If you said no, do you think they would have done the groceries?
Have they done the same amount of chores at home during their vacation, than they would do when they are working? I dont think one person being on the vacation should mean they need to do every chore at home.
If they have done less than normally then i fully understand the frustration, but if they have done their part, or more than that i think its selfish to think that they should be doing everything.
Just want to say that even if the basic casino has low profit margin, it gives nice foundation for other revenue streams. Lodging, food, drink, merch, shows, tournaments, conferences, events etc.
You can question whether we know everything, that’s always fair. but saying “maybe something will escape a high-gravity planet because we don’t know everything” is like saying “Maybe we’ll find out 2+2 isn’t always 4 because math isn’t complete.” Possible? In a philosophical sense, yes. Useful? Not really.
Most “revolutionary” discoveries refine our understanding, not overturn the foundation. Relativity didn’t make Newtonian mechanics wrong. It expanded the domain. Quantum mechanics didn’t nullify classical physics. It explained small scales. Dark matter didn’t erase gravity. It suggests additional components.
When you argue, “We’re still making discoveries, therefore our predictions about what is possible are worthless,” you’re ignoring that the discoveries rarely contradict established, experimentally validated constraints.
You aren’t offering any reason to believe our current models are wrong, only that they could be wrong because science is incomplete. By that logic, any claim can be doubted indefinitely, and no amount of evidence ever matters.
But i truly like your child like enthusiasm for space. You throw intresting ideas around, but so far they have been only wishfull thinking. Difference between science, fantasy and religion is, that when something new is proven in science, people accept it, but it needs proof first.
In fantasy people throw crazy ideas and have fun, knowing they are not real.
Religion is when you have “faith” that something is true.
You are living in somewhere between fantasy and religion with your ideas. There is nothing wrong with it, but it makes discussions meaninless, because while i try to argue based on science you dont have any limitations and can just say. “We dont know, maybe they can manipulate time”. Its really convinient isint it.
There are games where you watch how protagonist reacts to the world. (The Last of Us)
There are games where you decite how protagonist reacts to the world. (Mass Effect)
Thete are games where player reacts to the world (Zelda, Dark Souls, Valheim)
I feel like Crimson Desert is more of the last category.
deleted by creator
You’re treating scientific uncertainty as if it means “anything is possible.” It doesn’t.
We don’t assume variables on other planets match Earth. Astrobiology, planetary science, and exoplanet studies are built on the opposite assumption: that most planets don’t resemble Earth. When scientists estimate what life or civilizations could be like elsewhere, they work from measurable constraints (gravity, density, stellar flux, atmospheric composition), not wishful thinking. For example, we know that: A planet with 3× Earth’s gravity constrains organism size, structural strength, locomotion, and escape velocity. A planet with a dense hydrogen atmosphere changes chemistry and energy availability. A star’s light spectrum dictates photosynthetic possibilities. These aren’t guesses. They follow from basic physics and chemistry, which apply everywhere.
“They misestimated a heat shield” ≠ “we don’t understand planetary physics.” Engineering uncertainty in a single atmospheric re-entry doesn’t invalidate the underlying physics. Weather variation, material tolerance margins, and modeling limits don’t erase Newtonian mechanics or thermodynamics. If your argument were valid, airplanes would disprove gravity because turbulence is hard to predict. Scientific uncertainty does not mean lawlessness.
An organism the size of a mountain on a 10g world can’t simply evolve because “maybe their brains are bigger.” Biology cannot override: stress limits of matter metabolic scaling laws biomechanics gravity energy density limits An advanced species might innovate, but it doesn’t get to ignore basic constraints. A billion-year-old civilization would know more than we do, but they still can’t accelerate to escape velocity without energy, or support infinite mass with finite-strength materials. Knowledge does not nullify physics.
For all we know, they could be scientifically a billion years ahead of us and might be able to manipulate time or matter in ways we couldn’t conceive
This is pretty much just “We can’t rule out magic, therefore you’re wrong. Science can only operate on what’s known to be possible or what follows from tested theories. Speculating about physics-breaking abilities isn’t meaningful without evidence; it’s equivalent to saying “you can’t disprove dragons.”
When scientists say “a civilization on a super-Earth would struggle to reach orbit,” they base it on: the planet’s mass and radius → calculates escape velocity atmospheric density gravitational load on structures realistic energy sources We don’t need to know the exact geology to know that a planet of a given mass requires a minimum amount of energy to launch mass into space. That’s just conservation of energy.
Saying “we don’t know everything” is true. Saying “therefore any extreme scenario is viable” is not.
I would argue that main character being some what plank canvas is more a design thing than anything else.
Player is experiencing the world themself and its not filtered trough the protagonist morals.
Zelda games, especially Breath of the wild does things similary.
Yeah. I think you have some kind of frequency illusion situation going on.
Like many have pointed allready there has been many great single player games relased in few past years.
Care to give few examples of what games irk you?
I was sure you were bullshitting, but no. Its true.
Iron and nickel core + enough mass for gravity to start compress the planed and we are just little more dense than Mercury.
Uh… being smaller or larger does not really change the laws of physics… if the gravity is too high, no fuel has enough energy density to escape the gravity of the celestial body.
If you need 150kg of fuel to get 100kg worth of matter to escape velocity it does not matter how much fuel you have. It will not ever be enough to leave.
Another way of looking it is that she earned more money during the year than she estimated.
Haha you funny angry man.
If you really try to look. I mean really really put all your mental capacity to work, you can see that there was three. Yes. Three other examples in the list.
The most clever people among us also notices how they all were from different sides of the world and from different cultures.
Oh my. Could it be?! Could it be that, you only see what you want to see and compartmentalize any opinion that differ from your view to nice and cozy, easy to digest boxes? Have you ever tought that you might do that on other parts of your life too?
Here an idea:
Instead of throwing tea in the sea,
Find a better fucking target.
Hmm.
French revolution started because bread was expensive.
The Arab spring started because people got mad how one market stall keepper got treated.
Russian revolution if 1905 started when one factory was closed.
Boston tea party happened because of taxation.
Legistlations came months or even years after any of these revolutions
While i agree with you that things should be solved by civilized means, in enviroment where workers have no rights, union busting is normal and politicians dont get changes made, what else there is to do?
Would be simpler just to call them turtles and landturtles.
Do you think discussions like that happen in real life?
No it does not mean banning anything.
Goverment sets certain stantard of public healthcare and education, but if you want something outside of it, or for some reason, like long wait time for surgery etc. you can go to private sector.
I would love to hear you explain your train of tought here.
I mean they refer to their partner so there is no way of deducting the gender.
And they only refer to singular event, so it is impossible to know if they have only played the whole week or if the original commentter just got frustrated about the one thing.
I would also love to know what education level you are talking about, where jumping in to conclusions from incomplete data is acceptable reason to act superior.