd see in a failed injunction attempt and not an
advance ruling by the judge on a future lawsuit.

> BH I think you can relax now. ;)

I can still hope, can't I?

"Ceowulf" <ceo@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
news:40238bf2$0$1723$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au...
> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
> news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54...
> > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> >
> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> >
> > Now where's the first review...
>
> I may get flamed here, but im not sure why people feel good that DS got
> shafted? Sure its great to have a cheaper game, I aint arguing with that.
> But it does sound like he would be losing alot of money? He spent the time
> and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the chance to reap the
> rewards too?
>
> Ceo-
>
>

I take it you're new to the 'net and pc gaming in general?

"turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit 
when in news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54 he conjectured that:

> http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/490/490122p1.html


You know , I often wonder why Derek can't just step back and see for 
himself just what an ass he makes of himself with all this "attorney" crap. 
Does he not realise that by raving & ranting he is just bringing the 
publics attention to the fact that the publisher basically doesn't think 
his game is worth 39.99.

In addition, with all the hissy fits being thrown, who in their right mind 
can see Derek supporting the game in order to protect Dreamcatchers 
reputation?

"Ceowulf" <ceo@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
news:40238bf2$0$1723$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au...
> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
> news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54...
> > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> >
> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> >
> > Now where's the first review...
>
> I may get flamed here, but im not sure why people feel good that DS got
> shafted? Sure its great to have a cheaper game, I aint arguing with that.
> But it does sound like he would be losing alot of money? He spent the time
> and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the chance to reap the
> rewards too?

Activision has a line of budget titles that are decent for $20.  How is it
that they can make money if $20 is too low?  I think your statement is a bit
presumpuous.  Maybe this is simply a rehash of the same game he's marketed
several times before and it is being resurected from the budget bin for the
2nd, no 3rd, er 4th? time.

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:43:32 +0800, "Ceowulf" <ceo@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote:

>He spent the time
>and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the chance to reap the
>rewards too?

Fuck no. He gets everything he deserves.
--
From: PigFighter (fighterpig@hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: My Experience with D. Smart 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.space-sim
Date: 2001-10-15 22:29:56 PST 
-------------------------------------------
Derek,

You might actually sell more than 61 copies
of your game if you could learn to shut 
YOUR FUCKING DICK GARAGE once in awhile.

Walter Mitty <mitticus.remo.veme@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<Xns9487B2467C313waltermitty@127.0.0.1>...
> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit 
> when in news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54 he conjectured that:
> 
> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> 
> http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/490/490122p1.html
> 
> 
> You know , I often wonder why Derek can't just step back and see for 
> himself just what an ass he makes of himself with all this "attorney" crap. 
> Does he not realise that by raving & ranting he is just bringing the 
> publics attention to the fact that the publisher basically doesn't think 
> his game is worth 39.99.
> 
> In addition, with all the hissy fits being thrown, who in their right mind 
> can see Derek supporting the game in order to protect Dreamcatchers 
> reputation?

Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC! Dreamcatcher
said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian price [$39(US
equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream Catcher pdf for
DC's side of the story.

Karma/Dharma!

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:04:40 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not
not)notmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Ceowulf" <ceo@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
>news:40238bf2$0$1723$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au...
>> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
>> news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54...
>> > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
>> >
>> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
>> >
>> > Now where's the first review...
>>
>> I may get flamed here, but im not sure why people feel good that DS got
>> shafted? Sure its great to have a cheaper game, I aint arguing with that.
>> But it does sound like he would be losing alot of money? He spent the time
>> and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the chance to reap the
>> rewards too?
>
>Activision has a line of budget titles that are decent for $20.  How is it
>that they can make money if $20 is too low?  I think your statement is a bit
>presumpuous.  Maybe this is simply a rehash of the same game he's marketed
>several times before and it is being resurected from the budget bin for the
>2nd, no 3rd, er 4th? time.
>

Derek claimed to have made lots of money way back when he sold BC3000
v3.2227fbv RC1 as a budget title. I believe it sold for $14.00 then
went to $4.99. Wasn't it also an Activision budget line ?

On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels) wrote:

>Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC! Dreamcatcher
>said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian price [$39(US
>equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream Catcher pdf for
>DC's side of the story.

Where is it ? Got Link ?

"bioderm" <humanstastelike@fish.com> wrote in message
news:1027h9vdr0uvma9@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Ceowulf" <ceo@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
> news:40238bf2$0$1723$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au...
> > "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
> > news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54...
> > > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> > >
> > > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> > >
> > > Now where's the first review...
> >
> > I may get flamed here, but im not sure why people feel good that DS got
> > shafted? Sure its great to have a cheaper game, I aint arguing with
that.
> > But it does sound like he would be losing alot of money? He spent the
time
> > and effort making it, shouldnt he at least get the chance to reap the
> > rewards too?
>
> I take it you're new to the 'net and pc gaming in general?

And you would be wrong.

I guess I'm just not such a sheep and dont jump on all the bandwagons that
go past *shrugs*

Ceo-

bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
> On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels) wrote:
> 
> >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC! Dreamcatcher
> >said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian price [$39(US
> >equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream Catcher pdf for
> >DC's side of the story.
> 
> Where is it ? Got Link ?

Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there. 

http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000054;p=1

The DC affidavit pdf discusses the game's shortcomings including
Crashing to Desktop and the failure to deliver on time.

KARMA!!!

"turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message news:<_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54>...
> Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> 
> http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> 
> Now where's the first review...
> 
> turk

http://www.homelanfed.com/index.php?id=20331
Final Score: 89 percent

How it was done I have no idea. He said he wasn't sending out review copies. 
I seem to remember HomeLandFed was a fanboy site.

Karma/Dharma

"C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7518c2e1.0402070702.63be16c1@posting.google.com...
> bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
> > On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels) wrote:
> >
> > >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC! Dreamcatcher
> > >said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian price [$39(US
> > >equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream Catcher pdf for
> > >DC's side of the story.
> >
> > Where is it ? Got Link ?
>
> Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there.
>
> http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000054;p=1
>
> The DC affidavit pdf discusses the game's shortcomings including
> Crashing to Desktop and the failure to deliver on time.

