Zimerius: So you don't think it a bit weird if a company sells stuff that don't work without specifically addressing the fact that, it does not work unless....
of course we old old gamers are used to tuck back the forearms of our well know blouses and get straight into it but..... this does not mean we should condone bad practice....
I say, at least address the fact what's happening, what are the reasons (Fuck you windows) were not the hansy pansy crowd around here aye even when a starting IT fanatic first reaction to other people is to hide or to search for his only weapon this does not mean we should praise such actions, even if its understandable, we're not on the personal level here....
If someone buys a game today and really can't get it to run, be it out of the box or by fiddling with it, that's what support and refunds are for, support should provide a tech solution or the storefront should issue a refund.
Beyond that I don't think about it in terms of weird, i think about it in terms of preferable.
Given the impossibility of storefronts taking on the burden of an endless loop of testing thousands of games against every update liable to break something for someone somewhere i don't want them thinking that it's best to simply delist notoriously uncooperative titles, it's preferable to keep them alive and available "as is" than to corner them into a "cost effectiveness" type of rational.
There's nothing personal about any of this, it's simply how i see it. At a personal level i said what i had to say in the very first line of my reply to the op.