[quote who="Allegiance86" reply="159" id="2436433"]I dont think they give a fuck what the REAL fans want. Its all about the flipfloppers, who arent fans just people who enjoy the "new" take on an established franchise. Take BSG for instance, while there were alot of fans that came out of the original show, most of them were newcomers who never heard of BSG before the miniseries dropped. Reason for watching was the emphasis on the soap opera style drama. [/quote] well, thank fuck nobod
-RAISTLIN-
It never ceases to amaze me how many people blame a game for their own inadequate understanding of (in this case) networking. Zehdon and Spooky have it absolutely right.
supcom: forged alliance.
[quote who="psychoak" reply="142" id="2432843"]Note, the almighty soap opera tagged the "novel for tv" format a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. A never ending novel perhaps, but still... [/quote] yeah, maybe if FILM really meant TELEVISION you might have a point. but alas, you're completely incorrect. thanks for playing though!
[quote who="TheRezonator" reply="139" id="2432499"] Babylon 5 was Star Trek with more fighting. dont remember it being funny or all that popular... [/quote] didnt you just criticise someone for not watching properly and then commenting? no scifi fan who had actually watched a decent amount of the show would make this incorrect comparison. star trek? lol. it was certainly funny in parts here or there, and what does its popularity have to do with anything? all that states is i
[quote who="Allegiance86" reply="131" id="2431454"]Rais Ima take that as you trying to be funny. [/quote] not trying to be funny. SG is second only to sliders as the worst popular scifi ive seen. [quote who="Allegiance86" reply="131" id="2431454"] How many shows do you know that last longer then 5 seasons? [/quote] lol, i love it when fans use this as evidence of a show's innate quality. all it means to me is that dumbed-down scifi is more marketable and popula
[quote who="TheRezonator" reply="127" id="2431325"] name 4 'deep' sci fi shows with the action, humour and satisfaction for watching that SG gives you.[/quote] BSG, B5, Firefly. ok, i only got 3. but i couldn't name 4 series' WORSE than SG either.
so, is this iteration any better than the absolute garbage that constitutes stargate thus far? (original movie excepted)
but does the lobby remember anything once the game launches? i wouldn't have thought so.
[quote who="brjoha" reply="21" id="2431065"]By server, I meant the lobby server. It's in the best position to know whether a match is still in progress or has completed, and remember who is in the match and how they were connected (directly or proxied). [/quote] what? there is absolutely no difference between the lobby server and all the other players, other than the ability to change the game's rules before it starts.
there's only one remake im dying for, and that's tie fighter.
[quote who="GnomeChomp" reply="18" id="2430116"]Then surely it wouldn't be that difficult for the server to maintain a record of the game, and continue to check the number of players in it whilst it is still ongoing (every 10 seconds or so). If it detects that a player is missing it waits until that player is back in the lobby and offers them a chance to reconnect. [/quote] as stated already, there is no server. and yes, its pretty damned difficult which is why you can't do
[quote who="Charvel1" reply="1" id="2429468"]When human players start playing dumber.[/quote] yeah, exactly. if a game has any depth at all its damned hard to make competent AI.
[quote who="Thundercles" reply="11" id="2429735"] You know what I do when I don't like a post? I just stop reading it. I don't feel the urge to tell a bunch of people who don't give a shit. [/quote] you would have a point had i made a thread about it.
you know what i do when i dont want to play a game anymore? i just stop playing. i dont feel the urge to tell a bunch of people who dont give a shit.
good to know! but can projectiles hit units you werent aiming for? i thought SotS was a turn-based game?
[quote who="mgmetal13" reply="10" id="2429066"]If kitch's idea is possible I would definatly suggest the GPG do this for for Supreme Commander 2. [/quote] why? supcom/FA runs perfectly fine as long as everyone has less than 500 ping. playing FA online feels just like a LAN game, at least in 1v1 and 2v2.
[quote who="inerz" reply="43" id="2428798"]go play m.a.x and then tell me supcom isnt a ripoff of that... a bad one like i said btw max was before TA. [/quote] TA and supcom are one of the only games ever made (with cossacks i think) that simulate projectiles. TA was its very own beast and not a copy of anything. supcom was a sprititual successor to TA, not a ripoff of MAX which was a turn-based game ffs. [quote who="inerz" reply="43" id="2428798"] main
i buy them when the first group of towers are destroyed, to enable you to push onto the next tower.
lol, noob alert. a new syndicate has been in production for quite a while now ;)
yeah, zero chance.
yeah, all NPC dialogue is spoken. enjoying the game, though virtually identical to gothic in every way. but with much better performance which is great. if you enjoyed gothic you'll definitely like this.
[quote who="inerz" reply="32" id="2422375"]YES: Supreme commander is a cheap failed clone of this imo.)[/quote] what nonsense. perhaps you've heard of a game called total annihilation?
Rook, TB & UB.
[quote who="gkrit" reply="9" id="2424163"] lol ... u did very well, but u were lucky u had sedna to heal u. i woulda had 5 kills on u lol. dont forget, i had a newbie on my team and we still won [/quote] was a good game! my noob sucked more than your noob tho. ive never seen sedna get killed 7 times lol. look forward to our next engagement! :)