Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning
Posted Sep 1, 2005 9:48 UTC (Thu) by quintesse
In reply to: Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning
Parent article: On the defense of piracy enablers
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
To use "conceptual integrity" in this case is just playing the system, Blizzard is telling you that client and server are one inseperable product just like Microsoft said that IE was inseperable from Windows.
You gave an example about the German stadium before. I'm pretty sure that the changes they wanted to make were pretty obvious that the architect didn't agree with them. I guess that if the problem had been in the quility of the plumbing and they wanted to remove the tubes and replace it with a new better ones the architect wouldn't even have tought about objecting about the conceptual or artistic integrity, don't you think?
Well the Blizzard case is the same, they don't want you to believe that, they're trying to make you believe that what they have made is Centre Pompidou and that in this case the plumbing is an integral part of their product while it is not. It's the plumbing or foundation of a building, the wall the painting is hanging on, the plastic that makes the CD that contains the music etc.
to post comments)