Neddiggis

Really? You think just because you follow an insult up with ways to improve it makes it OK? That's just nuts. There are better ways of saying it and coming from a Moderator on this site I would find it very offensive if it was aimed at me. I'm all in favour of constructive criticism, but that wasn't it. I've done a 4 year professional design degree and another 6 years practice and never once received constructive criticism like this. And for the record, I find shows like Project Runway, American Idol etc utter tripe.

Originally posted by: Jasoncw Sweet Jesus!! You're getting some of the best critiquing that anyone has gotten in a BAT thread in some time, by some of the best BATers of all time, and all you can manage to do is argue about it! But regardless of how you respond to other people's criticism, I think this thread will be valuable for other people, so: quote> Really? Lets recap some of what you and SimFox have said. (Yes I have taken the worst quotes, but they are quotes I feel totally unnecessary in critiques, especially the last one from you) Originally posted by: SimFox Unfortunately, plenty. First thing you have to do is to seit and take a long look at your creation. Then try to built in your head explanations for the things you are doing. There are way to many illogical spots stating from the lattice... Also there doesn't seem to be any respect to sizes and proportions... It all looks unjustified, arbitrary. As a result the final creations is odd, no more then that.quote> Originally posted by: Jasoncw It's hard to feel like it would be worthwhile to critique someone who's being defensive.quote> Originally posted by: Jasoncw Your BATs suck. You're new, so that's ok (I've made much worse BATs myself), but that's what it comes down to plain and simple. Untill you fully accept that (you haven't yet, or else you wouldn't be trying to explain away the critiques (and yes, that's what you're doing, whether or not you're trying to)), you're not going to get any better. And you need to get better because your BATs suck. It doesn't mean anything, and it's not a reflection on you, that's just how it is. quote> Who the hell tells someone new they BATs suck?! Sure, his BAT's need some work, but saying they suck isn't going to help inspire him in anyway. What a way to treat new members!

Originally posted by: Kyleamor Thanks, I read the readme file and downloaded: https://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=14842 Fixed it right up. Cheers all.quote> Thats good news, what made you change your mind and listen the advice we gave you?

Originally posted by: Ledah2445 Excuse me, may i ask you something . Do you know how to create a network connection using CAM-AM (canal addon mod)quote> Yes I do. Although what type of connection do you want to make?

Dude! 3 posts, 4 mins apart is slightly excessive. Go here and register: https://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/Default.htm Login and then go here: https://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=851

As I told you at Devotion mate, you are missing a dependency. We can't tell you what one as we didn't install them, you did. All you need to do is read the readme, download the dependencies, and then reinstall ALL of them!

Originally posted by: Cioppo ch0c0: I'm sorry, I downloaded with Simgooober because I read it in this topic, but I heard a rumor that talks about CAN-AM with Oppie canals........................... quote> Not sure where that rumor came from, it's a new one to me. The reason that you can only have one canal set is that we would have to create a seperate puzzle piece for each different water type which would make the set very unweildy, and we are sure to miss out someones. SG and Cal's are the most obvious set choices as CityNut has used both textures for his sets, and I have used Cal's for mine. Oppies would be another worth adding in as it's very widely used and something to look at for the future.

Originally posted by: rudric I think the canal mods are the most stupid i've ever seen. You can do working canals by terraforming.quote> Here's an idea, don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Just out of curiosity, what are you adding to the game? Or are you just making use of all the wonderful stuff the rest of us are doing an passing comment?

