Post by: Bigworm2004 on April 15, 2004, 12:45:53 PM
Post by: Smadte on April 15, 2004, 01:03:18 PM
Quote
that game will be so awesome.
Actually, it's Mario 1-2-3. It's a counting game for younger players. Awesome.
Post by: Bigworm2004 on April 15, 2004, 01:26:10 PM
Post by: Pale on April 15, 2004, 01:26:45 PM
Post by: jasonditz on April 15, 2004, 01:28:32 PM
Its about damn time.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 15, 2004, 01:31:13 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 15, 2004, 01:56:49 PM
Post by: Pale on April 15, 2004, 02:00:31 PM
Post by: Bigworm2004 on April 15, 2004, 03:20:59 PM
http://www.nintendojo.com/infocus/view_item.php?1082044345
Maybe games like kid icarus, mario 128, and golden sun will be show off for the nintendo DS....could be, never know....
Post by: SatansNemesis on April 15, 2004, 04:37:23 PM
Post by: Smadte on April 15, 2004, 09:12:46 PM
Post by: jasonditz on April 15, 2004, 09:18:30 PM
Dammit
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 16, 2004, 03:20:25 AM
I didn't mean serious as in you were telling the truth, Mike, I meant serious as in the sarcasm was meant derisively.
Post by: Smadte on April 16, 2004, 02:12:12 PM
On a side note, Elfman in 12 minutes!!W00t!
Post by: Pikkcuber on April 16, 2004, 05:41:01 PM
Post by: Nephilim on April 17, 2004, 05:50:50 AM
Nintendojo from what Iv heard will be taken over by nintendo of America soon, making it the first ever offical nintendo fan site......there goes the rumor section lol
Post by: Arbok on April 17, 2004, 06:17:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: DeadlyD
Nintendojo from what Iv heard will be taken over by nintendo of America soon, making it the first ever offical nintendo fan site......there goes the rumor section lol
That was a April Fool's joke, they even admit it in their current poll....
Post by: Pikkcuber on April 17, 2004, 03:57:28 PM
Post by: Kotula53 on April 18, 2004, 12:31:51 PM
If you ever look at SSBM event like 20 or something it says mario 128
weird huh?
Post by: wei803 on April 18, 2004, 07:22:45 PM
what about the Kirby, is it the mysteriously missing Kirby Tilt n' Tumble? which feature GC > GBA link with motion sensor on the GBA cartridge???
... i keep wonder...
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 18, 2004, 08:10:04 PM
Yeah, really...Everyone knows Mario is all about teh mature...I mean, in the original he kills hundreds of helpless goombas and kidnaps Princess Toadstool from her hubby, Koopa...Then you have those Toads that don't seem to have a describable gender, and that whole Communist Mario thing that was going around a while ago...Not to mention the hint towards drugs I mean reallly Mario eating shrooms that's so mature I don't see why Nintendo is making Mario all cutesy omg I starting to regress blarg *faints*
Post by: joedaddy on April 18, 2004, 09:23:27 PM
thats what I think mario should be all about man. *dies of sarcasm poisoning*
ps. i think its time for resident evil to grow up as well...
Post by: wei803 on April 18, 2004, 10:30:41 PM
my imagination gone wild, some1 please stop me...
Post by: PaLaDiN on April 18, 2004, 10:54:34 PM
Take Mario into 4-dimensional gaming! And I'm not talking about something lame like time control... it's up to Nintendo to revolutionize the industry again with the next Mario. They should find a way to squeeze 4 proper dimensions in there.
Anything less and people will be disappointed.
Post by: wei803 on April 18, 2004, 11:05:00 PM
Post by: Ocarina Blue on April 19, 2004, 12:55:10 AM
BTW: You're avatar is just a little too big. 64x64 is the limit here
Post by: KDR_11k on April 19, 2004, 07:01:28 AM
Post by: dapyroman.dk on April 20, 2004, 05:02:21 AM
Post by: mojorizin on April 29, 2004, 04:52:46 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 29, 2004, 05:24:50 PM
Quote
Take Mario into 4-dimensional gaming! And I'm not talking about something lame like time control... it's up to Nintendo to revolutionize the industry again with the next Mario. They should find a way to squeeze 4 proper dimensions in there.
You're asking Nintendo to completely revolutionize not only gaming, but physics as well? You guys do have some high expectations.
Post by: PaLaDiN on April 29, 2004, 06:11:40 PM
Or was I?
