this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)
Games
37856 readers
549 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
WHY?! WHY ARE THEY BEING SO STUPID WITH HOGWARTS?!
They built this whole world into the game and did NOTHING with it! It's empty! Hogwarts the settings is perfect! The castle was fun to walk around in, to explore! I 100%'d the game because I loved exploring in it! Then they did nothing else to the game. I don't even remember what the antagonist's name was!
The game oversold all expectations! People just loved shelling out money for it! Then WB just dropped it.
I see things bitching every day about how their game studios don't make enough money and then they shit the bed here by just letting that game sit here!
If they're actually worried about money why are they not cranking out DLC every 4-6 months?! People would buy it! The world they built is begging to have more stories told, and people are holding out their wallets asking for more content for it - and they cancel it?!? They can't bitch and moan that games don't make money and then they just flip the off switch on their freaking money printer.
Thanks. That was cathartic.
(please do not support TERF content, pirate it if you really want to nostalgia bait yourself)
because dlc is not something you just "do". it's something of a scale and complexity that needs to be planned out from the go. If the dev team is allowed to cook you might get an Assassin's creed 2 situation. but this company will almost certainly not allow that to happen.
(please do not support TERF content, pirate it if you really want to nostalgia bait yourself)
Is someone upset they can't fork over more money to the rabidly transphobic piece of shit and the media conglomerate megacorp?
Seeing how the game prominently features trans characters and that Rowling wasn't involved in making it, it probably doesn't bother many people.
I want to support media that show and empathize with trans people, and Hogwarts is one of them. But yes, even though she was not involved, she surely is receiving some royalties due to the setting.
Rowling has enough money to donate to shitty politics for the rest of her life ten times over.
Attempts to "not support her" are about 3 decades too late and entirely irrelevant at this point beyond making people feel good about themselves. She doesn't need your support nor even registers it.
We're talking about the world's first and only writer to become a billionaire with her books here.
hogwarts is not the place to do that then. there are plenty of other queer games out there to support queer game dev. instead of pretending that giving money to rowling is doing anything to support trans people.
It would be ridiculous to pretend so. Giving money to trans-supportive games absolutely does though.
you are giving money to rowling with the purchase of any offically licensed harry potter product. that allows her to continue pushing her bullshit.
there are actual trans-supportive games out there to support and stop trying to make excuses for your inability to get past your nostalgia.
Right message. Wrong tone. Assuming you want people to fork less money to the transphobic piece of shit.
You do want that, right?
Oh shit, the tone police are here. I'm not under the impression the person I'm responding to is going to change their behavior after this has already been widely talked about to death for years, and so I really don't care what tone I use. This person is helping make the lives of real, actual, perfectly innocent trans people (and especially the lives of trans women) hell because they a) don't care about those people or somehow more pathetically b) do care but can't restrain themselves from buying themselves a children's toy to that end.
I get it. Venting online is way cheaper than therapy and twice as effective.
coddling the oblivious to enable the bigots has not been a winning strategy on any front if you simply look around.
Why'd you give money to a terf?
Ever looked at an advert? Bought a computer? Eaten food produced by a multinational chain like Nestlé? Almost every action you take will involve generating money for an absolute shit. It's fine (even encouraged) to let people who might not know that Rowing is a horrible bigot, but don't have a go at someone for enjoying a fucking video game.
nah, they asked a question. it's a loaded question for sure, but they asked a simple question. stop enabling.
What does this even mean?
stop enabling terfs. stop enabling punching down. stop enabling fascism. stop enabling ignorance.
I’ve seen plenty of “punching down” towards people who buy a game simply to enjoy it. It’s kind of happening in this thread.
If I buy a Trump bible to "enjoy" it, would you say that is wrong just because I give money to a fascist that is hellbent on killing minorities? Would telling me off be punching down as well?
ah yes, Gamers the MOST oppressed class of people.
bad faith argument that any sane person would be embarrassed to have uttered.
Not OP but I bought it for my sister who is notoriously impossible to buy birthday presents for because she explicitly requested something for once, then I played it through Steam family sharing to deny at least one sale of the game.
I'm suprised and a lil' confused why you would share this story in response. Respectfully, it feels like you're shifting blame. Like, okay, sure, It's your sister's birthdays fault you gave money to a terf.
I mean, you do you but if the trans persecution isn't a deal breaker when it comes to something so basic as media choices. Then, whatever. Own it.
Totally valid criticism, I absolutely agree with you. Times are tough for trans folk and giving money to transphobes is not helping that.
Looking back on it, I wouldn't buy it having seen how far off the deep end she has gone. I admit I dismissed her at the time as just a nutjob on Twitter but she's now proved to me that she is a bigot beyond reproach.
I also find myself in a better educated position than I was at that time. I have more LGBTQ friends and family than ever and I'm challenging anti-trans behaviour in others when I spot it.
It's less about giving money to the woman herself and more about how HP and JK Rowling are used as memetic weapons. Every release of a new property has seen a rush of transphobic actors invading trans spaces for years. Invoking the name of the author and showing solidarity in a lot of contexts is a not subtle way of showing support to the veiws expressed by the Terf ideology during a time when being trans is becoming criminalized in more places. The news isn't generally covering it well but Texas is passing laws where it is a criminal offense to misrepresent your birth sex at work or in public government spaces.
"Oh but it's just money" isn't so much the problem. It's the cover this entire conversation about ethical consumption or the lack thereof in daily life is providing to people throwing up open flags of anti-trans bigotry in public and using that as a tool to band together to attack the community and send open messages that trans people are not welcome in ways that the average cis person will dismiss as just "they like kid wizards".
Because I'm tired of being told what to be outraged about
You're supposed to be able to figure it out yourself. People wouldn't have to tell you these things if you were smarter.