Yes, and there is a price to be paid for that. Windows is another example where they adhere to backwards compatibility. The price is that you become literally chained to the poor decision or limited technology of that time. Eventually the limits that imposes on you becomes more costly than nuke and pave.
You will be hard pressed to find any tool that does NOT cause breakage at some point or another. Also remember, Blizzard makes the tool for themself first, everyone else second.
Also, for the record, Blizzard does try to preserve backwards compatibility. There's a decent number of systems that are effectively obsolete, but left in (Entire campaign section of the editor is a big one, User Types pretty much supplanted that).
I would also note, you don't have to pay much for the editor. Average tools cost at least 100 USD, and merely go up from there (Enterprise versions of stuff often range in the 4-5 figure range, like Visual Studio).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
@FunkyUserName: Go
Yes, and there is a price to be paid for that. Windows is another example where they adhere to backwards compatibility. The price is that you become literally chained to the poor decision or limited technology of that time. Eventually the limits that imposes on you becomes more costly than nuke and pave.
@Mugen245: Go
You will be hard pressed to find any tool that does NOT cause breakage at some point or another. Also remember, Blizzard makes the tool for themself first, everyone else second.
Also, for the record, Blizzard does try to preserve backwards compatibility. There's a decent number of systems that are effectively obsolete, but left in (Entire campaign section of the editor is a big one, User Types pretty much supplanted that).
I would also note, you don't have to pay much for the editor. Average tools cost at least 100 USD, and merely go up from there (Enterprise versions of stuff often range in the 4-5 figure range, like Visual Studio).