data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7cc43/7cc431702c48f84b426d571dd07bad1a30be0001" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6576e/6576ea4e70b7a5e70f05e9305034cad89ff6fae0" alt=""
A situation where Russia invades EU and US immediately after invades greenland, no longer looks so impossible to me
A situation where Russia invades EU and US immediately after invades greenland, no longer looks so impossible to me
Better to suck Putin’s cock than to have a female president
Long story short, there were two main issues that people had with Epic:
The first issue speaks for itself. The second needs a bit more context.
Tim Sweeney has an history of being arbitrary. One year he says one thing, the next another. Relevant to this case, Tim was openly against PC gaming back in the day, while Valve was pushing for PC gaming. We’re talking around 2010, where console gaming was predominant, most publisher favored consoles against PC. Valve at the time was one of the few companies betting on the PC platform.
Now, he’s suddenly pro PC gaming. People see this as him doing a 180, and trying to take the spoils from Valve’s work.
Then there were also some comments that he made that aged like milk, but generally speaking this is why people take an issue with Epic but not Steam
It already exists: ₿
I’m under the impression that the idea of an unified EU army is that they would be able to act independently in case of an attack, no need for votes or bureaucracy.
If that’s not the case, then yeah that’s a problem