Agreed, although I typically keep everyone in jumpsuits while on the ship (kinda treating them as g-suits to deal with the sheer amount of force they're under during combat). That said, I've discovered the Tamiyo(?) AIO hab comes with a toilet (no shower though).
Hopefully mods'll add a proper bathroom hab, you'd think the companionway 1x1s would be perfect for this function.
Great question! Really loved the Bioshock series, along with Bethesda FPSs (although they're not great, I rather enjoy the open worlds). Cyberpunk was great fun, although disappointing in a lot of ways. The Doom series is a personal favourite, although Eternal wasn't perfect, I really loved how the stories were handled in the previous two games.
For me, I like to seek a balance between story and gameplay. My big thing though is immersion, and being able to really understand the Universe the game takes place in.
Whilst not FPSs, the closest thing to Halo that I loved (Space-Opera shooters), the Mass Effect trilogy tops the list.
I'm gonna piss a lot of people off, and say that I really, really cannot stand Halo - the whole franchise, not just the 343 stuff.
The way I see it, my problem with the series is twofold: storytelling and gunplay. The storytelling is weak at best: whilst I'm usually a huge fan of environmental storytelling, there's just so little information in game for me to go off! It wasn't until I read the Reach novel that I figured out who the Covenant were beyond just "evil aliens". I questioned this issue on the site we don't talk about and was told to read the books, but put simply, if I have to read a book to understand your plot, then you haven't told your plot well enough. Chief is presented in the game as this incredible figure (as are the Spartans), but the games never really tell you why, and as such I never really care about Chief or his bullshit.
Regarding the gunplay, I find it (and movement) simply too floaty to be enjoyable. There isn't enough recoil from a lot of the weapons, and the SFX on most of the guns don't give a great sense of power.
I understand that it's a massive series of nostalgia for a massive number of people. I understand that it redefined FPSes, and I respect the games for this. They deserve every bit of praise people give them. They aren't bad games, but I just do not enjoy them.
To preface: I have studied constitutional law (was a lockdown subject for me). I'm not going to claim to have the understanding of either the High Court or the Constitutional Lawyers I've encountered, and bear in mind IANAL, and nothing I say here constitutes a true legal interpretation.
Based on both other legislation where the term "powers" has been used, as well as the context in which it is used in the proposed wording, I read it as referring to any abilities it may rely on in order to make its representations. I couldn't tell you what these may be, as that would depend on the Government of the day, but my expectation would be they'd be related to information gathering, decision-making (including whether a chair would exist and veto power), whistleblowing, and those kinds of things.
The wording is purposefully very vague of course - which serves a few purposes. The big one is about making it hard for oppositional forces to take it to the High Court to claim whatever controversial action its taking is unconstitutional; there've been a few cases like that that just end up wasting the court's time, along with tax payer money. Similarly, keeping it vague gives plenty of room to legislation to define its limitations, and allows for evolution as the needs of the community change.
Sorry for the essay mate, tl;dr: did study Constitutional law, had a great teacher! Powers is kept vague, but I would argue it refers to abilities. Vaguery is a good thing in a constitution because it gives room for the law to adapt and evolve.
Not what equity means. Equity refers to equal access to the same opportunities. Put simply, due to their post-genocide, White Australia Policy and "Breeding out the Black" (real campaign) numbers, Indigenous Australians completely lack representation in Parliament. Therefore they lack access to the opportunities your average Australian (regardless of race) has. An Indigenous Voice to Parliament will make things more equitable, not less, as it will provide access to the same opportunities of representation that the rest of us have already.
I am enormously sick of the no campaign brigading every discussion with terrible arguments in bad faith.
I have yet to encounter a legal expert, or for that matter, an Indigenous Australian who is accepted by their community, who is opposed. Similarly, the law is my degree. I've spent five years of my life studying it, and although I'm not a graduate yet (two units to go), I'd think I'd know more about this shit than Joe from bumfuck nowhere on Facebook.
