Le Lundi 21 Mai 2001 19:25, vous avez écrit : > On Mon, 21 May 2001, DAVID DELBECQ wrote: > > ------------------------------------> > > You say you don't want iso because you don't have time to create iso (...) > I fear that would look really crap dude. Firstly any general scale looks > crap (see old standard set pngs.. ), secondly half of the images wont fit > the 32 x 32 rectangle. > I don't understand what you mean with "half of the images won't fit the 32x32 rectangle". Maybe I was a little naïve, but I thought the iso pictures should be bigger than 32x32, (at least higher than that), to allow "high" monsters like cyclops. I've put a small example of what I try to say with this e-mail. > Umm I assume you mean crap. Much of my work has disappeared through time, > but it is doing the work that counts in the long run. I hear lots of talk (...) That discussion may be very interesting from a philosophical point of view I'll put the questions no one truly asked for until now: 1 - Are there people interested to create an iso-set on crossfire ? How they want it to be (technical or artistical point of view) does not matter. If there are volunteers ready to get involved in this, please let the others know. 2 - Are there people interested in developing a "better-looking" client (I admit this is somewhat vague, but I consider commercial games like Diablo or Baldur's Gate as references for the interface) ? If yes, then tell it and begin the work. The discussion about those subjects could continue Ad Vitam Aeternam; lots of ideas are certainly a good thing, but I think we nearly emptied the subject here. It does not matter if some people don't see iso or new client as priorities. Not all people working around Crossfire must work on every part being developed. I know that not everyone knows C or is a good drawer, but if we endlessly discuss of the pros/cons without having even tried to do something, we'll never go anywhere. Chachkoff Y.