It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.

Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano

"madkevin" <madkevin@golden.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit
when in news:CMudnRO3A49DnbjdRVn-uA@golden.net he conjectured that: 

> 
> "C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7518c2e1.0402070702.63be16c1@posting.google.com...
>> bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
>> > On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels)
>> > wrote: 
>> >
>> > >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC!
>> > >Dreamcatcher said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian
>> > >price [$39(US equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream
>> > >Catcher pdf for DC's side of the story.
>> >
>> > Where is it ? Got Link ?
>>
>> Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there.
>>
>> http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=00005
>> 4;p=1 
>>
>> The DC affidavit pdf discusses the game's shortcomings including
>> Crashing to Desktop and the failure to deliver on time.
> 
> It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.
> 
> Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano
> 
> 

Be careful how you use the name "Kevin". It's been taken by a certain 
game developer.

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:14:04 +0100, Walter Mitty
<mitticus.remo.veme@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>"madkevin" <madkevin@golden.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit
>when in news:CMudnRO3A49DnbjdRVn-uA@golden.net he conjectured that: 
>
>> 
>> "C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:7518c2e1.0402070702.63be16c1@posting.google.com...
>>> bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
>>> > On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels)
>>> > wrote: 
>>> >
>>> > >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC!
>>> > >Dreamcatcher said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian
>>> > >price [$39(US equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream
>>> > >Catcher pdf for DC's side of the story.
>>> >
>>> > Where is it ? Got Link ?
>>>
>>> Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there.
>>>
>>> http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=00005
>>> 4;p=1 
>>>
>>> The DC affidavit pdf discusses the game's shortcomings including
>>> Crashing to Desktop and the failure to deliver on time.
>> 
>> It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.
>> 
>> Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano
>> 
>> 
>
>Be careful how you use the name "Kevin". It's been taken by a certain 
>game developer.

Yeah but he uses the African spelling.

Lemming
-- 
Curiosity *may* have killed Schrodinger's cat.

"Lemming" <thiswillbounce@bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5vna20hpalu38kr38j1v26p75kbr306d3c@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:14:04 +0100, Walter Mitty
> <mitticus.remo.veme@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >"madkevin" <madkevin@golden.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit
> >when in news:CMudnRO3A49DnbjdRVn-uA@golden.net he conjectured that:
> >
> >>
> >> "C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:7518c2e1.0402070702.63be16c1@posting.google.com...
> >>> bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
> >>> > On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels)
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC!
> >>> > >Dreamcatcher said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian
> >>> > >price [$39(US equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream
> >>> > >Catcher pdf for DC's side of the story.
> >>> >
> >>> > Where is it ? Got Link ?
> >>>
> >>> Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=00005
> >>> 4;p=1
> >>>
> >>> The DC affidavit pdf discusses the game's shortcomings including
> >>> Crashing to Desktop and the failure to deliver on time.
> >>
> >> It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.
> >>
> >> Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Be careful how you use the name "Kevin". It's been taken by a certain
> >game developer.
>
> Yeah but he uses the African spelling.

I'll be laughing at that one all night. Thanks Lemming.

"C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7518c2e1.0402070707.28c7c241@posting.google.com...
> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
news:<_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54>...
> > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> >
> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> >
> > Now where's the first review...
> >
> > turk
>
> http://www.homelanfed.com/index.php?id=20331
> Final Score: 89 percent
>
> How it was done I have no idea. He said he wasn't sending out review copies.
> I seem to remember HomeLandFed was a fanboy site.

He didn't send out early versions of the game in copies. Once it went gold, he
said that he sent out review copies.

"Walter Mitty" <mitticus.remo.veme@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns9488AE723DCD3waltermitty@127.0.0.1...

> > It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.
> >
> > Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano
> >
> >
>
> Be careful how you use the name "Kevin". It's been taken by a certain
> game developer.

I'm almost positive I had mine first. Amazingly, my last name translates from
the original Italian as "he who would like to charge $39.99 for a game he's
released three times already". What are the odds?

Kevin "Fair To Middling" Cogliano

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 01:23:54 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
<bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:

>
>"C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:7518c2e1.0402070707.28c7c241@posting.google.com...
>> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
>news:<_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54>...
>> > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
>> >
>> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
>> >
>> > Now where's the first review...
>> >
>> > turk
>>
>> http://www.homelanfed.com/index.php?id=20331
>> Final Score: 89 percent
>>
>> How it was done I have no idea. He said he wasn't sending out review copies.
>> I seem to remember HomeLandFed was a fanboy site.
>
>He didn't send out early versions of the game in copies. Once it went gold, he
>said that he sent out review copies.
>

Well I just got my copy of UC and it's most certainly NOT a "value
product." Hell, the manual alone is worth $20.00. Key-card/map is
excellent, and the box art-work is killer.

I'm going to have to figure some way to convince the ol' lady that a
new vid card is in the budget, because this damn game won't run on my
gforce2 card! 

Anyway, most "value products" I've ever bought were either several
years old, or only came in a jewel box with a PDF manual ( or NO
manual at all ), no key-card/map, no extras AT ALL, and were EXTREMELY
limited on gameplay! ( yeah, I know you all think BC has no gameplay
value, but I disagree ) 

Don't get me wrong, I can't complain on the price, nor can I comment
on the game at present. From what I've read, UC is a re-hashed,
updated version of BC3K, but it's still NOT a "value product" by any
stretch of the imagination.

