All Topics Users older than one year ago

My PC has been overheating the past week. Until I can get a bottle of Canned air, I won't necesarilly be able to come by much.

Server Status:  (Updated every 10 minutes)

Download Link: http://st0rage.org/~hunterx/Client.zip

Server Details: http://st0rage.org/~hunterx/nerronline.html

I downloaded a 2D MMO creator and am trying my hand on creating a game with a Digibutter/Bitlands/SPM theme. I am currently looking for help in the following areas:

• Mapping - The engine uses a built-in map editor, so this part isn't too complicated.
• Spriting - This is where I need the most help, since I suck at spriting.
• Hosting - Currently the only way I can host the game is via my home PC, which means I won't be able to run it 24/7. If anyone knows of a free/cheap host that allows the running of servers and programs (specifically, a windows executable), please let me know. (Francis may be able to host, but he's very busy at the moment and hasn't been able to try yet.)

I've tried doing things like this in the past but they've always failed for various reasons. Provided there's enough interest on the site however, this might actually work.

PART ONE: in WHICH Brem's Hydraulic Operating Observational Peeping and Evasion Robot (Or HOOPER) explores SECOND LIFE.

Our little buddy las located BONDAGE PARK, a virtual mall dedicated to virtual *crag*ing. 

In it he encounters many bizarre devices. Of the many he saw,only three were noted in the log:

Later, Hooper decided to investigate a nearby settlement. To his horror, the settlement is a FUR COLONY.

Below is his automated response to the situation:

Unfortunately, it has little to no effect on the beasts:

Hooper briefly reevaluates the situation, and selects a more appropriate weapon:

CURSES! THEY SURVIVED:

The furfags are more resilient that previously thought, nonetheless, he continues his attack. Sadly, his campaign against them is tragically cut short:

BUT THEN, AN EMAIL ARRIVES: 

"Dear Hooper Bigboots,

This email is notification of action regarding your Second Life account,
Hooper Bigboots, for violation of the Second Life Terms of Service or
Community Standards. The violation in question occurred on April 24, 2010
in the region of Lusk.


Violation: Community Standards: Assault,  Safe Area

Most areas in Second Life are identified as 'Safe'.
Shooting, pushing, shoving, or otherwise targeting another
Resident in a manner prevents that Resident from enjoying
their Second Life is a violation of Safe area standards.



Action:
As a result of this violation, your Second Life account is
being temporarily suspended for a period of 1 days. It will
return to active status on Sunday, Apr 25, 2010."

you people probably don't know me but im back so hi

1. Add more *crag*ing standard forum links. You know, like the "Feedback" and "Digibuter News" under the *crag*ing Digibutter header. Also maybe move that closer to the top.

2. Better intergrate our off site branding. The Minecraft Server, the Stream, and for the love of god do something with the *crag*ing Facebook.

3. Add a *crag*ing BUTTON TO CLOSE COMMENTS

Read the review at the link I just gave you. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I doubt I've ever read a more stupid critique in my life. I mean, what the hell? I could understand giving the film an incredibly low one star if he, you know, actually explained how the film was bad based on its artistic merits. That's what critics are supposed to do, right? Good critics, that is. Provide an objective-as-possible take on a movie, considering the quality of its acting, script, cinematography, and other important qualities.

Ebert didn't do this. Instead, he wrote a mindless  rant on how the movie is supposedly "immoral."

First off, newsflash, Mr. Ebert: it's a movie. If you can be offended by pure fantasy such as this, then you're an egotistical moron who's obsessed with upholding a moral code that has essentially become meaningless.

Secondly, there's a certain amount of hypocrisy at work here. Roger Ebert has actually worked on films in the past that could be considered "immoral" in the same way this film is. Also, why doesn't he complain about Tarantino? Tarantino directs all sorts of films with over-the-top violence treated in silly ways.

Is it because "oh, it's a cute little girl, she shouldn't be doing those things?" No. That's a stupid argument. Grown adults shouldn't be doing those things either. By using that argument you're essentially arguing, "well, it's not okay for little girls to kill people, but I have no problem with grown men killing other grown men! Da-derp-da-derpity-dumb."

Jesus Christ, this guy's going senile, I swear to God. He'll trash anything he deems too "immoral" for his pompous tastes and like shit like the Garfield movie just because it's "family friendly."

If it's a fake then it's very well made.

You are all to address "Frozen" as Fludgewidgeon

25565, NOW GET IN HISSLE