Hogwarts Legacy - Not as good as Dog Kid University

[Rex Grossman]

Just now, Graham S said:

That’s really not what happened. He made a good point about what he’s done, which I took on board politely. He did (politely) imply that those of us who are talking about trans issues on rllmuk should be quieter and instead do something as laudable as he has done, without knowing what’s going on with us in the real world (for clarity I personally haven’t made a deep and meaningful change to society, although I do my bit in my immediate vicinity). Understandably, some people must have rolled their eyes a bit at that, and someone suggested he might come have across as a bit glib. Further discussion and apologies ensued, we’re all on the same side, and are grateful for his work. 
 

I don’t think the people who are speaking up for trans rights here are hysterical, despite repeated claims we are. 
 

At most you’ll see a few people affected by this, who are a bit stressed, voicing their distress. No need to police their tone. Just listen to them and wonder why they seem so upset. It’s easy to appear calm and rational above the fray if you don’t have skin in the game. If you do it takes more effort. 

This will be little consolation but you are certainly not the type of person I was referring to. Quite the opposite.

[Ste_S]

2 hours ago, Isaac said:

Yeah, WB won't donate to a trans charity as it is a tacit admission of guilt, which might damage the brand further. 

 

So instead they will stay silent and do what they currently are doing, which is try to separate the brand from JK as much as possible in people's minds (removing her name from the titles of the films, for example). 

 

I reckon there's probably a clause in JKRs contracts with Warner now; she's not allowed to post gender critical stuff on social during the release window of any new properties in the franchise, without penalties.

[Jamin]

Anyone here actually bought the game? Any thoughts? It seems to have scored higher overall reviews that I anticipated it would.

[Zael]

Also just to say, you don't need an excuse to talk about this stuff on Rllmuk. You might call it "screaming into the abyss" others have said "we've made our point". But it's a forum for discussion. People who constantly talk about balance in a shooter, or how a certain actor is in a movie, or how someone performs in a sport, don't need to justify why they're talking about it. They're not being accused of making their point, they're not being asked to go out into the world and make a difference. When this game releases and people talk about the graphics, or the quest design or the writing, no one is going to tell them to make their point and move on. Because in those instances people understand Rllmuk is about discussion and nothing else. It's a bit telling that this topic isn't granted that same understanding. 

[jonny_rat]

1 hour ago, g wings said:

First, a sincere thank you for taking the time to post about this. 
 

Second, I’ve honestly never meant to post in a way that implies expectation or superiority. It’s simply that I read a lot of passion here and just think how impactful it could be if used the right way.

 

To be clear; I’ve ignored lots of  opportunities that I could have stepped in to. I don’t feel especially bad about it because I know you can only support if you’ve got the energy/time/ passion and I often don’t, especially at the moment. I also get people thinking that they can’t contribute even though I think there are so many ways to do so.

 

Sincere apologies to anyone I’ve offended. Truly.

 

This bit hits me hard - I haven't done a days volunteering since having kids (and even worse I don't work in the sector any more, so can't even see myself as doing any good in my day to day either).

 

[Floyd]

10 minutes ago, Jamin said:

Anyone here actually bought the game? Any thoughts? It seems to have scored higher overall reviews that I anticipated it would.

 

Me too. I honestly thought it'd get 6s and 7s out of 10. Roll on Friday!

[Rex Grossman]

10 minutes ago, Zael said:

Also just to say, you don't need an excuse to talk about this stuff on Rllmuk. You might call it "screaming into the abyss" others have said "we've made our point". But it's a forum for discussion. People who constantly talk about balance in a shooter, or how a certain actor is in a movie, or how someone performs in a sport, don't need to justify why they're talking about it. They're not being accused of making their point, they're not being asked to go out into the world and make a difference. When this game releases and people talk about the graphics, or the quest design or the writing, no one is going to tell them to make their point and move on. Because in those instances people understand Rllmuk is about discussion and nothing else. It's a bit telling that this topic isn't granted that same understanding. 

You don’t need to justify anything to anyone.

 

EDIT Although people sure as shit wanted g wings to justify his comments.

[Paulando]

Bought this for my wife, as she hasn’t played a video game is years, but used to love Assassin’s Creed and Bully, and likes Harry Potter stuff I guess. Basically games with big maps and lots of waypoints to tick off.

 

Nothing else has tickled her fancy for a while, but this seems like it’ll be perfect for her. Looking forward to her enjoying a game again 

[jonny_rat]

4 minutes ago, Rex Grossman said:

You don’t need to justify anything to anyone.

 

EDIT Although people sure as shit wanted g wings to justify his comments.

 

Would you like me to justify my comments in response to their post? It's hard to see what else you could be aiming for here.

[Rex Grossman]

4 minutes ago, jonny_rat said:

 

Would you like me to justify my comments in response to their post? It's hard to see what else you could be aiming for here.

It wasn’t aimed at anyone is particular. People in general really didn’t like the suggestion that we can do something constructive.

[HarryBizzle]

My wife doesn’t really nerd out over anything but Harry Potter is about as close as she gets to doing so. She remembers playing these games extremely fondly:

 

 

I showed her a bit of this to see if she might be interested in the idea (the chances of her actually sitting down to play a video game are zero) and she wasn’t bothered in the slightest! Have to say I’m surprised. Looks cool to me and I hate Harry Potter. 

[Mike]

My partner is very excited to play, as she grew up loving Harry Potter, so I’m looking forward to getting to watch her play it, might even have a go myself. 

[Floyd]

12 minutes ago, BubbleDragon said:

i reckon my partner might be really interested in having a go at this if only just to wander around Hogwarts rather than to play the game fully.  

 

I know a few people in particular who will want to do just that! I realise I barely know anything about it in comparison. I do envy the the proper hardcore potter fans who are going to get something out of this that I'm not. If this was lord of the rings related I'd of booked the week off work. 

[Wiper]

I've avoided posting in here because I felt like I'd just be adding background noise (as a quick summary: I like the look of the game, and very much enjoyed the first four books growing up; meanwhile my housemate outright credits the series with keeping her alive as a teenager as waiting for the later books was her reason for carrying on; but both of us can't bring ourselves to give any money or support to so vocal and hateful a bigot as JK has become so we won't be picking up the game. If this sounds similar to other people in thread, that's because it evidently is).

 

However, I wanted to post because I found the way different outlets are dealing with the issue interesting, So far I've seen highlighted IGN's weak attempt at having their cake and eating it ("we'll leave a comment below the review, not even a cutaway box, discussing JK's views, and make no mention of wider context within the article itself"), and have been enjoying Rock Paper Shotgun's pleasing decision to not cover the game at all, but instead have a Magic Week where they highlight their favourite magic-themed games of all genres. I'd be interested to know how other major outlets have chosen to cover/not cover the game, if anyone else has been paying attention to that?

[Sumire]

7 minutes ago, Wiper said:

I've avoided posting in here because I felt like I'd just be adding background noise (as a quick summary: I like the look of the game, and very much enjoyed the first four books growing up; meanwhile my housemate outright credits the series with keeping her alive as a teenager as waiting for the later books was her reason for carrying on; but both of us can't bring ourselves to give any money or support to so vocal and hateful a bigot as JK has become so we won't be picking up the game. If this sounds similar to other people in thread, that's because it evidently is).

 

However, I wanted to post because I found the way different outlets are dealing with the issue interesting, So far I've seen highlighted IGN's weak attempt at having their cake and eating it ("we'll leave a comment below the review, not even a cutaway box, discussing JK's views, and make no mention of wider context within the article itself"), and have been enjoying Rock Paper Shotgun's pleasing decision to not cover the game at all, but instead have a Magic Week where they highlight their favourite magic-themed games of all genres. I'd be interested to know how other major outlets have chosen to cover/not cover the game, if anyone else has been paying attention to that?

 

I don't know, at least IGN acknowledged it and explained why they didn't want to discuss it in their review and provided some links to stories relating to it if people want to learn more. I think they just wanted to review the game for what it is outside of all the controversy.

 

 

[Robobadlad]

GameSpot have a huge "How to help trans people by donating to a charity" banner and an article about JK Rowling's anti transgender stance on their front page, and Eurogamer seem to be not mentioning the game at all. I think they're the only two major sites not touching it though (other than RPS as you mention), the rest are treating it like any other game, although usually with a disclaimer in the text. 

[Down by Law]

Digital Foundry got review code late so that's likely why Eurogamer haven't reviewed it either.

 

Anyone here going to cancel their Edge subs if they review it? 

[Graham S]

I was irritated by the rather thoughtless PC Gamer headline “Hogwarts Legacy review-in-progress: It'd be a lot easier to dismiss Hogwarts Legacy if it weren't so good”

[Rex Grossman]

1 minute ago, Down by Law said:

Digital Foundry got review code late so that's likely why Eurogamer haven't reviewed it either.

 

Anyone here going to cancel their Edge subs if they review it? 

No way will Edge review it. I expect coverage of the backlash however.

[matt0]

Just now, Graham S said:

I was irritated by the rather thoughtless PC Gamer headline “Hogwarts Legacy review-in-progress: It'd be a lot easier to dismiss Hogwarts Legacy if it weren't so good”

 

Was just about to post about that. Greasy behaviour.

[Graham S]

3 minutes ago, Graham S said:

I was irritated by the rather thoughtless PC Gamer headline “Hogwarts Legacy review-in-progress: It'd be a lot easier to dismiss Hogwarts Legacy if it weren't so good”

Although I imagine the real translation is “It’d be a lot easier to ignore if we didn’t get a million clicks and we want the money”

[matt0]

3 minutes ago, Graham S said:

Although I imagine the real translation is “It’d be a lot easier to ignore if we didn’t get a million clicks and we want the money”

 

Exactly. And there'll be dozens of complete guide and FAQ posts, spreading the review over two articles etc.