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 29, 2004, 06:12:32 PM
Post by: ThePerm on April 29, 2004, 08:14:57 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on April 29, 2004, 08:23:35 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 29, 2004, 11:36:34 PM
Just as bundles of matter can have a physical position in space (3D), they can also have a position/status/condition/property in physical time. Grouping time & space together, you can get something that can be interpretted as a movie -- the contents of the frames may differ at different points in time.
Post by: Ocarina Blue on April 30, 2004, 02:12:04 AM
For all practicle purposes such as when creating a movie etc, time co-ordinates would have to be recognised, as well as the 3 others of space. So while time would be the 4th dimensional-coordinate, it wouldn't be the 4th dimension. Or something.
Wouldn't the most logical form of time travel that we could complete in the near-future be just to move really fast arond space/time then measure the time lapse using two atomic clocks?
Post by: WesDawg on April 30, 2004, 05:39:26 AM
More interestingly alot of things in physics get described by their coordinates in momentum space instead of realspace. There might be some sort of intersting game in that, but probably not. I think I'd rather just have a water pack.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 30, 2004, 07:17:10 AM
The problem with a movie is that if you look on the film roll, every object exists once per frame, however, unless we're vastly violating mass-conservation we can only have one object, which can only be in one place in the timeline (ergo, if you went back through time, there wouldn't be an Earth). Unless we assume that the mass of an object increases over time (which would be interesting, considering gravity supposedly extends into all dimensions) we'd have to assume a completely static universe (i.e. no time). Actually, the previous sentence makes no sense, since if time is dimensional, it doesn't pass and objects wouldn't increase in mass since they wouldn't do anything. That is possible, but pretty pointless to argue about, since time travel and the like wouldn't be possible, either (since neither you nor the rest of the universe does anything since time "stands still").
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 30, 2004, 03:01:35 PM
The film roll is simply a graph, displaying instantaneous stages of existence in reference to a point in time. Give the film an infinitely large framerate, and you'll have physical(spatial) points in the frame be continually existant. Problem solved. A "point" in time is just a instantaneous slice of existence for us to look at."
And WesDawg's example is the real-world experiment to test Einstein's theory of relativity. One of the conclusions, in general terms, is bundles of matter (like a person, or even an aircraft) have different time frames, depending on their speed. The faster you travel, the slower your time frame becomes, relative to objects moving slower than you. So, if the pilot who travelled faster (very, very fast) watched his clock as he flew by, he/she would think was operating at the normal, usually perceived speed. But outside his craft, the rest of the world (or some other slower frame of reference) would seem to be moving faster, whose clocks would seem to move along faster. A minute on the earth would seem to go faster than a minute in the craft (according to the pilot). Conversely, if we're on the earth, a minute on his craft would seem slower than a minute we measure here; the pilot's clock slowed down, according to us. Therefore, from the pilot's perspective, he "moved forward in time."
For particles above the atomic level, the math works out just fine for the phenomenon mentioned above. For subatomic particles, and even smaller, things get CRAZY, and we haven't been able to measure it well.
Come again for another brain-busting episode of MR. WIZARD'S WORLD.
Post by: PaLaDiN on April 30, 2004, 06:21:17 PM
How did I know this was going to happen?
Oh well.
Just to add to the confusion.
Try both dragging and shift-dragging... press stereo for stereoscopy. If you have no idea how to do stereoscopy (it's a bit like Magic Eye, pretty fun), get some 3D glasses instead.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 30, 2004, 08:25:14 PM
Relative time doesn't prove a thing about dimensional time, though. Time is often claimed to be a dimension we move through at a more or less constant speed and maybe could even travel through. However, there's no reason for a dimension we're moving through to act as "time". If you're moving, you have one location. Anyone looking at a point where you previously were would not find you there (since you're somewhere else). Furthermore, for movement to happen, we need time to pass. If this time was dimensional, it couldn't pass (since it'd be movement). Also, if we believe the theories about time travel, time is like a graph. That means, no matter where you look, everything is already there and nothing ever changes. And everything has an infinite length. Now, if we said something is moving through time slower, how would it do so? By writing itself slower than everything else? Which means that it would 1, increase mass and 2, not be there if something wrote itself faster and looked for the slow object. The problem with a dimension is that things can only exist in one point in a dimension, not in every. And that things wouldn't move along it without some other form of time passing.
Sorry for repetitions, bad explainations, etc. I have trouble putting my thoughts into words. I think there's some form of non-dimensional time that passes independantly of anything happening in space"time".
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 30, 2004, 09:14:58 PM
You seem to have a good amount of this stuff fresh in your head. When's the last time you studied modern physics?
Post by: KDR_11k on May 02, 2004, 01:31:35 AM
