How big are your balls?

WhoopA · Post by **WhoopA** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:54 pm

672m 66.8cm

What, you thought I'd post something gross?

Protodude · Post by **Protodude** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:58 pm

Mine's pretty small, I didn't replay that level much.

Spazz · Post by **Spazz** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:00 pm

Mine was like 860+m

Ngangbius · Post by **Ngangbius** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:33 pm

The largest I managed to roll was about 827m and I rolled everything in the level.

Spazz · Post by **Spazz** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:39 pm

Well, some things dissapear once the katamari gets to a certain size, and it also depends on how much stuff fell off.
I've got to double-check anyway, but a friend of mine has it right now. =/

Cuckooguy · Post by **Cuckooguy** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:19 pm

I remember I got the ball to a certain large size (large enough to roll over small trees), and then I was like "Hey, I wonder if I can shake it all off", so I visited the round park with a clock in it so I can crash into everything, and I managed to make the katamari naked, but, even though I shook everything off, it was larger than it's original starting size, and there was an invisible larger sphere for collision detection around the smaller katamari ball, and the Prince is completely unseeable (the Prince model is probably taken off at some point).

Locit · Post by **Locit** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:29 pm

Spazz wrote:Mine was like 860+m

Ditto.

Post by **Delphine** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:34 pm

672? That's it? C'mon, man, you gotta try harder than that. My personal best is 864m 3cm 1mm. <a href="http://s9.invisionfree.com/Katamari_Dam ... 79">People have gotten up to 880.</a>

WhoopA · Post by **WhoopA** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:15 pm

Hey, I thought that wasn't bad for the second time I played that level.

Post by **Delphine** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:24 pm

You've only played the level twice? Well, it's not that bad, in that case.

Kishi · Post by **Kishi** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 11:56 pm

860 sounds about right.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 12:13 pm

Decimal points are terrific when combined with the metric system.

Omni Hunter · Post by **Omni Hunter** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 3:39 pm

That's because decimal points usually revolve around the metric system.

Post by **Delphine** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:43 pm

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:01 pm

I'm just saying that 672.868m makes a hell of a lot more sense then 672m86cm8mm. I mean why use the metric system if you aren't going to take advantage of the fact that it is a base ten system?

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:44 pm

It's because in the earlier stages the ball doesn't get that big... your goal in stage 1 is 10cm, for example. In some of the later stages, you start extremely small (in cm) and then gradually expand to meters. You get a clearer idea of your progress by looking at each degree of measurement individually.

So there.

Post by **Pepperidge** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:47 pm

I'm glad that something has finally convinced you people to start using the metric system.

Locit · Post by **Locit** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:24 pm

I actually just finished a paper on the metric system, and why the traditional American system is inferior in every way. Unfortunately, it is very hard to find the actual plausible reasons we stayed with the inch-pound system, so I literally just finished it, having started at six in the p.m.

Fucking inches... I hate them so much.
But now I hate centimeters too.
That's associative hatred for you.
God I need sleep.

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:30 pm

How about some actual plausible reasons why we still observe daylight savings time?

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:39 pm

I don't think there are any plausible reasons why we still observe Daylight Savings Time anymore. Generally, people think it's because it helps farmers but from what I've read, they hate it, too.

So, the only real reason is..

Tradition!

Kishi · Post by **Kishi** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:44 pm

I think it's extremely weird that we cock ourselves up so much for the supposed sake of farmers anyway.

Post by **G.Silver** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:42 am

I find this a little hard to believe, but apparently it's so that businesses can reduce their operating costs by not having to have their lights on as people work in the dark. It might make sense except that most businesses keep the lights on all day long no matter what it looks like outside.

In one state, Indiana I think, all but one county does not observe daylight savings time for religious reasons, because apparently artificially "changing" the time of day is against god's will. I don't know about any other countries, but they don't have it in Japan either.

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:54 am

I'm pretty sure we're the only nation in the world stupid enough to pretend the earth's rotation speeds up for an hour once every year.

Post by **Segaholic2** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:03 am

Too bad DST was invented by a <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Willett">Brit</A>.

Post by **G.Silver** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:17 am

wikipedia wrote:DST is particularly unpopular among people working in agriculture because the animals do not observe it, and thus the people are placed out of synchronization with the rest of the community, including school times, broadcast schedules, and the like.

Hah, shoulda just gone <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_s ... ">there</a> in the first place.