I bet you if No Mans Sky was compatible with Occulus Rift or some other flash in the pan head goggle someones head would explode from confusion and mixed emotions.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
1. yes there are people who are falling over themselves over No Mans Sky 2. we DO know about the playablity and features of those 'other' games 3. we DONT know about the playablity and full feature list of No Mans Sky 4. Many if not most of those 'other' games have said playability and is compelling experience, while No Mans Sky we dont know if its compelling because we cant play it.
that is all I am saying on that topic.
I think we can keep it to a 3 point exchange at most before it gets out of control so I am trying to mitigate that.
Wow. lol
Cheers Mate!
I'm kind of upset that I seemed to have completely missed all the crazy hype No Man's Sky is getting. Out of all my gaming friends, I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who even knows about it.
First time we've seen the game, and it already looks closer to being finished than Star Citizen.
Game looks interesting, but we'll see.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
Landing on planets? yeah already covered by about 6 games now (or so I would have to count)
does it matter how many games can do this??? Don't buy it, but many people do and may want to buy them all or one out of the bunch since it may have different features...I don't see why companies can't make games to have competition...Competition is a good thing..
Landing on planets? yeah already covered by about 6 games now (or so I would have to count)
does it matter how many games can do this??? Don't buy it, but many people do and may want to buy them all or one out of the bunch since it may have different features...I don't see why companies can't make games to have competition...Competition is a good thing..
out of all the games that do this general 'thing' No Man Sky literally looks like the LEAST attractive of all of them.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I bet you if No Mans Sky was compatible with Occulus Rift or some other flash in the pan head goggle someones head would explode from confusion and mixed emotions.
It is will be on the Ps4 vr in fact many are saying that's why it was delayed from August to late year. Remember No Man's Sky was a Ps4 exclusive but it will now be available on pc but not xbox1.
Interesting. It seems to have a very small scale, though. Flying from planet to planet is faster than I can get to the car to drive to the airport to fly to a neighboring state. Let me correct myself, it's not a very small scale, it's a sub-atomic scale. Space should feel bigger.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
Yup, and that's exactly the problem. What is the expectation of quality for a "pre-alpha"? At least in Alpha and Beta there are more clear expectations, although I think that they have become less and less realistic. The sentiment seems to be "If I'm paying for it, it should be of good quality." Therefore, I would opt for going back to strictly offering beta testing. That's it. Oh, and when I say beta, I mean a true beta, not like the Destiny beta or OW Beta which happens a week before release, lol.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
If someone told you you were playing a "pre-alpha" build of a game, then they were lying to you, lol
The original meaning of "pre-alpha" was the design stage, i.e. no game exists yet. "Alpha" means "the beginning", so "pre-alpha" means "before the beginning".
But then again, nowadays it seems that "pre-alpha" means whatever the developer wants it to mean.
Modern marketing methods have to cater for things like paid early access game play, and to justify the shoddy state of the game that you "paid" to play early, we now have a total perversion of the "alpha" term.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
If someone told you you were playing a "pre-alpha" build of a game, then they were lying to you, lol
The original meaning of "pre-alpha" was the design stage, i.e. no game exists yet. "Alpha" means "the beginning", so "pre-alpha" means "before the beginning".
But then again, nowadays it seems that "pre-alpha" means whatever the developer wants it to mean.
Modern marketing methods have to cater for things like paid early access game play, and to justify the shoddy state of the game that you "paid" to play early, we now have a total perversion of the "alpha" term
that sounds like a purposefully created logic loop.
you are saying no product that a person can play is pre-alpha.
I say:
1. it doesnt matter
2. a developer can call a product what every stage they want to anytime they want to and they can even make up words
3. a 'playable pre-alpha' I think we all know what a person means when they say that unless we are new to gaming.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
Yup, and that's exactly the problem. What is the expectation of quality for a "pre-alpha"? At least in Alpha and Beta there are more clear expectations, although I think that they have become less and less realistic. The sentiment seems to be "If I'm paying for it, it should be of good quality." Therefore, I would opt for going back to strictly offering beta testing. That's it. Oh, and when I say beta, I mean a true beta, not like the Destiny beta or OW Beta which happens a week before release, lol.
1. some people here are saying its literally impossible to play a pre-alpha becuase by definition they pulled out of their ass you cant play a pre-alpha. I however, understand what you are trying to say.
2. a developer can call any stage of a game development anything they desire. There isnt a strick rule that comes from god that makes it not possible to call what should be called a beta a pre-alpha if they so desire it so what the developer calls it really dosent matter
3. I am playing (a game that is in early development) called Out of Reach and its a ton of fun. That is all I care about. Is if fun. if developer wants to call it released, pre-alpha, beta, alpha or fuck nuts with ice cream, i dont care.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
Yup, and that's exactly the problem. What is the expectation of quality for a "pre-alpha"? At least in Alpha and Beta there are more clear expectations, although I think that they have become less and less realistic. The sentiment seems to be "If I'm paying for it, it should be of good quality." Therefore, I would opt for going back to strictly offering beta testing. That's it. Oh, and when I say beta, I mean a true beta, not like the Destiny beta or OW Beta which happens a week before release, lol.