Opinion may and will vary. =P

"Shingen" <Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:n6bb20hrd19rs9pmeglkg9t4a9gu8nl66c@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 01:23:54 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
> <bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:7518c2e1.0402070707.28c7c241@posting.google.com...
> >> "turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
> >news:<_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54>...
> >> > Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
> >> >
> >> > http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
> >> >
> >> > Now where's the first review...
> >> >
> >> > turk
> >>
> >> http://www.homelanfed.com/index.php?id=20331
> >> Final Score: 89 percent
> >>
> >> How it was done I have no idea. He said he wasn't sending out review
copies.
> >> I seem to remember HomeLandFed was a fanboy site.
> >
> >He didn't send out early versions of the game in copies. Once it went gold,
he
> >said that he sent out review copies.
> >
>
> Well I just got my copy of UC and it's most certainly NOT a "value
> product." Hell, the manual alone is worth $20.00. Key-card/map is
> excellent, and the box art-work is killer.
>
> I'm going to have to figure some way to convince the ol' lady that a
> new vid card is in the budget, because this damn game won't run on my
> gforce2 card!
>
> Anyway, most "value products" I've ever bought were either several
> years old, or only came in a jewel box with a PDF manual ( or NO
> manual at all ), no key-card/map, no extras AT ALL, and were EXTREMELY
> limited on gameplay! ( yeah, I know you all think BC has no gameplay
> value, but I disagree )
>
> Don't get me wrong, I can't complain on the price, nor can I comment
> on the game at present. From what I've read, UC is a re-hashed,
> updated version of BC3K, but it's still NOT a "value product" by any
> stretch of the imagination.
>
> Opinion may and will vary. =P

I respect your and Br d's opinion of the game. It just sounds horribly boring to
me and the time that I played the free version for a couple hours (okay most of
that time was trying to get the damn thing installed) it was far more like work
than fun. Being a software engineer, reading technical manuals and struggling
with bugs is gosh darn work, not my idea of hobby fun! As you said,

Opinion may and will vary. =P

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:28:14 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
<bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:
>
>I respect your and Br d's opinion of the game. It just sounds horribly boring to
>me and the time that I played the free version for a couple hours (okay most of
>that time was trying to get the damn thing installed) it was far more like work
>than fun. Being a software engineer, reading technical manuals and struggling
>with bugs is gosh darn work, not my idea of hobby fun! As you said,
>
>Opinion may and will vary. =P
>
well if it was a crap release of the same game, I would be the first
to scream about it. The fact is there is DEFINITE "production value"
in this release. It may not be on par with M$, but it's still far
superior to any Activision game I've ever bought.

Gameplay is entirely subject to the gamer, but the title is NOT a
"value product" even though DC chose to market it as such. 

It's a good buy for the price even if it's exactly the same as BCM
with improved graphics. 

Maybe you should expand your horizons and purchase it just so you can
say you played the game and it was indeed crap. 

...or maybe, if you opened your mind and closed your prejudices, you
might find a game worth merit after all...=P

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:28:14 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
<bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:

> It just sounds horribly boring to
>me and the time that I played the free version for a couple hours (okay most of
>that time was trying to get the damn thing installed) 
>
I'm curious. Was this the 1998 free release of BC3K 1.0xxxxx or the
2000 free release of BC3K 2.09??

The first was completely unplayable, though I did get it to install
and run. The second is both installable and playable up until you hit
the save-game bug. Then, you are just SOL. =P

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 07:03:03 GMT, Shingen
<Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:28:14 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
><bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>I respect your and Br d's opinion of the game. It just sounds horribly boring to
>>me and the time that I played the free version for a couple hours (okay most of
>>that time was trying to get the damn thing installed) it was far more like work
>>than fun. Being a software engineer, reading technical manuals and struggling
>>with bugs is gosh darn work, not my idea of hobby fun! As you said,
>>
>>Opinion may and will vary. =P
>>
>well if it was a crap release of the same game, I would be the first
>to scream about it. The fact is there is DEFINITE "production value"
>in this release. It may not be on par with M$, but it's still far
>superior to any Activision game I've ever bought.
>
>Gameplay is entirely subject to the gamer, but the title is NOT a
>"value product" even though DC chose to market it as such. 
>
>It's a good buy for the price even if it's exactly the same as BCM
>with improved graphics. 
>
>Maybe you should expand your horizons and purchase it just so you can
>say you played the game and it was indeed crap. 
>
>...or maybe, if you opened your mind and closed your prejudices, you
>might find a game worth merit after all...=P

The game isn't the point

"madkevin" <madkevin@golden.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit
when in news:B62dnW9_94PCNrjdRVn-hA@golden.net he conjectured that: 

> 
> "Walter Mitty" <mitticus.remo.veme@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:Xns9488AE723DCD3waltermitty@127.0.0.1...
> 
>> > It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.
>> >
>> > Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Be careful how you use the name "Kevin". It's been taken by a certain
>> game developer.
> 
> I'm almost positive I had mine first. Amazingly, my last name
> translates from the original Italian as "he who would like to charge
> $39.99 for a game he's released three times already". What are the
> odds? 
> 

Worse than the odds are that his middle name is really an African tribal 
name.

"Shingen" <Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:n2nb2011q0tnu4h1k9afao3rq15ere4k6h@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:28:14 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
> <bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >I respect your and Br d's opinion of the game. It just sounds horribly boring
to
> >me and the time that I played the free version for a couple hours (okay most
of
> >that time was trying to get the damn thing installed) it was far more like
work
> >than fun. Being a software engineer, reading technical manuals and struggling
> >with bugs is gosh darn work, not my idea of hobby fun! As you said,
> >
> >Opinion may and will vary. =P
> >
> well if it was a crap release of the same game, I would be the first
> to scream about it. The fact is there is DEFINITE "production value"
> in this release. It may not be on par with M$, but it's still far
> superior to any Activision game I've ever bought.
>
> Gameplay is entirely subject to the gamer, but the title is NOT a
> "value product" even though DC chose to market it as such.
>
> It's a good buy for the price even if it's exactly the same as BCM
> with improved graphics.
>
> Maybe you should expand your horizons and purchase it just so you can
> say you played the game and it was indeed crap.
>
> ...or maybe, if you opened your mind and closed your prejudices, you
> might find a game worth merit after all...=P

This is a serious response.

