SR1 was nowhere near as bad as Tomb Raider. The combat was a bit boring and the puzzles were repetitive, but the platforming was significantly more viable than Tomb Raider.
I mean, I haven’t touched either game in over two decades, and I only briefly played Tomb Raider versus the hundreds of hours I spent in all the Legacy of Kain games, and I frequently watch cutscene “movies” of the LoK titles, but I’m sure that hasn’t created a bias in me whatsoever.
Bowser for Kart and Kirby for smash… makes sense
Just say menses and womenses when in the plural
GOTTA GO FAST (for lent)
I can’t wait to find out that Marika learned the ability to transform gender from Cap’n Crunch in the FromSoft x Quaker collab
I’m excited for your venture into the trading card business
I’ll take your entire stock
Maybe they watched Predator, I saw something similar happen there
History repeats itself…
The whole party switch thing is a bit of a misnomer, or mislead - the fact is, you had completely different worlds at the time. For example, Lincoln’s republicans supported the abolition of slavery, the abolition of alcohol, and westward expansion. The opposing democrats at the time supported white supremacy and protections of religious minorities. Then go forward a few years, and Democrats (like Wilson) wanted income taxes and silver-based money, while Republicans (like McKinley) wanted tariffs and gold-based money. Then after that, you get closer to what we know now, which is Democrats wanting larger government and welfare for the poor, while Republicans wanted less government and anti-communist foreign policy.
So there’s less of a switch and more of different gradual challenges to different shifting groups of ideologies. It just looks like a switch when you look at individual issues that look like they hold the same water as other issues today.
For example, you can have people that are absolutely for welfare, but also against religious freedoms; the poor need to be housed and fed, but everyone needs to be Christian. You could have then an opposing party that absolutely hates the idea of being theocratic, because they believe in the individual person’s freedom to be themselves, but at the expense of people who need support. Sort of the same way how Libertarians and mostly left circles can all agree that drugs shouldn’t be criminalized today, but have polar opposite beliefs for economic policies and government services.
Or smth idk I’m not an expert, I’m just taking a rly long shit
I don’t think we should let them vote. I’m all for inclusiveness, but for humanity. I draw the line at Lobstermen.
This was, verbatim, what a child said during an interview. He stumbled and jumbled over his words, uttering this incomprehensible nonsense. Others, however, try to decipher his words and dare to gleam a sliver of truth of the secret machinations of the universe.
This post reads like shit!