1. some people here are saying its literally impossible to play a pre-alpha becuase by definition they pulled out of their ass you cant play a pre-alpha. I however, understand what you are trying to say.
2. a developer can call any stage of a game development anything they desire. There isnt a strick rule that comes from god that makes it not possible to call what should be called a beta a pre-alpha if they so desire it so what the developer calls it really dosent matter
3. I am playing (a game that is in early development) called Out of Reach and its a ton of fun. That is all I care about. Is if fun. if developer wants to call it released, pre-alpha, beta, alpha or fuck nuts with ice cream, i dont care.
1. Haven't you claimed to be a software developer? Have you ever cracked a text book on software development? I don't think that people are pulling definitions from their asses. It's, actually, quite well defined that anything prior to Alpha is Pre-Alpha. You're simply contributing to the nonsense and marketing bullshit by claiming that there is anything other than that. So you're essentially being sold a polished turd whenever someone is selling you a "pre-alpha". All it means is that it's in some state of completion between conceptualization and Alpha.
2. Again, you're right, you can call it whatever you like. In fact, if there's one thing that software companies are horrible at is standardizing terminology. So, yes, you could call it "Julie" or "Steve", but it doesn't change the fact that pre-alpha, as described in text books, is "in development". It's just as ambiguous as that.
3. I'm glad you're having fun with the game that you're participating in. That wasn't really the point, though. The point was, and I think your original comment illustrated it well, that marketing obscures where the game is in that life-cycle. Why I think your post supports that is that you're very happy with the game you have in EA that is "pre-alpha", and it is of good quality. However, there are others which are horrible which also claim to be in "pre-alpha". Both games could turn out to be great, but the public opinion of game 2 is inaccurate because labeling it as "pre-alpha" gives the impression that it's closer to being done than what it really is. The label does nothing to help determine a timeline for the game in the least and only raises concerns about quality that may be completely unwarranted.
I guess I am going to be the party pooper - this is a good example of a trailer that won't live up at all to the actual game (if it ever gets finished).
Just my hunch.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think this looked all that amazing. I see this and all I can think is Space Engineers. I've done all of this already.
I see it didn't take SEAN long to come in to a completely unrelated game's thread and start dissing No Man's Sky. I crack up every time he directly compares NMS and SE, as if they're even remotely similar, other than being in space. I guess it's obvious he would do the same here, seeing as this appears to be SE 2.0.
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
I am 'pre-alpha' player for Out of Reach and I got to say that game is really good. It needs more content but even at its current state it has more content then most released games so there is that
Yup, and that's exactly the problem. What is the expectation of quality for a "pre-alpha"? At least in Alpha and Beta there are more clear expectations, although I think that they have become less and less realistic. The sentiment seems to be "If I'm paying for it, it should be of good quality." Therefore, I would opt for going back to strictly offering beta testing. That's it. Oh, and when I say beta, I mean a true beta, not like the Destiny beta or OW Beta which happens a week before release, lol.
1. some people here are saying its literally impossible to play a pre-alpha becuase by definition they pulled out of their ass you cant play a pre-alpha. I however, understand what you are trying to say.
2. a developer can call any stage of a game development anything they desire. There isnt a strick rule that comes from god that makes it not possible to call what should be called a beta a pre-alpha if they so desire it so what the developer calls it really dosent matter
3. I am playing (a game that is in early development) called Out of Reach and its a ton of fun. That is all I care about. Is if fun. if developer wants to call it released, pre-alpha, beta, alpha or fuck nuts with ice cream, i dont care.
1. Haven't you claimed to be a software developer? Have you ever cracked a text book on software development? I don't think that people are pulling definitions from their asses. It's, actually, quite well defined that anything prior to Alpha is Pre-Alpha. You're simply contributing to the nonsense and marketing bullshit by claiming that there is anything other than that. So you're essentially being sold a polished turd whenever someone is selling you a "pre-alpha". All it means is that it's in some state of completion between conceptualization and Alpha.
2. Again, you're right, you can call it whatever you like. In fact, if there's one thing that software companies are horrible at is standardizing terminology. So, yes, you could call it "Julie" or "Steve", but it doesn't change the fact that pre-alpha, as described in text books, is "in development". It's just as ambiguous as that.
