people liking one game in the genre is a very poor predictor of whether they’ll like another one
I love survival/building games, and so do most of my friends. Even the terrible ones are usually fun. So I'd posit that it's the opposite with a caveat: liking one for more than its story means you'll enjoy the others.
I think it's more indicative of games/hobbies as a whole than the survival genre specifically. People who love the adrenaline of a motorcycle may not enjoy the thrill of going down a mile high mountain on two thin sticks, IF it was the rumble of the engine beneath them that they actually enjoyed. If it was the rush of the speed though (or in the case of survival/building games, the exploration and struggle to stay alive and not lose your stuff), then they'll likely enjoy the other adrenaline sports.
It's horror in the sense that Bioshock was horror, but much less so. There are some areas with 'tension' that you pretty quickly become accustomed to, just as you would in a game where there is a 'progression' of areas where each area you move into is quite difficult at first until you get the resources and build the new items from that area.
It would make sense for it to be canon in the subnautica universe. I think they were pretty much the epitome of authors with an anvil with the references to economics and governing.
I want to know what the fuck was going through the head of each person who was involved, from the ordering all the way own to the agents on board. How do you get so twisted? Sinking a ship that was protesting by merely placing protestors?
It's not a crime. You can use force to reclaim stolen property. Legally, it gets 'interesting' when you involve a weapon in your use of force, because some areas allow the threat of deadly force far before it can actually be used and you're probably going to expose yourself to legal avenues if the police don't like you when they show up. But simply kicking someone's ass after they stole from you? Perfectly permissible.
If you want to talk about the morality of it, that's a different conversation.
What's that old quote about the body being an example of a shitty civil engineer? Something along the lines of: "Only a new civvy puts the playground next to the sewer outflow."
From experience with these sorts of folks, they take positive things as the reply, and just don't think about negatives. The rare negative that they can't ignore gets blamed on other people who aren't believers, or whatever their version of 'the devil' is.
This isn't paying to see a concert, play, or musical. This is buying a book for amazon's e-reader, and them not allowing you to read the book anymore when they put out the book's sequel.
Yes, but averaging is the wrong take here. I believe the actual amount of gun owners is under 40%, if I remember the studies. I personally witnessed a messy divorce, and the individual that had a personal stake in the gun collection moved somewhere in the realm of 200 rifles out of the house. I thought I knew gun nuts* before that, and it blew my mind. Those sort of folks are going to massively skew the guns per capita.
*I had seen collections of 50+, but they were rare and rich... most 'nuts' that I knew just liked their personal amount of 5-10 that they thought were the bee's knees.
I'm pretty sure I'd do the same thing as everybody else. Depending on just how narrow or deep you want to get in your time and visibility level, it's either going to be a breath, heartbeat, diapedesis, secretion, action potential, hydrolysis, oxidative phosphorylation, electron exchange, or wibbly-wobbly lepton-level quackery.
As an entire organism, I'd guess I'd either get out of bed or discover very quickly that my sometimes in-bed-morning-routine because of discomfort has now become impossible and there's a new set of discomforts that need to be rolled around until a comfortable position is found.
That one freaking kills me. I can only hope that the movement of some places onto mastodon might help be a gentle push and a guide that can be pointed to for other places to follow.
I feel like the west virginia statistic may be heavily biased by what a poor family might feed a child. I remember my parents using hot dogs for 'cheap' meat that could be doctored into meals that my picky toddler ass would eat.
Took a closer look to see if I was surprised by any correlation about poverty, and browsed away with the belief that the south is still a shithole... which might still correlate with poverty. I think kansas/oregon is the first entry that wouldn't be 'south.'
Exactly! The 'death' of facebook has in no way seemed to impact its influence on everything. I still find places that use a facebook page as their company website. The marketplace is inescapable if you want to buy or sell something used.
All this idea would do is establish a very well known area for AI to be used in... and it would serve the same function as a reservoir of infection for pathogens.
Fruits in general aren't as good for you as general thinking have them. The majority have been bred to be so exaggerated in their sugar content that, as an example, you can't feed pet primates fruit very often or they will get diabetes (without getting into the horrors that keeping primates as pets encompasses). You can quickly get an idea of this by searching for 'wild strawberries vs grocery strawberries.'
The fibrous parts of fruits is good, the 'nutritional' aspects of them are decent, but the absolute black-hole-mass of sugar on the one side of the teeter-totter is a pretty big negative for them.
The get rich quick scheme I thought was well thought out, for the 'in universe' principles that had been laid out. One galleon converted to a lot of copper, so the mary sue could take gold from the muggle world, get it made into galleons in the wizard world, trade those for a metric shit ton of copper knuts, and then take those to the muggle world to be sold for a much larger sum of money than had been used to buy the gold.
As long as you don't expect it to work forever, it would be fine. The writing was terrible, but the character established all the nuts and bolts of the operation by 'just asking' questions to the diagetic narrator: pure gold was able to be made into galleons for a fee, banks would give you your money in knuts if you asked, and the prices would work for it.
The writing was jank and the protagonist narrator insufferable, but the conclusions he drew did make sense for the world he had been placed in, as appropriate for a 'rationalist' critique of harry potter.
Edit: the part where I just threw up was where the narrator had an immediate, perfectly-thought-out-but-the-writer-couldn't-come-up-with-an-actual-thing when mcgonagoll threatened to alter his memory, but he had thought of a perfect solution to that years ago. It reminded me of terrible ttrpg players who just ad hoc added parts to their backstory so they could be mary sues in a collaborative game.
My friend in avorion spent countless hours designing incredibly cool, streamlined ships that had V wings and neatly spinning barbettes for weapons systems. He downloaded the fan-made recreations of popular sci-fi series.
...
I made cubes. I put square stone on top of square metal armor on top of reinforcing blocks, and threw everything into ever-expanding cubes. Once I got the auto-targeting weapons, I WAS the borg. It was beautiful.
I love survival/building games, and so do most of my friends. Even the terrible ones are usually fun. So I'd posit that it's the opposite with a caveat: liking one for more than its story means you'll enjoy the others.
I think it's more indicative of games/hobbies as a whole than the survival genre specifically. People who love the adrenaline of a motorcycle may not enjoy the thrill of going down a mile high mountain on two thin sticks, IF it was the rumble of the engine beneath them that they actually enjoyed. If it was the rush of the speed though (or in the case of survival/building games, the exploration and struggle to stay alive and not lose your stuff), then they'll likely enjoy the other adrenaline sports.