Re: Guild Wars: Best graphics for an MMORPG?

d"Wolfing" <wolfing1@xxxxxxxxx> looked up from reading the entrails of
the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>
>Xocyll wrote:
>> Gerry Quinn <gerryq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> looked up from reading the
>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>> say:
>>
>> >In article <fqp4o195kbfh3an9fqfpsrb7jj65ekiqjt@xxxxxxx>,
>> >Xocyll@xxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>> >> "Josh Mayfield" <ultibloo-usenet3@xxxxxxxxx> looked up from reading the
>> >> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>> >> say:
>> >>
>> >> >I really like Silkroad Online's graphics:
>> >> >
>> >> >http://www.silkroadonline.net/dataroom/screenshot.asp
>> >>
>> >> Too bad the makers are so retarded they won't let you look at the
>> >> website unless you use IE.
>> >>
>> >> That says a little something about their technical skills.
>> >
>> >Actually it loads fine in Firefox, and the images can be viewed.
>> >However part of the page requires the Flash plug-in, which you
>> >presumably had previously installed in IE.
>>
>> Not to quibble but, With firebird it didn't load, and flash IS
>> installed.
>> IE does not and has never been installed.
>>
>> >Nothing to do witrh the browser at all.
>>
>> Well yes it is, they claim it's optimized for IE on the one page they
>> always sent me to.
>> Firebird will load the proper page if javascript is disabled, but then
>> none of the pictures can be viewed since it's only done through JS.
>>
>> Whatever happened to the idea of making a website viewable by just about
>> any browser so the majority of people can see it?
>>
>> Sorry but in my opinion once you've hung a "best viewed with" or
>> "optimized for" notice on your site, you've admitted it's crap and/or
>> you know *** all about good design.
>
>Now here, come on, again using the Internet to insult people from the
>safety of the wire.
>I also use Firefox, and I have experienced these problems. Most of the
>time is not the 'you know *** all about good design', it's mostly the
>reasoning of '95% of the people use IE, screw the other 5%' mentality.
>But don't worry, as Firefox gets more and more people, more designers
>will realize they will have to install it in their computer to check
>everything works just as in IE. Just give it time.

No it's not 95% use IE therefor i'll design for IE.
It's usually "i'm using MS frontpage and don't know it defaults to using
extensions that won't work unless they use IE" OR it's "I'm adding every
whizbang feature I can find and am deliberately using stuff that only
works with IE"
Of course people who don't know what they're doing never test for
compatibility, they just slap it online, never realizing that it "works
great" on their dev machine that has all the data cached locally but
doesn't work so great even for the people who are using IE because they
packed it so full of crap even broadband connections get saturated.

It all comes down to people who haven't the first clue how to design a
page, and "tools" like frontpage that let any moron create a webpage
WITHOUT knowing anything about design or the technology.


Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
.