3. I'm glad you're having fun with the game that you're participating in. That wasn't really the point, though. The point was, and I think your original comment illustrated it well, that marketing obscures where the game is in that life-cycle. Why I think your post supports that is that you're very happy with the game you have in EA that is "pre-alpha", and it is of good quality. However, there are others which are horrible which also claim to be in "pre-alpha". Both games could turn out to be great, but the public opinion of game 2 is inaccurate because labeling it as "pre-alpha" gives the impression that it's closer to being done than what it really is. The label does nothing to help determine a timeline for the game in the least and only raises concerns about quality that may be completely unwarranted.
lol
1. yes I am a software developer and as a software developer I am telling you flat out that a developer DOES NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES. please try to understand, yes that is in a textbook but there is no ruling authority on the planet that forces a developer to follow it and AS A DEVELOPER, i am telling you its not uncommon for us to completely ignore those rules. are you clear yet? Its called 'best practices' not 'shit doesnt work if you dont follow them'
2. your admitng to number 1 but in number 1 pretending that you dont understand. odd
3. again to make it crystal clear. Software development cycle is a 'guideline' that is very often ignored, not done 'by the book' and it can be that way at the developers choice but as a gamer all you need to worry about is 'are you having fun' game can be called in a 'pre-pluto fuck nuts with ice cream.001' phase and it doesnt change that important factor.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Game looks interesting, but we'll see.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
Don't worry, this game won't make the slightest difference to NMS's success, it won't even slow it down slightly, lol
This is pre-alpha footage, so this game is still a year or two from release at best. NMS launches in a few months' time !
I love the revival of the spaceflight and space sim game genre. :-D
Have fun
having the quantilion gazilion planet does not even make sense
So What Now?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I agree, it looks pretty horrible. This is where the ambiguous naming conventions begin to hurt games. Pre-alpha == essentially anything. It's a development build. Problem is that people now believe otherwise, like there is some sort of timeline attached to Pre-Alpha like it's a phase of testing or something. So by labeling it as being captured from a pre-alpha build, I feel like it gives the false impression that what we're seeing is closer to being done than it actually is.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Hmm, what was it again... it's like at the tip of the tongue..
Ahah, potential!
That's the word I was looking for. Haven't seen it for so long, took a while to identify it.
It is will be on the Ps4 vr in fact many are saying that's why it was delayed from August to late year. Remember No Man's Sky was a Ps4 exclusive but it will now be available on pc but not xbox1.
Yeah lol.
Where is Mr have Fun?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Have fun
Yup, and that's exactly the problem. What is the expectation of quality for a "pre-alpha"? At least in Alpha and Beta there are more clear expectations, although I think that they have become less and less realistic. The sentiment seems to be "If I'm paying for it, it should be of good quality." Therefore, I would opt for going back to strictly offering beta testing. That's it. Oh, and when I say beta, I mean a true beta, not like the Destiny beta or OW Beta which happens a week before release, lol.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
The original meaning of "pre-alpha" was the design stage, i.e. no game exists yet. "Alpha" means "the beginning", so "pre-alpha" means "before the beginning".
But then again, nowadays it seems that "pre-alpha" means whatever the developer wants it to mean.
Modern marketing methods have to cater for things like paid early access game play, and to justify the shoddy state of the game that you "paid" to play early, we now have a total perversion of the "alpha" term.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
2. a developer can call any stage of a game development anything they desire. There isnt a strick rule that comes from god that makes it not possible to call what should be called a beta a pre-alpha if they so desire it so what the developer calls it really dosent matter
3. I am playing (a game that is in early development) called Out of Reach and its a ton of fun. That is all I care about. Is if fun. if developer wants to call it released, pre-alpha, beta, alpha or fuck nuts with ice cream, i dont care.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
1. Haven't you claimed to be a software developer? Have you ever cracked a text book on software development? I don't think that people are pulling definitions from their asses. It's, actually, quite well defined that anything prior to Alpha is Pre-Alpha. You're simply contributing to the nonsense and marketing bullshit by claiming that there is anything other than that. So you're essentially being sold a polished turd whenever someone is selling you a "pre-alpha". All it means is that it's in some state of completion between conceptualization and Alpha.
2. Again, you're right, you can call it whatever you like. In fact, if there's one thing that software companies are horrible at is standardizing terminology. So, yes, you could call it "Julie" or "Steve", but it doesn't change the fact that pre-alpha, as described in text books, is "in development". It's just as ambiguous as that.
3. I'm glad you're having fun with the game that you're participating in. That wasn't really the point, though. The point was, and I think your original comment illustrated it well, that marketing obscures where the game is in that life-cycle. Why I think your post supports that is that you're very happy with the game you have in EA that is "pre-alpha", and it is of good quality. However, there are others which are horrible which also claim to be in "pre-alpha". Both games could turn out to be great, but the public opinion of game 2 is inaccurate because labeling it as "pre-alpha" gives the impression that it's closer to being done than what it really is. The label does nothing to help determine a timeline for the game in the least and only raises concerns about quality that may be completely unwarranted.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
1. yes I am a software developer and as a software developer I am telling you flat out that a developer DOES NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES. please try to understand, yes that is in a textbook but there is no ruling authority on the planet that forces a developer to follow it and AS A DEVELOPER, i am telling you its not uncommon for us to completely ignore those rules. are you clear yet? Its called 'best practices' not 'shit doesnt work if you dont follow them'
2. your admitng to number 1 but in number 1 pretending that you dont understand. odd
3. again to make it crystal clear. Software development cycle is a 'guideline' that is very often ignored, not done 'by the book' and it can be that way at the developers choice but as a gamer all you need to worry about is 'are you having fun' game can be called in a 'pre-pluto fuck nuts with ice cream.001' phase and it doesnt change that important factor.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다