Opening my mind or prejudice has nothing to do with it at all. I rarely read
game manuals because it is generally too much like my daily job. I have very
little patience for bugs, for the same reason. It is just too much like my daily
job except unlike my job, I don't get the self satisfaction of fixing them. I
have to keep experiencing the bugs over and over. The maximum patience I have
for bugs is a game like Morrowind after it was patched up. For me it CTD maybe 4
times. A couple of those times it still almost made me stop playing the game
because I hadn't saved the game in a while. I had to let the game sit for a day
or two before I decided to pick it back up again. Dealing with complicated hard
to use interfaces in games is something that I have even less patience for. My
time for gaming is very limited (at least relative to what I'd like). I don't
have enough time to waste it on a second or third tier game. The only
frustration I'm willing to deal with in a game is like when the Galactic
Civilization's AI kicks my butt. There's more top rated games available than I
have time to play. Actually buying the game would be only a very minor annoyance
in that I'd have to go find a used one and parting with the $5 or $10 to buy the
thing would be totally insignificant. The big barrier I have to ever playing the
game is that the list of games that are high quality and almost universally
praised that I would like to play outstretches my time to play them by a long
shot.

Ceo, you might not be "young" to the pile of wagons going by, but that
affidavit from Robert Stevenson sounds and describes a game exactly
like the game I own three titles ago....   to the "Tee".   Not fun,
low quality, crashes, bugs, "what am I doing in this game?", poor
interface...  hmmm.  Wonder if it is the same game?   And I only paid
$4.99 and it was too much.  People been trying to "suggest" to hothead
for years to change some of those things.  The "idea" of the game is
awesome.  The execution never made it.

I guess maybe you don't own the game?



> And you would be wrong.
> 
> I guess I'm just not such a sheep and dont jump on all the bandwagons that
> go past *shrugs*
> 
> Ceo-

"Shingen" <Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:n2nb2011q0tnu4h1k9afao3rq15ere4k6h@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:28:14 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
> <bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:
[snip]
> >
> well if it was a crap release of the same game, I would be the first
> to scream about it. The fact is there is DEFINITE "production value"
> in this release. It may not be on par with M$, but it's still far
> superior to any Activision game I've ever bought.
>
> Gameplay is entirely subject to the gamer, but the title is NOT a
> "value product" even though DC chose to market it as such.
>
> It's a good buy for the price even if it's exactly the same as BCM
> with improved graphics.
>
[snip]

I'll be interested in hearing your critique of it after a bit of play.  I
wondering if the "instant ship-switching" feature, which was removed from
BCM, got back in?

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 19:56:25 GMT, "DocScorpio"
<DocScorpio@prodigy.net> wrote:

>
>"Shingen" <Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>news:n2nb2011q0tnu4h1k9afao3rq15ere4k6h@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:28:14 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
>> <bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>> >
>> well if it was a crap release of the same game, I would be the first
>> to scream about it. The fact is there is DEFINITE "production value"
>> in this release. It may not be on par with M$, but it's still far
>> superior to any Activision game I've ever bought.
>>
>> Gameplay is entirely subject to the gamer, but the title is NOT a
>> "value product" even though DC chose to market it as such.
>>
>> It's a good buy for the price even if it's exactly the same as BCM
>> with improved graphics.
>>
>[snip]
>
>I'll be interested in hearing your critique of it after a bit of play.  I
>wondering if the "instant ship-switching" feature, which was removed from
>BCM, got back in?
>

I can see why he took the instant switch out, so as to make the game
feel more realistic, in that you have to actually walk to the ship
bay, climb in the ship, pilot it and then return to the CC if you want
to take out another ship or assume command of the bridge. This means
the commander is subject to the same constraints as every other crew
member. he problem with that is it just makes the game even more
distant to a new player, being able to just jump into what ever you
wanted at any time made it much more accessible

br d

"Shingen" <Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:n6bb20hrd19rs9pmeglkg9t4a9gu8nl66c@4ax.com...
>
> Well I just got my copy of UC and it's most certainly NOT a "value
> product." Hell, the manual alone is worth $20.00. Key-card/map is
> excellent, and the box art-work is killer.

I just picked up my copy.  The manual is quite substantial and the keycard
is also a welcome addition.  However I'm fairly certain that DC picks up the
tab for the costs asssociated with production.  That they would include
these items and still lower the price to $20 tells me that they have some
serious issues with the value of the game itself.

Discounting the great looking box and above average quality printed docs and
keycard, my impression is that this *is* a budget quality product.  I just
started the game and immediately ran into both irritating bugs and laughable
gameplay.  And this is only after messing with the game for 30 minutes tops.
Most of the 30 minutes was spent checking the options adn checking the ini
configuration file to see if I'm doing anything wrong.

1) The game forces roll axis in the J/S x axis.  This is fine for a flight
sim but it's backwards to how I've configured every space sim I've played.
The key card lists a key for swapping this.  It didn't work.  Checking
further into the FAQ, I find that it's only for sticks that don't have roll
axis.  The FAQ go on to say I can override with a command line option.  I
add this and it doesn't work.

2) The into BC3000 and DC splash screen anuimation cannot be bypassed with
ESC or mouse press.  This is unlike an modern game.  The FAQ shows a command
line parameter to bypass.  It does work.

3) The keypress for toggling HAT mode did not work.

4) The throttle on my MS Precision Pro2 J/S does not work properlu.  It will
allow you to reduce throttle but not increase.

5) I only played instant action mission.  The planets had textures that any
12 year old could create in Paint Shop Pro in 10 minutes.  They had zero
features.  I'm not a stickler for great graphics, but this was ridiculous.

6) The laser animations are a joke.  Two skinny lines that shoot from your
ship with sound effects reminiscent of an 80's coin op machine.
Coincidently I bought Intellivision Lives for the XBox at the same time and
if I closed my eyes I might have gotten confused about what I was playing.
In one of the other instant action games the laser painted two static
looking little starbusts when you fired.  It was quite funny as to how crude
it was.

7) The first instant action mission I tried to attack the enemy.  I couldn't
even get much closer at full throttle for minutes until it turned around and
came to me.  The combat was literally a joke.  The enemy ship moved like
someone from the 50's recanting a flying saucer episode.  If you could
imagine a flying object randomly moving in every direction including to and
from you with no apparent rhyme or reason, then you've got it.  It is a
completely amateur attempt at simulating space combat.

I have seen plenty of budget games that are far superior to UC in production
value to UC.  Take a look at Activision's $20 Apache Air Assault.  Putting
aside whatever preference one has in genre or gameplay, from a production
point of view AAA is a far superior title.  The graphics are superior.  The
voice acting is superior, the modeled environment is superior, and the
physics are superior.  Also was of the most important facets of modern games
is presenting the game in such a way that the new player is drawn into it.
UC fails to do this just as every BC game before it.

