Harriet Potter - A game changer?

All you can do is what you feel is the right thing to do, and leave everyone else to do what they choose. If you can’t or don’t want to separate the art from the artist, fine, if you can, fine.

In terms of everyone getting paid, sure, but so has JKR. She may get, what 0.003p from every coy sold, but it’s more likely that she’s just getting lump sums for use of the licence, and that’ll already be caught up in her deal with WB for everything Harry Potter related. Not buying this will have next to no effect on her whatsoever. She’s already got more money than she’ll ever need. To stop her influence she has you need to remove her voice and you’re just shit outta luck on that one.
The only people it will affect are the dev studio and publisher, who will have had almost nothing to do with JKR other than building and marketing the game based on the thing she created 20 odd years ago.
Boycotting a videogame is easy to do, as mentioned, because it’s not a necessity to own or play, and similarly, boycotting a video game is pointless because it’s not a necessity and won’t have any meaningful impact anywhere.

It's more so the way these outlets have been so self masturbatory about being so progressive and tackling the big societal issues through the gaming spectrum so people take the medium and themselves more seriously. "Look, we aren't all sweaty neckbeards who piss into mountain dew bottles in our bedrooms!"

Then what you'd have to say is the single biggest opportunity to pin your colours to the mast in the history of the industry comes along and you're magically saying nothing whatsoever. Reeks of cowardice and shows just how compromised all of these do-gooders truly are.

I still remember the nukes raining down in Civ like it was yesterday...

(yes I know you meant it seriously)

I think if it was to deflect attention then more would have been made of it.

Maybe that’s the mistake. Maybe they should have released something to say “look, we don’t agree with this sentiment, which is why we are taking these steps to be inclusive”.

Did Joe Rogan create Spotify, or he owns it? Never knew that.

For me, a case of separating art from the artist has happened multiple times in music. Some of my favourite bands ever have had revelations where the front man has been massive racists or abusive towards their wife, in one instance it emerged the singer of one of these bands plotted to hire a hitman to kill his ex. I had difficulty contemplating it all, what they did was reprehensible...but damn those guitar riffs are really sick. Ultimately I decided that I couldn't change my feelings on the music that came before, but I also couldn't support the band or the individual going forward and found other alternatives.

The same things happening with HP now as JK continues down this road. Separating art from artist...some people find it really easy, for others they just can't. And I don't think you can just blanket refuse or accept something regardless, it's all on a case by case basis. We all have bought a game that we know was made under ridiculous dev crunch environments or someone on the production is a massive racist, sex offender or going to publisher CEOs that fund political fundraisers you don't like.

Maybe it's finally time to turn to cdkeys...

I had to actually double check that was really her. What a fucking nob.

Best avoid that Megadrive Moonwalker game.

Yep, I think we resolved that issue.

Wasn't there something about her initially selling the rights to Harry Potter to WB and it being considered a masterstroke of a deal? Could be misremembering, but I recall it was something along the lines of her taking a nominal fee for it, but would take some small percentage of all merchandise sales. WB rubbed their hands with glee thinking they screwed her out of loads of money, only to later find out that small percentage turned out to be worth billions.

Think it also covered some creative control over the franchise and is partly why they are unlikely to be able to easily ditch her now she is being such dick. I recently heard that her insistence on creative control is why the Harry Potter land is at Universal, instead of at Disney where it was originally going to be. She was tring to have too much say over what the theme park contained (specifically, I understand she insisted it have no real world food and drink brands).

Can confirm, it does not. You can buy some fairly grim butter beer and relatively edible analogues of all the stuff from the movies, though.