There is no case for a no vote. None whatsoever. The change would not grant special rights to Indigenous Australians. It has been repeatedly explained by both lawyers and politicians. You can read the change yourself. It has to be a constitutional change, because that protects it from being outright removed by successive governments, which is the very thing that happened to the previous body that performed this role. By definition, it is not racist, as racism refers to negative treatment on the basis of race or ethnic background, and not differing treatment. This is one of three steps proposed by Indigenous Australians towards reconciliation, and isn't the endpoint. If it fails, it will be the endpoint.
When the colonisers arrived, Indigenous Australians outnumbered colonisers. Now, they make up just 2.5% of the population. We are driving them to extinction. If this fails, by the time we get around to trying again, it is likely the genocide will have all but been completed.
Ethically and morally, a yes vote is the only choice. Legally, it is the best choice for change.
Meanwhile, my boss refused to give me a raise because "we don't take inflation into account" and "your coworker was using his phone, and therefore you might be".
Frankly, if they get a payrise for doing fuck-all, I should be getting at least equivalent for busting my arse and producing some of the best results for the company in a decade.
Also, fuck the fact that we don't have legislated consistent payrises. If we legislated wages being directly tied to inflation, life would be much easier.
Not remotely microtransactions at all. The purchase you're referring to is the deluxe edition upgrade, which came free to anyone who played the game during the beta, and costs $10 USD for:
The Soundtrack
An Artbook
An ingame dice skin
Some completely cosmetic items that are outclassed by literally every other thing in the game.
Honestly? To call this a microtransaction is making a pretty big and unjustified claim. This is a bonus to chuck the devs a little extra money for the soundtrack and artbook. The additional stuff is moreso a bonus for purchasing the first two. By comparison, CoD charges $18USD for a gun skin.
Mate, you have no idea what you're on about. Larian is one of the most transparent studios there is, and they have not once released a game with microtransactions or DLC. Similarly, every game they made has had a free "definitive edition" within twelve months of release.
Research before you make claims like this, Larian are not a AAA studio.
Got a source on the child labour thing? Not doubting you, but as a non-American I'm confused as to how the hell youse aren't in open revolt.
EDIT: Responding individually later. In short, fuck. In long, thanks all for sending me those links, I'm gonna go wash my eyes out with bleach and attempt to un-know all that I now know
Successful and good are completely different and unrelated metrics. Fifty Shades of Grey was extremely successful, but no one in their right mind would ever call it good. Psychonauts was met with universal acclaim, and is widely considered to be one of the best games of all time, and yet it was a complete flop and needed more than a decade to get a sequel.
Bethesda games are extremely successful. They are not good games, and their success is not a good thing. Bethesda kicked off microtransactions in 2007 with Horse Armour. This decision completely fucked the wider industry. Not a fan.
Honestly mate? Not at all. I'm concerned about Starfield because of Bethesda's track record since Fallout 4, and in particular, their constant attempts to introduce paid 'mods' to their games through the creation club (which are always overpriced for tiny amounts of content) as well as how broken their games have been at launch since Morrowind. When my PC, which can run Baldur's Gate 3 on max settings, can't run Oblivion without mods without regular crashes, then there's a big problem.
I want Starfield to be good. But Bethesda do not make good games. They make broad games, but there's no depth, and what is there is fairly consistently buggy. They have the Pokemon problem though, where people are willing to give them a pass because of the big name. I guarantee you, if a smaller developer released games in the state that Bethesda does, their games would be (rightfully) panned.
Agreed, although I typically keep everyone in jumpsuits while on the ship (kinda treating them as g-suits to deal with the sheer amount of force they're under during combat). That said, I've discovered the Tamiyo(?) AIO hab comes with a toilet (no shower though).
Hopefully mods'll add a proper bathroom hab, you'd think the companionway 1x1s would be perfect for this function.