Most of my gaming this year has been on my iPad. There are a lot of enjoyable “real” games… Just to give some examples: Total War, Six Ages, Slay the Spire, FM23, Kingdoms Two Crowns, Vampire Survivors, and I’ve played many more.
Just in my small social circle, I know of a family where the father was addicted and it actually kept them from putting food on the table, and another friend who only has part time work but still managed to spend over a thousand dollars and choses to live with her parents.
I've never had anyone ask me such a strange question. I think most humans know that when someone says "hi" you say "hi" back, I don't see how that could be confusing to new team members.
Yes. The sentence in question is "Yucatán es una tierra la de menos tierra que yo he visto".
The section "la de menos tierra" sounds fine in isolation, as do the preceding and following sections.
But together they give off a very archaic feeling. Understandable since it was written almost 500 years ago.
A modern version, might be:
Yucatán es la tierra de/con menos tierra que (yo) he visto.
If you know Spanish and you read that sentence and the following ones here: https://www.wayeb.org/download/resources/landa.pdf (cmd+f or go to page 101) you'll notice that every single sentence is rendered differently as it would be in modern Spanish.
An example:
Yucatán es una tierra la de menos tierra que yo he visto, porque toda ella es una viva laja, y tiene a maravilla poca tierra, tanto que habrá pocas partes donde se pueda cavar un estado sin dar en grandes bancos de lajas muy grandes. La piedra no es muy buena para labores delicadas, porque es dura y tosca; empero, tal cual es, ha sido para que de ella hayan hecho la muchedumbre de edificios que en aquella tierra hay; es muy buena para cal, de que hay mucha, y es cosa maravillosa que sea tanta la fertilidad de esta tierra sobre las piedras y entre ellas.
And a quickly made conversion into modern Spanish, trying to preserve certain things while excising others haphazardly:
Yucatán es la tierra con menos tierra que yo he visto, porque toda ella es piedra viva, y tiene maravillosamente poca tierra, a tal grado que habrá pocas partes donde se pueda cavar (4-5 metros cuadrados) sin dar con grandes bancos de lajas muy grandes. La piedra no es muy buena para labores delicadas, porque es dura y tosca; pero, tal cual es, ha sido usada para construir los numerosos edificios que en aquella tierra hay; es muy buena para cal, de la cual hay mucha, y es cosa maravillosa que esta tierra sea tan fértil, sobre las piedras y entre ellas.
EDIT: so everything is understandable really, but some things, like the phrasal adverb (?) (locuciónes adverbial) "a maravilla" has become less used than using -mente to convert an adjective into an adverb. And some articles are used strangely, and some words aren't used anymore (estado as a unit of area), empero instead of pero, etc.
I'm glad I could help. And yes, I can see how it can be difficult to distinguish them, especially since there really wasn't any word that truly has become obsolete in those sentences, except the specific meaning of estado, it was just a matter of how everything works together, both words and phrases.
Also note that even in the modern version I made, some sentences sound formal, or perhaps literary, such as "que en aquella tierra hay" rather than the super informal "que hay allá" or the middle ground "que hay en aquella/esa tierra".
Also note that I completely botched the spelling of lucuciones adverbiales by adding an accent and eliding the plural, oops.
If you have good enough performers, unfamiliarity with the language won't get in the way.
It might seem a bold assertion, but there's a reason that classically-trained Shakespearian actors are often cast in sci-fi shows (Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen as perhaps the most famous examples). They're trained to convey more information through intonation and gesture so that you don't need to know the words they're saying, which translates well to performances in invented languages.
I tend to agree (Alec Guinness being another great example), though I think it is also about how big a deal live Shakespeare was in Britain in the eras those actors came up. A lot of good British actors were in Hamlet because they were talented and of age.
It'd be extra convincing if there were more non-Brits with Shakespeare backgrounds that became big Sci Fi actors to point to. There are American Shakespeare companies or performances, but it's a much smaller deal.
ETA: another source of great sci-fi actors was Hammer Films, which produced Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. Great American sci-fi actors come from more backgrounds because there's more acting jobs in America.
David Tennant (THE Doctor) is performing Macbeth at Donmar Warehouse in London this winter. One show basically ticks three boxes (actor, play, and theatre) for my wife and her Shakespeare fandom. So it's a 10 hour flight for us in December.
Maybe I just didn't encounter any such performance when I was less... to be perfectly honest, I don't think I've ever seen a Shakespearean stage play I've been able to fully follow, even though my English is OK nowadays.
I've always had to use captions and backtrack/pause.
Laurence Olivier is a great actor. I've enjoyed several of his films, including his Hamlet adaptation (which he also directed). I have yet to watch Richard III though.
It was my first encounter with Hamlet so I didn't have another frame of reference to judge the performance.
And I had already watched him in other movies such as Rebecca (I didn't like the movie except for the (some of the) end) so maybe I was used to his acting.
