Re: DOOM3, a big disappointment

Michael-NC wrote:
> "Raymond Martineau" <bk039@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:nbcoh0t7l8o6a5pisar9bed5i96t23pecr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:41:23 GMT, "Michael-NC"
>> <NoAddress@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> No, but he probably has to continually restock his metro***ual,
>>> touchy-feely ego.
>>
>> Well, it seems that the nay-sayers are beginning to resort to
>> personal attacks.
>
> Well, I _never!_
>
>>> For Christ's sake, can't someone not like a game because it's
>>> graphics are too dark and gameplay too simple without being accused
>>> of denying their feminine side and not allowing themselves to be
>>> scared???
>>
>> Not liking a game because it is too dark is a valid reason.
>> However, since Doom 3 is playable at a properly calibrated monitor
>> setting without having to resort to things such as the in-game gamma
>> adjustments - there is no reason to hate it.
>>
>> This is no different than the original Quake (which was also easily
>> fixed by either increasing the gamma, or by increasing the monitor
>> brightness). Hell, it's no different than RtCW:ET, which contained a
>> visual method of optimizing brightness to allow the game to be
>> displayed as the developers wanted it.
>
> Oh, OK. I'll go tell the multitudes of people who are complaining
> about the darkenss in the game that Raymond says you just got it
> wrong and Steven says to get in touch with your feminine side to
> enjoy the game. I'm sure that will put an end to all this silly
> business.

You do that Michael, it's a very small 'multitude' as far as I can tell.
Shouldn't be difficult given your oratory capacity.  Seems you single
handedly surred off all this "silly business".  Why?  Is this yet
another "vote with your wallet" ploy you're engaged in?

Your method of languaging sets you apart from anyone else I've seen to
date.  But for one.
--
McGrandpa [AGQx]