DC rightly saw that UC was simply a niche title that could only appeal to a
small subset of gamers.  DS failed miseralbly to create a compelling title
that draws in the unitiated (to the BCM series) gamer.  This game fails in
numerous ways to compete as a modern offering.  The printed materials are
it's only redeeming feature as it is only an incremental improvement over
it's predecessor, which have always lagged the gaming world in terms of
"state of the art".

I'm not trying to say that UC could not possibly appeal to anyone.  It
obviously does.  But this game will never appeal to the average space sim
fan.  The fact that the box looks great and the marketing blurbs sound
wonderful, just means that too many people will get something they didn't
think they were buying.  I would have to nominate DC for a humanitarian
award for lowering the price.

I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun gameplay.

"C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7518c2e1.0402070702.63be16c1@posting.google.com...
> bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
> > On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels) wrote:
> >
> > >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC! Dreamcatcher
> > >said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian price [$39(US
> > >equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream Catcher pdf for
> > >DC's side of the story.
> >
> > Where is it ? Got Link ?
>
> Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there.
>
>
http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000054;p=1

I read the affidavit yesterday...

http://www.3000ad.com/soapbox/dc/AFFIDAVIT_OF_ROBERT_STEVENSON.PDF

Item 17 states the rational for lowering the price.  After purchasing and
installing the game I can say that his reasoning is accurate to a tee.  By
my estimation he was being as kind to UC as he possibly could without
blowing his case.  You have to realize that they were still trying to market
the game and make money.

"FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not not)notmail.com> wrote in message
news:zzzVb.18853$GO6.2097@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Shingen" <Shingen@aolsukd.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:n6bb20hrd19rs9pmeglkg9t4a9gu8nl66c@4ax.com...
> >
> > Well I just got my copy of UC and it's most certainly NOT a "value
> > product." Hell, the manual alone is worth $20.00. Key-card/map is
> > excellent, and the box art-work is killer.
>
> I just picked up my copy.  The manual is quite substantial and the keycard
> is also a welcome addition.  However I'm fairly certain that DC picks up
the
> tab for the costs asssociated with production.  That they would include
> these items and still lower the price to $20 tells me that they have some
> serious issues with the value of the game itself.
>
> Discounting the great looking box and above average quality printed docs
and
> keycard, my impression is that this *is* a budget quality product.  I just
> started the game and immediately ran into both irritating bugs and
laughable
> gameplay.  And this is only after messing with the game for 30 minutes
tops.
> Most of the 30 minutes was spent checking the options adn checking the ini
> configuration file to see if I'm doing anything wrong.
>
> 1) The game forces roll axis in the J/S x axis.  This is fine for a flight
> sim but it's backwards to how I've configured every space sim I've played.
> The key card lists a key for swapping this.  It didn't work.  Checking
> further into the FAQ, I find that it's only for sticks that don't have
roll
> axis.  The FAQ go on to say I can override with a command line option.  I
> add this and it doesn't work.
>
> 2) The into BC3000 and DC splash screen anuimation cannot be bypassed with
> ESC or mouse press.  This is unlike an modern game.  The FAQ shows a
command
> line parameter to bypass.  It does work.
>
> 3) The keypress for toggling HAT mode did not work.
>
> 4) The throttle on my MS Precision Pro2 J/S does not work properlu.  It
will
> allow you to reduce throttle but not increase.
>
> 5) I only played instant action mission.  The planets had textures that
any
> 12 year old could create in Paint Shop Pro in 10 minutes.  They had zero
> features.  I'm not a stickler for great graphics, but this was ridiculous.
>
> 6) The laser animations are a joke.  Two skinny lines that shoot from your
> ship with sound effects reminiscent of an 80's coin op machine.
> Coincidently I bought Intellivision Lives for the XBox at the same time
and
> if I closed my eyes I might have gotten confused about what I was playing.
> In one of the other instant action games the laser painted two static
> looking little starbusts when you fired.  It was quite funny as to how
crude
> it was.
>
> 7) The first instant action mission I tried to attack the enemy.  I
couldn't
> even get much closer at full throttle for minutes until it turned around
and
> came to me.  The combat was literally a joke.  The enemy ship moved like
> someone from the 50's recanting a flying saucer episode.  If you could
> imagine a flying object randomly moving in every direction including to
and
> from you with no apparent rhyme or reason, then you've got it.  It is a
> completely amateur attempt at simulating space combat.
>
> I have seen plenty of budget games that are far superior to UC in
production
> value to UC.  Take a look at Activision's $20 Apache Air Assault.  Putting
> aside whatever preference one has in genre or gameplay, from a production
> point of view AAA is a far superior title.  The graphics are superior.
The
> voice acting is superior, the modeled environment is superior, and the
> physics are superior.  Also was of the most important facets of modern
games
> is presenting the game in such a way that the new player is drawn into it.
> UC fails to do this just as every BC game before it.
>
> DC rightly saw that UC was simply a niche title that could only appeal to
a
> small subset of gamers.  DS failed miseralbly to create a compelling title
> that draws in the unitiated (to the BCM series) gamer.  This game fails in
> numerous ways to compete as a modern offering.  The printed materials are
> it's only redeeming feature as it is only an incremental improvement over
> it's predecessor, which have always lagged the gaming world in terms of
> "state of the art".
>
> I'm not trying to say that UC could not possibly appeal to anyone.  It
> obviously does.  But this game will never appeal to the average space sim
> fan.  The fact that the box looks great and the marketing blurbs sound
> wonderful, just means that too many people will get something they didn't
> think they were buying.  I would have to nominate DC for a humanitarian
> award for lowering the price.
>
> I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
> any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun
gameplay.
>
I was blaming the graphics on myself. I thought that I had some
compatibility issues with my Video Card.