I've just checked over the Chat Log from our chat with Da Silva at SC4D in Sept last year. Couple of small quotes: 7:39 < PhilippeCitiesXL> We don't want players to be forced to pay anything for custom content Is this still the case, because from what was said earlier it sounds like a change of heart. Additionally, to reinforce what David is saying: 17:30 < PhilippeCitiesXL> However, we cannot give you full control on the building properties 17:30 < PhilippeCitiesXL> Let me explain you what we would like to achieve 17:30 < PhilippeCitiesXL> Ideally 17:31 < PhilippeCitiesXL> We would like players willing to go on the Custom Content creation to have the right tools (provided by us and other dedicated community members) to create Art Assets 17:32 < PhilippeCitiesXL> Once those assets are made, we would take them and place them in our level design pipeline with YOUR recommendations as how they should react in the Sim 17:32 < callagrafx> RAISE HAND: Without full control, how can we add content that fits in-game? We submit it to MC for inclusion? So you want control of all content made for CXL? Do you realise the sheer volume of work you're opening yoursleves up for? 17:32 < PhilippeCitiesXL> Then, we would take care of its distribution to players throught our website and our dispatcher system that allows players to download and manage their buildings 17:33 < PhilippeCitiesXL> cal: Yes we do 17:33 < PhilippeCitiesXL> cal: But there is no other way around Again, I wonder if this is still the intention, but it sounds like everything we create for CXL would have to pass through MC's hands, and then possibly be only available if you pay for their subscription, creating the strange situation of paying for your own work. I would recommend people interested check out the chat log here: sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php

Thats not so unusual David, given they are pushing this as an MMO game. However, I would be interested to know what you get for the money you pay each month. Most MMOs provide regular updates to the game, new content, etc and I would hope that Monte Cristo would be doing the same. Additionally, I recall (and I could be wrong, don't have the log at hand) Da Silva saying that Monte Cristo wouldn't be charging for user created content, even though all of it would have to pass through their hands before being released. I'm not sure if this is still the case (both the charging and the process of creation) but I would be very dissapointed were that the case.

Just to clear a few things up, Chris was about ready to release this when he got hit by real life. All the things highlighted by simfox are his personal opinion, as he pointed out he and Chris differed on many points. The V3 number I think was actually Chris's internal version number, as opposed to a global version number and I am sorry for the confusion, that was my fault. SimFox's 'issues' with some of Chris's additions are again personal opinion. Chris did add a few functions that existed in Max already, but that stemmed from Chris's unfamiliarity with Max. The array command was the one that springs to mind. The LOD functions that were added, despite what SimFox says, are brilliant. Most people who use Max will understand the danger of doing a very complex LOD, and it's never a smart move to design for the lowest common denominator. On the lighting rigs, I'll talk to Lee about that, it looks like an issue with the Rigs, and I don't think Chris changed the default rigs so it's possibly an historical issue. We should be able to sort that one out. I'm not sure about the sun and sky, but I've always had issues with that, but again Lee should be able to help. The reason I didn't put a post here is due in part to the fact I rarely visit here unless someone points me here, and Lee is banned, so we wouldn't be able to provide adequate support. I was intending to make a post announcing it, but I have been hecticly busy at work and didn't have the time. If anyone has any queries, please post them at the linked page at SC4D or send myself or Callagrafx a PM there.

Originally posted by: DocRorlach While doodlea21 is right in principle, in practice this does not quite work because the SC4D link first of all focuses on BSC & related dependencies; and secondly it requires membership. Thus Pegasus' dependency, for example, are not listed, nor are ton's of dependencies from other independent creators. quote> Doc, have you looked at the list on SC4D ever? It contains every single dependency available on the STEX, PLEX and BSCLEX up to around July last year I think. I have also linked to external sites like Gizmo's for the more common dependencies, although it's possible they have fallen off the list when it was converted to Joomla. There has never been, and never will be, a site bias to the list, although I am not able to update any of Peg's PLEX dependencies myself although his STEX ones would be added. I started it when I was in the same position as concrete_miele November 2006. It was originally hosted at Peg's, and the intention was to do something similar to what he is suggesting, however during Peg's hosting problems and conversion to SMF it got dropped and Jeronij kindly offered to host it. I have recently gained access to the source and hope to update it soon, but it's a mamoth task and takes some time to do and my life is a little manic at present. When I update it I will also provide a downloadable PDF version so people can print it off and keep track of what they have downloaded.