Most surfaces in space look like a quarry. So that’s fair. You could also include the ones that are on fire and the ones inside of some sort of toxic cloud.
But the exceptions are the most interesting parts. There’s a reason there’s not much entertainment out there about people stranded in deserts, mountains, and open oceans that feature not a single encounter with life.
I’ve played Star Citizen, roaming dead space and lifeless planets gets old fast.
I mean, space also looks like this:
Point being: the statement “space looks like X” doesn’t make any sense because space looks like literally everything.
I mean, space doesn’t look like anything.
Then what are the lines on on my graph for huh!? Dummy
Also true. Even truer, in fact. Still validates classic Dr. Who having trash production design.
What do you mean “Dr. Who trash production design”? I really can’t understand why you would say “Dr Who trash production design”! /s
Most surfaces in space look like a quarry. So that’s fair. You could also include the ones that are on fire and the ones inside of some sort of toxic cloud.
But the exceptions are the most interesting parts. There’s a reason there’s not much entertainment out there about people stranded in deserts, mountains, and open oceans that feature not a single encounter with life.
I’ve played Star Citizen, roaming dead space and lifeless planets gets old fast.
Is most surface area on planets/asteroids, or on stars?
Walkable and filmable? It would be the rocky ones.
Tecnically, this photo is taken in space.
All photos are
I like your point, but to be pedantic, I think in this context “space” is short for outer space.