Birds

That should run it easy. Yeah you can still play 1.6 or Source. Recommend trying CS:GO though, the ranking system gives a goal to aim for besides just most kills each game. Wingman provides good laughs with a mate.

CS:GO has competitive 5v5 or 2v2 ranked matches you can play in and you earn ranks depending on skill level and performance so it matchmakes you with similar ranked players. Not as important in the lower ranks but eventually there comes a point you need to work with ya team to win. There are deathmatch modes amongst others and also the economy of weapon skins. If your laptop has any kind of dedicated graphics card you'll be able to run it. I'm running it with one of the best onboard/motherboard graphics and it runs okay.

Yeah that's fair enough. Within the game I think you can compare different iterations/releases or even mods of it; it's certainly a lot fairer than game to game. CS went through a similar thing. There was a big division between CS1.6 and Source when the latter came out and used an entirely new game engine. Skill transfer was difficult and about the only tactical thing that carried across was some map knowledge. Then the move from Source to CS:GO saw CS veterans like me fail hard in what was a completely different style of play and weapons with an emphasis on a new set of variables - camping/lurking for instance being rewarded and legitimised as a tactic (along with its counter tactics) rather than frowned upon. AWPers valued and capable of flipping a game. Then like you mentioned with Quake, with any new update of CS:GO that nerfs a gun or changes gun prices, shifts spawn locations etc. has major carry on effects to competitive play. Something as simple as changing the Five-Seven recoil had a butterfly effect that altered pistol round and overall game strategies for everyone especially pros.

Experts on their respective games it may make them, but experts on psychology another thing. I'd like to know exactly how they define this skill cap, cause I interpret the skill ceiling thing you mentioned as the breadth of skillset that you can bring to a game and influence it with, in which case I think it's easy to overlook a lot of what goes on in a game like CSGO but isn't immediately obvious from watching in-game footage. My case is that there's no game a pro isn't going to be putting 100% of their mental energy into and considering/manipulating a hundred variables at once. They have to; it's what allows them to create an edge over each other. They're not just better at aiming and clicking; none of these games are linear enough to make that assumption and I'd happily dissect a clip of CSGO vs Quake to demonstrate a par for variables. But I think comparing skillsets of two very complex and different games is above ignorant. My own proof in the pudding is that CSGO is arguably more profitable for a pro gamer at the moment - if another game is arguably more demanding of multiple skills, you could suggest CSGO at pro level a cake walk for a pro Quake player...they would clean up in MLG comps. So why not? They put Rossi in a Formula 1 car and he drove it with prodigious ability - 0.7 seconds behind Schumacher's laptimes in practice, who remarked Rossi would be immediately competitive if he switched sports. Winning a race? That's another thing...

What are you arguing here man...you compared them on skill in the first place saying one had a higher ceiling than the other and now you're agreeing they're actually incomparable and totally different games? So...which is it? And who in their right mind would refer to CS as anything but an FPS/shooter? Summation of your argument appears to be "Quake is a real shooter because I still like it and rocket jumps and powerups give it a higher skill cap. CS isn't because I don't like it anymore; I reject its skill variables and some 'cheese mechanics' were exploited to artificially inseminate skill into an otherwise linear game". I guess rocket jumps and a lack of weapon recoil don't ironically parallel the latter assertion. No one "had to" rocket jump, they just...all do it? I played CS in its beta stages too. I played it at 1.1, 1.3 and 1.6. I played Source and I still play CSGO. The game evolved and retained popularity with good reason. It's also been a major backbone in the rise of world stage competive gaming. You don't have to like it, but if someone infers that people playing Quake are utilizing/portraying some higher level of skills...I will call bullshit each and every time.

It was a temporary game mode; part of a recent operation, but was pretty popular so after the operation finished that they brought it back fulltime in an update. It uses half-sized / blocked off versions of regular large maps and some of its own small maps. Recommend giving it a go!

Nah I peaked at LE under new ranking system, but lost it a couple games after. Was rolling with the LEMs and SMFCs for a bit too, before a downward spiral and then not giving a fk. I mostly play wingman now, 2v2 = less people in the team to blame and it's 15 minute games.

You'd understand if you made it to LE ?

My bad brah...interrupted the steady stream of daily banter powering this steam train of a thread. I'll be more considerate of ya thumbs next time.

Skill difference between players wasn't a shortcoming of Quake; multiplayer online games had been that way for years...it was more a success of CS:GO when Valve introduced an effective system of rank-based matchmaking so that regardless of skill you could still win at it or "do well" against those of similar skill. To put difference in the success of the two games down to some sort of skill ceiling based on their unique gameplay dynamics isn't just ignorant af, it's borderline biased towards your game of choice. CS Source was dead in the water and old hat (albeit still faithfully played by some) until CS:GO reignited interest by officiating competitive play and giving incentive to get better than peers of similar skill. Quake isn't transferable either man. Play CS:GO competitive as a decent Quake player; I guarantee you'll get ruined the same as a CS player will in Quake. Even CS Source isn't transferable to CS:GO - I'd played Source for 10 years and I still got f**ked up in my first few games of CS:GO comp at one of the lower ranks. To the point where I got frustrated because I couldn't understand how two variations of the same game could be so different, until I started learning the hundred other skills involved in a five man team besides just aiming and shooting. I mean camping is a damn skill in CS:GO. Your rocket jumps, powerups and across map hits at 200mph...they are just our bunny hops, our deagle one taps, our weapon drops, our awps through walls, team boosts and run boosts, our flashes and smokes bounced off exact locations, our recoil control, our carefully positioned lurks, our map and expected play knowledge, reload moments/timing, our dynamic strategies devised and agreed in the 10 seconds before a round start and subsequent timing and microphone comms, our carefully calculated economy for saving and buying weapons, listening to footsteps and knowing exactly how close an enemy is and where they are coming from, each bullet you fire revealing position on map, a ninja defuse or a fake bomb plant that your enemy doesn't buy because they sense your psychology at play. Our dictionary of names for each and every position on each and every map. I could go on forever. This stuff isn't immediately obvious to someone just observing a pro play, but an experienced player will likely spot it in everything they do (commentary at tournaments is often a good insight), whilst to everyone else it looks like point and shoot. It ain't the same game it was 10-15 years ago. I used to play TFC and with the myriad of classes and special abilities and tricks that made it seem more complicated than CS, it would be easy to say it had a higher skill ceiling, but truthfully I've never been more mentally fatigued from a game than I have been playing a close one of CS:GO comp in the higher ranks. So yeah, I continue to call bullshit on skill ceilings until I see those Quake players spend 3 months learning CS:GO and then steal some tournament prize money. It ain't gonna happen because totally different, totally incomparable games.

I call bullshit on the skill ceiling/cap stuff. I don't think you can compare the top tier across different games in the same genre. Besides being immeasurable, if you acknowledge that playing within a team is an entire skillset in itself that individual players can be completely void of - determining best how to complement your team mates with your skill set rather than detract from it; accounting for their movements/tactics too, not just your opponent etc. Not to mention that a single good player can carry the shit out of their team and sweep the win, which is why smurfs flourish and are such a problem for the CSGO community. Bottom line, I'd argue that at the top tier level of any game you've got the elite players giving a game 100% of their mental energy and analytical ability and none moreso than another. Otherwise you wouldn't have consistent tournament winning CSGO teams but we do. And my apologies if that's not the argument being made here. But with how much more popular and profitable CSGO is in e-sports, it would make sense for players to jump game for the prize money alone, but it doesn't happen that often as skill transfer doesn't always work out. When a team of elite Quake players form an unstoppable CS team because higher skill cap, just to win 1mil in a contest, I'll believe in the comparison. Even with a month of practice they'd get rightly destroyed by a team of LEs alone, and vice versa for the Quake equivalent.

Look like Rota Grids

Unrelated, this cheapie Dell laptop I got for ~$400 can play CSGO. 40-60fps - definitely playable and it's low detail/shadow settings but still impressive for internal graphics.

It's a long term play for most, the kind of thing that has a piece of string length to it... I made further profits post VWL announcement by trading it short term. And if anyone heeded my warning to buy at the tail end of last year when it dropped to 1.8 cents, they'd have more than doubled their money a few months later. So there's definitely opportunity to make short term profit on it, but I'm guessing most here like me are invested in it for the long term now, in which case you just leave the money in there and follow the news. It's a roulette spin - you either gonna lose it all or buy a lambo.

Windows movie maker

With iw2 basically being ditched with no positive result and costing 10's of millions... I'm surprised it's at the price it is. For the first time I don't agree with how management handled that one...I interpreted it as basically a drawn out version of "well this isn't working" covered up with "well we've got plenty of data anyway to initiate a farm out". They haven't done anything dishonest given the results from that drill were never a guaranteed thing, but I'd sooner they own it in a concise manner in their report. Announcement confusion is the worst thing for this share and given the complex nature of oil drilling it really needs to be translated into layman terms let alone using unnecessarily confusing language. Share is still worth a heap IMO, given what they can do with the HRZ and a horizontal well - IW2 was just a test well to prove up the resource and they alluded to having farm out offers on the table before they drilled it - not to mention what else is on the acreage in the way of conventional. But yeah, the lambos will be waiting another year at least lol. Should be a nice spike when/if a farm out partner is announced or leading up to it. I'd personally be taking advantage of poor market sentiment towards the share right now as people head in the opposite direction and undervalue it. 100,000 shares for ~2k yes please.

Ling long tires $400 Engine conversion $6k Final inspection wash/wax/vacuum $10k #priorities

I reckon I could get him on the straight if it was a rolling

Crisitunity Tax return top ups ftw

Be mad when my 12 year old Inspiron is still kickin along on XP with dem security updates

Bodybuilding.com forums Do they even lift?

Deadlifts create a social life

Impressive driving man - that some nice countersteering Do hit me up if you ever part ways with that dash...

+1 for volunteers. Just spectating this for most of the day was freezing af Will be an awesome venue when the weather heats up again and now that we've seen what works well and what doesn't