[Robobadlad]

GirlfriendReviews got massive backlash for playing it yesterday - they did a tweet saying they were playing it that got so many negative replies that they did a follow up saying they were raising money for the Trevor Project and that they'd not paid for it. It sounds like their Twitch chat was so negative they went in to subscribers only mode. 

[Gabe]

15 minutes ago, Graham S said:

I was irritated by the rather thoughtless PC Gamer headline “Hogwarts Legacy review-in-progress: It'd be a lot easier to dismiss Hogwarts Legacy if it weren't so good”

There was some of that attitude in this thread too prior to release (on the basis people thought it looked rubbish), and I sadly suspect for the majority of people that will exactly be their thought process, so that headline will resonate with them. 

[Graham S]

9 minutes ago, Gabe said:

There was some of that attitude in this thread too prior to release (on the basis people thought it looked rubbish), and I sadly suspect for the majority of people that will exactly be their thought process, so that headline will resonate with them. 

To be clear it’s a perfectly understandable attitude from an individual rllmuk poster who’s not invested in the ethics- yeah, I’ll probably give it a swerve but if it’s a 9 then OK I’ll pick it up second hand. But I find it more irritating from a respected outlet like PCG. We would like to take an ethical stand on this but LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS ON HIS HAT. It’s silly. And is designed for clicks and hype. Fair enough to cover this game, just be a little sensitive about how you do it is all I hope for. 

 

*edit*

Also I do think it’s a lie: you’re not covering it because you think it’s culturally significant, you’re covering it because it might pay for your salary. 

[Gabe]

Just now, Graham S said:

To be clear it’s a perfectly understandable attitude from an individual rllmuk poster who’s not invested in the ethics- yeah, I’ll probably give it a swerve but if it’s a 9 then OK. But I find it more irritating from a respected outlet like PCG. We would like to take an ethical stand on this but LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS ON HIS HAT. It’s silly. And is designed for clicks and hype. Fair enough to cover this game, just be a little sensitive about how you do it is all I hope for. 

Yeah, I don't disagree with that.

[Graham S]

16 minutes ago, Gabe said:

Yeah, I don't disagree with that.

And I think you make a good point of it being a sentiment that will resonate with a potential buyer, and it is encouraging a click, promoting a sale and reassuring the buyer that it’s totally fine and good to play it anyway.

 

I’d expect it from corporate hype-mongers like IGN, but I just assumed PCG was a bit more Edge/RPS/Eurogamer when it comes to thinking through how to present things. Not a big deal, it just made me raise an eyebrow. 

[Darren]

2 hours ago, Rex Grossman said:

It wasn’t aimed at anyone is particular. People in general really didn’t like the suggestion that we can do something constructive.

 

I think people were fine with that suggestion, but were suspicious that it was being made in bad faith in an attempt to end the discussion. As I said, it's an inevitable pitfall of political discussions, especially online where the text is all we have to go on. I try not to be suspicious that everyone just asking questions/just making a polite suggestion/just wondering is a sea lion, and I try to give people the benefit of the doubt/enough rope to hang themselves, but it's hard.

[Unofficial Who]

47 minutes ago, Graham S said:

To be clear it’s a perfectly understandable attitude from an individual rllmuk poster who’s not invested in the ethics- yeah, I’ll probably give it a swerve but if it’s a 9 then OK I’ll pick it up second hand. But I find it more irritating from a respected outlet like PCG. We would like to take an ethical stand on this but LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS ON HIS HAT. It’s silly. And is designed for clicks and hype. Fair enough to cover this game, just be a little sensitive about how you do it is all I hope for. 

 

*edit*

Also I do think it’s a lie: you’re not covering it because you think it’s culturally significant, you’re covering it because it might pay for your salary. 

 

There's a thread on twitter covering this angle from Patrick Klepek.

 

https://twitter.com/patrickklepek/status/1622599571971923970

 

Quote

Watching gaming outlets jump through rhetorical hoops to justify coverage on Hogwarts Legacy isn’t surprising, but it’d be more honest if they played it straight and just said “our shaky business model does not allow us to ignore any game that might sell 10 million copies.”

 

Quote

Games like Elden Ring justified salaries last year. If Hogwarts Legacy can provide a fraction of that value, websites that live and die on SEO will have no choice but to engage with it. Morality and ethics did pretty quickly under something that arcane.

 

[footle]

52 minutes ago, Graham S said:

 

Also I do think it’s a lie: you’re not covering it because you think it’s culturally significant, you’re covering it because it might pay for your salary. 

and, unstated in Patrick’s Twitter posts, it isn’t as though videogames media on the web is a stable long term profession.

how many outlets folded in the last two months?