same
sadface

Omg.
I was MattC~
Remedy thought it was hypoxia aimbotting us during the match... turns out it was nano aimbotting us, gg.

apparently nano is teaming with louie for skillz's tourney........

hopefully everyone has to record. ><

__________________

http://www.myspace.com/wyld3

nano gtfo of my halo 1

updated

why is elmo banned btw?

__________________

^^^^^^^^^^

__________________

its not frame lag. if it was, the player (remedy?) would have skipped too. so, i slowed it WAY down and the player is still moving perfectly with EACH frame, no jumps whatsoever. whereas his reticle makes a decent sized snap in ONE frame.

i was planning on hearing this defense....thats why i slowed it down sooooooo far so that its 1-2 frames a sec or so. this shows a aimbot and nothing else. also, at the tail end of the video i made, the slowest part...watch that yellow dot. it does fade in about 3 frames.

this is why you used that graphic on the screen. it worked pretty well, kudos. i always wondered why a graphic was only used once. (besides the "OS")

__________________

http://www.myspace.com/wyld3

no it's not. trust me, if I wanted to cover up an aimbot, I could get rid of the snap all together. the graphic doesn't cover up anything. if you want me to prove it to you by fixing this clip to look more legit I can and will (although it will be hard because I don't have the source and now I have a graphic to work around). I've never done it before but I know exactly how I would do it. I added the cg because the clips was boringish - he stood still and the lack of movement made it drag on; I just wanted some eye candy (it's not even that good looking when I look back on it).

you have no right in accusing me of modifying this clip to make him look legit. you can accuse him of aimbotting or clickbotting or whatever, but bringing me into this is childish, especially considering I could have completely covered up the snap if I wanted, but I didn't mess with it at all.

__________________

He CAN accuse you, since you "modyfied" it. It did seem less snappish than it would be without the "eye candy". This could be you doing it to hide it, or just for entertainment and you didn't know.

50% chance one of them is right. Now I trust you did not do it, since you are a great editor and I think you are absolutely disgusted by aimbots/clickbots. (So am I.)

So don't take it offensive, it's just that he THOUGHT it, and it did look like it.

__________________

No, he has no right to accuse me as what I did didn't cover anything up. His reticle is still clearly visible, and the cg covers up but a small fraction of the screen; it's not obtrusive. The only possible way it could provide as a modification in Nano's benefit is if somehow it causes a person to be distracted in some odd psychological way. I cannot attest to it not doing this because I was predisposed to the original clip (I know what it looks like), but if I really intended to cover it up I think I would go with something that would physically cripple the clip preventing the viewer from even being able to argue anything because the snap would be covered up (i.e. snap or some sort of manual frame blending), instead of something psychological that would sure to fail as hundreds of people are to be viewing the video.

I did notice the snap when I was editing the video, but I regarded it as frame lag. If I really wanted to cover it up all it would take was a white flash; watch the video and you'll see that there's a symbol crash or something of that nature right when he snaps. Putting an unobtrusive graphic that still allows for his reticle and his opponent to be clearly visible? Are you actually accusing me of messing with this, wlyd3?

Argue about Nano's legitimacy all you want, but don't bring me into this.

(most of this is addressed to wlyd3)

__________________

im sorry but you are a retard. i don't know where you get your info from.

the only people im playing with are shazaam, benja, mike, summon, thorn, naota, and nauman.

have a nice day.

__________________