- 0 Posts
- 41 Comments
I’m fairly certain that Ryujinx is a hobby project as well, which would contradict your claim that developing emulators for later-gen systems requires funding. However, I may be mistaken.
Regardless of if I am right about Ryujinx, your claim that I am “cheering for another company” just because I called a spade a spade with regards to Nintendo’s legal trickery in the Yuzu case is still wrong. As I said, the Yuzu team was wrong to profit off of adding patches for leaked games. They deserved to get their Patreon shut down for that. However, the sentence forbade them from ever working on a Nintendo emulator again, which is excessive because developing an emulator is not and should not be illegal.
For another example that might clarify my position: I believe that Palworld is in many ways a blatant rip-off of Pokémon IP that obviously marketed itself on its similarities with Nintendo’s franchise. Nintendo was quite right to sue them. However, the lawsuit evoked patents whose very existence is the epitome of bullshit, such as using a drawn outline to represent the position of a player character or NPC who is totally or partially obscured behind an opaque object. This is an obvious solution, and one of the requirements for a patent is that it be non-obvious.
We live in a complex world. It is possible to be in the right and still be an unethical overreaching asshole about it.
Nintendo used to make unique hardware. The Wii, Wii U, DS, 3DS and even the Virtual Boy innovated and brought something to the table that nobody else was offering. Even the Switch’s erasure of the handheld/console divide was unique. This Switch 2, though? It’s a Switch on steroids. This is the same uncreative shit that Sony and Microsoft have been doing, just an iteration on their previous offering.
Nintendo’s innovations have purchased it a lot of good will from consumers. When the innovations stop, expect the good will to follow suit. That’s only natural.
You are completely wrong.
The Yuzu team was profiting from game leaks and piracy, and that’s illegal. Their software was not illegal. Nintendo’s lawsuit was riddled with bullshit claims about circumventing encryption and other made-up offenses, and resulted in the 100% legal development of both Yuzu and Citra being forcefully terminated. The actually just solution would have been to forbid them from monetizing their projects by promising fixes for unreleased software.
Here’s a simple analogy: if you own a 3D printer and sell objects made with that printer, some of which are illegal for whatever reason (e.g. parts for making untraceable firearms), should a court forbid you from ever using a 3D printer ever again, even if it’s to make a kickstand for your tablet, or should it forbid you from making illegal parts only?
Nintendo’s hardware used to have features that competitors lacked. The DS’s dual screens, the 3DS’s 3D top screen, the Wiimote, the Wii U’s controller with a second screen. Even the Virtual Boy did something different, though it didn’t do it well. Nintendo used to innovate on hardware while everyone else was just going for bigger numbers. Exclusives made sense as they made use of those features that you just couldn’t get elsewhere.
The Switch and Switch 2 have this portable/dock gimmick but that doesn’t really affect gameplay in a way that makes the software incompatible with a PC or a Playstation 4/5. And there’s the Steam Deck and a load of other portable gaming PCs out now, so even if it did there’d be no justification for a Switch exclusive other than greed and an unwillingness to prioritize the consumer.
Color me underwhelmed.
Nintendo is going to have to bring it in a big way to win me back after all the shit they’ve been pulling and it looks like they decided to do the exact opposite of that. At least it has a proper kickstand. I have no clue how they thought that flimsy plastic membrane from the first Switch was a good idea.
Yes, I’m just explaining it, not justifying it. What I means is “don’t get worked up or upset about it because this is just human nature and while you may be able to change this particular manifestation of it, you will never fix the underlying problem”, not “don’t try to change people’s minds when they’re wrong”. You’re right to be teaching people some discernment. Just don’t suffer when they refuse to listen.
Look, much as the heavily online audience likes to pretend otherwise, most people making these games are perfectly nice, care about what they do and even have some degree of attunement to their audiences.
Sure, most people involved in these projects do. But for any given team, if you told me you knew for a fact that exactly one person in that team wasn’t, and asked me who I thought that person was, I’d guess “the money guy” every single time.
I could be wrong but it seems like before, licenses for games you owned but hadn’t downloaded were already loaded o to your account when you logged in. So in your example, if user 2 bought a game and didn’t download it on that console, then user 1 bought and downloaded it and took the PS5 offline, user 2 could still play it because his license was already there. Now, user 2 has to go online to grab the license first.
Seems like it will have a minimal impact.
Most customers won’t know or care, unfortunately. People have been brainwashed into thinking that corporations have a moral right to aggressive litigation to protect their poor, fragile interests almost as if they were David and the indie studios who dare to break their totally fair patent on “having different buttons to confirm and cancel” or whatever were big bad Goliath. And many gamers, especially younger ones, who are Nintendo’s core demographic, are notoriously ready to defend their pet corporations tooth and nail against any and all criticism, almost as if they were being personally attacked.
Poverty is literally the lowest it has ever been worldwide in the history of civilization, what the hell are you rambling about?
Have you ever heard the phrase “the grass is always greener on the other side”? You’re comparing a comprehensive view of current life with a romanticized and heavily edited version of the past and feeling bad about it. This is like a teenage girl driven to anorexia by comparing her real self to the heavily edited photos other girls post online.
Thank you! I very much have that predisposition. I’ve noticed that I have addictive behavior towards sugar and caffeine as well (I’m fine as long as I don’t have any, but if I have some I’ll continue to crave more at shorter and shorter intervals until I go to sleep and it resets), and recently celebrated my third month nicotine free after about four years total smoking and then vaping.
Addictive proclivities are a personal defect normally. But when you exist in a context where there are people whose job it is to get you hooked on things, they become a handicap.
This is the rational opinion. Which should be enough to let you know that it’s not the majority opinion. Consumers, as a collective, are nearly braindead.