PDA

View Full Version : Low-Budget Amateur Maps?


AlexanderII
9th Jan 2002, 06:19 PM
How about starting a new review section on this server exclusively for low-budget home-made amateur maps, for those poor map-makers not yet hired by anybody?

There's now a huge pile of maps. Let's make some kind of sorting. I don't think it is possible to review all of them, but if we divide them into big and small (rather crude division but it makes sence, since if one aims for the small target size of the map, he creates a different kind of map which should have different reviewing parameters). That was basically my point and for we could call small maps "Low budget maps", just until we find a better name.

A "low budget amateur map" must fit there criteria:
1. It must be made by an amateur,
2. It must have a relatively small area and filesize,
3. No more rules so far.

Exactly what point 2 means can be negotiated. Let's say there is a limit of 500K (unpacked size). Those maps smaller than 500K, made by amateurs and having some reasonably small area (to have a lot of action) could make a new class of maps. That's basically my idea.
Regards,

AlexanderII

AltImA
9th Jan 2002, 06:38 PM
I am a LOW BUDGET MAPPER... as you say... and im proud...

BangOut
9th Jan 2002, 07:08 PM
Alex:

what you just said is what this site does :|

AlexanderII
9th Jan 2002, 07:22 PM
Correction to the definition:
How about a separate section for nice-and-small fast-action maps for short-and-sweet gaming. Let's for the sake of this poll call this kind of maps "_LOW_BUDGET_ amateur maps". they have to comply with these guidelines:
1. It must be made by an amateur mapper.
2. It must have relatively small area and filesize.
3. No more rules so far.

Deathwing
9th Jan 2002, 07:49 PM
I hope you don't think the 5000+ maps on this site are actually official. :p The only thing that anybody reviews are user(amateur)-created maps.

AlexanderII
9th Jan 2002, 08:46 PM
Deathwing:
Like I just said, there's now a huge pile of maps. Let's make some kind of sorting. I don't think it is possible to review all of them, but if we divide them into big and small (rather crude division but it makes sence, since if one aims for the small target size of the map, he creates a different kind of map which should have different reviewing parameters). That was basically my point and for we could call small maps "Low budget maps", just until we find a better name.

Regards,

AlexanderII

Deathwing
9th Jan 2002, 10:32 PM
Than what's it got to do with mappers who are or aren't hired?

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 01:07 AM
It can be both, can't it?

Balton
10th Jan 2002, 06:00 AM
Alexander. I think you have no clue about this community. There are thousands of mappers out there. And only a handful of them is hired. Yet those hired guys dont have the time to produce maps for an old game like UT.
What you are asking for is a special section for n00bish maps. And to be true that is the sort of maps that shouldnt waste space on any server. As I said go and look what is out. I recommend you to take a look at DavidM's maps. He is what you call an amateur and a master of small DM maps. You will see a slight difference between the maps you are looking.
Sorry to break it to you but you dont have a clue yet...

StoneViper
10th Jan 2002, 08:32 AM
I'm a hired mapper. I get paid to design levels (but not with ued, but i also map with ued for fun).

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 11:06 AM
Balton.de
What you are asking for is a special section for n00bish maps.
Not at all. Just like in ther arts there is sketch, there is pencil drawing, there is etude, there are large 6-meters long paintings and there are miniatures. These are all different types of art and they all have different evaluation criteria.

Regards,

AlexanderII

Balton
10th Jan 2002, 11:30 AM
Originally posted by AlexanderII
Balton.de

Not at all. Just like in ther arts there is sketch, there is pencil drawing, there is etude, there are large 6-meters long paintings and there are miniatures. These are all different types of art and they all have different evaluation criteria.

Regards,

AlexanderII


a map is not a piece of art that catches dust! you will play it and will have fun! there are lots of factors that will make a map good. sorry but no one needs those lame maps! get your ass behind the editor and work on your technics. you will in a month laugh about cloudwars!

