If you ever feel like doing a second playthrough (the side quests and DLCs are fun) then train with captain Bernard, the captain in Ratttay, he teaches you some combos and blocks that make combat a whole lot more manageable.

A general strike would be one example.

It’s hard to have an army without an economy, and it’s hard to effectively enslave a nation by forcing them to work at gunpoint.

I guess Mexican drug cartels are pretty much the libertarian wet dream.

Ooo, that one’s good, I’ve never thought of that before. I bet “So you want a weak government like Mexico?” would short circuit many libertarian’s brains.

Even then, it was only legally abolished, some plantations never had any Union soldiers come, so they never freed their slaves, just kept them in “sharecropping” agreements but they weren’t allowed to leave. Actual share cropping was also horrific and also sometimes had slavelike conditions.

Some of these fake “sharecropping” agreements stayed in place till the mid 1900s.

Here’s a very excellent video by Knowing Better on Neoslavery.

Skyblivion actually has a confirmed release date in 2025 already.

There’s all sorts of reasons being unionized could help create a better product.

Hopefully it means less insane crunch but it’s still up to the higher ups to say “ok good enough” and release before it’s polished right?

Yes you’re correct, but the union beyond just meaning less crunch, also means that the average worker has more pathways to be vocal about problems with the product. They also now have a “nuclear option” of going on strike if management makes a decision regarding the product that the union really doesn’t like.

Beyond all that though, even just basic stuff like job satisfaction/happiness at your job, can lead to a better product in creative industries, and unions are proven to lead to happier workers.

Didn’t she work as a prosecutor? A literal prosecutor, vs a literal criminal, might be able to make an effective dichotomy of democracy vs fascism in (somehow) still undecided voters.

Oh this could definitely be it, let the union exist, get the good press, and then fuck them hard in contract negotiations.

Microsoft has actually voluntarily recognized a gaming company union before. It seems they prefer to voluntarily recognize the unions and then fight them during the contract phase, not sure exactly why they do it this way instead of trying to stonewall the first step like most companies.

It’s objectively not. It was great back when Oblivion came out

It objectively is for their use case. What do you want them to do? Switch to Unreal? Switch to Unity? Switch to any other pre-built engine? They can’t, none of those will work for their use case without major modification.

Want them to create an entirely new engine from scratch? I mean, they could do that, but that would involve throwing away 20 years of innovation and experience on this product and would delay any projects massively.

Want them to massively update their engine? They just did with Starfield’s Creation Engine 2.0, which fixed or improved 90% of their engine issues and is a massive overhaul of their original engine.

This is a company that recently sold for several billion dollars, they’ve undoubtedly had a team investigating what they could to do their engine for at least a decade, and they’ve decided that this path is the only realistic one for them.

But I’m sure you know better than the large team that does this for a living. /s

It would be pretty much a copy/paste fix in the engine. They have just opted not to.

You either misunderstood the comment you’re replying to or don’t know how the unofficial patch works or both.

99% of what the Unnofficial patch fixes have absolutely nothing to do with the engine. For example, we’ll use the Skyrim Unnoficial Patch, easily the biggest and most popular. It fixes literally nothing in the engine, it fixes certain models not having textures wrapped correctly, it fixes certain meshes or textures having small errors like clipping, it adds a new flag for a town that didn’t have a flag in the original for some reason, the absolute closest it gets to an “engine fix” is fixes for different scripts that sometimes fire incorrectly.

Literally none of these are engine issues or fixes. Sure, they definitely should’ve fixed them before releasing the game, but it’s not like these are engine issues that have somehow persisted for 20 years. They’re very small bugs with models, textures, and scripts, which are all individual game issues, not engine issues.

Fo3 had a small update recently to get rid of Games For Windows Live and to fix Windows 10/11 compatibility.

The FNV update was probably something similar.

That wasn’t exactly on Todd Howard, though? There was going to be a new update for Fallout 4, and everyone, especially every modder, knew that for at least a year beforehand.

There are 5 other even larger projects in development other than Fallout London, Fallout London was the only one to come out and blame Bethesda for a foreseeable delay.

The right wing of any political system is regressive

Yes, I completely agree. That’s what I’m saying. I don’t see how you can fix that other than universally disallowing the right wing of politics any influence over decision making, in which case the left will likely fracture in between its most left wing elements and it’s most centre-left elements and the process starts again.

So unless you want endless purging of whatever happens to be on the right wing of your political spectrum, I don’t see what the cure to Conservatism or the right wing is.

