Sounds like this was more of a bribe than any legal case against the emulator. In which case nothing is stopping anyone from putting a fork back up, and gdkchan gets to laugh all the way to the bank.
I’m thinking less bribe and “laughing away to the bank” and more of a “Nintendo threatened to ruin their life with legal fees if it wasn’t taken down”. The frivolity of said case is irrelevant when they just bully normal people legally like that.
The lesson here is to download every single working nintendo emulator as a backup and share it with your friends. Emulation is legal after all even if the Nintendo mafia try to shut it down.
It’s a fair question, but honestly I think Nintendo generally focuses on emulators that they perceive as affecting their current or near-future income. The Wii U is fully dead to Nintendo, at least for the moment.
Lol it’s like Nintendo just wants to back itself into a corner and waste away with its IP. Jeez. I honestly have no desire to purchase anything from them anymore.
I still emulate a solid amount of their games I’ve had for most of my life because I don’t want to wear down my old hardware.
They haven’t gotten a cent out of me since the GameCube, though, so I understand I’m probably not going to be their target audience anymore.
Lol it's like Nintendo just wants to back itself into a corner and waste away with its IP.
This is a Switch emulator, meaning these are games that are still available for sale. It's not like taking down a SNES emulator or something Nintendo hasn't made available for 30+ years, it's involving games they're selling today. Taking down an emulator is literally Nintendo protecting its IP.
I honestly have no desire to purchase anything from them anymore.
If you were using this emulator, you weren't likely purchasing anything from them in the first place. And I'm no doctor, but... I'd have to imagine that's likely the reason Nintendo took this down to begin with.
I getcha, just have not been stoked about Nintendo’s continual deathmarch against the hydra of emulation.
I honestly think it’s more of a waste of money than it’s actually worth and the publicity of taking down emulation sites is pretty bad for them (especially when they take down ones which deal with largely abandonware or really old games, like Vimm’s lair did).
Without getting into the debate over the ethics of piracy or anti consumer practices, jumping into the fray by aggressively litigating and making a splash like Nintendo and Sony seem to focus on likely hurts their bottom line and certainly hurts their reputation with consumers.
While I don't support pirating products that are currently for sale, I do think it's essential that emulators like Ryujinx are developed now in order to preserve titles for later. Some Switch software already has been delisted, and someday eventually all of it will be.
While I don’t support pirating products that are currently for sale
I do when Nintendo refuses to make them available on other (higher quality) hardware and also treats their paying consumers and fans like scum. I can boot up Doom on any of a dozen different computers 30 years later and play to my heart’s content but that’s not an option for Nintendo. Piracy generally is completely justified by a vast array of anti-consumer bullshit. If they can’t make games without resorting to that bullshit, fuck 'em. I hope they go under.
The delisting is what gets me most (and we’re dealing with that in basically every media catalogue from film/tv to games).
Well, that and the blatant cash grabs I see with rereleases that end up being console specific and basically unsupported like with the cases of the Wii store and basically every iteration of their online stores since.
I played Wii and eventually Wii U with buddies for smash but am glad I didn’t own the systems. I know one of my friends gave a lot of money to Nintendo multiple times getting classics like Pokemon Snap and other nostalgia buys on multiple systems.
My most recent experience with Nintendo was borrowing a buddy’s switch to play Breath of the Wild back around when it came out. I’m pretty meh on their new content and by the way a lot of their recent releases were received, I’m not super interested. Might bug someone to play the Pokemon Arceus one which seems kinda cool, but that would be the extent of my interest and it’s not really nagging at me, anyway.
My main gripe is that they seem to be doing the bare minimum with their IP (with little innovation in the field/botched releases) and wasting money/resources on what I see as frivolous, shortsighted, lawsuits in the name of protecting their property as well as corporate heavy production that ends up with forgettable and formulaic games.
Maybe I am now become old, but I don’t care to see the most recent iteration of the Pokemon, Zelda, Mario, or Smash Bros sagas and am perfectly content with replaying N64 to GameCube classics in those series. Probably doesn’t help that I went to college with a bunch of friends who hung out and played Project M with some Halo 3 or Reach sprinkled in for variety lol.
If you were using this emulator, you weren’t likely purchasing anything from them in the first place. And I’m no doctor, but… I’d have to imagine that’s likely the reason Nintendo took this down to begin with.
Actually…I own a Switch and paid full price for TOTK on launch week. But playing the game in 30fps chunky resolution was very painful for me, as i’ve gotten quite used to 60fps+ over the last few years with 3D games. I almost put the game down in the first hour or so, playing the game was literally making my eyes hurt. That’s when i went poking into the Switch emulation scene and set up yuzu (RIP). Within a few hours i was playing TOTK at 60fps 1440p and it was mostly glitch free. I put another 20 hours into the game before putting that down. But it was a glorious 20 hours, as that game is absolutely beautiful when you can wipe away the greasy look of 30fps low-res Switch graphics.
So…I am a Nintendo customer that was getting a better experience out of my purchased Nintendo game by emulating it. I know that isn’t everyone in this scene - I see the reddit posts everyday for the past week about people playing leaked Echoes* of Wisdom. I get why that shit would piss Nintendo off. It just sucks that now, others can’t share the amazing experience I had with TOTK.