DavidM
10th Jan 2002, 11:35 AM
woah!!
waht a great idae for a comtest!!
I go on working on my map now!

Hourences
10th Jan 2002, 11:36 AM
leet thread :P

Claw
10th Jan 2002, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by Hourences
leet thread :P

leet spammer :P

Balton
10th Jan 2002, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by DavidM
woah!!
waht a great idae for a comtest!!
I go on working on my map now!

name the map DM-Alexander][ !!!

Rukee
10th Jan 2002, 12:10 PM
Is this guy for real???? :rolleyes:


WHAT DO YOU THINK NALICITY IS FOR????

It`s were people (Amateurs) post ther maps!!

I think the ratio is very high for not paid mappers then ones that are getting paid crusing the forums here!!
I only know a few that are getting paid....but those maps they make don`t make it to nalicitys dnld anyway....so what`s the problem....we already have what you asked for......now if they would just update the map dnlds sometime soon....or ditch it for the new NC3 site....

Tonnberry
10th Jan 2002, 12:14 PM
hurray!

alex is back, and he is l33t3r than teh last time :D

Evil_Cope
10th Jan 2002, 12:58 PM
alex....


a section for the cream of the "noob maps" as some might say, would be kinda out of place.

the plain fact is, that small basic maps, are not that good. reviewers here at nalicity usually give such mappers advice in reviews to improve their skills so they can create bigger and better maps, and the forums here are the best place to go for level editing help 80% of the time.

setting smaller crapper maps as something else would discourage mappers from trying to get better, and create maps that eclipse the mappers of the day...

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 03:08 PM
mister_cope:
setting smaller crapper maps as something else would discourage mappers from trying to get better, and create maps that eclipse the mappers of the day...

Big maps are good for single player and also for games with 60 players or so. A deathmatch with 60 people is a total mess and I find no fun in that sort of stuff. You can say whatever you want, but small deathmatch maps are becoming classics now (as well as duelin maps) and people will come back to them again and again.

Now what you're saying is similar to that saying "with the invention of television there is not going to be need in radio". Now we have satellite tv and we still have radion channels even on satellite tv. Not to mention the use of the radios! It's there! Small portable radios, radios in the shops, stores, supermarkets. Car radio. It's everywhere today! Whether you want it or not!

And just because you bought a car does not mean that all should buy cars and stop using bus, subways e t.c. And that's basically wat you're saying now.

Regards,

AlexanderII

Evil_Cope
10th Jan 2002, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by AlexanderII
mister_cope:


Big maps are good for single player and also for games with 60 players or so. A deathmatch with 60 people is a total mess and I find no fun in that sort of stuff. You can say whatever you want, but small deathmatch maps are becoming classics now (as well as duelin maps) and people will come back to them again and again.

Now what you're saying is similar to that saying "with the invention of television there is not going to be need in radio". Now we have satellite tv and we still have radion channels even on satellite tv. Not to mention the use of the radios! It's there! Small portable radios, radios in the shops, stores, supermarkets. Car radio. It's everywhere today! Whether you want it or not!

And just because you bought a car does not mean that all should buy cars and stop using bus, subways e t.c. And that's basically wat you're saying now.

Regards,

AlexanderII


im not talking entirely about size. indeed, most of the high profile mappers of the day are making maps for 1on1 play or similar.

im atlking about complexity and ambition as much as anything...

Balton
10th Jan 2002, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by AlexanderII
mister_cope:


Big maps are good for single player and also for games with 60 players or so. A deathmatch with 60 people is a total mess and I find no fun in that sort of stuff. You can say whatever you want, but small deathmatch maps are becoming classics now (as well as duelin maps) and people will come back to them again and again.

Now what you're saying is similar to that saying "with the invention of television there is not going to be need in radio". Now we have satellite tv and we still have radion channels even on satellite tv. Not to mention the use of the radios! It's there! Small portable radios, radios in the shops, stores, supermarkets. Car radio. It's everywhere today! Whether you want it or not!

