I don’t mind RNG, I mind games that rely on it over proper design. Xcom has tons of RNG, but it’s generally still possible to win most maps with proper strategy. Most roguelikes have this problem where any given run is impossible to win regardless of play.

I do appreciate the games that give you quit and quit to desktop in the same menu.

• Games that offer stealth as an option over combat, but have mandatory combat bosses.
• games that have excessive grinding as part of the main gameplay.
• Games where randomness is the primary factor in winning and losing.

AI chat bots are actually a useful workaround for shitty web uis now. When you don’t know which icon is hiding the thing you want, you can just ask the AI to do it for you.

Tastebuds do change as you age, so you will probably find a lot of things you didn’t like starting to taste better. Also being able to prepare things the way you like them is huge.

The difference between a garden or farm fresh tomato and the things in the grocery store are enormous.

Department of feeding and testing kids.

Let me introduce you to Spec Ops the Line. A game where wanting to blow stuff up is the political statement.

Valerian and the city of a thousand planets. It’s an amazing setting and if you put some leads with actual chemistry in a sequel it could do well.

That chemical is a calorie.

1. Ancient people were as intelligent as we are.
2. It didn’t have to start at a massive scale, it was likely a smaller start that spread and expanded.
3. Finding and making food was the thing everyone spent all their time on until the agricultural revolution, even then is was still almost everyone. It wasn’t until the industrial revolution that a majority of people weren’t focused exclusively on food production.

At a minimum it should be popular enough to be a good reference machine for indie and AA developers to ensure good performance.

My grandma thought one of her pregnancies was a hangover at first…

A proper long Island is about 5 ounces of liquid with 4 of them being liquor. That’s way more potent than a bee and a shot.

I would want at least a day between those two though. Multiple full days of meetings in a row would be awful.

There’s plenty of games that you could say the same about that didn’t get the traction. It’s still a hit based industry. It’s not a knock against the game, it’s a reality of the industry.

The starter edition bundle is 11.99 us and the ultimate is 104.80 in USD. There’s basically 2 different types of DLCs in the paradox model. The core expansion type that is released every year or so and adds or fleshes out an area of the game, these are generally must haves and reasonably priced if you have played the game for a year(s) to mix it up. The second is smaller focused packs that add a faction or some extra flavor to a more minor mechanic. These are relatively expensive for what they offer, but aren’t always intended for everyone to buy.

If you are a hardcore completionist this model is bad for you, but if you can live with not having everything then it’s not terrible.

I think the big studios lost reality with what the gaming market is. It’s a hit based business, you need a level of volume that they’ve been backing off on. It’s not that the expedition 33 devs were so much better, they just happened to be the lucky ones that put out a solid game that got traction.

Investing is great for retirement funds, over the 30 years or so it’s great for returns. It’s terrible to invest principle you need in scope of months or 1-2 years even.

If you have 20k and a 20k loan, putting that money in the stock market is stupid if you need that money to pay the loan. If you have 20k, a 20k loan, and income to cover loan payments in addition to living, it may be beneficial to invest that 20k, but it’s still relatively high risk.

It’s gone down moth over month many times though. If you are dependant on that principle month to month it’s insane to trust the market.