I just played the most recent round of stress testing after the initial invite-only beta a few months back. The game is in WAY better shape post-delay than it was initially, but I can’t help but feel it still needs some significant additional time to bake. The devs definitely seem to be taking player feedback to heart, so I do have faith it could get to a good spot, but I’m personally going to wait for a steep sale to purchase, at which point it would ideally be patched into an even better place.
Weapon attachments, a more on-the-fly equipment and gear game… Some small QoL items… Honestly aside from getting to ride the hype of a new release there isn’t much to this iteration that “elevates” it beyond KF2. That’s largely why I said it still needs time to cook. If you took everything that KF2 did right and polish the shit out of it, crank it to 11 so to speak, then I could see a full separate release as justifiable. This one is definitely feeling more like a rebase so that they can go even HARDER after micro transactions and battle pass monetization.
I played only a bit of Oolite about 10 years ago and man, this does not look like the same game at all. In a good way, of course! There’s actualy detail on the ships now! Props to the Oolite team!
My 3 year subscription to gamepass (I got it by buying 3 years xbox gold cards from brazil and upgrading to gamepass by buying one month so dont hate me) expired a month ago. I was able to beat expedition 33 just in time to never give them money again. Yesh.
…made in 2018 by a Russian team. Way before the whole Ukraine war thing, you understand
Flipping through a history book on Russian/Ukrainian relations in the 21st century
Closing the book, putting it back on the shelf, whistling, and walking away
More seriously, I’ll never understand folks who hear “So-and-so is from Nationality X, so now I must/must not purchase products from them because of their bloodline.”
That’s definitely fair, but there is the argument that the largest source of change for major powers is through harming their economies.
Sort of like, I like the artistry from this person from X nation, but by giving them money, I am indirectly helping fuel the economy of X nation, therefore giving their goverment less incentive to change existing behavior.
The problem is that in order to achieve that collective impact, a whole lot of innocent parties who have no support for or active hostility for the existing regime are also badly impacted. Usually individuals will greatly suffer before the political or structural systems will ever change.
So it’s a bit of a bind. Support Russian media, comes with the side effect of supporting the Russian regime, at least indirectly from their income flowing into taxes. End of the day, it’s a choice to make.
It’s also that you’re fueling their cultural influence. Cultural influence does a lot of sanitization. Look at how japanophiles often fetishize Japan rather than seeing it as a country with good and bad elements. America was particularly good at this conversion.
I’d love to see some data backing this argument up. Doesn’t seem like years of sanctions on Russia, Iran, or North Korea had a sufficient impact to cause any change. Harming the economy can just as likely be used to reinforce the regime by creating a common enemy and blaming them for the people’s hardships (like North Korea does with the USA) On the other hand, use of force was pretty effective in causing change in Nazi Germany or Japan.
Of course it’s not all straightforward. Change by force can have negative results, and change by economic means can have positive ones. That’s why I’d love to see the data, if there is any
Doesn’t seem like years of sanctions on Russia, Iran, or North Korea had a sufficient impact to cause any change.
Seems like it made them more insular, more self-sufficient, and more hostile to future diplomatic entreties.
Change by force can have negative results, and change by economic means can have positive ones
What if, instead of trying to extort or kill a nation’s residents in order to force them to adopt your preferred foreign policy, you simply afforded them an opportunity for peaceful coexistence?
Putin wouldn’t be President of Russia if the US and the USSR had been able to settle their differences without a 60 year long series of proxy wars and regime changes. Neither would Trump, for that matter.
Putin is in power specifically because they settled their differences and Yeltsin was such a drunk idiot that it pushed people to vote for someone who promised stability and prosperity. Putin wasn’t very anti-West until the 2010s. I’m old enough to remember when there was mild talk about Russia joining NATO.
My bad, i didn’t realize the separatist action in Donbas was in 2014. I was thinking of 2008, but that was the Georgian invasion and unrelated to the post I replied to
youtube.com
Aktywne