And just because you bought a car does not mean that all should buy cars and stop using bus, subways e t.c. And that's basically wat you're saying now.

Regards,

AlexanderII

crap! we arent watching TV or listening to radio. stop those whacky comparing. If you eat a banana and not an apple it doesnt mean you are for child-labour. so CUT IT! and ut wih 60 people? what are you talking??? a small map in fact is oftne a VERY DETAILED ONE! 700-1000 brushes is normal!!! get off of your trip and say hello to the nurses!

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by Balton.de


crap! we arent watching TV or listening to radio. stop those whacky comparing. If you eat a banana and not an apple it doesnt mean you are for child-labour. so CUT IT! and ut wih 60 people? what are you talking??? a small map in fact is oftne a VERY DETAILED ONE! 700-1000 brushes is normal!!! get off of your trip and say hello to the nurses!

Funny. But off-topic.
If the complexity is your only concern - that's only your opinion. If i put 1000 brushes on an open-area map and try to do some lighting my Geforce2 I'll be glad if my Geforce2 will give me 10 frames per second at some point in the game. Even on my simple map whan I make moving clouds and "shadows" from them I get a really slow motion. And That's still not as far as my imagination can go.
Sometimes I listen to the common sence. And it tells me that a perfect map does not have to be complex. If you implant an MP3-player into a hammer. It'll be much more expensive, but it's not necesserily going to be better than a regular hammer. It may even be not as durable as a simple hammer. Think about it.

Regards,

AlexanderII

Evil_Cope
10th Jan 2002, 04:46 PM
sorry dude. but that just doesnt hold true.


simple does not mean good.

gameplay is not at its best in 2d duke nukem esque maps, and said maps usually look worse to todays standards than even the dullest of davidm maps.

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by mister_cope
sorry dude. but that just doesnt hold true.


simple does not mean good.

gameplay is not at its best in 2d duke nukem esque maps, and said maps usually look worse to todays standards than even the dullest of davidm maps.
I never said that simple means good. But I'm convinced that good things are simple. Someone said that it's easy to complexify, but it's hard to simplify.
Hence the good-old KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid)
Yes, Duke3d's old now. It's been 7 years since I started playing it. So, please, tell me about it.
There's always something to learn, but that does not mean that everyone has to listen only to you and do maps exactly as you tell. Don't you think that if a person is a newbie in map making he's not familiar with CAD, architecture, lighting, photography or whaterver else.

I guess, you'll have to figure that out yourself. I'm feeling humiliated by having to waste my time explaining simple things that no one seems to be listening anyway.

Regards,

AlexanderII

Evil_Cope
10th Jan 2002, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by AlexanderII

I never said that simple means good. But I'm convinced that good things are simple. Someone said that it's easy to complexify, but it's hard to simplify.
Hence the good-old KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid)
Yes, Duke3d's old now. It's been 7 years since I started playing it. So, please, tell me about it.
There's always something to learn, but that does not mean that everyone has to listen only to you and do maps exactly as you tell. Don't you think that if a person is a newbie in map making he's not familiar with CAD, architecture, lighting, photography or whaterver else.

I guess, you'll have to figure that out yourself. I'm feeling humiliated by having to waste my time explaining simple things that no one seems to be listening anyway.

Regards,

AlexanderII

i was and still am to a certain extent, a noobie. i freely admit it.

but mooning after duke nukem maps as examples of good design is not the way to get better.
they have nothing to teach us that cant be taught better by other maps.

im not saying this is even what youare doing (mooning after duke maps) nostalgia is a great thing.


but duke style maps are last generation. and setting up a seperate division for maps of this style and similar maps is not the way to go forward. learning the unreal editor is tough. and if mappers are encouraged to think that they cant do full maps, or more interesting maps, by setting up a patronising little club.


also, mapping style is not limited.

i am not telling anyone how to make maps. im simply not in that position. but i cant help fealing that you should try some more maps before telling people that they should treat "low budget maps" as anything other than the first step on the path to wizdom/leetnes.


i suggest you try the following.

ctf-projextx2
dm-smallsoldiers (or some other davidm map)
dm-bastion
dm-chimera or imago
dm-titania][
and so on.

im sure if you ask, people will be able to suggest more great maps than me. but these should start you off nicely.




now stop sulking. im trying to help you.

