It’s free, so don’t let that stop you, but it is very fair if you want a more complete experience before trying it out.
(It is paid on steam as a way to suport the game, but free downloads can be found on their website)
It’s free, so don’t let that stop you, but it is very fair if you want a more complete experience before trying it out.
(It is paid on steam as a way to suport the game, but free downloads can be found on their website)
I would say yes and no. It is a game about evolution with some similarities but it is very focused on a realistic representation of evolution. This makes it a more complex game than spore and actively encourages many different niches not just agressive, peaceful and mixed as spore did.
Aldo currently they are working on finishong the cell stage and the beginning of the multicellular stage while have more in deapth discussion about the transition between the microscopic and macroscopic phases among other things.
As a Dane I’d guess they didn’t realize Americans use it as a greating and so assumed you to be initiating a conversation unrelated to ordering, possibly with bad intentions.
It would be a little like starting the conversation with a “how is your mother”, it would signal way more familiarity than was had, come way out of left field and be generally unwanted when you are working if you don’t have time to stop for the conversation that would ensue.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think you did anything wrong necessarily, it’s just a cultural difference that likely causes misunderstandings if none of the parties are aware of it. I’d liken it to a Eurpean going to a restaurant in the US, not tipping anything and how both parties may feel the other party to be rude after the fact if the server let their dissatisfaction show.
I could of course be wrong and they may just have been an ass, plenty of those in tourist heavy areas for sure. Just something to consider if it could have been the case.
The fact that me pointing out why your accusing someone else of moving the goalpost isn’t true and a mistake on your part is met by you immediately trying to make me disprove a claim you haven’t even made explicitly yet, makes me think this will go nowhere regardless of anything I might say.
Will you acknowledge your mistake and move forward? If so I’m open to discussing it further, but if you continue to avoid the points made as if to never acknowledge when you are wrong then I’m not going to bother.
Fascist regimes
^ Right here is where they specified that they weren’t talking about all authoritarian societies but a subset.
If you want to argue that your list is all fascist countries then do that, but they did not move any goalposts by correcting you after giving what you labeled authoritarian countries instead of fascist ones specifically.
The theology may have evolved, but to say they were never Christians would be unjustified, even if I agreed they had stopped being Christians due to this.
I do however not think that is the case either. I agree that their veneration for Trump often becomes pretty much worship. That however doesn’t mean they aren’t Christian. He seems to take a status in their theology ranging from a saint-like figure to prophet and even the second coming of Jesus. Christians started out as a jewish sect and only over time became a distinct religion. I think this Trump worship is similarly a Christian sect that could potentially become a destinct religion. I just haven’t been convinced it has happened yet.
Why would you claim them not to be Christians? They seem very clearly Christian to me. I can’t really see a non “no true scotsman” reason to say they aren’t, and especially that they never was.
Mine would be Thrive, not so much due to its current gameplay, though it is okay, but moreso due to an unwavering commitment to a vision. It has gone on for years and is essentially a scientifically close to accurate version of spore. They have almost finished the single cell stage and are working some on the transition to multicellular now as I understand it. I find it to be an impressive project as it started from the disappointment with spore and has evolved into something that I would genuinely suggest as a learning tool in middle school biology class.
They basically did the same thing the Satanic Temple often does. Use the rules republicans make thinking only they will benefit. When they are used by the other side as well it has a funny way of causing a reevaluation of if it should in fact be legal after all. My understanding is that CAH made a sort of parody of Musks trick although doing it in a slightly more careful way to make sure that any legal action against them would apply more broadly. I don’t think it’s good that vote buying is a thing, but equating the satirical protest campaign with the actual thing being pushed against is unfair in my opinion. You can argue if they go about it the right way or not but legitimizing the original offense by pointing out people cheered at the counter campaign opposing musk using the same tool and humor feels disingenuous.