I believe the reason it happened, in short, is that Take2 (the publisher) were really obsessed with the release being a surprise, at the cost of far too much.

For one, this meant that basically every job listing for the game never described what the game you’d even work on was. Most of the devs they got were juniors who:

1. were willing to sign more restrictive contracts without the confidence to push back
2. did not necessarily know much about the game, or even the genre (supposedly, besides Nate, only 1 dev was an active KSP1 player and another was aware of the game but never really played)
3. this game was their first sizeable project

For two, it meant that a lot of management roles were taken up by people from Take2 to enforce the secrecy (who also saw KSP as having franchise potential, but that’s a rant for another day). Few of them intimately understood what makes us dorky nerds enthusiastic about KSP.

This is also part of the reason they avoided talking to the KSP1 devs; they were afraid of some of them even hinting that a sequel was in the works. As to why they continued to not talk to them after announcing the game I’m not sure. Perhaps they were afraid they’d tell the uncomfortable truth that the game was making the same development mistakes as KSP1 and more.

But then I’ll never sleep

EEEEEEEEE

People have been crazy enough to try.

Ok this may sound insane but trangle cut sandwiches definitely taste different than square cut. 3 holed donuts obviously won’t but at least with sandwitches it changes how much of the crust vs everything else you taste.

My understanding is that leaves contain some compound(s) that, when wet and under the extremely high pressures that train wheels provide, becomes one of the most effective lubricants we know about. In other words, the brakes literally won’t do anything because you’ll slip-n-slide your way at the same speed you were going before.

TOEM is usually the game that I suggest for this sort of genre. I got it from someone who had an extra key from a humble bundle, and in hindsight I wish I bought it because they deserve the money.

don’t worry, those are lowercase L’s

Who long dragon? You long dragon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3XPi1E7nYA

Yeah honestly I wish more products had laws like this. Or, actually, the rule should be you can’t sell it at a higher price within a certain time frame, because that’s a better indicator of scalping.

I’ve been wanting to buy one of the B580 GPU’s intel released, but as soon as there’s stock it immediately gets bought out and resold on amazon at a 150$ markup. I can’t think of any other rule that would effectively stop this behavior.

Were you trying to set firefox’s volume? I’ve encountered that when I forgot I set the volume of a youtube video from in the video player. For whatever reason Firefox implements that functionality by repeatedly overwriting it’s own volume in pulseaudio/pipewire.

As someone who’s used both, I’d have a strong preference for Odin over Rust if it were at a stable 1.0 release. As it stands now (or, at least, when I used it), Odin is very much in flux. Spend enough time with the language, and you’ll either find a bug with the compiler or the semantics will change after you update.

That said, it would be my favorite without those problems. It is a really simple language in a good way. There’s no fancy language features that are just syntax sugar (well except maybe context, but I find that to be actually convenient). You can understand everything in an afternoon if you are already familiar with programming in other languages. Rust is pretty much the opposite in all of these reguards.

Rust also has the benefit of being pretty recognizable at this point, so if you say your project is in Rust then people will know what that means, unlike Odin. More “resume-able” in a way.

So, in short:

• Odin if you’re doing it as a hobby
• Rust if you want something “real”

Has the OP actually had doritos? Every bag has some chips that have 3x the coating and others with barely any. I have a bag in my living room and can confirm this.

Usually whan people make this argument with BG3 as evidence it comes with the implicit assumption that Larian is a AA developer, not a AAA one. I haven’t done enough research on what constitutes AAA vs AA and where Larian fits in that so I don’t know if that’s reasonable, but that’s the argument.

To me it looks like the artist fully redrew the frame again, and for the most part the differences are mistakes. They probably redrew it to make it undeniable that it’s separate frames, similar to doing the same thing in animation to give a flipbook effect.

Left because it filters out the other hacker’s viruses.

Gnocchi I wouldn’t personally call a noodle but if someone did I wouldn’t call them out on it. Hell, I probably wouldn’t even notice.

Ravioli is definitely a noodle. Not the stuff inside, though.

Pierogi is a similar story to ravioli, even if it feels less "noodle"y to me.

Other dumplings it depends. Chicken & dumplings’ dumplings for example definitely aren’t, as that’s usually leavened (and even when the aren’t they’re still quite bread-like). Bao isn’t for similar reasons. Gyoza if steamed/boiled is again like ravioli, and I’d still describe it that way if pan-fried but only because of it’s resemblance to boiling it.

Point is, the american english definition of noodle, or at least how I use it as an american, is boiled, unleavened dough. When you see americans refer to some food as a noodle it’s more often a textural distinction, not a shape one (even if most would consider noodles to have a canonical shape, which is why the OP feels the need to clarify sheets).

While I do agree that math gets much easier with interest, and that it gets more interesting the further you get into it, and that math is inherently beautiful, etc. I feel this argument has to fall flat to people who don’t already agree. It’s the education equivalent of when someone says they couldn’t get into an anime and then the fans tell them ‘oh it gets really good around season 9’. You could be completely correct, as you are here, but it’s utterly unconvincing if you don’t already “know.”

To be fair, I think this is mostly a problem with math curricula. Math classes up through high school and early college seem to focus on well trodden solutions to boring problems, and at some (far too late) point it flips around to being creative solutions to interesting problems. I think this could be fixed eventually, but such is the system we have now.