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 07:04 PM
mister_cope:
Thanks for pointing them out for me. That's exactly what I want: to be able to quickly find that particular kind of maps and look at nice and small maps. Why can't there be a small section dedicated to that? Is it too hard to maintain, or what?
Simply, why not?

Regards,

AlexanderII

vilehelm
10th Jan 2002, 08:09 PM
how bout a section where one goes to gouge ones eyes out cuz one can't read any more silliness in one thread...

ok ok just a joke

after art school my relatives would always ask me about "weird artist" like Yves Klein or Jeff Koons and say "well hell anything could be art then" . "If i stabbed somebody in the chest with a needle that would be art huh?". Yeah i replied just not very good art... but maybe somebody might could make great art out of stabbing someone in the chest with a needle and someone did, "Pulp Fiction".

Maps should be taken on a map by map basis. Thorns is the plainest map I know of yet everyone votes to play it cuz it can be fun.

Polycount don't equal cool, Simple don't equal great stabs to the chest with needles doesn't equal great art but sometimes the two do run into oneanother.

I'm a newbie to this forum so flame away but it seems the NaliCity site has a repository for maps that are reviewed and divided up through a defined system and the playtesting section is there to talk about testing maps and the eating kittens section is there to talk about eating kittens (hehe made you look)

GoldenMouse
10th Jan 2002, 09:55 PM
You might want to take a look at DM-Manhunt. It's a tight little thing, but it oozes quality. Perhaps what you are talking about is simplicity in design, not in detail. Detail should never be kept simple. IMHO, the main distinctions between a n00b and a 1337 mapper lies in detail level and flow.
NC3 is bringing loads of new features. As of now, all the maps are lumped into broad categories based upon game-type. You know this, it's obvious enough to those who look at it right now. NC3 will supposedly have a sophisticated organization system. Exactly how it goes, I am not entirely certain. I do agree with you that one of the organization criteria needs to be map size. But size doesn't matter in map quality, it's how it's used. ;) Does anyone have any specifics on how the new database is going to function? It would be conveniant to be able to list maps that fit only certain criteria, though how to standardize playercount could be tough, if not impossible.

Edit/Clarification: I mean listing by criteria as like a search engine. i.e. Show me all maps made by Joe with a rating of 8 or higher

StoneViper
10th Jan 2002, 10:38 PM
Originally posted by AlexanderII
...Why can't there be a small section dedicated to that? Is it too hard to maintain, or what?
Simply, why not?

Regards,

AlexanderII

i think the reason for the hatred of this idea is that the boundary between the two sections of maps you want is too vague, seemingly arbitrary boundary used to segregate in a similar way that Black people and White people were segregated, or Jew's and Muslims, etc.

The mappers will no longer have unlimited styles of mapping. They will always be aiming for either one of the two catagories. This idea will eliminate the uniqueness in every map.

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 11:15 PM
to vilehelm:
I know what you mean. Me myself, I don't like abstract art, avant-gard, and things like those and in no sence am I promoting such "junk" in the map making. So get me right.

GoldenMouse:
I'm a player. In playing the game I enjoy playing the game. Cool textures, nice sounds, small details and architectural masterpieces don't replace the gameplay. I've seen lots of beautiful maps, but I can't find one I would enjoy playing. I find that generally the smaller maps have more action, in them. I like when there's a lot of action. Small not in the filesize, I mean, small geometry. Unless I'd want to practice company attacks, but that's what RTCV is good for - not very good, but certainly better than UT.

