spiffmeister

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What's the point of contesting if you have no policy positions? All they've said afaik is pretty much identical to lib talking points "labur/greens is failing the act", "no one is listening to the people"

So far seems pretty cynical imo.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I haven't quite finished it yet, my feeling is that it slightly overstays it's welcome.

I've also noticed that most of the time I do a thing or two in the game then realise there's not quite enough time in the loop to do another thing, but just enough time to make me want to not waste the loop, since I find starting a new loop a bit tedious.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

From memory it respawns the low level enemies constantly, since they're just ammo/health/armour pinatas. You needed to kill the big enemies to complete an arena.

Not really a fan of the design choice, but I had a decent amount of fun when I clicked with how the Devs wanted you to play.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

slug

That's "vindictive and devious baby elephant" to you mate.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It really is shocking how talentless you can be to be a successful right wing talking head.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

I convinced my partner to play it recently and the way I knew she'd finished it was that I could hear sniffling from the desk behind me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

American politics infects Australian politics in many ways sadly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

This changes the effect of negative campaigning (people still show up in Aus vs the US), but the idea is to dissuade people from voting for someone, rather than encourage them to vote for you. This might have a positive effect on votes for the party doing the negative campaigning, but I think it's a poor definition of convincing someone to vote for you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I don't think this is a useful definition of voting for

which implicitly gets them to vote for you.

Seems to only be true if you think of there being only 2 parties, which is why I don't think the definition is good.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

It's hard to cuff someone doing a nazi salute when your right hand is up in the air.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Compulsory voting means any campaign has to be focused on actually getting people to vote for you

I don't think this is necessarily true, did you miss the massive amounts of negative campaigning that happens every election?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

He fucking loves playing this card.

view more: ‹ prev next ›