Player freedom doesn't mean open world. Crysis for example spoke a lot about player freedom because it gave you a ton of different tools to go through the levels as you wanted. But it was still a linear single player game

Of course they are

Not being likely to win doesn't make them illegitimate.

The UK is a FPTP system with 7.5 significant parties

I'm not even fucking American 😂. I just believe that people have the right to stand and vote for a legitimate candidate.

They vote anti establishment in general, which is the green party.

I just personally hate anyone who tries to argue somebody doesn't have a right to ruin for presidency, they might not win but that's not the point. If you're a democracy, any citizen who meets the criteria has he right to run for an elected position.

People are allowed to stand for election without engaging in your idiotic 2 party system

People who don't like Trump but are too anti Democrat to vote Harris

^Nobody gives a shit about your existing monarchy outside of your country

Patently false.

30m Americans watched Harry and Megans wedding, that's 3x the viewership of the NBA finals

You have a man who's spray painted himself bright orange... Badly running for the premiership of your country.

If you want to operate in a country, you have to abide by their laws.

Pogba went for about 80 ish million YEARS ago and Rice is a much better player.

There's like a 50 minute gameplay walkthrough.

I don't agree with this at all. Some of what it does is absolutely fantastic, some is fairly basic. It's a game of very high highs, but some of the lows bring the game down. The game has improved a lot since launch though, and this xpac seems to improve it a lot more. Nothing's guaranteed but I'm cautiously optimistic.