Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning
Posted Aug 24, 2005 19:55 UTC (Wed) by FlorianMueller
In reply to: Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning
Parent article: On the defense of piracy enablers
The first example is unrealistic WRT the cost of Internet access of the USA (where the bnetd decision was made), but even if it weren't, it doesn't take into consideration that all Blizzard games provide for LAN play.
The difference between a game and a file system:
- For a game, the interest of the designer in controlling the conceptual integrity and of his piece of art must be rated higher than for a file system.
- For a file system, the interest of the user in heterogeneous access is a more valid one than of someone to tamper with an entertainment product.
The combination of those two factors is why the comparison might have a different outcome in the end.
As for instant messaging like ICQ, I generally would agree that there's no pressing need to access them except if one dominates the market. Interoperability can be mandated for anti-trust reasons (as is just happening to Microsoft in the European Union).
to post comments)