It reminded me of FALCON 3.0 and the shit fit that my father threw trying to
squeeze out a dozen more KB's of RAM. I ended up Rem'ing out several dozen
Autoexe.bat entries and then creating a boot disk when we couldn't get his
other programs to run afterwards. It was the first time that he thought the
magnet school I was attending might turn out to be a good idea after all.
Then we got Memmaker at Egghead and that turned out to be a real sweet
utility.

If you are big on space based games, remember Wing Commander? It came with a
utility that made a boot disk for you. I thought that was the coolest thing
I ever saw.

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:25:19 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not
not)notmail.com> wrote:

>I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
>any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun gameplay.
>

How is UC different form the other BC games?

"Shriver" <Shriver@cox.net> wrote in message
news:liAVb.26079$tP1.2982@fed1read07...
> I was blaming the graphics on myself. I thought that I had some
> compatibility issues with my Video Card.

It was hardly your card.  I'm running an FX5900.  So far I'm not finding the
graphics to be any better than Terminus, which looked dated when it came out
maybe 4 years ago.  His claims about needing pixel and optionally vertex
shaders seems a bit incongruous with the quality of the graphics assets in
the game.

> If you are big on space based games, remember Wing Commander? It came with
a
> utility that made a boot disk for you. I thought that was the coolest
thing
> I ever saw.

Yes I remember but I never played it.  I think at that time I was into RTS
games like Warcraft and Age of Empires.  IWar is the oldest space game I've
played since I had a glide card and it was supported.  That is if you don't
count Star Raiders (on the Atari 800), Asteroids, and Space Invaders (heh
heh).

"Chizel" <chizel4@aol.com> wrote in message
news:b27132a8.0402080941.558f8767@posting.google.com...
> Ceo, you might not be "young" to the pile of wagons going by, but that
> affidavit from Robert Stevenson sounds and describes a game exactly
> like the game I own three titles ago....   to the "Tee".   Not fun,
> low quality, crashes, bugs, "what am I doing in this game?", poor
> interface...  hmmm.  Wonder if it is the same game?   And I only paid
> $4.99 and it was too much.  People been trying to "suggest" to hothead
> for years to change some of those things.  The "idea" of the game is
> awesome.  The execution never made it.
>
> I guess maybe you don't own the game?

I read the letter by Robert Stevenson myself AFTER posting it. And as I
stated afterwards I agree, it looks like a hell of a nightmare. I do own BCM
Gold, and it didnt do too badly, but yes it did crash once or twice, and yes
it was f*cking hard to get into I have to admit.

Ceo

"FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not not)notmail.com> wrote in message
news:zzzVb.18853$GO6.2097@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> DC rightly saw that UC was simply a niche title that could only appeal to
a
> small subset of gamers.  DS failed miseralbly to create a compelling title
> that draws in the unitiated (to the BCM series) gamer.  This game fails in
> numerous ways to compete as a modern offering.  The printed materials are
> it's only redeeming feature as it is only an incremental improvement over
> it's predecessor, which have always lagged the gaming world in terms of
> "state of the art".

Oh I should add that the soundtrack provided is a complete album's (CD for
the post vinyl generation) worth of New Age electronica that was well done.
Probably not exactly the kind of music that most gamers really like, but if
you are a Tangerine Dream fan then you will probably like it.

"bp" <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a2pd20p1gr6sekb84qc3rgmjmu4qckt0tj@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:25:19 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not
> not)notmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
> >any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun
gameplay.
> >
>
> How is UC different form the other BC games?

So far it looks the same.  The main screen lacks the tutorial button, which
IMO is a step in the wrong direction.  You would think that after publishing
a game with a button to access tutorials that didn't tutor anything, that
the next game woud actually add tutorials that did tutor.

I have no idea what changes were made from BCG to UC to "rebrand and action
focus" the game.  Best I can tell is it's just a name change and an
incremental update over BCM plus a long overdue printed manual.

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 15:57:41 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not
not)notmail.com> wrote:

>
>"bp" <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:a2pd20p1gr6sekb84qc3rgmjmu4qckt0tj@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:25:19 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not
>> not)notmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
>> >any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun
>gameplay.
>> >
>>
>> How is UC different form the other BC games?
>
>So far it looks the same.  The main screen lacks the tutorial button, which
>IMO is a step in the wrong direction.  You would think that after publishing
>a game with a button to access tutorials that didn't tutor anything, that
>the next game woud actually add tutorials that did tutor.
>
>I have no idea what changes were made from BCG to UC to "rebrand and action
>focus" the game.  Best I can tell is it's just a name change and an
>incremental update over BCM plus a long overdue printed manual.
>
Hey br d sounds like you owe me some kudos.

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 12:21:00 -0800, bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 15:57:41 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not
>not)notmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"bp" <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:a2pd20p1gr6sekb84qc3rgmjmu4qckt0tj@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:25:19 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not
>>> not)notmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
>>> >any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun
>>gameplay.
>>> >
>>>
>>> How is UC different form the other BC games?
>>
>>So far it looks the same.  The main screen lacks the tutorial button, which
>>IMO is a step in the wrong direction.  You would think that after publishing
>>a game with a button to access tutorials that didn't tutor anything, that
>>the next game woud actually add tutorials that did tutor.
>>
>>I have no idea what changes were made from BCG to UC to "rebrand and action
>>focus" the game.  Best I can tell is it's just a name change and an
>>incremental update over BCM plus a long overdue printed manual.
>>
>Hey br d sounds like you owe me some kudos.

You don't get it that easy, I said if somebody says it's crap, he
hasn't said that (yet).
Anyway, that's FLY135, I have him palmfiled, which means I have to put
my hand over the parts of the post he wrote.

br d

"turk" <turk96@_*&^%#^&cast.net> wrote in message
news:_FFUb.183323$Rc4.1370420@attbi_s54...
> Let the celebrations begin...Judge ruled that UC can ship at $19.99.
>
> http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/news_6087551.html
>
> Now where's the first review...
>
> turk
>
>


Truth in advertising demands this should go on the box.

