This is an interesting theory if you haven't seen it. It's only eight minutes long, but if this is true, there is no such thing as an NPC, they are all YOU (or me, or noyoushutup {wonder which water-muddier HE is these days})
Don't know if I believe this, but it's somehow comforting to me.
Level implies balance, which a) represents momentum of motion and b) implies ones choice at the center. Therefore...same balance for difference choices. The few suggest the inversion thereof, hence multiple levels/balance for the same choice (following).
Sleight of hand: games suggesting the player to reach the end of the level or to level up.
we clearly see a differentiation
Being one implies being different from every other one. One can only see (perceive) differentiation (moving differences aka perceivable inspiration)...others tempt one to ignore this for suggested sameness, hence you ignoring one (singular) for we (plural).
https://youtu.be/h6fcK_fRYaI
This is an interesting theory if you haven't seen it. It's only eight minutes long, but if this is true, there is no such thing as an NPC, they are all YOU (or me, or noyoushutup {wonder which water-muddier HE is these days})
Don't know if I believe this, but it's somehow comforting to me.
retards gonna re
We have that in common then.
Level implies balance, which a) represents momentum of motion and b) implies ones choice at the center. Therefore...same balance for difference choices. The few suggest the inversion thereof, hence multiple levels/balance for the same choice (following).
Sleight of hand: games suggesting the player to reach the end of the level or to level up.
Being one implies being different from every other one. One can only see (perceive) differentiation (moving differences aka perceivable inspiration)...others tempt one to ignore this for suggested sameness, hence you ignoring one (singular) for we (plural).