Re: A89: a89: Drugwars


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A89: a89: Drugwars




true, he may do whatever he wants, but I don't want a retarted, filty,
stupid basic game posted on this ASM list.  got it?  I think you've heard
the oppinions.  Not many people like this stupid game.  Why not make a game
that won't offend people?  Make a game people will WANT to play, rather than
get pissed about?
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Newman <miken@dodgenet.com>
To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: A89: a89: Drugwars


>
>It may be a retarded game (I don't know cuz I've never played it) but this
>guy can do whatever he wants.  He asked if people were already making it
>and for advice on features.  He didn't ask for your permission.  Just
>forget about it and don't use it if you don't like it!  I, for one, am
>interested in trying it out as soon as it's released and forming my own
>opinion about the game.  However, if I don't like it, it's not that
>important to broadcast on a mailing list.
>
>At 07:52 PM 9/23/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>I agree completely. Drugwars is a retarded game; time should not be
>>wasted bringing it to the 89. ESPECIALLY not in ASM! Drugwars is
>>completely text-based... what is the purpose of making it in ASM? It
>>could be just as good, and programmed much faster, if it were to be
>>written in BASIC.
>>
>>Dormando: Please do not refrain from from creating your high-quality
>>games simply because there are those that choose to take part in idiotic
>>games such as Drugwars.
>>
>>Please... try to keep the 89 a high quality, reputable calculator. Don't
>>plague it with worthless text-based ASM games, otherwise others' view of
>>it will be low. We don't want or need that.
>>
>>Just my $0.02.
>>
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>Joseph L. Davison
>>http://www.joedavison.com
>>webmaster@joedavison.com
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>Dormando wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm just saying that it contributes to the corruption, let's all make
>and play halfway intelligent games.  Like nibbles.  Not something that we
get
>>> to run around and deal drugs, shoot people, and have a raving fun
>drug-dealing time, in assembler even.
>>>
>>> I just might be convinced to dig up my dad's old m68k manual from the
>basement and write some cool games for this calc, but just the start of
this
>>> drugwars game might keep me from releasing my works like the 83 did for
>me, I worked hard on some games, I even did a little test to see which
>>> games did better, and it turns out, KILL BARNEY#@$@#  did better than my
>graphical strategy game that kicked ass and was complex for it's time in
>>> basic, kill barney was made in 6 hours and was text based.
>>>
>>> ooOoooOoooo, an advanced, assembled DRUGWARS game, how special.  If I'm
>going to be beaten out hands down by something just as stupid as that, why
>>> the hell should I release anything at all?
>>>
>>> Olle Hedman wrote:
>>>
>>> > >let's do the world a favor, and a bet to the rest of the calculator
>world and have this be one of the few >calculators NOT to get this crappy,
>>> > >overused game.
>>> > >
>>> > >-Dormando
>>> > >Fantasyware (NOT THE ONE THAT CREATED DRUG WARS IN THE FIRST
>PLACE@#%@$%)
>>> >
>>> > People OBVIOUSLY like this game..  (even though I myself never have
>>> > played it)
>>> > why cant you allow them to make it and play it?
>>> > It's not like anyone is trying to force YOU in to playing it!
>>> >
>>> > just my opinion...
>>> >
>>> > //Olle
>>
>>
>
>==============================
>         Mike Newman
>http://www.dodgenet.com/~miken
>      miken@dodgenet.com
>         ICQ: 2114458
>==============================


Follow-Ups: