![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
||||
![]() |
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| As I said before, I agree. | |
| Posted By: 123456789 | Date: 4/19/02 5:36 p.m. |
In Response To: Re: The place where your whole argument falls down (PCDestroyer) I already had my next-gen system, a Dreamcast, and the few games I had for it I was happy with. I know people with PS2's, and they suck: I was convinced there was no redemtpion whatsoever for next-gen consoles. And then comes XBox. I was about to take an oath to burn the first one I say, 'till I learned that Halo was going to be released exclusively (among consoles, I know) for XBox. That was the one and only reason I purchased an XBox. Halo. It. I didn't think that there would be any other way to acquire the game for months, and I was right. When I read gameing magazines that heralded Halo as game of the year with nary a mention of XBox's other offerings (evidently, the industry consencus, an accurate one, is that Halo is all that stands between XBox and death). So, anyway, had Halo been concurently released for the Mac, I would have spent my money on computer accessories, bought the Mac release, and left those unGodly Xcrement Boxes in Microshaft's inventory where they belonged. I agree with PCd that many people would have done the same, and that that is the main reason for the delay in the PC/Mac launch. | |
|
| Replies: |
| Big News!! - DirectX for Macintosh! | Miguel Chavez | 4/17/02 11:19 a.m. |
| Yeah... Kinda | Mr. Zarquon | 4/17/02 11:56 a.m. |
| Geez... why the negative spin? | ferrex | 4/17/02 1:03 p.m. |
| Because, I am. | Mr. Zarquon | 4/17/02 1:10 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | Kanen Faud'r | 4/17/02 1:26 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | PCDestroyer | 4/17/02 2:32 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | Mark Levin | 4/17/02 3:07 p.m. |
| Carmack... | Miguel Chavez | 4/17/02 3:22 p.m. |
| Re: Carmack... | ferrex | 4/17/02 7:08 p.m. |
| Re: Carmack... | Mr. Zarquon | 4/17/02 9:31 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | PCDestroyer | 4/17/02 3:45 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | ferrex | 4/17/02 7:02 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 9:57 a.m. |
| Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG | protexts | 4/18/02 4:46 a.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 10:11 a.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is off | protexts | 4/18/02 2:11 p.m. |
| Make a 1AC! | 123456789 | 4/19/02 11:47 a.m. |
| Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | kiro69 | 4/18/02 11:19 a.m. |
| Re: Speak for yourself there, parnter... | Lophan | 4/18/02 12:09 p.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | protexts | 4/18/02 2:30 p.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:37 p.m. |
| The place where your whole argument falls down... | Louis Wu | 4/18/02 4:54 p.m. |
| Re: The place where your whole argument falls down | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 5:04 p.m. |
| Ack. | Louis Wu | 4/18/02 5:16 p.m. |
| Re: Ack. | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 5:45 p.m. |
| Re: Ack. | protexts | 4/18/02 9:34 p.m. |
| Re: Ack. | kiro69 | 4/19/02 10:36 a.m. |
| Re: Ack. | Louis Wu | 4/19/02 10:54 a.m. |
| Re: Ack. | protexts | 4/19/02 10:01 p.m. |
| As I said before, I agree. | 123456789 | 4/19/02 5:36 p.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | protexts | 4/19/02 5:38 a.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:26 p.m. |
| awesome reply, pcd *NM* | kiro69 | 4/18/02 10:43 a.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | Lophan | 4/18/02 12:38 p.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:40 p.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | Warbow | 4/18/02 4:42 p.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:57 p.m. |
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | Lophan | 4/19/02 12:24 a.m. |
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | PCDestroyer | 4/19/02 10:24 a.m. |
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | vector40 | 4/19/02 9:03 p.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | Lophan | 4/20/02 12:13 a.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | vector40 | 4/20/02 1:12 a.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | PCDestroyer | 4/21/02 6:27 p.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | protexts | 4/20/02 5:15 a.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | vector40 | 4/20/02 4:09 p.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | PCDestroyer | 4/21/02 6:24 p.m. |
| Implementation and Stealing | protexts | 4/22/02 3:24 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | Aida-kun | 4/22/02 5:15 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | PCDestroyer | 4/22/02 9:56 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | protexts | 4/22/02 2:45 p.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | PCDestroyer | 4/22/02 9:49 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | protexts | 4/22/02 3:05 p.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | PCDestroyer | 4/22/02 8:34 p.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | kiro69 | 4/23/02 10:35 a.m. |
| I agree | 123456789 | 4/17/02 3:19 p.m. |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |