For Harry Potter fans, the upcoming release of Hogwarts Legacy is fast approaching and it seems they're making sure it works on Steam Deck. Well, that might be a bit of a stretch, they might have just loaded it up to see if it works, but the result to players is the same.
When asked about the status of it on Twitter, the official WB Games Support account noted "We reached out to the Hogwarts Legacy team for you and were able to confirm that the game WILL be Steam Deck verified on launch. We hope this helps with your decision! Take care." — good news for anyone who plans to pick it up. Being Steam Deck Verified almost always means it will work well on desktop Linux too.
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
More about it:
Hogwarts Legacy is an open-world action RPG set in the world first introduced in the Harry Potter books. Embark on a journey through familiar and new locations as you explore and discover magical beasts, customize your character and craft potions, master spell casting, upgrade talents and become the wizard you want to be.
Experience Hogwarts in the 1800s. Your character is a student who holds the key to an ancient secret that threatens to tear the wizarding world apart. Make allies, battle Dark wizards, and ultimately decide the fate of the wizarding world. Your legacy is what you make of it. Live the Unwritten.
Available for pre-order on Humble Store and Steam.
Something to be aware of though, are all the issues surrounding the Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling. An article on Forbes goes through some of it and goes into better detail than I can. Comments on it are open, as long as people don’t throw around insults at each other, respectful debate is fine.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: LinuxerThe world will never be perfect where everyone lives in harmony and there is sum mutual agreement... If you constantaly concentrate on "negative things" around and in social media, you become negative.
Yes.
Quoting: LinuxerSometimes it looks like the joy has been stripped away from some people because of all the media hassles and out of propoprtion dramatization etc.
This isn't as neutral as you'd like it to be I fear. Is it out of proportion in this case?
... and you're in the discussion, while you said you didn't want to.
(No, I don't want to either.)
0 Likes
I will buy it as it could be the first wonderful game from the Harry Potter franchise. Since the first book decades ago, I wish for a good game in this universe, and there were a lot of bad ones until now.
Regarding J.K. Rollings quotes:
I don't get why many people feel so much hate. Rollings is an old school feminists and feels threatened, that something on scientifically very thin ice could (or a very young trend, or at least not as well researched until now) undermine women's rights. So her intentions are good, I can respect that. But I cannot respect the hate she gets or the call for boycott of the Hogwarts game, of which profit goes more to the developers and the publishers than in her pocket.
Regarding J.K. Rollings quotes:
I don't get why many people feel so much hate. Rollings is an old school feminists and feels threatened, that something on scientifically very thin ice could (or a very young trend, or at least not as well researched until now) undermine women's rights. So her intentions are good, I can respect that. But I cannot respect the hate she gets or the call for boycott of the Hogwarts game, of which profit goes more to the developers and the publishers than in her pocket.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Scytalescientifically very thin ice
I thought I had an idea what this all is about, but I really got no idea how this could be scientifically thin ice. To not further derail things here, could you PM me a pointer?
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: ScytaleRollings is an old school feminists and feels threatened, that something on scientifically very thin ice could (or a very young trend, or at least not as well researched until now) undermine women's rights.Scientifically on very thin ice according to whom? Medical consensus across numerous studies shows that gender affirming care has better outcomes than the alternatives. If JKR thinks so, she's hardly an subject matter expert with her BA. And this idea that bigotry is justified because we should entertain baseless, hypothetical threats to women's rights is ridiculous. If I went on a campaign against washing your hands because washing your hands could undermine women's rights, should I really be given the benefit of the doubt?
5 Likes, Who?
Buy the game, or don't, but buying it does support a confirmed bigot, as eldaking pointed out earlier. If you're one of those people who can admire the work despite the artist, that's cool. I'm generally not - doesn't matter if it's writing, music or film, if the people behind the creative work are arseholes, I don't fund them. Or I try not to at any rate. Turns out, there's an annoyingly large amount of arseholes around, sadly, and occasionally I hear about their various exploits too late.
At least by this point, you know what you're getting into with JKR.
At least by this point, you know what you're getting into with JKR.
4 Likes, Who?
InhaleOblivion Jan 13, 2023
Wait I get to actually create my own wizard and I'm not forced to play as Harry Potter...sign me up lol.
*Goes to check Steam page*...$60 quid?!? Nah I'll wait for a sale for this one.
Last edited by InhaleOblivion on 13 January 2023 at 5:37 pm UTC
*Goes to check Steam page*...$60 quid?!? Nah I'll wait for a sale for this one.
Last edited by InhaleOblivion on 13 January 2023 at 5:37 pm UTC
0 Likes
Hope this will be multiplayer, in that case i will drag everyone into the game! :D
Looks fantastic, and i really love how they seem to follow the lore to the letter unlike many modern games that bastardize it into something completely else.
Looks fantastic, and i really love how they seem to follow the lore to the letter unlike many modern games that bastardize it into something completely else.
0 Likes
Quoting: MayeulCI started reading that. Ehhhhh . . . I wasn't as impressed with it as it was with itself.Quoting: slaapliedjeQuoting: KlaasI only like the first four books. The rest is rather ridiculous since she thinks that randomly executing characters and a racist teacher employing physical torture on a child equals mature story.Huh, I've never read the books. Recently bought the movie pack in 4k... and got about 2.5 movies into it and then paused for a while. Not that they aren't watchable (pretty sure I've seen up to 5 at one point), I just have more things to do that I'd rather spend my time on... Eventually I'll get to all of them.
I really liked the Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality fanfic. Not sure I can enjoy vanilla HP (such as this) after reading that.
0 Likes
Tangled.
Soooo . . . I don't like the stuff Rowling has been saying. And it does seem like she's been doing more than just mentioning if asked, she's been like using her fame as a platform to amplify these views. And those views, if adopted by people she successfully persuades, could have nasty real world consequences for a fair number of decent people just trying to live their lives. So that's serious.
On the other hand . . . those views are not in the Harry Potter books, whose ethos is generally anti-discriminatory on class, race, gender and sexual orientation. Reading Potter, one would not expect the author to suddenly turn around and discriminate against one particular group. So reading and liking Potter, or presumably playing Potter games, doesn't make anyone bad, y'know? It's not like Ayn Rand or something--reading and liking Ayn Rand books probably means you're bad, or at least badly need to grow up.
And I don't think there's any reasonable chance at this point that Rowling is going to get much more famous than she already is. Buying the games is not going to grow Rowling's platform in any noticeable way. So I find it hard to worry about too much. If she was sinking every dollar she received into an anti-trans campaign, then indirectly giving her your dollar would be a problem, but she just mouths off about it some, she's not running an organized campaign. I'm not gonna buy it, but just because it's not the kind of game I buy.
Finally, I do think there's a philosophical tension between strong feminism and the way trans is thought of, that is not just about old fashioned feminism being old fashioned, and that the trans-supportive community might want to think about. It's a pity some feminists have been so dang aggressive and absolutist about it, that's gone bad all around. But the thing is, feminism has been to a fair degree about the idea that gender roles and similar social baggage surrounding gender are arbitrary, social constructs that shouldn't really have much to do with what genitalia you're sporting. And consciously and intellectually, I'm sure many trans people and the community around them would agree. But trans identity tends to revolve around the idea of changing physical things and the gender roles associated with them, as a linked process. Implicitly that makes gender roles essential rather than arbitrary--becoming a gender with (hormones, surgery etc) involves taking on that gender's roles, or looked at the other way, taking on a gender's roles requires making physical changes to become that gender. Functionally, that approach supports the idea that men are supposed to be a certain way and women are supposed to be a certain way. And feminists, used to thinking about the roles rather than the sheer physicality, would reasonably worry about what seems from that perspective to be saying that the solution if you can't hack the roles assigned to you is not to rebel against the socially enforced roles themselves but to switch teams so you can conform to a set you're more comfortable with. So I can see some feminists being wary. At the same time, they need to accept that fundamentally trans isn't about that--it seems to be about the actual body. Although . . . people's body self-image is also socially mediated . . . it's all really complicated, but I do think that there's a need for tackling the relationship between trans issues and some of the deeper feminist thought about gender roles, rather than letting them just slide past each other as if they're unconnected, or either dismissing the other.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 13 January 2023 at 6:32 pm UTC
Soooo . . . I don't like the stuff Rowling has been saying. And it does seem like she's been doing more than just mentioning if asked, she's been like using her fame as a platform to amplify these views. And those views, if adopted by people she successfully persuades, could have nasty real world consequences for a fair number of decent people just trying to live their lives. So that's serious.
