Political stand? Hahahahaha.....is this some sort of joke? o.0

4K upscaled graphics aren't needed to enjoy the game(and don't really improve much on a number of significantly older games, imo), there's probably ways to play MP(direct via IP/etc) with the original versions of D2 as well, and I honestly doubt the widescreen mod for D2 is as buggy as you claim(and even if it was, it's probably not that way for everyone and/or there's likely other WS mods/etc for the game).

But go ahead: if you/others want to waste your hard earned money on a slightly shinier(and likely with cut/edited content) version of a game which already has a decent enough version available, then I won't try to stop any of y'all.

====

Speaking of: did you hear that apparently Larian is going to be using a new launcher/client?
(it's optional so far, afaik.....one can play without going online....but still....)

Yes and no. I don't really have any list. But I tend to avoid some companies, like EA. I don't particularly like Ubisoft's ridiculously invasive DRM that makes starting any game painful, but I do enjoy Far Cry and Assassin's Creed games, so I have very little choice.

But I do not give a single cent to Epic Games until they stop pursuing exclusive deals. PC is not for exclusive deals. Let consoles fight for those. I appreciate Epic's attempts to even the playfield when it comes to platform's cut of the sales, which typically is 30%. But the exclusive games, that is a deal breaker for me. If it would be only their own games, like Fortnite, I wouldn't care. If you make a game, you decide if you want to let others sell it. But if you sell other people's games I want no exclusivity. So that is the only thing I am strictly against. No money to Epic until they stop pursuing exclusive deals.

Activision-Blizzard after the Blitzchung incident and Warcraft 3 disaster, and Klei.

Having to be very selective with gaming time due to work, it's luckily not much of an issue due to the several lifetimes worth of excellent games available outside of companies that have questionable bedfellows.

It's working fine for me. Maybe you're not installing it right? I don't care about online MP, especially DRM'd online MP. Also DRM isn't a "political issue", it's a practical one. See how useless Diablo 3 is offline. And finally, the game looks fine without overrated 4k (with removed textures). You speak only for yourself when you claim a butchered and crippled D2 "Resurrected" is "superior", let alone a "must have".

Yes, there are certain practices and such which go well beyond the pale, and therefore I would supply them with any money ever.
Examples:
EA - well it’s EA. If the devil (was real) and a company, this would be it.
CDPR - not just for the cyberpunk trash, but their whole handling of everything surrounding it, and the push for microtransactions, loot box gambling, and in the process destroying anything left of GOG.
Beamdog - the masters of slap a widescreen mod on it and roll in the loot! Virtually single handed lay created the whole “remasters and “remake” cash grab market.

There is also an in danger, or to thoroughly check list:, for example:
Tiny build - never heard anything good about them.
Blizzard - self explanatory.

I mean there are lots of others in each category, and other categories like don’t trust. I also now keep a blacklist of games I have played and would never waste the disk space even for free (hey, cyberpunk is high on that list too!).

If I finally get round to building my database organiser, I will just have some categories added for these types of things, but for now it’s just on an excel spreadsheet where I keep my organisation.

Again, what is/was wrong with the originals?

Afaik there are also mods to upscale/etc the hud/interface as well, and of can of course always run in lower(though not very low, just sub 4k/etc) resolutions and/or in a window.

I'm gonna guess that doesn't apply when one connects to an opponent directly over IP/etc.

Will it maybe be slightly better looking? If so, then yes.....imo slightly shinier is the perfect phrase for such.

Weirdos? Do you mean people complaining about things that aren't actually there or that haven't happened(in games/other media/etc), or do you see anyone who has criticism against censorship in that/any game as a weirdo?

I meant that others can use mods.

As for me: I like vanilla, but sometimes I like to switch it up with some mods(for various games). Also one of the best things? Mods are usually free, and can even be better than the official product(remasters/etc) in some cases.

====

Well obviously there are others who are the same....i.e. those who will buy a remake/remaster because "shinier graphics" and because the new version might be easier to install/set up.....it's a good part of why the remake/remaster market keeps growing and why more companies keep getting in on the trend with other old IPs.
(note: I half expect "Ow My balls!" to become a real TV show at some point in the near future, with the way things are going)

Same with state of a decent chunk of the AAA games industry atm, who know a number of customers will buy due to game company/series/etc loyalty and/or who will buy anything that looks shiny enough or is somewhat easier to install/play.

Doesn't have to be anything wrong with the originals to want to have an updated look. I, for example, like eye candy. That's why I spent a lot of money on a graphics card. So of course I like to have games that look pretty. Looking forward to Skyblivion and Fallout 4: The Capital Wasteland, by the way.

I still like older games, but if an updated version is available, I want to play the updated version.

looks like the loser dvoted the whole topic :D

I don't have a problem with people buying/playing remakes/remasters, per se(i've even played a few)......I just smh a bit at those that buy most/all such games "blindly"(no matter the quality) just because it's something shiny and new.
(same with those who buy the latest i-Phone/etc every year just because they changed a few misc things and perhaps improved it a tiny bit in some ways)

Also a new updated look (remaster) is fine and all, as long as nothing is cut/edited to "appeal to modern tastes"(as some call it nowadays), and also as long as people can still buy/play the old versions as well.

I'm a bit different on this.....if the new version is not too much better looking, adds features/etc I don't need, and/or is too high priced then I will stick with the old one.

I can't make a list, it would be too big. And I am more of a rewards kind of guy.

I have to admit to having a Love Hate relationship with most ... if not all.

Those that provide their games to GOG, deserve good points, but then some of them poorly support them here, so bad points for that.

And those that don't provide games to GOG or only a few of them, they need bad points for that.

In fact any of them that embrace DRM deserve bad points. DRM should be outlawed.

And what about GOG Connect? Why isn't that being embraced? Surely bad points should be assigned to all who don't support it. It's all very well to say, that we are getting a different version here ... with no DRM. But there should never have been any DRM in the first place.

But on a more positive note, some do do great things, give great discount, even freebies or bonus content, so of course all that deserves good points.

Management come and go with many of them, sell outs and takeovers etc. Hard to keep track of it all and assign good or bad points.

The one factor I feel control over, is the price I am prepared to pay, and that governs me more than anything else.

Don't give them the opportunity to do too bad by you.

It's rarely easy though. Because while you may support the good things they do, that might encourage them with the bad that is also in the mix.