7/10 Nazis killed in WWII were at the hands of the Soviets

And 10/10 of the Polish officers and civilians killed at Katyn were at the hands of the Soviets too. There’s no point in defending a regime that did horrific things, just because they happened to kill a lot of people who also did horrific things.

There’s also no point in arguing that “one nation won the war” against anyone in World War 2, the war would’ve been significantly worse and more brutal had almost any of the allied nations not participated.

Without the US lend lease and factories, the Soviets wouldn’t have had a chance, and it would’ve been a much much more brutal battle even if they succeeded. Not to mention the massive amount of work the U.S. put into fighting Japan in the Pacific almost alone.

Without the Soviets the other allies would have had no continental power to distract the Germans, and North Africa would likely have fallen along with the UK.

Without the UK, the Axis would’ve had a much much easier time navigating waterways and trading with the world, not always having the possibility of being harassed from one of the UK’s colonial ports or airports. Not to mention the constant threat of invasion from the sea and the opening of a second front that the UK provided.

There’s others I won’t even mention because it would take too long like the invaluable support of India and China without which Japan would’ve dominated Asia, and the people of Africa and South America who also contributed.

There’s literally no way a non-propagandizing historian could put the victory solely on any of the Allied nations, each and every one was completely indispensable

There can’t really be a cure though, what’s “conservative” is just whatever is on the right wing of a country’s politics at any point in time.

Which government are you talking about? Most land owned by the government in the U.S. is either worthless desert, contracted out to the private sector, or the small bit leftover that’s actually used by the federal government.

It’s imperative to understand that non-internationalist worker movements that don’t care about imperialism are the actual bourgeois concessions that you mentioned earlier.

Certainly, but the left wing of the Labor party and the Communist Party in France were the ones to advocate for and eventually succeed in gaining decolonization, instead of endless campaigns of repression.

Excuse me, which demsoc movements have control in the so-called “democratic world”?

Lula in Brazil, Luis Arce in Bolivia, Claudia Sheinbaum in Mexico, and Gabriel Boric in Chile to name a few.

Speaking of Cuba, I bring another source: a book by Pedro Ross called "how the worker’s parliaments saved the cuban revolution

I’ll have to read it, I’ve been meaning to do more research on Cuba.

Anyhow, how’s your statement that as soon as they have multi-party systems you’ll consider them successful, consistent with your claim that you measure success on the material conditions of the working class?

I believe the main abuses of the Communist parties were caused by their complete control over power with no recourse. When the party became repressive, the leaders/bureaucrats making the decisions couldn’t be voted out, not even by average party members. I also just thoroughly have an issue with the party dictating to the working class what it’s priorities are, and not the reverse. I’m not arguing they’d even have to start having multi-party elections, but at least have multiple people within the part contest the same seat in the politburo/central committee/legislature, argue for separate sets of ideas or plans (that adhere to party ideology), and let the party members decide which should be deciding the future of the party and country. That’d be enough for me, currently I see the political selection process in communist states to be controlled from above, usually by the highest organs of power, such as the Organization Department of the Chinese Communist Party, which controls the party and state bureaucracy, and the Politburo, which controls the process in China.

I think there’s just a different measure of success. I think the socialist movement that built up the NHS in England with Bevan, the movement that built the Workers Coucils in France, the socialists that wons the 8 hour day globally, the Zapitistas, the PKK/YPG, and the rest of the socialist movements that built the modern welfare state could be considered successful.

I measure success more on the material conditions of the working class, rather than if the party has complete control over a country. Currently the democratic socialist movements have more control in the Democratic world, global South and global North, than the Leninists do.

The very second that China, Vietnam, Cuba, or Laos actually allows for free elections between multiple socialist factions, and not just the control of society by a party elite, that’s the second I’ll consider those leninists more successful than the Democratic Socialists.

I would also like to note because my other reply ran out of space, I wouldn’t consider myself an anti-communist, but rather pro-democracy.

There’s plenty of communists, even leninists, that I look up to for inspiration, people and movements such as Allende, Sankhara, Che, Hu Yaobang, and the French and Italian communist parties being some examples, and I don’t think the actions of Lenin or even Stalin are universally bad, just that their authoritarian actions allowed for abuses that never should’ve happened in the name of socialism, and that there’s also plenty of inspiration in non-Leninist democratic socialists such as Goldman, Luxemburg, Haywood, Bevan, and Meidner.