noodles_nomore

Haltet euch da raus. Euer Circus geht mich nichts an. Wenn ihr mir einen Gefallen tun wollt, seid einfach ehrlich mit eurem Boss. Ich muss jetzt lernen.

So sehr ich auch dankbar dafür bin, dass ihr mich über Kevin informiert habt (wenn das denn überhaupt wahr ist), tut mir Leid, aber ihr habt euch das selber eingebrockt.

I'd expect that any kind of logistics would need tight bounds on min-max 'performance', and not be up to the whims of artificial stupidity. Am I wrong?

Please explain how you made this connection.

Desktop Dungeons blows my mind because it is so incredibly well balanced and I have no idea how it can be. It's a puzzly kind of "coffee break roguelike." It marries an emphasis on the puzzly aspect of gameplay (e.g. enemies don't move) to the typical rogue-like fashion of explosive combinatoric possibility in a perfect way that just doesn't make sense. The result is that you'll often find yourself looking at impossible-seeming situations and still finding a way through. I've not had as much relief-extacy with any other game, including adrenaline-trembling hands, despite -- or maybe because of -- the fact that it's entirely turn-based.

Thanks for posting this. It's better than I remember.

Refusing a good faith debate with an audience of millions of people is silly. Insisting that a good faith debate has to be done in real time is silly. The only salvation for this rotten society is a return to literacy.

The legal system is a game that is played for profit. Being able to sue anyone for anything is advantageous for the big dogs. So it's imperative that as many laws as possible cover as much seemingly innocuous human conduct as possible with the highest stakes possible. Unrestricted expansion of intellectual property, the ability to lay claim to arbitrary regions of the ideosphere, makes perfect sense.

That's exactly right. You've been successfully filtered.