That makes sense. I’m generally extremely sceptical of critics, to start with, so I would not generally red flag that discrepancy (Look at the awards shows, they frequently are at odds with what is actually popular, since they are fundamentally coming at things from a different angle). But the other criteria, all taken together, do seem strong indicators, so that makes sense, which is a shame.
Personally, I was pleasantly surprised, but only because the bar of expectation was extremely low. Over all, I still don’t think it’s particularly great on the whole (although it had its moments). I just wish we could have more discourse about the things it did well/badly without it constantly falling into the woke/anti-woke nonsense, all the time. (For me, at least, ‘too woke’/‘not woke enough’ has nothing to do with its issues - they’re all about storytelling and handling of established lore/canon)







Of course it does. This particular change may seem innocuous in itself, but the idea of compliance with ridiculous laws like this one, in one jurisdiction, being implemented in a project used globally will result in compromising everyone’s privacy/security, regardless of whether they are even subject to that law or not.
If anything, it’s more troubling for those outside the relevant jurisdiction, since we get 0 say on the laws, and have no actual reason to comply.