No, pointing out hypocrisy would be going “hey, didn’t you also blatantly rip off a popular product? Isn’t it hypocritical for you to criticize them for something you also have done?” What Aboutism is defined as: “the rhetorical practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation, by asking a different but related question, or by raising a different issue altogether. Whataboutism often serves to reduce the perceived plausibility or seriousness of the original accusation or question by suggesting that the person advancing it is hypocritical or that the responder’s misbehavior is not unique or unprecedented.” www.britannica.com/topic/whataboutism
It’s not redirecting the conversation to respond to your statement that whataboutism is when the hypocrisy is “unrelated”. Which conveniently lets you decide what is related or unrelated.
Oh, they wouldn’t happen to be calling them orks now, would they? That would be terrible.
Judging an ethnic group by their non-democratic government is prejudice, you are prejudiced. Now please continue to justify your racism like everyone else before you.
You’re citing examples from the 6th, 4th, and 18th centuries and arguably the last one isn’t even about intellectual property
Even ignoring the blatant “what aboutism” if your justification for why it’s ok to steal video game ideas is because some Byzantians were mean to you 1400 years ago just know that nobody is going to take you seriously
No, but this might shock you, other countries have different definitions of what theft is. Theft is taking something from someone.
The funny part being that it is literally enshrined in American law that game mechanics can’t be copyrighted, so its not even in the definition of theft in America either.
Game mechanics can be Patented in the US, just look at the Nemesis system.
Also, just because a country decides that their definition of a thing is different than everyone else’s, doesn’t make it correct. Just look at Russia, they have so many different forms of lying to justify lying in everyday life, but that doesn’t make corruption OK.
On top of that, you were the one who defended this fairly blatant plagiarism by pointing to examples of theft.
I have no issue with people going after China. I’m not a hexbear/ml stooge. It is possible for two things to be bad. It is possible for something about a bad entity to be neutral or at least unsurprising. Which is how I would describe China’s lack of real interest in engaging with, from their perspective, the global order’s new fad interest in intellectual property rights.
I would have thought this was obvious but forcing your rivals to abide by their own rules while flouting them yourself is not an endorsement of those rules, it’s a mockery of them.
Explaining means you actually explain your point instead of throwing out random examples of others doing something similar and then mockingly asking "I wonder why they wouldn't care".
You also seem to be moving the goal post with every post. You said China doesn't care to engage in IP fad, I showed China absolutely does engage in it. Now you're saying of course they do because they flount the rules themselves. Actually they don't. A few years ago Beijing IP court decided a Chinese artist had to pay around half a million to a Belgian artist for plagiarizing his work. I guess you're about to find another excuse to shift the goal post once again.
You think I’m going to shift the goalposts for one example? Ok, yeah that definitely overrules literally decades of behaviour. You win. Here’s your Internet reward for the best argument. ⭐️
I was expecting something where the Chinese IP courts rule in favor of breaking IP laws or at the very least turn a blind eye. This current article doesn't count because there's no resolution here. As for AliExpress, they have an entire process in place to handle IP infringement and they actually ban sellers off the platform if they continue infringing.
Most Links are portrayed as being either kids/teenagers or very young-looking adults, and Zelda is often portrayed as being a more experienced character, still young but often already embroiled in the politics or conflicts that are core to the story’s initial setup. Link usually shows character growth as he rises to the challenge, but Zelda is often a more static character, who starts the story fully fledged.
I’ve never heard of either actor, but a cursory Google to look at their various photos and I can see them working in the roles. Obviously assuming they can act, too.
Usually they reincarnate to be about the same age. Zelda does tend to be in leadership because she always reincarnates as the princess but link is always physically much stronger. Also his face is weirdly round for the character but that’s my own artsy opinion based on the main 3D games.
I was crossing my fingers for Hunter Schafer, but the casting they chose looks pretty decent. They’re a bit younger than I expected but I guess it’s lore accurate.
One should not make the mistake to just judge a single photograph, for a role in a film. Its also important how they move and talk, and what the perception of the person based on existing films is. I’m not in the position to judge about any of these castings or your suggestion, just wanted bring in this point into the discussion.
People have different preferences. It would be nicer to say “I don’t see it, I don’t think she would fit,” instead of “y’all are weird as fuck…” that’s kind of rude and weird to say.
I’m going to give coyotino the benefit of the doubt here and say that meant “Look at her, she already looks like Zelda” just based on the previous sentence
Is this a criticism of the quote, or a response to it?
Once again, you’re not actually just stating your issue, and your responses are ambiguous enough that they could be interpreted either as an objection to people treating Hunter Schafer in a way that you perceive as negative, or an objection to Hunter Schafer.
Between their stealing YouTube money from people giving them free advertising and never reducing the price of decades old games, if they make them available at all, and their shitty online experience, I’m amazed Nintendo has any market goodwill left, but reality never ceases to amaze me. Nostalgia is a powerful beast.
I understand they make some of the most fun games ever, but their legal department cancels that out by an order of magnitude.
It’s not the best selling console of all time. It had one of the best launches, but the PS2, DS and OG switch sold 160, 154 and 152 million. Switch 2 only has 5 million so far.
I bought a Switch last November and couldn’t believe the bullshit Nintendo is pulling. $60 for almost 10 year old games, horrible network adapter on the switch, no voice chat except through a stupid app and it’s not even available in most games. Add to that that the fact that I hate Nintendo’s policies and attitudes towards modding and emulation and consumer protection and I’m never buying another Nintendo console. I’ll go with the Steam Deck and I’ll be selling my Switch in the next couple weeks. Nintendo is an anti-consumer aggressively capitalistic corporation in my opinion.
I know it doesn’t matter, but after all I’ve read about Nintendo and the Switch 2 in the last year?
Fuck 'em. I’m going to get a Steam Deck or a Lenovo handheld, and I’ll just enjoy the Nintendo products I already have. I’m not spending a small fortune on a console that they can brick remotely, or force me to buy a $50 proprietary charger for, or a “virtual game cartridge”.
theverge.com
Gorące