30 ms·

Microsoft turned every PC user who doesn't use Windows from a first-class player into a second-class player who can't play what's now branded as "Minecraft". It

by mort96 4y ago

Microsoft turned every PC user who doesn't use Windows from a first-class player into a second-class player who can't play what's now branded as "Minecraft". It's impossible for Linux and Mac players to play the game with any of the consoles, and there's a good chance you can't play with Windows people thanks to how Microsoft railroads you away from "Minecraft: Java Edition". They've split the community and shown clear hostility to people who aren't using Windows. What more do you need to conclude that Microsoft is "destroying" Minecraft?

jahsome 4y ago
Could you please explain your points?
- mort96 4y ago
  There used to be a game called Minecraft. It was written in Java, and was the same on Windows, macOS and Linux (and any other platform with a Java runtime). People on all platforms could play the same game with each other. They also made a C++ reimplementation of Minecraft – codenamed "Bedrock" – which they used for the console and phone editions of Minecraft. Eventually, they released a "Windows 10 Edition", based on the Bedrock code base. This version is incompatible with Linux and macOS, and can't play multiplayer with the Java client. Later, they renamed the Java client from "Minecraft" to "Minecraft: Java Edition", and renamed "Minecraft: Windows 10 Edition" to "Minecraft". They also started railroading buyers towards this game formally known as "Minecraft: Windows 10 Edition". As a result, the definitive version of Minecraft, the version someone gets if you just tell them to "buy Minecraft", does not work on Linux or macOS. If you're a Linux or Mac user, and you want to play Minecraft with a friend who uses Windows, you're probably going to find that their game is incompatible with yours. Because as a Linux or Mac user, you don't get to play the version branded as simply "Minecraft". You're off in your own separate world, playing the incompatible game known as "Minecraft: Java Edition". To add insult to injury, there's nothing technically preventing the game now known as "Minecraft" from working on Linux and macOS. "Minecraft Education" is a product based on the Bedrock code base which is available on Linux (well, ChromeOS) and macOS. Does that make it clearer?
  - jahsome 4y ago
    Seems like you insinuate cross-platform Java to Bedrock play was possible at some point, and now isn't. I don't think that was ever the case. In any case, I don't see how any of what you described could be characterized as "hostile."
    - mort96 4y ago
      I did not mean to insinuate that playing multiplayer between Java and Bedrock was possible at some point. I mean to say that playing multiplayer "Minecraft" between Linux, Windows and macOS was possible, but is no longer possible, since "Minecraft" is now a product which doesn't work on Linux and macOS. If you don't see how what I described could be characterized as "hostile", you've either misunderstood something, or we have a different understanding of what "hostile" means.
      - jahsome 4y ago
        > we have a different understanding of what "hostile" means. Indeed.
        rixthefox 4y ago
        Pray tell what you call it then: A company takes a game that had a very lively multiplayer community, replaces the game engine that was based on software that could run on any platform as long as it supported Java to .NET where the only possible platform is Windows. Take everyone who has ever purchased the game and force them to migrate their accounts to a Microsoft account in order to continue playing, then intentionally make the two versions of the game incompatible just to force people to play a watered down "definitive edition" that still lacks many of the features that allowed the community to thrive in the first place while issuing all these updates that essentially equate to "spyware". Yes, I think the word you are looking for is, in fact, Hostile.
        George83728 4y ago

by mort96 4y ago

jahsome 4y ago

Could you please explain your points?

mort96 4y ago
There used to be a game called Minecraft. It was written in Java, and was the same on Windows, macOS and Linux (and any other platform with a Java runtime). People on all platforms could play the same game with each other. They also made a C++ reimplementation of Minecraft – codenamed "Bedrock" – which they used for the console and phone editions of Minecraft. Eventually, they released a "Windows 10 Edition", based on the Bedrock code base. This version is incompatible with Linux and macOS, and can't play multiplayer with the Java client. Later, they renamed the Java client from "Minecraft" to "Minecraft: Java Edition", and renamed "Minecraft: Windows 10 Edition" to "Minecraft". They also started railroading buyers towards this game formally known as "Minecraft: Windows 10 Edition". As a result, the definitive version of Minecraft, the version someone gets if you just tell them to "buy Minecraft", does not work on Linux or macOS. If you're a Linux or Mac user, and you want to play Minecraft with a friend who uses Windows, you're probably going to find that their game is incompatible with yours. Because as a Linux or Mac user, you don't get to play the version branded as simply "Minecraft". You're off in your own separate world, playing the incompatible game known as "Minecraft: Java Edition". To add insult to injury, there's nothing technically preventing the game now known as "Minecraft" from working on Linux and macOS. "Minecraft Education" is a product based on the Bedrock code base which is available on Linux (well, ChromeOS) and macOS. Does that make it clearer?
- jahsome 4y ago
  Seems like you insinuate cross-platform Java to Bedrock play was possible at some point, and now isn't. I don't think that was ever the case. In any case, I don't see how any of what you described could be characterized as "hostile."
  - mort96 4y ago
    I did not mean to insinuate that playing multiplayer between Java and Bedrock was possible at some point. I mean to say that playing multiplayer "Minecraft" between Linux, Windows and macOS was possible, but is no longer possible, since "Minecraft" is now a product which doesn't work on Linux and macOS. If you don't see how what I described could be characterized as "hostile", you've either misunderstood something, or we have a different understanding of what "hostile" means.
    - jahsome 4y ago
      > we have a different understanding of what "hostile" means. Indeed.
      - rixthefox 4y ago
        Pray tell what you call it then: A company takes a game that had a very lively multiplayer community, replaces the game engine that was based on software that could run on any platform as long as it supported Java to .NET where the only possible platform is Windows. Take everyone who has ever purchased the game and force them to migrate their accounts to a Microsoft account in order to continue playing, then intentionally make the two versions of the game incompatible just to force people to play a watered down "definitive edition" that still lacks many of the features that allowed the community to thrive in the first place while issuing all these updates that essentially equate to "spyware". Yes, I think the word you are looking for is, in fact, Hostile.
        George83728 4y ago