StoneViper:
There is always boundaries. There are reasons for segregation. And mappers never had the unlimited styles of mapping. The map has to follow certain guidelines in order to be playable. There are always limitations. The deathmatch is not CTF. I'm not saying that there must be two cathegories. But I think it makes sence to be able to sort the maps by the area of the battlefield. And don't you be worried about the uniqueness problem. The opposite will happen actually, the more cathegories there are, the more unique a map is. Will you agree?

Regards,

AlexanderII

AlexanderII
10th Jan 2002, 11:19 PM
So what do you think the new sorting criteria should be?
I suggest "area of the battlefield" as one of them.

Regards,

AlexanderII

StoneViper
10th Jan 2002, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by AlexanderII

StoneViper:
There is always boundaries. There are reasons for segregation. And mappers never had the unlimited styles of mapping. The map has to follow certain guidelines in order to be playable. There are always limitations. The deathmatch is not CTF. I'm not saying that there must be two cathegories. But I think it makes sence to be able to sort the maps by the area of the battlefield. And don't you be worried about the uniqueness problem. The opposite will happen actually, the more cathegories there are, the more unique a map is. Will you agree?

Regards,

AlexanderII
The only thing i really agree with you is that the smaller maps do have faster flow and are thus more fun, but,... not always. lots of small eye-candy maps just plain suck, other's are quite fun. This is why i've always loved CTF-Gauntlet.

I just think it it too unproffessional to classify ctf-orbital in a different catagory as ctf-niven.

@kuma
10th Jan 2002, 11:53 PM
this idea = goatse.cx

lucifix
11th Jan 2002, 02:54 AM
hey sphincter boy, if you want "small" maps why not look at the file size? or how about this far out idea........READ THE REVIEWS!!!

BangOut
11th Jan 2002, 03:02 AM
Don't flame the newbies.

Balton
11th Jan 2002, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by AlexanderII


Funny. But off-topic.
If the complexity is your only concern - that's only your opinion. If i put 1000 brushes on an open-area map and try to do some lighting my Geforce2 I'll be glad if my Geforce2 will give me 10 frames per second at some point in the game. Even on my simple map whan I make moving clouds and "shadows" from them I get a really slow motion. And That's still not as far as my imagination can go.
Sometimes I listen to the common sence. And it tells me that a perfect map does not have to be complex. If you implant an MP3-player into a hammer. It'll be much more expensive, but it's not necesserily going to be better than a regular hammer. It may even be not as durable as a simple hammer. Think about it.

Regards,

AlexanderII


you just dont get it. I am having a geforce2 too. And my last map had a bit more than 800 brushes. And it runs VERY VERY smooth on standard pcs.
And you are talking about off-topic? than cut your ****ing comparisons out! And it is still spelled "SENSE"!!! you are making no sense!

Balton
11th Jan 2002, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by AlexanderII

I never said that simple means good. But I'm convinced that good things are simple. Someone said that it's easy to complexify, but it's hard to simplify.
Hence the good-old KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid)
Yes, Duke3d's old now. It's been 7 years since I started playing it. So, please, tell me about it.
There's always something to learn, but that does not mean that everyone has to listen only to you and do maps exactly as you tell. Don't you think that if a person is a newbie in map making he's not familiar with CAD, architecture, lighting, photography or whaterver else.

I guess, you'll have to figure that out yourself. I'm feeling humiliated by having to waste my time explaining simple things that no one seems to be listening anyway.

Regards,

AlexanderII

you came here to get feedback on your map. you got feedback you flamed back telling how great your map is. NOW EAT COW!
You can sell ice cream for over 10 years and still dont eat ice cream. So whats the deal? YOU MAKLE NO SENSE!

Balton
11th Jan 2002, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by AlexanderII
mister_cope:
Thanks for pointing them out for me. That's exactly what I want: to be able to quickly find that particular kind of maps and look at nice and small maps. Why can't there be a small section dedicated to that? Is it too hard to maintain, or what?
Simply, why not?

Regards,

AlexanderII

so you define your map as small and nice? NICE?!
oh, boy better waste your time on a sixer or some hardcore vodka!

if you want such a mapping site open one up on yourselve... nalicity has some sort of standard

Balton
11th Jan 2002, 07:11 AM
Originally posted by BangOut
Don't flame the newbies.

but what if he is already taking a shower in fuel and handing me a lighter???

jreister
11th Jan 2002, 08:56 AM
guess he meant a site for low-quality maps that dont suck on a 486

@kuma
11th Jan 2002, 09:02 AM
wel I for one LOVE the idea

in fact I got so excited over it I made my first UT map since, well a long time

http://www.btinternet.com/~rickaaay/dm-alex.zip

clean, simple classic gameplay evocative of DukeNukem deathmatch at it's finest!

Balton
11th Jan 2002, 09:07 AM
Originally posted by @kuma
wel I for one LOVE the idea

in fact I got so excited over it I made my first UT map since, well a long time

http://www.btinternet.com/~rickaaay/dm-alex.zip

clean, simple classic gameplay evocative of DukeNukem deathmatch at it's finest!

woah! nice! 1st time that I can see an maxx brush :P
but far under your niveau...

vilehelm
11th Jan 2002, 09:07 AM
Originally posted by AlexanderII
So get me right.

I don't think it's possible.

BangOut
11th Jan 2002, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by @kuma
wel I for one LOVE the idea

in fact I got so excited over it I made my first UT map since, well a long time

http://www.btinternet.com/~rickaaay/dm-alex.zip


My low budget masterpiece has 7.5 downloads per KB... not half bad :cool:

http://www.fileplanet.com/dl/dl.asp?PlanetUnreal/mapped/DM-Britney.zip

Mxtrmntr
11th Jan 2002, 10:27 AM
I think this thread is becoming the quality alternative to all the "best maps ever" threads out there...

Rukee
11th Jan 2002, 01:16 PM
The BEST (http://www.fileplanet.com/index.asp?scope=0&section=0&file=82591) map ever!! :p



















NO AUTOSCRIPTING!!!!!! :p

@kuma
11th Jan 2002, 03:02 PM
balton, you obviously dont get it and never will

eyecandy's always going to come second to good old fashioned gameplay, I can't believe I have to explain this to you fools

DavidM
11th Jan 2002, 03:09 PM
rich, there are 2 major bugs in your map
i've attached 2 pics for you, i hope you are gonna fix them, i would be very dispointed

Astaldo711
11th Jan 2002, 03:09 PM
Okay, going by your criteria, any map on NaliCity of 500K or less is an amateur map??
Excuse me if I'm wrong, but aren't 99% of the maps on NaliCity by people who aren't paid for it?
Calling them "Low-Budget Amateur Maps" is just rude!
I don't know the first thing about making a map, so all but the crappiest I pay homage to...(Bows down to mappers)

DavidM
11th Jan 2002, 03:10 PM
pic 2

DavidM
11th Jan 2002, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by Astaldo711
Okay, going by your criteria, any map on NaliCity of 500K or less is an amateur map??
Excuse me if I'm wrong, but aren't 99% of the maps on NaliCity by people who aren't paid for it?
Calling them "Low-Budget Amateur Maps" is just rude!
I don't know the first thing about making a map, so all but the crappiest I pay homage to...(Bows down to mappers)


aaah, paid mappers = good mappers!

vilehelm
11th Jan 2002, 03:30 PM
I paid $19.99 for my copy of UT... is that low budget enough?

Got the BONUSPACK TOO!