It’s funny, I own a switch and I would have bought the game (and I probably will still if the technical and QoL issues get resolved) but I’m emulating it better than the hardware can run it right now.
Lol it’s like Nintendo just wants to back itself into a corner and waste away with its IP. Jeez. I honestly have no desire to purchase anything from them anymore.
pretty sure the only reason nintendo cared is because ryujinx was prominently displayed in the leaked footage of echos of wisdom, pre launch
Nintendo’s been way too busy in this scene for too long a time for that to be the only reason. I can see that such a leak wouldn’t help, but they’ve been pouring money into these cases for years and have really ramped it up in the last five or so
I immediately sought out working backups of both Yuzu and Ryujinx. The “bright side” of this situation is that it pissed me off enough to go acquire both the new Zelda game that potentially caused this whole situation by being leaked early, and the game that was at the absolute top of my to-play list: Unicorn Overlord. So far it is looking like a fantastic game.
I like it more, but I’m a fan of the more classic Zeldas. It’s good, but it’s marred by the same technical issues that plagued the LA remake, and the lack of some basic QoL features like a Quick Select or Favorites wheel is bringing it from ‘great’ to ‘good.’
That’s not the developer, that’s a Discord mod, and they said in that message specifically that they haven’t heard anything from the dev. It also says nothing about what “the agreement” is. It could very well be a legal settlement.
He is a developer (github) and in fact had a pull request merged in August. I suppose it’s possible it was a “legal agreement”. It seems implied that it wasn’t, and that was what I remembered when replying
…after knowing for damn sure it was a serious issue in two successive process generations.
There is no way this happened without a LOT of people knowing EXACTLY what was happening, and covering it up. The DoJ should really kick off an investigation into the situation, because it’s pretty obvious there was malfeasance at multiple levels. That, or their leadership and QC processes are both so categorically inept that one could argue the company should be straight up nationalized as a critical strategic asset.
Or force them to admit they are selling it for real without all the license mumbo jumbo. They have always known what “buy now” buttons were meant to lead you to believe. And — in my humble opinion — you aren’t wrong for believing that; they are.
Next: make it so games can’t suddenly lose their music license. This is so incredible annoying. I know it’s depending on what the publishers negotiated, but it shouldn’t be possible to suddenly patch out soundtracks because of a license expire.
Seriously. If I bought GTA before those licenses expired, my download should always have them, even if newer ones do not (which, to be clear, still sucks that that’s acceptable).
Some games, like Allen Wake, have been full out removed from sale because of expired music license. There has been other cases some come back later with the music stripped.
There is a bigger barrier to them being able to take it away from you. But they absolutely can. Broadcast content like a movie or TV show illegally, and see what happens.
This is about the medium by which the license is provided, there is no doubt whatsoever that the license is the same. This has been proven repeatedly. The difference here is that the distributor can be legally forced to remove the content by the owner of the media. So, if for instance you order a physical disc and pay for it ahead of time and then the place you order from loses the right to distribute that disc, you absolutely won’t get it in the mail because they’re required to send it back to the owner.
You’d likely get a refund in that case but that’s because you didn’t get to actually enjoy that media at all. But buying a license to a show on Amazon or something is different only because it’s likely that they have pull the show after you paid for it and outside the return window. Meaning in theory you have enjoyed or consumed the media you paid for. So the license is legal.
What really needs to change imo isn’t the transparency. This discussion keeps being had repeatedly and people keep being outraged by it as if they have never heard that this can happen. Its been 20 some odd years of this and I would think it would be common knowledge by now.
What really needs to change is the terms by which the owner who licenses the content in the first place should either be required to provide a refund or equivalent on a different platform, or they should be the ones held liable for their terminology in the licensing agreement that would require that license to be null and void for people who have already purchased it.
But literally every single time I say this people get upset about it and nobody can explain why.
Broadcast content like a movie or TV show illegally, and see what happens.
Yeah, that’s because you own the property, not the intellectual property. This is copyright law, not an affront to your ownership. When you “buy” a movie digitally on Amazon, you’re only buying access to their copy of the movie. Amazon bought the right to distribute it to you. When that contract expires, they can’t distribute it to you anymore. That’s why it’s not ownership. When you buy a game on GOG, you download the installer, and they cannot take it away from you, no matter how hard they try; that’s their whole shtick.
But literally every single time I say this people get upset about it and nobody can explain why.
Someone has probably explained the above to you before.
On the basis of technicality, it will depend very wildly on the ToC of said intellectual property. As you said, GOG just distributes the installer and that is it, the IP holder can technically revoke your/GOG license if that is in the ToC somewhere.
Yeah, hence why I said that technically the license can be revoked. Enforcing that is another matter. Without going into the weeds, we need to rethink how to handle it. At minimum, we need to make sure that if the license is revoked not from breaking ToS, the Copyright/IP holder must refund the purchase too. The copyright/ip holder still has the right to their creation but the consumer is also protected via those refund. It is indeed not bulletproof but whether you like it or not, copyright/ip protection is needed to some extent.
Not trying to argue, but I don’t believe I can re-sell my copy of a game I “bought” on GOG, so in my view that’s not full ownership as most people understand it. If you’re a full, legal owner of some property, you can sell that property anywhere you like.
theverge.com
Aktywne