They really did. Even got some Doralingus & Associates vibes from some of these.

I think they literally replaced the game people owned prior, and removed features.

I definitely remember that they made legal language for it so if anyone made anything like DoTA out of it again, they’d own it.

Of course, the game was rejected by the community.

Edit:

…but was plagued by bugs, a lack of features and poor design choices such as the “massive” user interface. German magazine GameStar opined that the remaster was still a good game in regards to its single-player, despite it not including the promised changes and additions, but its multiplayer features were now either worse than before or non-existent.

Player response was overwhelmingly negative. On release, the game was review-bombed by users on Metacritic, temporarily becoming the lowest score ever for a Blizzard game, before being surpassed by 2022’s Diablo Immortal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warcraft_III:_Reforged#Reception

Well, to put it succinctly:

If the system is made well, maybe it can be very easy to drive a carriage over them and remove a lot of them relatively quickly.

I wonder if they can get away with just using a single bolt for each panel. Or maybe none, just long pins and the power connection. Unplug and lift straight up? Maybe it doesn’t have to be a big issue.

I’ll have to check if there are detailed plans.

Iirc it’s decidedly uncool, with how gimped the remastered version of Warcraft 3 is.

And like other time-limited services outside entertainment, the duration should be made clear. I’d personally like something as clear and blunt as:

"We guarantee access for at least X months/years after paying the license.

After service is suspended we will release all information and code necessary to set up a private server or otherwise restore function."

And for the worst kind:

"We make no guarantees of access duration, and can revoke your access immediately after paying the license.

After service is suspended we will not release information or code necessary to set up a private server or otherwise restore function."

Ideally the last type dies out completely, or becomes exceedingly rare.

These always online, server-dependent, licence-limited games are very unlike what we used to deal with; Books, DVDs, CDs, and other games on disk/cartridge or with a simple download that you can keep and use for as long as you live as long as they’re still stored and in readable condition.

They’re very different, and should be treated like it.

There should be a very clear visual difference when looking at the box or store page of a game that is made to simply last as long as you keep the code stored, and a game that won’t. A consistent warning design. Maybe two color codes.

Look at the reality of what has happened to animal rights progress after the animal rights movement was effectively replaced.

It has flatlined entirely.

Not voting wasn’t productive

This is the casually dismissive attitude that got you the next 4 years. You should know how this would go, but you’re apparently still in a bubble?

So basically you think I’m wrong that it would be that unpopular of a decision.

You’re a motherfucker with your human rights violating humor. Also, dads are motherfuckers. Also, the user who thought you were theirs shouldn’t get back in contact with a dad that would subject a stranger to that kind of humor.

Yeah, the quick way to filter them is a quick way to piss off Metacritic users.

How the fuck can you claim to have read what I wrote?

That kind of removal would be unpopular, a lot of people would drop Metacritic fast.

That’s where we’re going to focus the problem solving, when that’s how you choose to stir shit up. We’re going to focus on preventing climate activists from destroying shit, and we’re going to talk about how to punish them.

You didn’t read what I wrote.

You only saw the disagreement.

Your dad is a real motherfucker, Lally.

If my advice means anything, don’t get reunited.

Is that really the smart thing?

I’m fairly confident that would be about as good for them as shooting themselves in the foot.

You have to realize what world you’re living in. These people and their agreeing friends aren’t just a loud minority, just yesterday they demonstrated something that really should have informed your worldview more than it seems to have, given what you suggest here. That kind of removal would be unpopular, a lot of people would drop Metacritic fast.

To an extent I agree with them, in that they ruined the tone of the game, but unlike these reviewers I personally think developers are allowed to make standalone slop. It doesn’t ruin anything I’ve bought from them before.

Finally by all reasonable accounts it absolutely is a woke, pronoun-conscious, DEI focused game. Those words wouldn’t even really be out of place if one showed up in a positive review.

You have to learn to think before you make yourself more unpopular.

I’m from Estonian Lemmy, and I’m not even Estonian!

“The painting itself was unharmed, but the 17th-century frame sustained some damage after the soup acted as paint stripper on the delicate surface.”

So climate activists’ official position is to target the frames of these paintings, as they see them as important enough to piss people off but not important enough to preserve?

Time to lock originals away from the public forever.

Same. Idiots make it less, not more likely to see actual change.

If I went out and smeared yogurt in the face of every kid in a stroller to call attention to the cause, please stop me.

Don’t worry, they’ll start being forced to read the good book in school some time next year.