SoldjahBoy's Forum Posts

  • Nice work mate

    Bit of a jack-of-all-trades really... bit like myself... little bit of this and a little bit of that. Thumbs up!

    ~Sol

  • I guess I'm saying you didn't need to buy the extra GPU power ... yet.

    I generally skip every other generation of hardware and take a look at upcoming releases. DirectX 11 is coming and they're talking about 12 already.

    The cycle doesn't end, and as far as gaming goes, I gave up on PC for the most part. Xbox 360 and PS3 will last 5-6 years and cost tons less. There's a few PC exclusives left, but not nearly enough to blow a huge sum on a PC.

    Core2Duo 2.4ghz, 3 gigs of ram and an 8800M.

    I'm down to just this laptop and nearly every gaming system on the market. I will never buy a desktop PC again. I used to do exactly what you did, and I guess I just don't care anymore.

    Yeah the second card was waaaaay overkill... I just did it becaue I would have used the spare money for something way less, er, cool otherwise.

    I haven't bought a computer since DX9 just came out... so it was time. Besides DX11 is just DX10 with a few extra features that cards don't even support. DX9 is still being improved on, and game are only just starting to break into DX10... I think DX11 and upwards will be one of those things that Microsoft bring out and it will fail (kinda like Windows Me).

    Your laptop explains why you can run Crysis at least... having said that, something like that here would still set you back a good $2300ish AUD.

    This is the first time I have gone all out on a PC and believe it or not, I did it mainly for graphics work and video editing. Working with high def video clips and cutting them together in premiere is suprisingly hefty on the resources. I noticed a big improvement adding the second video card when using jog/shuttle functions on several Gb's worth of 2 second clips. I also own many consoles as I enjoy those for the pure gaming side of things... but sadly I haven't bought a current gen console because the 360 is a piece of junk (hardware reliability-wise) and the ps3 is too far ahead of its time, and by the time game developers figure out how to use it the ps4 will be out. :/

    ~Sol

    PS I still want a PS3 lol... eventually

    *EDIT*

    Sorry if I missed a lot of "S" letters... this laptop keyboard is a bit wonky and the S key is behaving badly.

  • Sounds good, but you do know they made "Hospital Tycoon" as a sequel so-to-speak, to that game? Still, I'd be keen to see what additions and changes you guys manage to make to the classic original!

    ~Sol

  • Here's a couple more explosion generators:

    http://www.geocities.com/starlinesinc/

    http://gmc.yoyogames.com/index.php?showtopic=211466

    Nice find man! I had verison 1 of this program, didn't know version 2 was even out

    Awesome!

    ~Sol

  • And my point is that because of how few programs support multi-core still, you could have 100 of the best gpus on the market and it still won't match the potential of your CPU ... see what I'm saying?

    I'm 100% sure I understand what you are getting at... are you saying the GPU i the bottleneck in the system or the CPU? I know the CPU is the bottleneck since it is not being used properly YET. I bought it because software will grow into it... I have owned a computer store or at least worked in one for the last 12-13 years, so I'm pretty up with what is going on in terms of hardware advancement. I bought now because we are half way through the 7 year technology phase... this PC should last an easy 3 years without any upgrade and still play whatever the latest game is no worries.

    I ran Crysis on a quad core CPU versus a dual core, with the same clock speed. The results for me were that the fps were the same 90% of the time, until a lot of physics occurred at once, leading to the quad core giving around 5 fps more.

    Yes same clock speed I'm sure the quad is better, but typically duals are a much higher clock speed and will generally perform better at, well, anything at the moment. This is why I want to "downgrade" for now ince the hardware is so far ahead of the software, my quad is wasting away with 3 cores doing pretty much nothing.

    I don't support blowing a lot of money on a computer because A. it will be outdated in 6 months and B. companies won't utilize it for much longer, making the technology cheaper by the time they do.

    So, when do you stop waiting? What you just stated happens all the time. If you thought like that, then you would never buy anything new...ever. I have bought like 10 computers in the past, and I always spend a mediocre amount on my parts... and in 18 months it's like "awww I can't run XXXX because it's too phat and my computer sucks.", yet all of my friends who spent like three times the amount can still run the latest crap at full graphics with enough juice spare to run at least 2 more copies at the same time at full graphics.

    Partly the reason why I just do everything on a laptop now. It cost half the price of a good desktop PC, plays Crysis on high at 30 fps and is portable.

    I don't know what kind of laptop you have, but my MSI GX600 (512gb GeForce 8400M, core 2 centrino, 4gb ddr2 800, etc etc...) doesn't run Crysis at 30fps... at least, not on anything over Low settings. D:

    More power to you if you're Bill Gates in disguise - I guess I'd have 100 PC's for no reason then if I was.