(Straight out of DC statment)

Visual defeciences in the art direction and overall quality of the graphics
Weakness in the sound effects and sound design
Low quailty production
Lack of clear design cohesivness and game play
Lack of polish and feature production elements
Many 'unknown' and 'unfinished' elements

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:33:27 +0000, br d <one1@two2.fsnet.co.uk>
wrote:

>On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 12:21:00 -0800, bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 15:57:41 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not
>>not)notmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"bp" <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:a2pd20p1gr6sekb84qc3rgmjmu4qckt0tj@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:25:19 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not
>>>> not)notmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
>>>> >any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun
>>>gameplay.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> How is UC different form the other BC games?
>>>
>>>So far it looks the same.  The main screen lacks the tutorial button, which
>>>IMO is a step in the wrong direction.  You would think that after publishing
>>>a game with a button to access tutorials that didn't tutor anything, that
>>>the next game woud actually add tutorials that did tutor.
>>>
>>>I have no idea what changes were made from BCG to UC to "rebrand and action
>>>focus" the game.  Best I can tell is it's just a name change and an
>>>incremental update over BCM plus a long overdue printed manual.
>>>
>>Hey br d sounds like you owe me some kudos.
>
>You don't get it that easy, I said if somebody says it's crap, he
>hasn't said that (yet).
>Anyway, that's FLY135, I have him palmfiled, which means I have to put
>my hand over the parts of the post he wrote.

I believe you got on me for suggesting the game would be buggy. 

 http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=forum;f=21

Maybe this will help convince you.

BTW buggy CTD games are crap.

I'll be waiting.



>
>br d

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:35:58 -0800, bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:33:27 +0000, br d <one1@two2.fsnet.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 12:21:00 -0800, bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 15:57:41 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not
>>>not)notmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"bp" <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:a2pd20p1gr6sekb84qc3rgmjmu4qckt0tj@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:25:19 GMT, "FLY135" <fly_135@(hot not
>>>>> not)notmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >I will still attempt to put some time into this game to see if I can find
>>>>> >any redeeming features.  Just maybe somewhere in there is some fun
>>>>gameplay.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> How is UC different form the other BC games?
>>>>
>>>>So far it looks the same.  The main screen lacks the tutorial button, which
>>>>IMO is a step in the wrong direction.  You would think that after publishing
>>>>a game with a button to access tutorials that didn't tutor anything, that
>>>>the next game woud actually add tutorials that did tutor.
>>>>
>>>>I have no idea what changes were made from BCG to UC to "rebrand and action
>>>>focus" the game.  Best I can tell is it's just a name change and an
>>>>incremental update over BCM plus a long overdue printed manual.
>>>>
>>>Hey br d sounds like you owe me some kudos.
>>
>>You don't get it that easy, I said if somebody says it's crap, he
>>hasn't said that (yet).
>>Anyway, that's FLY135, I have him palmfiled, which means I have to put
>>my hand over the parts of the post he wrote.
>
>I believe you got on me for suggesting the game would be buggy. 
>
> http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=forum;f=21
>
>Maybe this will help convince you.
>
>BTW buggy CTD games are crap.
>
>I'll be waiting.

This is where I referred to UC:
----------------------------
You've been pulling people up about UC and saying "How can you know
this", so lets question the questioner, how can you have these
opinions about the game when you've never played it?
You want to tell people it's full of bugs, or in your experience it
doesn't run or patch then great, go ahead you're talking from first
hand knowledge, but someone came here for some genuine information
about the game and you say all of the above. 
-------------------------------

You'll notice I said that if you wanted to tell people it was full of
bugs then fine, hardly "getting at you", the rest of the post I was
referring to BCM, and more pointedly, to the fact that you readily
offer critical opinions on something you haven't had any experience
of. How the game we still don't know, if it's buggy as fuck then
great, you made the right call, although I never said I expected it
not to be, I said BCM was now "mostly stable".

Isn't this fun? It's like watching Ribo and Dan pick over every
utterance all over again.

Christmas is coming.

br d


>
>
>
>>
>>br d

"br d" <one1@two2.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2q7i20lm78974lq74kt07gkhbhrbtnmbbj@4ax.com...
>
> You'll notice I said that if you wanted to tell people it was full of
> bugs then fine, hardly "getting at you", the rest of the post I was
> referring to BCM, and more pointedly, to the fact that you readily
> offer critical opinions on something you haven't had any experience
> of. How the game we still don't know, if it's buggy as fuck then
> great, you made the right call, although I never said I expected it
> not to be, I said BCM was now "mostly stable".

I've been playing the game for about a total of 1.5 hours.  I've had one CTD
and one point in the game where it stops responding to a lot of keyboard
commands but it was still running (I couldn't even exit the game, so a CTD
would have welcome at that point).

Is the game full of bugs.  Not if what others perceive as a bug, you
perceive as a feature.  There is no question it's buggy, but that doesn't
mean you can't overlook the bugs and still have fun.  Collision detection is
certainly wanting in the FPS mode.  You can expect lots of graphics
anomalies.  It's defintitely detracts from the game when you look at at
nicely modeled shoreline (Yes, believe it or not *some* of the modeling
looks good), and then it converts to a bunch of hard edged polygons like
your Z-buffer ram went haywire.

Good things?  Well I liked the dynamics of the VTOL aircraft that you fly
around on the planet.

Totally bizzare things?  I landed and hopped out in 1st person mode and
there's a bunch of animals (horses, tigers, and either gorillas or
Neanderthal men) all wandering around as if on Qauludes (how else can you
explain tigers and horses wandering with no interaction).  What made it even
more bizzare was that they were all just *white*.  As if he made the model
but decided not to bother making textures for them.  If this was a polar
planet it might have made sense.  Not that I'm insinuating that DS does
drugs, but I can imagine a bunch of stoners sitting around thinking that
this would be cool to just throw in the game.

Whereas most games pick a feature set and attempt to polish and make that
feature set as correct as possible;  UC is more like an ad hoc collection of
programming experiments that are thrown togeather into DS's imaginary world.
Nothing actually looks to be completed.  A common programming saying is that
the last 10% needed to complete a program takes 90% of the time.  It seems
that DS takes every idea and implements everything but that last 10%.

BTW, you will probably never hear say any game is crap.  They all have some
merit.  It's just that not all games have developers that consistantly boast
about how the next release will be the do all and end all of games in his
genre, and then follow thru with something that's more the gaming equivilent
of the "Rocky Horror Picture Show".

