Ideas for good 2 player coop games?

Post by **FatherJack** » July 31st, 2006, 23:45

Gunslinger42 wrote:Since the stuff in CS:S breaks apart differently for everyone due to it being clientside, does that mean the ragdolls are the same? I'd hate to think that when I'm teabagging someones face it looks more like I'm teabagging their foot on someone else's screen

Goodness me, how embarrasing would that be? In truth most people seem to hit the teabag target, although I have seen a few at chest or waist height. Perhaps that's intentional, though.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » July 31st, 2006, 23:52

Gunslinger42 wrote:Since the stuff in CS:S breaks apart differently for everyone due to it being clientside, does that mean the ragdolls are the same? I'd hate to think that when I'm teabagging someones face it looks more like I'm teabagging their foot on someone else's screen

Yes, the bodies can/do land differently, basically only barrels (and some other stuff) will show the same for everyone

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » August 1st, 2006, 7:19

Dr. kitteny berk wrote:In short - physics processing will only be useful for client side content - details (like making water look pretty) rather than interactable content.

All makes sense. So we all need physics cards (including a very powerful one on the server) and a country wide gigabit network, get cracking BT!

Actually someone was telling me that sometime during the 80s or 90s BT were proposing to replace all the copper phone lines to people homes with fibre, but it was blocked by the Government because they didn't want BT to have a monopoly.

Hehulk · Post by **Hehulk** » August 1st, 2006, 8:58

spoodie wrote:Actually someone was telling me that sometime during the 80s or 90s BT were proposing to replace all the copper phone lines to people homes with fibre, but it was blocked by the Government because they didn't want BT to have a monopoly.

I'm fairly sure they did do that. My mum use to work for BT in that time period and she swares blind they did.

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » August 1st, 2006, 9:58

Hehulk wrote:I'm fairly sure they did do that. My mum use to work for BT in that time period and she swares blind they did.

What? They did lay fibre? Why are we all using ADSL then?

Hehulk · Post by **Hehulk** » August 1st, 2006, 10:07

Fucked if I know. I'm just repeating what I've been told more than a few times.

Gota ask though, if we arn't on fibreoptics, how do providers like bulldog give us the speeds they do?

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » August 1st, 2006, 10:25

Hehulk wrote:Gota ask though, if we arn't on fibreoptics, how do providers like bulldog give us the speeds they do?

My understanding that it's just ADSL technology, ADSL2+ perhaps. Greater compression so you can get more data down the copper line. Perhaps it's the connection between the exchanges that your Mum is referring to, they will be connected by fibre I should think.

Woo Elephant Yeah · Post by **Woo Elephant Yeah** » August 1st, 2006, 11:11

Operation thread tangent achieved

Sheriff Fatman · Post by **Sheriff Fatman** » August 1st, 2006, 12:38

DSL works on the frequencies that commercial voice transmisions don't use, thus it can carry boat loads of data without impacting on the normal servive.

I think BT only replaced certain parts of upper echelon infrastructure with fibre-optics, not all domestic lines. I know for sure that we still have copper because DSL doesn't operate on fibre networks

pixie pie · Post by **pixie pie** » August 1st, 2006, 12:42

Sheriff Fatman wrote:I think BT only replaced certain parts of upper echelon infrastructure with fibre-optics, not all domestic lines.

We can be damn sure of this.
Although I've heard that they plan to *eventually* move everything to fibre optics (Makes perfect sense really.. apart from the billions it would cost).

cashy · Post by **cashy** » August 1st, 2006, 13:11

i saw a documentary on the discovery channel once about how they made fibre optic cable, tis fucking fascinating. cant imagine it being cheap after seeing that

pixie pie · Post by **pixie pie** » August 1st, 2006, 13:26

cashy wrote:i saw a documentary on the discovery channel once about how they made fibre optic cable, tis fucking fascinating. cant imagine it being cheap after seeing that

If you make enough of something, the production is cheap. And to make all of Britain be covered by fibre optic, would make enough..
The hassle of having to install cables to *every* house in Britain would give you the cost. For example, if you want a cable provider to get cable to your area, it costs thousands, and if you've got thousands x lots more of thousands.. you get lots of moneys cost

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » August 1st, 2006, 13:37

cashy wrote:i saw a documentary on the discovery channel once about how they made fibre optic cable, tis fucking fascinating. cant imagine it being cheap after seeing that

That was probably How It's Made, which is a very interesting but very cheaply made show that covers lots of stuff. The process of making fibre cables involves pulling a thread from a large block of glass, being partly a manual process you can understand why it's so expensive. This is what the show told me, may not still be true.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » August 1st, 2006, 13:43

spoodie wrote: That was probably How It's Made, which is a very interesting but very cheaply made show that covers lots of stuff. The process of making fibre cables involves pulling a thread from a large block of glass, being partly a manual process you can understand why it's so expensive. This is what the show told me, may not still be true.

That show is terrible, i watched one episode, it was full of oversights, wrong information and pretty much skipped whole sections of some processes.

semi-educational kid's tv. nothing more.

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » August 1st, 2006, 13:53

Dr. kitteny berk wrote:That show is terrible, i watched one episode, it was full of oversights, wrong information and pretty much skipped whole sections of some processes.

semi-educational kid's tv. nothing more.

Meh. It shows as much as I want to know about how bicycle helmets/industrial pipes/foreign sweets are made. Also it has such fantastically cheesy muzak

pixie pie · Post by **pixie pie** » August 1st, 2006, 13:58

spoodie wrote:Also it has such fantastically cheesy muzak

Lol! THIS

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » August 1st, 2006, 14:00

Dr. kitteny berk wrote:
That show is terrible, i watched one episode, it was full of oversights, wrong information and pretty much skipped whole sections of some processes.

semi-educational kid's tv. nothing more.

LIES

All Discovery programs are well made and extremely well researched, only the highest pinnacle of educational televisual entertainment graces the screens of viewers lucky enough to feast their eyes on such an insightful range of informative programming

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » August 1st, 2006, 14:02

mrbobbins wrote:
LIES

All Discovery programs are well made and extremely well researched, only the highest pinnacle of educational televisual entertainment graces the screens of viewers lucky enough to feast their eyes on such an insightful range of informative programming

Watch How It's Made, then get back to me

Post by **Roman Totale** » August 1st, 2006, 14:23

mrbobbins wrote:
LIES

All Discovery programs are well made and extremely well researched, only the highest pinnacle of educational televisual entertainment graces the screens of viewers lucky enough to feast their eyes on such an insightful range of informative programming

But I thought you...

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » August 1st, 2006, 14:29

Dr. kitteny berk wrote:Watch How It's Made, then get back to me

As if I've not seen it, there's bloody millions of them so they pad out the schedule with the <a href="http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0SAADA3MW ... g/made.jpg" target="_blank">fuckers</a>

Roman Totale wrote:
But I thought you...

... were an International Space Jockey?, only on weekends.