Oh and on the “freedom of speech” thing HoloLens-Fan mentioned. In my counrty, the US, it means you can not be imprisoned for what you say by the authroites…mostly. Like you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater that isn’t and not expect to face any consequences if people get trampled and die because of what you did
And sadly a lot of citzens here seem to have no idea what Freedom of Speech means and what it does not. I recently had a coworker get fired because of all the crazy conspiracy shit he kept talking about to other people here and even in front of customers sometimes. And when we told him to stop, because he was going to get fired (plus none of us wanted to hear that shit) he would yell “you can’t make me stop, I have freedom of speech!”
That’s not how it works. At least that’s not what freedom of speech means here. It means we could not have anyone drag him off to jail for what he was saying. It does not mean no one can question, or criticize what you say, or that your employer could not fire you for it
Holo, not sure if it’s the same way where you are from, but based on the way you threw that one at me, I hope it’s not, or you may have a fundamental misunderstaning of it as well
I haven’t finished it but from my experience every head shot was a kill while using a non auto rifle. Even when not in stealth, the rifles can one-shot anyone in a single hit on normal difficulty mostly it was heavies with helmets that could take a hit.without dying.
But after I upgraded the rifle for better penetration that wasn’t a problem, but for whatever reason automatics needed more than one shot even with penetration, so I went with it explosive rounds and and poison rounds(causes frenzy and enemies fight each other) that while they do less overall damage but helped with clearing locations when the non auto was not enough.
It’s also only means the government can’t censor what’s being said (barring matters of National Security). It does not mean private companies can not moderate what’s being said in their premises or on or through their services. They’re very much like your favorite local bar, if you get too loud, obnoxious, or abusive, you can be bounced. Sometimes even with a punch to the face.
I just felt you were not getting where I was coming from and were being overly defensive about it. You could have explained things to me far differently than you did. I don’t hate your country, I was merely wondering if you guys hated mine and if so, why
We might be talking in the same language ‘English’ but come from far different countries with maybe different way of expressing views. Let’s and call it a day and talks about games.
That all got way out of hand. Very sorry for causing that little fracas to everyone who saw that. I often go back and read things I’ve said and realize that it may come off confusing, or very differently than how it does to people from my neck of the woods
You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now
P.S. mods who come upon this. Sorry for making you have to deal any of that. If I get a warning or even time off for this, I get why and won’t hold it against you…and won’t call you dickheads
Anyone else taking advantage of the Far Cry 6 free weekend? I wasn’t gonna but then I thought “hey I got nothing else going on this weekend”, and so now I’m trying to blast through it. Judging by my progress so far - I’m not gonna get it finished but oh well.
I’m so far having fun though, but the main point I’ve been thinking is that these games seem to be struggling to find their identity as an open world game since Ubisoft towers became so frowned upon. It’s a bit of a shame really, because I actually think the Ubisoft towers approach (to clarify: “climb the tower, reveal an area of the map and all the side activities available”) SUITS Far Cry. The open world in Far Cry exists to facilitate the sandbox action that can occur - the fun chaos that can occur as you get into scrapes with wildlife, or passing trucks or just by giving the player the freedom to approach an objective however they choose. It doesn’t really function in a way to make the player want to explore it freely. I don’t think that’s inherently bad it’s just the way they design their open worlds, and so Ubisoft towers (or even just giving the player a checklist of things to do) is kind of ideal because they just tell people where to go if they want to do any particular kind of activity. Instead Far Cry feels like it’s stuck trying to encourage exploration because that’s what people demand when it really doesn’t fit the game.
Far Cry 6 feels somewhat awkward about this, at the start of the game you’re given a map which shows you all the paths and roads across the open world - it marks out which areas aren’t safe which gives you a rough idea of where some enemy bases are BUT some of these are part of optional side objectives and some of them are part of story missions. You have no real way of knowing till you get there or the game diagetically points you in it’s direction from reading notes/bribing soldiers/getting information from other rebels. It’s a little awkward, sorta makes me wish I just had a map of check marks to go clear.
There is one thing it does that I like though, and I think it points to what Far Cry SHOULD be doing - one of the optional side objectives is anti-air guns dotted around the map. You can’t fly anywhere near one till you get it blown up, and so they naturally reveal themselves if you fly within their target radius. This works really well, both in it’s simple execution and in that it’s an open world task that has an actual effect on how you play the game. It makes me think - why isn’t Far Cry just copying Crackdown 1 at this point.
For those who haven’t played it the structure of Crackdown was basically that each region had a hierarchy of bad guys to take out, you could go STRAIGHT for the one at the top if you really wanted and finish the whole region off neatly but you’d be up against a MASSIVE challenge if you did. Working your way up their ranks not only has the advantage of letting you gain XP and build up your character, but killing each major enemy would have an effect on the overall faction. “This guy was in charge of recruitment, the faction has less soldiers available now” - that sorta thing. By killing all the high ranking enemies, you’d weaken the leader and make the final mission in that region easier.
I think this would work incredibly well for Far Cry if they recontextualised the whole open world checklist around it. “You took over their munitions factory, enemies can now run out of ammo and have to resort to melee weapons” “You took over this roadblock, there’s now less trucks patrolling the region and a chance backup will not come when requested”, “You destroyed this barracks, every location now has less enemies”. Far Cry 5 and 6 both follow a similar structure where there’s 3 major regions run by 3 people working under the main antagonist so it’s already pretty well set up for it - Far Cry 5 even goes so far as to give the player complete freedom to do whatever it is they want to do because your main progression is tied to a meter on how much damage you’ve caused to the enemy (or something to this effect) and that fills up whether you complete open world side tasks or do story missions. You can beat the game having barely even touched the story. I’d say go back to that, give the players the option to go take on each regions final dungeon WHENEVER they want to and rework the open world and the missions to all have an actual tangible effect on the enemy forces and how the final dungeon plays out. That would make for a more interesting game I think.
Anyway long chain of thought I was just playing it and thinking about that and wanted to ramble a bit.
Wow this is an interesting thread about people leaving MS because of 30% pay increases which is kinda a huge pay increase which surely means the people like working at MS so it takes a fairly big increase to leave.
In the thread people have actually taken a pay cut to work at MS because of the culture.
I am curious about the positions that pay 400k-500k lol
Though usually when you have a higher salary you get less social benefits. Also in fintech, usually the salaries are very very high but there you are aging faster.