I will say that given the printed manual/keycard and the $20 price tag, that
UC is the first worthwhile buy in the series for people who actually want to
see what it's all about.

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:33:27 +0000, br d <one1@two2.fsnet.co.uk>
wrote:

>Anyway, that's FLY135, I have him palmfiled, which means I have to put
>my hand over the parts of the post he wrote.

That's not what you said it meant when you had *me* palmfiled.  I've
still got the chafe marks.

Lemming
-- 
Curiosity *may* have killed Schrodinger's cat.

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:05:48 +0000, Lemming
<thiswillbounce@bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:33:27 +0000, br d <one1@two2.fsnet.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Anyway, that's FLY135, I have him palmfiled, which means I have to put
>>my hand over the parts of the post he wrote.
>
>That's not what you said it meant when you had *me* palmfiled.  I've
>still got the chafe marks.

Lol!
Oh fuck off! I needed that you fucker, getting far too serious
tonight. 
Thanks.

br d

"FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not not)notmail.com> wrote in message
news:8O9Wb.20740$GO6.2331@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> "br d" <one1@two2.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:2q7i20lm78974lq74kt07gkhbhrbtnmbbj@4ax.com...
> >
> > You'll notice I said that if you wanted to tell people it was full of
> > bugs then fine, hardly "getting at you", the rest of the post I was
> > referring to BCM, and more pointedly, to the fact that you readily
> > offer critical opinions on something you haven't had any experience
> > of. How the game we still don't know, if it's buggy as fuck then
> > great, you made the right call, although I never said I expected it
> > not to be, I said BCM was now "mostly stable".
>
> I've been playing the game for about a total of 1.5 hours.  I've had one CTD
> and one point in the game where it stops responding to a lot of keyboard
> commands but it was still running (I couldn't even exit the game, so a CTD
> would have welcome at that point).
>
> Is the game full of bugs.  Not if what others perceive as a bug, you
> perceive as a feature.  There is no question it's buggy, but that doesn't
> mean you can't overlook the bugs and still have fun.  Collision detection is
> certainly wanting in the FPS mode.  You can expect lots of graphics
> anomalies.  It's defintitely detracts from the game when you look at at
> nicely modeled shoreline (Yes, believe it or not *some* of the modeling
> looks good), and then it converts to a bunch of hard edged polygons like
> your Z-buffer ram went haywire.
>
> Good things?  Well I liked the dynamics of the VTOL aircraft that you fly
> around on the planet.
>
> Totally bizzare things?  I landed and hopped out in 1st person mode and
> there's a bunch of animals (horses, tigers, and either gorillas or
> Neanderthal men) all wandering around as if on Qauludes (how else can you
> explain tigers and horses wandering with no interaction).  What made it even
> more bizzare was that they were all just *white*.  As if he made the model
> but decided not to bother making textures for them.  If this was a polar
> planet it might have made sense.  Not that I'm insinuating that DS does
> drugs, but I can imagine a bunch of stoners sitting around thinking that
> this would be cool to just throw in the game.
>
> Whereas most games pick a feature set and attempt to polish and make that
> feature set as correct as possible;  UC is more like an ad hoc collection of
> programming experiments that are thrown togeather into DS's imaginary world.
> Nothing actually looks to be completed.  A common programming saying is that
> the last 10% needed to complete a program takes 90% of the time.  It seems
> that DS takes every idea and implements everything but that last 10%.
>
> BTW, you will probably never hear say any game is crap.  They all have some
> merit.  It's just that not all games have developers that consistantly boast
> about how the next release will be the do all and end all of games in his
> genre, and then follow thru with something that's more the gaming equivilent
> of the "Rocky Horror Picture Show".
>
> I will say that given the printed manual/keycard and the $20 price tag, that
> UC is the first worthwhile buy in the series for people who actually want to
> see what it's all about.

You should post this on the Gone Gold first impressions thread.

http://www.gonegold.com/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=015857;p=6

"Bill Huffman" <bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote in message
news:N1gWb.2438$jf.2221@twister.socal.rr.com...

> You should post this on the Gone Gold first impressions thread.
>
> http://www.gonegold.com/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=015857;p=6

I'll have to check it out.

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 01:22:42 GMT, "Bill Huffman"
<bhuffma1@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com> wrote:

>
>"Lemming" <thiswillbounce@bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:5vna20hpalu38kr38j1v26p75kbr306d3c@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:14:04 +0100, Walter Mitty
>> <mitticus.remo.veme@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >"madkevin" <madkevin@golden.net> brightened my day with his incisive wit
>> >when in news:CMudnRO3A49DnbjdRVn-uA@golden.net he conjectured that:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "C Dobbels" <charles_d16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:7518c2e1.0402070702.63be16c1@posting.google.com...
>> >>> bp <6ball@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:<5el820l4s8rn0fdm8vhegm70d1gsiv814m@4ax.com>...
>> >>> > On 6 Feb 2004 17:51:53 -0800, charles_d16@yahoo.com (C Dobbels)
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > >Ouch, ouch, and ouch. I will not be buying a copy of UC!
>> >>> > >Dreamcatcher said it CTD's and a fanboy who paid the full Canadian
>> >>> > >price [$39(US equivalent)]confirmed it. Be SURE to read the Dream
>> >>> > >Catcher pdf for DC's side of the story.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Where is it ? Got Link ?
>> >>>
>> >>> Sorry. I posted it in another thread but it got split there.
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=00005
>> >>> 4;p=1
>> >>>
>> >>> The DC affidavit pdf discusses the game's shortcomings including
>> >>> Crashing to Desktop and the failure to deliver on time.
>> >>
>> >> It also mentions that the multiplayer doesn't work. Funny.
>> >>
>> >> Kevin "My Karma Ran Over Your Dogma" Cogliano
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >Be careful how you use the name "Kevin". It's been taken by a certain
>> >game developer.
>>
>> Yeah but he uses the African spelling.
>
>I'll be laughing at that one all night. Thanks Lemming.
>

Is it still funny after all this time?

Lemming
-- 
Curiosity *may* have killed Schrodinger's cat.