On the other hand . . . those views are not in the Harry Potter books, whose ethos is generally anti-discriminatory on class, race, gender and sexual orientation. Reading Potter, one would not expect the author to suddenly turn around and discriminate against one particular group. So reading and liking Potter, or presumably playing Potter games, doesn't make anyone bad, y'know? It's not like Ayn Rand or something--reading and liking Ayn Rand books probably means you're bad, or at least badly need to grow up.
And I don't think there's any reasonable chance at this point that Rowling is going to get much more famous than she already is. Buying the games is not going to grow Rowling's platform in any noticeable way. So I find it hard to worry about too much. If she was sinking every dollar she received into an anti-trans campaign, then indirectly giving her your dollar would be a problem, but she just mouths off about it some, she's not running an organized campaign. I'm not gonna buy it, but just because it's not the kind of game I buy.
Finally, I do think there's a philosophical tension between strong feminism and the way trans is thought of, that is not just about old fashioned feminism being old fashioned, and that the trans-supportive community might want to think about. It's a pity some feminists have been so dang aggressive and absolutist about it, that's gone bad all around. But the thing is, feminism has been to a fair degree about the idea that gender roles and similar social baggage surrounding gender are arbitrary, social constructs that shouldn't really have much to do with what genitalia you're sporting. And consciously and intellectually, I'm sure many trans people and the community around them would agree. But trans identity tends to revolve around the idea of changing physical things and the gender roles associated with them, as a linked process. Implicitly that makes gender roles essential rather than arbitrary--becoming a gender with (hormones, surgery etc) involves taking on that gender's roles, or looked at the other way, taking on a gender's roles requires making physical changes to become that gender. Functionally, that approach supports the idea that men are supposed to be a certain way and women are supposed to be a certain way. And feminists, used to thinking about the roles rather than the sheer physicality, would reasonably worry about what seems from that perspective to be saying that the solution if you can't hack the roles assigned to you is not to rebel against the socially enforced roles themselves but to switch teams so you can conform to a set you're more comfortable with. So I can see some feminists being wary. At the same time, they need to accept that fundamentally trans isn't about that--it seems to be about the actual body. Although . . . people's body self-image is also socially mediated . . . it's all really complicated, but I do think that there's a need for tackling the relationship between trans issues and some of the deeper feminist thought about gender roles, rather than letting them just slide past each other as if they're unconnected, or either dismissing the other.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 13 January 2023 at 6:32 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Guestlook your comment seems very reasonable and logic, but lets call things how they are. Within the "cancel culture" there is ppl actively calling out to burn books or precious works of art. That's why I said I had split opinions about this because I don't like radical approaches in neither ends. This problem should be handled other way like having proper anti discrimination laws, JK Rowling should not be allowed to say such things. She should be fined. Her books are not the issue. It's a "free peach" issue, free speech is not about targeting and promoting hatred against minorities, here she crossed a line. She should be fined and legally muzzled.
I'm confused... you say you're against "radical approaches in neither ends" and then call for... fining her by jurisdiction? I'm all for boycotting JKR and everything but even I'm against passing laws that ban (most) of what she says.
I don't get why boycotting JKR is... radical. Neither do I think "radical" is bad actually, we do *need* quite some radical changes in the world. Soon.
I've not seen serious calls to book burning or the like though. Often only through 2nd or 3rd hand reports by people heavily taking things out of context or downright faking things. I won't deny that there may be some *very* few people who'd do that, but that's far from "cancel culture". Especially, considering that this "canceled" author just has landed *another* huge publishing success. I'm still scratching myself: Where was there any "canceling"?
3 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me