    I just have one PC and one laptop :/

    ~Sol

  • You know it was good, and you love it... secretly xD

    <3

    ~Sol

  • It might not be busy enough, but that's like saying "I only pee'd a little bit on the floor... I won't worry about cleaning it up until someone takes a crap and misses as well."

    ~Sol

  • I didn't notice that before, but there doesn't seem to be a way I can fix it. Since the pull of an object is multiplied by it's mass, lighter objects will be pulled in faster than heavier objects and end up pushing the pulling object.

    Yeah a few quirks I found about your example compared to mine:

    -Objects move towards each other correctly, where mine is nowhere near the "right way".

    -In your example, when a lighter mass object hits the heavier mass object, it seems to act as an outboard motor on a boat, and push the heavier object along. With mine, the lighter objects will bump the heavier object and cause it to shift slightly but then it will stabilize.

    -Also in your example, objects of the same mass will attract PERFECTLY to each other, and behave exactly like deadeye was requesting... however if left in a massive bundle they start to spin around faster and faster until they "fling" themselves off and it becomes a big mess.

    You are DEFINITELY on the right track... we just need to suss out where it is going wrong. I think a combination of your ideas and my ideas may get it working correctly.

    There needs to be a correlation between distance (using the distance formula), mass (which is calculated in your example), and friction (which I think your example doesn't seem to be using?).

    Having not really thought about this too well---

    Perhaps a solution for force applied towards an object could be something along the lines of;

    +For each instance

    : sqrt((ObjectA.X-ObjectB.X)^2+(ObjectA.Y-ObjectB.Y)^2)-(ObjectA.Mass-ObjectB.Mass)

    Therefore, objects with a higher mass than another, will not move towards the smaller object, rather it will attract the smaller massed objects. This will also mean that if a smaller object is too far away from another larger one, it will not be influenced by the mass as it would if the larger object were of higher mass.

    I don't think I made a lot of sense there lol... I dunno... I know what I'm trying to say, perhaps I should try to make something with it instead of confusing everyone! <3

    ~Sol

  • There certainly are a lot of threads about this, especially in the last week or so...

    I agree with deadeye. Can we get them all merged and globally stickied?

    ~Sol

  • What's to say that there WASN'T a Big Bang? What's to say that there ISN'T a God? What's to say that God created the Big Bang as a highly calculated way of laying down his creation of the universe?

    ~Sol

  • For anyone who uses Windows... you guys all know that Windows has a pissy clipboard that can hold ONE THING AT A TIME! How useless is that?

    Get ClipX (http://www.bluemars.org/clipx/), it's free, it's fast, and it allows you to have unlimited clipboard "slots" where you can copy copy copy copy copy, then paste a specific selection later on.

    Copy as normal with CTRL+C but when pasting press CTRL+SHIFT+V and you get a nifty menu of all the copied items you have.

    I set this thing to run on startup of Windows, and I find it VERY HANDY!

    ~Sol

  • Hey link I am working on a very similar thing myself... I have used three objects though... one "planet" object, with a lower mas "moon" object, then even lower mass "comet" objects.

    When two comets collide, they make a moon, and when the moons collide with the planet, the planet gains mass and the moons are destroyed.

    I will make it so the "player" can shoot the objects;

    shoot a comet, and it is destroyed

    shoot a moon and it breaks into 2 comet objects

    shoot a planet it will lose mass equal to two moon objecs, and create two moon objects

    if the planet is shot enough, it will be destroyed.

    comets at the moment are only attracted to the moon objects, and the moon objects are currently only attracted to the planet object, but the effect is rather convincing.

    I was basically trying to get a psudeo version of the video that deadeye posted.

    Instead of using xy measurements based on distance, the force applied is equal to the DISTANCE FORMULA of the objects, so if they are far away they will to to move back together more quickly... this is the opposite of what would happen in a real world experiment, but for applied mechanics in a game situation, it seems to work quite well.

    I will keep playing with it before I upload... the way your example works is probably way better than mine, so I may work with your example and include the merging and seperation of objects based on a player shooting at them.

    ~Sol

  • Evolution nor Creation have either been proven nor disproven. There is evidence that evolution may have been the way we came to be, however given the natural changes in history, humans have not been around long enough for such things to occur at the rate at which has been implied via scientific carbon dating. There is also evidence that the bible existed, and that predicitons within have come true 1000's of years after they were written... but it could just be coincedence or people seeking the answer to the question.

    Basically, you believe whatever you want... nobody is right or wrong because nobody else can prove otherwise.

    ~Sol

  • Simple but very effective! Nice work Doppel

    ~Sol

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Yeah, all links broken... I recommend Fileshack or FileDen to host stuff on...

    ~Sol