Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/20/14 03:25 AM, Food123 wrote:

At 8/20/14 02:53 AM, xXDathDalerXx wrote: StickDeath did what it had to do...it paved the way for a lot of things that would eventually become commonplace on NewGrounds

i still hold Stick Survivor in high regards. and for you unfortunate souls who missed the glory days;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dfk9aCeuPA

That site is not up anymore dude. This Topic is from 2007 and is a 6 yr old Topic

lol what does that matter?? it was already dead at the point of creation of this topic, and yet here we are...talking about it

StickDeath did what it had to do...it paved the way for a lot of things that would eventually become commonplace on NewGrounds

i still hold Stick Survivor in high regards. and for you unfortunate souls who missed the glory days;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dfk9aCeuPA

At 5/9/09 08:50 AM, Ranger2 wrote: It wasn't completely about states' rights.
The Civil War was the ultimate test of democracy.

the US never has & hopefully never will be a democracy...it's a republic

if you think about it the war really wasn't about slavery...some northern states had slaves & Lincoln even promised that they could keep their slaves after the war, his prime concern was maintaining the union as one of his speeches shows

"I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." ... My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union"

the whole war was basically one huge power grab using slavery as an excuse, so no...the war did not have to happen. the sought lost & along went with it the right to secede as was agreed upon in the constitution

:1) That was local government, not federal. Such a situation could have been resolved today with gathering proper evidence.

yeah, just like the way we impeached Clinton for "Whitewater" or Bush for his advocating of torture & war crimes, or those spies from AIPAC in which congresswoman Jane Harman was caught on a legal wiretap operation accepting a bribe in exchange for helping known spies go free, or the Sibel Edmonds case also involving corruption & spies

not all men are created equal in this current country...i don't think i even need to rebuttal anything else of your meaningless tirade, as someone else has already taken care of that

At 5/7/09 05:14 PM, TheMason wrote: There is a fundamental flaw in your argument that dooms it from your first assumption. Speech is NOT a material object that can be confiscated. Thus, by your own arguments, it is obvious that you think that governments can take away a person's ability to speak as easily and/or effectively as they can outlaw the sale of guns and confiscate those already in private hands.

i was just about to say the same thing, this guy is a complete fool & not even worth the time...makes me sad that most people in america are starting to think like this

PS: England??
ever heard of rising crime?? gun ban serves absolutely no purpose other than to leave law abiding citizens open to abuse

At 5/5/09 01:02 AM, Tancrisism wrote: You know, I always found it bizarre that gun nuts equate their "right to bear arms" equal to their "right to the freedom of speech". Freedom of speech is fundamentally 100 times more important than the right to own a gun. Just because it was written in the same list in the constitution doesn't make it necessarily equal in overall importance.

you are dead wrong & simply an idiot...it is the right to bear arms that keeps all our other rights in check
the first thing a tyrannical, oppressive government does is take away peoples guns so they can't defend their rights (Germany,China,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMinn_Coun ty_War

rights are useless without the means to protect them, read the sordid history of gun control
http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.
htm

the state abuses us enough already, just imagine if we had no guns

Why we do it. Why do we do it? Well, usually there is a three-part process. The first part is that some big corporation finds that the government in a country where it's operating is giving it problems. The government of Country X is giving our big corporation problems - they're taxing us, they're restricting us, they're nationalizing us, they're forcing us to obey labor laws - and then the head of that corporation will go to Washington and complain. That's phase one.

Then while the intervention planning is working its way through the foreign-policy process, the motivation suddenly changes; it morphs. We decide that we're actually intervening not for economic reasons, even though those are the only reasons why we're ever even talking about this country, but we're doing it for political or geostrategic reasons. We're doing it because the government of Country X is a threat. Now how do we know it's a threat? For one reason, because it's bothering this big American corporation. What more proof do you want? That means it's got to be anti-American, anti-capitalist, probably a tool of all of our enemies. But these countries in most cases are only trying to build the capitalist economies that they admire so much from us. What we want is to have a free capitalist system here but not allow anyone else in other countries to develop that. So there is the second phase, where the motivation morphs suddenly from an explicitly economic one to a so-called political one.

And then there is a third phase that happens after the intervention when it's time for our leaders to explain to us and to the world why we did it. And then you usually get a third reason that didn't even come up during the planning and execution of the operation, and that is we only did it to help them. Not only did we not seek anything for ourselves, but we actually sacrificed ourselves in order to bring something good to other people.

I think that the American people are slowly, perhaps because of the events of the last few years, beginning to cast some doubt on this, and we're beginning to see the real reasons for these, the real motivations, the fact that these interventions only serve a tiny piece of the American public. They don't serve the interests of America. They serve the interests of a small clique of people who are making huge amounts of money from the outside world and see that the American military is prepared to serve as their private enforcing police force. That is the deal that has been made over generations between the private and public sector in Washington.

At 5/6/09 06:47 PM, adrshepard wrote: The US doesn't demand tribute or worship. All we ask is that other countries "play ball" and trade with us, as well as refrain from allying themselves with our greatest enemy. It's not as though Latin American nations didn't realize that the US assumed the leading role for international developments in the two continents, we've said as much ever since the Monroe Doctrine.

but the US does demand tribute...look at Iraq for a prime example, "do what we say or we come n get ya"
the US also ripped south americas resources...you don't need to rape a country to trade. look at Africa for another example, people there are dying of hunger because of the US!! they talked the countries into using its resources as collateral for IMF loans

Poland and Georgia are still pretty fond of us, actually.

lol you're kidding right?? Georgia is almost in the middle of a coup, half the military is setting up to overthrow the government (a government backed by the US of course) & many in Poland are protesting against NATO

Actually you're wrong again. Japan depends on the US for military support and the UK is a huge trading partner that played a substantial role in the Iraq campaign. Russia and China don't like the US for the simple reason that we are their greatest rival.
"Spreading democracy" is simply our form of rhetoric. For the Europeans it was "civilizing" and "Christianization", for the Russians it was about helping their Slavic "brothers", etc. Every country's history is waist-deep in hypocrisy, and it doesn't really amount to anything anyway.
A dictatorship we can control is preferable to a communist people's republic any day.

just listen to yourself go...a true american patriot!!
if Japan & the UK liked the US so much they wouldn't be voting against it constantly at UN meetings...& they also prefer trading with China, they avoid having anything to do with the US whenever possible

maybe you should go work for the government, i'm sure they would appreciate people like you

national image irrelevant??
the whole of the middle east & most of south america hates the US because of their interventionist policies...eastern europe has also seen a rise in resentment towards the US

every time the US gets involved in a foreign mess it makes new enemies while keeping few friends...Japan,China,Russia,UK all want the US out of power. the US has troops in almost every corner of the globe, it's been building an empire under the guise of "spreading democracy" when in reality it has helped spread dictatorship many times (Chile,Bolivia,Nicaragua,Afghanistan,Ira q,Germany,Cuba) the US funded many of them directly & actively supported them

& americans wonder why people hate them

At 3/2/09 08:33 PM, Judzfell wrote: and i cant get high enough in the upside down water

wolf form & swim to the top

At 3/2/09 09:36 PM, narudude1996 wrote:

:Could someone please explain why turn-based RPGs are so damn popular?

story element...the fighting is just a side diversion

the whole point of C# is the .NET framework
just because it's standardized doesn't mean it's open source, or open standard or whatever the fuck you're trying to say
microsoft owns both .NET & C#
most of the useful ones like ASP & windows form is patented to them
mono has already had trouble with microsoft before concerning their compiler

At 9/2/08 01:33 AM, thoughtpolice wrote: What's your point?

microsoft doesn't open source it's library, any other compiler will be half crippled

c# was invented by microsoft

At 8/29/08 08:51 PM, Strongbow wrote: Yes, but GuitarPro-5 costs money.
This won't.

won't be as good either, the work needed for something of this level is being underestimated
punk-o-matic works cause it's clips of riffs

people could just get GuitarPro-5 & do this

At 8/27/08 03:36 AM, ASSKICKER11 wrote: i am not damanding i am just wondering if there will be an episode 7 in super mario bros Z.

"where is episode 7 becase if they just stoped making it then that was just stupid i mean come on did it not say in the ep.6 that there was another but i think they just gave up"

i'm not demanding
pffft, please...7 will come out whenever he feels like it, which could be never just as it could be tomorrow

At 8/23/08 01:17 AM, Spaltzer wrote: For the record: In companies, usually bigger than this, there is always someone who oversees work, gives insight, and documents everything. This is usually called the Project Leader, or Producer.

a producer normally puts down the money for the project
& the super usually has experience

i don't know of many companies that put someone at the helm without having experience & knowledge in the field of what they will be managing

At 8/20/08 02:06 PM, Alpharius120 wrote:

:ou don't need any script to make a movie about the game. you're not supposed to copy it to the word.

he wants the conversation script/story script

At 8/20/08 12:45 PM, half-a-nip wrote: Your never going to finish this,people say stuff like this all the time and never actually FINISH it.

i agree, ppl who talk a lot do little :)
the ppl who are doing are too busy to be talking

i don't see what the problem is, use whatever collision method flash allows...cept you would have to probably make another object if you plan to make some enemies susceptible to only 1 type of fireball
or make a template that all enemies inherit from. i wish i knew flash so i could offer some real code snippets, but general advice will just have to do i guess
there's any number of ways to go about solving a problem...you could even make it so that every odd numbered enemy in the array can only be killed by fireballB
simple solution i just came up with right now, though pretty predictable in game...you could get crazier with the math

At 8/20/08 12:16 AM, KynetiK-27 wrote: What code? I havent done any script for the fireballs yet. You mean my shorthand for loop which served to demonstrate a point?
.
How is it flawed, and how is it any different from what you posted earlier?
.
I did say before i can minimise the amount of uniques, as there is only a few which have mulitples onscreen at once. Having optimised that, there are only 2 types of fireballs that will have dynamic names, there will rarely be any more than 5 total onscreen at once, and i only have to do a check for them when they exist. A for loop should suffice if the num of objects is this low no?

i was assuming as you said you were working in an engine that you had something down, either way you should have had a pseudo-code, if even in your head

anyway i misunderstood what you wanted to do, it looked to me like you wanted to make 4 or 5 unique objects. i'm not familiar with the flash language, but it should have a foreach loop to simplify even further (but didn't you say you didn't want to use a for loop at first?? eh whatever, this message board needs a recap of the posts)

the code you made is obviously flawed...the best way to do it is like i said, & how pretty much the engine the guy above posted. rewrite if you wanna save yourself some headaches
if you keep going with what you have now you will probably run into issues, & certainly slowdown because you're introducing too many uniques to keep track of

computer logic is so easy

fireball
enemy
how many fireballs on screen?
how many enemies on screen?
is fireball hitting enemy?
do shit

mind you i really don't know how flash works but i'd make all the enemies & fireballs inherit from one place, then all you need to do is check once...make some variable that keeps track of how many fireballs or enemies are on screen & another variable if they are alive,check collision & if they touch kill fireball & kill enemy (in other words stop drawing them & keeping track of them) reset their values to not alive to keep the loop going

At 8/19/08 04:02 PM, MistahMaxx wrote: look, id like to use flash but not some 30 day trial crap cant afford it and its not available here.

plenty of free alternatives to try your hand at, so you better get started cause it's not likely that people will do your stories for you

JSYK - sprites are altered with something called Hue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hue
there's usually a way to alter the tint you can give a sprite (in games of course) this way they can easily change the Hue to make characters flash or change colors & a bunch of other tricks

but you don't care about none of that, you just wanna copy your character & then mess with the alpha/opacity channel

At 8/19/08 10:41 AM, WolfAkela wrote: Please enlighten us on your CS3 purchase.

he had the 5 finger discount lol
you have to be an idiot to come here & put that in quotations like that

At 8/19/08 12:24 AM, Joelasticot wrote:

At 8/18/08 11:59 PM, mustangman24 wrote: i got one but i got some good ways of making money online 50$+ per game i made a crap game in 5 minutes got 50$$$

The future of flash?

tell me about it...& people wonder why flash isn't taken seriously in the entertainment industry

temporary job
part time job