Anyone tried stunning one of little goofy monsters and throwing them in the water. I got completely mauled after doing that and almost died. It was funny as hell though.
Printable View
Anyone tried stunning one of little goofy monsters and throwing them in the water. I got completely mauled after doing that and almost died. It was funny as hell though.
flavor flavio
Quote:
Originally posted by BladeRunner:
There are some lovely touches in this game.. like the way those bouncy creatures (can't remember the name), turn into a nasty little monsters, (like gremlins) if they get wet and throw their exploding TURDS at you.. LOL.
Mephisto
Yeah someone else said it was a bit short, but if there are difficulty levels you're a wimp unless you try the hardest setting first http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/wink.gif. (I only found Kingpin too hard at its hardest setting so far). I also prefer the direct approach than the System Shock2/SOF, style of limited saves and in SS2, repopulation of cleared areas, a pathetic attempt to hide a short game or small map.
Agreed!Quote:
Originally posted by BladeRunner:
I also prefer the direct approach than the System Shock2/SOF, style of limited saves and in SS2, repopulation of cleared areas, a pathetic attempt to hide a short game or small map.
I usually hate respawning monsters like in Turok2, but in SS2 I found it to be appropriate and contributing to the creepy atmosphere (after some hours of cursing and bashing my keyboard, of course http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/smile.gif ).
------------------
I like beers. Cheers!
Hey
Blade, I think that the hit you take in FPS games when u put on FSAA is not worth it because the games are to quick to notice the diff i have tried it with a few FPS games and i dont think it is worth it i much rather use it on racing and other sim games. it helps those games alot. Also i have played with 2X FSAA on a Voodoo5 5500AGP and i find the hit is not as much as when i put it on a GF2GTS this is just my finding it can be diff for u but alot of review sites have found the same thing.
------------------
Abit BP6, Dual 366@550, 128MB RAM, 13.6GB WD 7200RPM ATA/66, Voodoo3 3000AGP OCed to 183Mhz
Inventor of the PMP, Phunk Master Phreezer.
That's cool Blade.
I have seen the V5 5500 with 2x FSAA with in a demo of F.A.K.K 2 .... and it look awesome. The GeForce seems to not perform not so well with the Q3 engine. But I don't see why because you said that your card with FSAA looks good in Half-Life but not in F.A.K.K 2 .. but they have the same engine???? must just be the game.
thanks for the reply
Proceed
Like I said it is hard to put into specifics what I don't like about it, but as enabling FSAA on a Geforce usually means stepping down a resolution or two the gains in Q3 and FAKK2 don't improve the image at all to me. Julie is more jaggie, and the scenery is more blurred looking. I have to add this is minor but looks better in a higher res without FSAA.
Half-Life uses the original Quake engine, (with improvements) so can't be compared to the Quake 3 engine.
It just struck me that both these games, (Q3 & FAKK2) using this engine look better without the Geforce FSAA IMHO.
I personally think it's hardly worth having FSAA on the Geforce as Half-Life is the only game I've used it on to play with. Everything else I'd rather run in a higher res with it off.
[This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 08-21-2000).]
Tomb Raider IV looks really nice in 800x600x32 and 2x2FSAA, I think better than in 1024x768x32 without FSAA. And runs smooth.
Cool....well the Q3 and Quake engines are the same to me...
peace