:rolleyes:

@kuma
11th Jan 2002, 04:51 PM
this thread seems to have missed the whole point of nali city

it IS a repositary (Spelling?) for hundreds of gigs of 'low budget amateur maps'

if you want a site that deals solely with single big box maps then start your own, I doubt it'd be too popular but then I'm a pessimist

LXIXGTO
11th Jan 2002, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by Balton.de



get your ass behind the editor and work on your technics. you will in a month laugh about cloudwars!
.
.
.
.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
.
.
Yeah, why did the silly Cloud War map get such
a good review?! :rolleyes:


:biorifle:





:cool:

Balton
11th Jan 2002, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by LXIXGTO


Yeah, why did the silly Cloud War map get such
a good review?!



it was just a joke from davidM

Chrysaor
12th Jan 2002, 01:21 AM
I think DM-****city is well worthy of a site as you describe :)

Ulukai
12th Jan 2002, 11:00 AM
Oh, low-budget amateur maps

Never mind.

RedFox
12th Jan 2002, 03:19 PM
****! I downloaded DM-Alex! :D ough!

JTRipper
12th Jan 2002, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by Balton.de
And it is still spelled "SENSE"!!! you are making no sense!


This is excellent! NC needs more spelling lessons from Balton! ;)

Balton
12th Jan 2002, 07:06 PM
Originally posted by JTRipper



This is excellent! NC needs more spelling lessons from Balton! ;)

my spelling sux but this is soooo basic and obvious. after I used a few times the "you make no sense phrase" it should've been obvious... nvm

JTRipper
12th Jan 2002, 09:52 PM
Actually I figured out a while ago that your spelling isn't bad at all, but your typing sucks. ;)

Rukee
13th Jan 2002, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by JTRipper
Actually I figured out a while ago that your spelling isn't bad at all, but your typing sucks. ;)

LMAO!!!

Both of mine suck!!! Spelling and typing!! :p
about as bad as this thread!!!!! ;)







damn....I`m being hard on myself!! :p

Balton
13th Jan 2002, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by JTRipper
Actually I figured out a while ago that your spelling isn't bad at all, but your typing sucks. ;)

especialy when I am drunk : )

JTRipper
13th Jan 2002, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by Rukee
damn....I`m being hard on myself!! :p

Heh, no you're not. ;)

Chrysaor
13th Jan 2002, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by JTRipper


Heh, no you're not. ;)

rofl, i;'m tghe;a worst typer her, iO suxx Nad you ;know ;itz!

vilehelm
13th Jan 2002, 11:54 PM
Try typing with a hammer next time...

This thread has finally taken a turn for the better :rolleyes:

JTRipper
14th Jan 2002, 02:51 AM
lol, hammer... why didn't I think of it? My obsession with heavy, blunt objects should have made it a natural.

vilehelm
14th Jan 2002, 09:19 AM
hulk angry...

HULK TYPE!

jreister
14th Jan 2002, 09:57 AM
Hulk wanting fast action
Hulk mepping
Hulk making lo budgit mep
Hulk biggest lo-budgit meppa

Chrysaor
14th Jan 2002, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by vilehelm
hulk angry...

HULK TYPE!

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

Nachimir
16th Jan 2002, 03:18 PM
Wow. Tar... feathers... everywhere.

JTRipper
16th Jan 2002, 07:50 PM
Yep. It just doesn't get any better than this. ;)

StoneViper
17th Jan 2002, 12:54 AM
ever wonder why he stopped posting¿........

@kuma
17th Jan 2002, 08:05 AM
no. Just enjoy it while it lasts.

jreister
17th Jan 2002, 08:38 AM
he´s busy on Cloudwar ][
Don´t disturb his royal concentration

vilehelm
17th Jan 2002, 02:16 PM
I thought that was Cloud War ][ ...

by the way Viper, how do you type an upside down "?" ?

GMotha
17th Jan 2002, 02:23 PM
¿ <-- like this:p

vilehelm
17th Jan 2002, 04:40 PM
¿

jeez, ask a simple question...:rolleyes: