Gears of war 3 - Gridlock (Never before seen game play) [Graphics God].

A little game called Killzone 3 came out this February managed to outclass it technically and UC3's latest footage proved to be above it too, so sorry I don't see any graphics god here, even on consoles.gpuking

KZ3 doesn't even have SSAO.

[QUOTE="gpuking"]A little game called Killzone 3 came out this February managed to outclass it technically and UC3's latest footage proved to be above it too, so sorry I don't see any graphics god here, even on consoles.Bus-A-Bus

KZ3 doesn't even have SSAO.

[QUOTE="gpuking"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

KZ3 doesn't even have SSAO.

sts106mat

and that pics supposed to be graphics king? LOL

Wow that looks awful^

Anyway can't wait for Gears 3, Sep 20th seems so far away :cry:

Wow that looks awful^ABCarmine

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"]Wow that looks awful^gpuking

You might want to look at your posting history before throwing around the fanboy monikers so casually.

here is a video, watch all the way until the end, this guy is a PC gamer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pZf-MNo4Fgsts106mat

Yeah, i saw videos of him on youtube. I think he is the personification of the Xbox 360. I don't care what system he prefers, wen i'm thinking about the 360 as a person, i'm thinking about that guy.

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"]Wow that looks awful^gpuking

Nah, I'm a Hermit if anything, that picture looked terrible.

[QUOTE="sts106mat"]

[QUOTE="gpuking"] Sure, but it uses a fully deferred renderer which makes so much bigger difference in visuals especially for sci fi shooters with tons of projectiles, explosions, lights and fire. It's a no brainer really, games using deferred rendering are just better looking since the scene is so much more alive and accurate. gpuking

and that pics supposed to be graphics king? LOL

OK :), the true graphics god on consoles.

but bringing it up just takes the wind out ofrecent released andupcoming hyped games, I'm not surprised people ignore it. On a simular playing feild GeoW3, UC3, KZ3 are all comparible for over-all graphics and polish but GOW3 still crushes all recent games striving for the title of best console graphics.

[QUOTE="gpuking"][QUOTE="sts106mat"]

and that pics supposed to be graphics king? LOL

casharmy

OK :), the true graphics god on consoles.

but bringing it up just takes the wind out ofrecent released andupcoming hyped games, I'm not surprised people ignore it. On a simular playing feild GeoW3, UC3, KZ3 are all comparible for over-all graphics and polish but GOW3 still crushes all recent games striving for the title of best console graphics.

I have god of war 3 and I dont understand why people hype its graphics? The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies. Of course you'll reply by saying the beginning of the game, but in reality, the titan exterior textures aren't amazing on close inspection and in addition they're scripted.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="gpuking"] Says the guy with Gears of war 3 sig, but yes on consoles for sure. Feel free to post anything to prove otherwise rather than LOL this and that.Ironbash

OK :), the true graphics god on consoles.

but bringing it up just takes the wind out ofrecent released andupcoming hyped games, I'm not surprised people ignore it. On a simular playing feild GeoW3, UC3, KZ3 are all comparible for over-all graphics and polish but GOW3 still crushes all recent games striving for the title of best console graphics.

I have god of war 3 and I dont understand why people hype its graphics? The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies. Of course you'll reply by saying the beginning of the game, but in reality, the titan exterior textures aren't amazing on close inspection and in addition they're scripted.

rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS now lol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to? sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash here because this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

here is a video, watch all the way until the end, this guy is a PC gamer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pZf-MNo4Fgsts106mat

rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS nowlol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to?sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash herebecause this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

casharmy

It could be that his opinion differs from yours. I personally think that GOW3 looks great, but I'd give quite a few other titles better graphics.

Gears 3 has really shaped up.

Lots of fanboys in here getting insecure about it's graphics.

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

OK :), the true graphics god on consoles.

but bringing it up just takes the wind out ofrecent released andupcoming hyped games, I'm not surprised people ignore it. On a simular playing feild GeoW3, UC3, KZ3 are all comparible for over-all graphics and polish but GOW3 still crushes all recent games striving for the title of best console graphics.

GOW3 PIC

casharmy

I have god of war 3 and I dont understand why people hype its graphics? The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies. Of course you'll reply by saying the beginning of the game, but in reality, the titan exterior textures aren't amazing on close inspection and in addition they're scripted.

rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS now lol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to? sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash here because this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

I have god of war 3 and I dont understand why people hype its graphics? The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies. Of course you'll reply by saying the beginning of the game, but in reality, the titan exterior textures aren't amazing on close inspection and in addition they're scripted.

Ironbash

rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS now lol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to? sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash here because this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

?

*looks at own GOW3 box art, proceeds to open case*

Umm, that's not GOW3, that's good of war collection that does NOT include GOW3.

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS now lol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to? sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash here because this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

casharmy

?

*looks at own GOW3 box art, proceeds to open case*

Umm, that's not GOW3, that's good of war collection that does NOT include GOW3.

Are you blind? Thats god of war 3 on the right

[QUOTE="casharmy"]rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS nowlol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to?sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash herebecause this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

clone01

It could be that his opinion differs from yours. I personally think that GOW3 looks great, but I'd give quite a few other titles better graphics.

lol, since Uncharted 2 was the last unaimous graphics king of the industry (reviews, GOTY awards, and other develper approval) Only GOW3 was able to best it in graphics (with reviews andGOTY awards to back it up)

Honestly you saying you'd give "quite a few other titles better graphics" isrediclious being that all the games that were said to look better than GOW3 in 2010 failed meaning that you would only have to be talking about games from this year.

lol what games have *better* graphics than GOW3? Im not talking about you trying to use some kind of *tech* argument or whatever because that failed last year GOW3>RDR, what has better graphics IYO?

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

Ironbash

?

*looks at own GOW3 box art, proceeds to open case*

Umm, that's not GOW3, that's good of war collection that does NOT include GOW3.

Are you blind? Thats god of war 3 on the right

really hard to see with that blury picture but I take your word for it.

regardless, doesn't change anything I've said. The game is rendering 100% of what ever it shows on the screen and the game is 100% 3d you should have never tried to use those points as arguments againt GOW3 because they are wrong and is nit-picking?

LBP is on a 2d plane with a 3d aspects same as Street fighter 4 GOW3 is not, so you failed in argument status the minute you tried to discredit it with those gripes.

[QUOTE="clone01"]

[QUOTE="casharmy"]rendering is limited? lol what are you talking about the game is fully 3d the way the game is played is a design choice, not a techincal defecintcy. GOW 1 and 2 exist as an example of this, is it supposed to play like a FPS nowlol oh man. And GOW3 has the best textures of any console game this gen, there are no better (on consoles) sowhat are you compairing it to?sounds like you are trying too hard.

are you just trying to bash herebecause this is a PS3 exclusive? Or did you really not play the game?

casharmy

It could be that his opinion differs from yours. I personally think that GOW3 looks great, but I'd give quite a few other titles better graphics.

lol, since Uncharted 2 was the last unaimous graphics king of the industry (reviews, GOTY awards, and other develper approval) Only GOW3 was able to best it in graphics (with reviews andGOTY awards to back it up)

Honestly you saying you'd give "quite a few other titles better graphics" isrediclious being that all the games that were said to look better than GOW3 in 2010 failed meaning that you would only have to be talking about games from this year.

lol what games have *better* graphics than GOW3? Im not talking about you trying to use some kind of *tech* argument or whatever because that failed last year GOW3>RDR, what has better graphics IYO?

Just so you know, Cronos uses less than a 2048x2048 texture. It may look good in this screen, but when in game and when you're in control of Kratos, the difference is quite clear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MBJv5D5OUw

Also, Crysis 2 won unanimous console graphical acclaim, even though it wasn't in HD nor had a stable framerate. In addition you have not yet explained why the majority of the game is played majorly short tunnel-like sections and why the boss fights limit you to a VERY small area with very little environmental effects going on (Poseidon being a good example, the geometry of the mountain is actually using very little memory, and the main focus is on both Kratos and Poseiden + Hippocampi). When a developer applies all the processing power possible to a very linear section, you will see a good LOD in almost everything. This is certainly true compared to games such as infamous 2.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="clone01"]

It could be that his opinion differs from yours. I personally think that GOW3 looks great, but I'd give quite a few other titles better graphics.

sts106mat

lol, since Uncharted 2 was the last unaimous graphics king of the industry (reviews, GOTY awards, and other develper approval) Only GOW3 was able to best it in graphics (with reviews andGOTY awards to back it up)

Honestly you saying you'd give "quite a few other titles better graphics" isrediclious being that all the games that were said to look better than GOW3 in 2010 failed meaning that you would only have to be talking about games from this year.

lol what games have *better* graphics than GOW3? Im not talking about you trying to use some kind of *tech* argument or whatever because that failed last year GOW3>RDR, what has better graphics IYO?

in the hands of a diffrent developer your argument falls to peices...

and Infamous 2 is a far more complex game than RDR

Next argument?

I really like the firstInfamous and havent played the second game yet,but why have you just posted what looks like cut scene or QTE gameplay? Why not an ingame screen with full Hud? I notice this always happens in graphic king threads. The ingame images with full HUD that busabus posted of Crysis 2 are clearly the best graphics on any console with only the PC to best them.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

Are you blind? Thats god of war 3 on the right

sts106mat

really hard to see with that blury picture but I take your word for it.

regardless, doesn't change anything I've said. The game is rendering 100% of what ever it shows on the screen and the game is 100% 3d you should have never tried to use those points as arguments againt GOW3 because they are wrong and is nit-picking?

LBP is on a 2d plane with a 3d aspects same as Street fighter 4 GOW3 is not, so you failed in argument status the minute you tried to discredit it with those gripes.

but Gears 3 DOESN'T look better :?

lol and Infamous 2 is more techincally impressive than anything gears 3 has going on so dose that mean Infamous 2>>>Gears 3 IYO?

also UC3 doesn't look better than GOW3 either so you are rolling snake eyes if you are trying to argue I'm saying this just because it's on PS3. You just want Gears 3 to look better for your own reasons I aint mad, but don't try to lable me with our own perspective, again you don't even own a PS3 what would you know about how it stacks up?

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="casharmy"]

lol, since Uncharted 2 was the last unaimous graphics king of the industry (reviews, GOTY awards, and other develper approval) Only GOW3 was able to best it in graphics (with reviews andGOTY awards to back it up)

Honestly you saying you'd give "quite a few other titles better graphics" isrediclious being that all the games that were said to look better than GOW3 in 2010 failed meaning that you would only have to be talking about games from this year.

lol what games have *better* graphics than GOW3? Im not talking about you trying to use some kind of *tech* argument or whatever because that failed last year GOW3>RDR, what has better graphics IYO?

casharmy

in the hands of a diffrent developer your argument falls to peices...

and Infamous 2 is a far more complex game than RDR

Next argument?

Bullshots beyond belief. While I agree, it being my favourite PS3 exclusive, some of the voice acting in the game is fairly stiff, not to mention swamp monster texture detail is fairly low res. Finally the game has NO AA, a big put off. And I have the game contrary to your belief.

lol what games have *better* graphics than GOW3? Im not talking about you trying to use some kind of *tech* argument or whatever because that failed last year GOW3>RDR, what has better graphics IYO?

casharmy

I found RE5 and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood to look fantastic. I think GOW3 has better graphics than RDR. That being said, the scope of RDR and what they did with the visual presentation was impressive......lol

[QUOTE="casharmy"]lol what games have *better* graphics than GOW3? Im not talking about you trying to use some kind of *tech* argument or whatever because that failed last year GOW3>RDR, what has better graphics IYO?

clone01

I found RE5 and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood to look fantastic. I think GOW3 has better graphics than RDR. That being said, the scope of RDR and what they did with the visual presentation was impressive......lol

The only downside of brotherhood in my eyes was the LOD on everyone except Ezio.

also UC3 doesn't look better than GOW3 either so you are rolling snake eyes if you are trying to argue I'm saying this just because it's on PS3. You just want Gears 3 to look better for your own reasons I aint mad, but don't try to lable me with our own perspective, again you don't even own a PS3 what would you know about how it stacks up?

casharmy

So again, this comes down to your opinion. Secondly, you seem to be all about using the "he doesn't own x system" or "x game." When I asked you to prove that you own a 360, you never did. That's a bit of a double standard.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] RDR is absolutely a beautiful game on 360 and is pretty close to graphics king for consoles IMO. the PS3 couldn't cope with the open-world in HD due to ram constraintsso had to go sub hd and lose a load of foliage, shadow effects depsite being developed by a completely separate dev team. heck, sony admitted the other week that cross game chat cannot be done on PS3 due to the RAM. 360 has had this feature since launch and yet here we are years later arguing that one game looks better than another. how silly.Ironbash

in the hands of a diffrent developer your argument falls to peices...

and Infamous 2 is a far more complex game than RDR

Next argument?

Bullshots beyond belief. While I agree, it being my favourite PS3 exclusive, some of the voice acting in the game is fairly stiff, not to mention swamp monster texture detail is fairly low res. Finally the game has NO AA, a big put off. And I have the game contrary to your belief.

lol, wait a minute you just tried to use RDR as an arument tool and then go on to try to bash Infamous 2 on not having perfect graphics when the same can be done on "swap monster detail is fairly low res" dude how much low res stuff could I point out about RDR?

Your arugments aren't consistant at all, I see you are just *finding* reasons to bash them so I'm not going to bother arguing with you on this

BTW: what belief are you talking about? owning the game doesn't change the fact that it's a perfect example to cripple the points you tried to make about PS3 not being about to do impressive open-world games

"PS3 couldn't cope with the open-world in HD due to ram constraints" was your exact comment I believe...nice back track tho.

Looks alright.

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

in the hands of a diffrent developer your argument falls to peices...

and Infamous 2 is a far more complex game than RDR

Next argument?

casharmy

Bullshots beyond belief. While I agree, it being my favourite PS3 exclusive, some of the voice acting in the game is fairly stiff, not to mention swamp monster texture detail is fairly low res. Finally the game has NO AA, a big put off. And I have the game contrary to your belief.

lol, wait a minute you just tried to use RDR as an arument tool and then go on to try to bash Infamous 2 on not having perfect graphics when the same can be done on "swap monster detail is fairly low res" dude how much low res stuff could I point out about RDR?

Your arugments aren't consistant at all, I see you are just *finding* reasons to bash them so I'm not going to bother arguing with you on this

BTW: what belief are you talking about? owning the game doesn't change the fact that it's a perfect example to cripple the points you tried to make about PS3 not being about to do impressive open-world games...nice back track tho.

Firstly if you look back over the previous page, you'll realise it wasn't me who brought in RDR- proves your argument is as flawed as your observation skills

And secondly console games are easy to bash, they have flaws that stand out. Maybe you just want to defend games you don't own, but I find that you've ignored my previous post regarding cronos and still have not given an answer on that. I guess it's because you finally realise that Santa Monica had to make sacrifices. This proves that the only thing you're worried about is saying XXX looks better than YYY but you give little reason why. Gears 3 is a difficult game to bash because the way it hides its flaws is pretty good. I don't like the DOF the unreal engine has though.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]also UC3 doesn't look better than GOW3 either so you are rolling snake eyes if you are trying to argue I'm saying this just because it's on PS3. You just want Gears 3 to look better for your own reasons I aint mad, but don't try to lable me with our own perspective, again you don't even own a PS3 what would you know about how it stacks up?

clone01

So again, this comes down to your opinion. Secondly, you seem to be all about using the "he doesn't own x system" or "x game." When I asked you to prove that you own a 360, you never did. That's a bit of a double standard.

I don't need to answer something that's common knoledge. just like it's common knoledge that he doesn't own a PS3. If you don't konw what systems I own by now, just do your post historysifting thing that you say youlike to do and you will find out.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="Ironbash"]

Are you blind? Thats god of war 3 on the right

sts106mat

really hard to see with that blury picture but I take your word for it.

regardless, doesn't change anything I've said. The game is rendering 100% of what ever it shows on the screen and the game is 100% 3d you should have never tried to use those points as arguments againt GOW3 because they are wrong and is nit-picking?

LBP is on a 2d plane with a 3d aspects same as Street fighter 4 GOW3 is not, so you failed in argument status the minute you tried to discredit it with those gripes.

What GS says about the graphics wont really matter, I remember the reviewer of Crysis 2 being straight up asked in the hype thread if Crysis 2 looks better then U2 and KZ3 and he said its for to inconsistent and that KZ3 and U2 looked better. And when cows brought that up they got "but but we only use GS for the flop game".

I don't need to answer something that's common knoledge. just like it's common knoledge that he doesn't own a PS3. If you don't konw what systems I own by now, just do your post historysifting thing that you say youlike to do and you will find out.

casharmy

How is it common knowledge if you've never provided any proof? And again, what does it matter if one has a different opinion than your own? You seem to be ridiculing people for having a contrary stance from your own.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]I don't need to answer something that's common knoledge. just like it's common knoledge that he doesn't own a PS3. If you don't konw what systems I own by now, just do your post historysifting thing that you say youlike to do and you will find out.

clone01

How is it common knowledge if you've never provided any proof? And again, what does it matter if one has a different opinion than your own? You seem to be ridiculing people for having a contrary stance from your own.

incorrect.

I ridicule peope for making arguments for things that are false or have no basis and for having inconsistencies

example of false/no basis for argument:Ironbash: "The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies"

completely ridiculous argument because everything is in 3d regardless of how it's played and everything is 100% rendered. GOW3 is no more linear than any other hack n slash game, trying to use these points as a basis for argument against it's graphics has no merit at all.

also false: "PS3 couldn't cope with the open-world in HD due to ram constraints"

after posting Infamous 2 an example of an open-world game which disproves the point he goes on to bash infamous 2...

example of inconsistant: "swamp monster texture detail is fairly low res." (referring to Infamous 2)

However in the previous post he says RDR is an absolutely beautiful game.... but it also has fairly low res textures in places anyone can point out as well, am I wrong? But he only gripes about low res textures in Infamous 2, stange huh?

I'm pretty consitant in my argumets as I don't try to change my arguments points from one game to another.

[QUOTE="clone01"]

[QUOTE="casharmy"]I don't need to answer something that's common knoledge. just like it's common knoledge that he doesn't own a PS3. If you don't konw what systems I own by now, just do your post historysifting thing that you say youlike to do and you will find out.

casharmy

How is it common knowledge if you've never provided any proof? And again, what does it matter if one has a different opinion than your own? You seem to be ridiculing people for having a contrary stance from your own.

incorrect.

I ridicule peope for making arguments for things that are false or have no basis and for having inconsistencies

example of false/no basis for argument:Ironbash: "The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies"

completely ridiculous argument because everything is in 3d regardless of how it's played and everything is 100% rendered. GOW3 is no more linear than any other hack n slash game, trying to use these points as a basis for argument against it's graphics has no merit at all.

also false: "PS3 couldn't cope with the open-world in HD due to ram constraints"

after posting Infamous 2 an example of an open-world game which disproves the point he goes on to bash infamous 2...

example of inconsistant: "swamp monster texture detail is fairly low res." (referring to Infamous 2)

However in the previous post he says RDR is an absolutely beautiful game.... but it also has fairly low res textures in places anyone can point out as well, am I wrong? But he only gripes about low res textures in Infamous 2, stange huh?

I'm pretty consitant in my argumets as I don't try to change my arguments points from one game to another.

What does 2d or 3d have to do with anything. You yourself said not to use any "tech" term. A lot of what makes graphics is art direction,3d or not. And why do you feel the need to ridicule and be condescending to people here, whether you agree with them or not?

and you didn't answer my first question.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="clone01"]

How is it common knowledge if you've never provided any proof? And again, what does it matter if one has a different opinion than your own? You seem to be ridiculing people for having a contrary stance from your own.

clone01

incorrect.

I ridicule peope for making arguments for things that are false or have no basis and for having inconsistencies

example of false/no basis for argument:Ironbash: "The game is so linear that the rendering is limited to a portion of the section you are only in, which is immediately forced by the fixed camera. Therefore it only has to render around a small path with the enemies"

completely ridiculous argument because everything is in 3d regardless of how it's played and everything is 100% rendered. GOW3 is no more linear than any other hack n slash game, trying to use these points as a basis for argument against it's graphics has no merit at all.

also false: "PS3 couldn't cope with the open-world in HD due to ram constraints"

after posting Infamous 2 an example of an open-world game which disproves the point he goes on to bash infamous 2...

example of inconsistant: "swamp monster texture detail is fairly low res." (referring to Infamous 2)

However in the previous post he says RDR is an absolutely beautiful game.... but it also has fairly low res textures in places anyone can point out as well, am I wrong? But he only gripes about low res textures in Infamous 2, stange huh?

I'm pretty consitant in my argumets as I don't try to change my arguments points from one game to another.

What does 2d or 3d have to do with anything. You yourself said not to use any "tech" term. A lot of what makes graphics is art direction,3d or not. And why do you feel the need to ridicule and be condescending to people here, whether you agree with them or not?

and you didn't answer my first question.

Why do you feel the need to ridicule and be condescending to people here, whether you agree with them or not?

Why do you feel the need to ridicule and be condescending to people here, whether you agree with them or not?

casharmy

Pardon? When have I been condescending to you? I've simply asked you a couple of questions, which you seem to be reluctant to answer. If I've come across as insulting, that certainly wasn't the intent. I'm curious why you would purposely do this, however.