Topic: Protect you digital rights

The reason you don't have to buy this content again on iTunes or Steam is precisely because digital media is king. If anything this is an argument for a transition to digital only.

@skywake My argument isn't physical vs digital. My argument is that people who purchase a license to play digital games through a storefront shouldn't have to repurchase that license just because they update their hardware.

@subpopz Frustrating right. Agree it makes business sense. Ethically, not so much. It makes having multiple consoles a hindrance to modern gamers (in this very specific instance). PC gaming is way ahead of the curve with this (and always has been).

Except physical media have the same exact problems the original post mentions.

The solution: Only buy board games.

They'll work on top of most surfaces. So if you upgrade your hardware that's not a problem.

@Yosheel I'm down for some decent board games! Awaiting the Scythe expansion later in the year.

@Shellcore Well, yes, it's easier to port something between PC, PS4 and Xbox than it was 15 years ago, that's true. And even Nintendo currently uses the default mobile architecture, so many developers should be familiar with it. However, it still takes time and resources to port the games to other hardware and playtest the game.

And you cannot force the developer to make a game available on a certain platform, so if it's an old and/or obscure game, it may not even be worth the effort if most people can just claim the game for free.

''ROMs'' aren't ported by the way. Developers create emulators to run their older games. It's a lot more efficient than porting them individually, but it's only restricted to older hardware (and usually not last-gen software), and they still need to develop new emulators for new systems.

As for backwards compatibility. I see no reason for Microsoft or Sony to change their plans too drastically, if their next systems are similar to their other systems, they should stick with the same x86 architecture, and the systems should be backwards compatible from the get-go. No pseudo-BC programme like Microsoft is doing should be needed.

All consoles are computers. The really big difference is the flexibility and usability of the OS.
The OS we know as windows are support a wide range of hardware and allows you to setup function on the OS.
A consoles OS has limited hardware support and few setup functions.
This is the benefit of the consoles, you have few variables to keep track of, so the system is easier to use.

Now program license are not that different when it comes to physical copies and digital.
On a physical copy the the user right to the license is build in.
If the copy breaks so does your user rights.
A digital copy has the user rights bound to the a code or account.
If you lose the code or the account you lose your user rights.

Now I am talking about protecting this user rights.
If we allow the companies to limited us by hardware, programing or branding then give them the right to cheat us.

Let say you can update the Wii U hard drive and this is view as a supported upgrade by Nintendo and is OS.
Now the OS will have to register the upgrade or it will serve no purpose.
If the is no limitation you will now have a upgrade Wii U, you will have faster load time of programs stored on the hard drive.
Now if there is a limitation on this. Then you have to buy all you games again, because you user rights of the games is only valid on the original hardware setup.

There is the same problem with OS upgrades. If Nintendo release a new update, is the user rights also valid on the update OS?

And let and lot least, what if the OS update has a rebranding.
The Wii U system get a new update, you know own the Wii U+
Faster and supports the new graphic updates for the new games we will release.
Oh and Wii U OS does not support the old Wii U game, but they are available on a new streaming service that cost X amount a month.

Now does any of this sound fair to anyone?
If it does, now imagine you losing you user rights every 6 months because of 1 of the 3 examples?

@Slitth has an OS update on your wii u ever made a game unplayable or any other console for that matter? I feel like you're creating a problem out of hypotheticals that haven't ever happened. I may be wrong but I don't recall whatsoever an OS update taking away the ability to play a digital game

Paranoia. Buy games in whatever format seems convenient to you. Atari 2600 carts still only work with the 2600, 7800, and on the Intellivision with an adaptor. If you want to play them on a modern console, despite your complete 2600 collection, you have no choice but to rebuy them digitally or in a compilation pack or rom hacks. These digital purchases or physical compilations will not transfer to your next most modern device unless the companies involved go through the courtesy of doing such a thing. Moral of the story: if you don't want to rebuy games, maintain your consoles. Free upgrades are free to you, but someone had to port the game to the new system. It costs game companies $ to make and maintain. Nothing is owed to you beyond the game you already bought. If it falls apart in 90 days, tough luck, past warranty, go buy another.

@redd214 No, but I lost 2 games on a DS system update that I had to buy again.
Dr Mario and Super Mario Land if I recall correctly.

@Slitth did you contact nintendo about restoring your licenses after the update? I have literally never heard of a system update requiring games to be purchased again and I keep a pretty good ear to gaming as a whole.

A... DS update? I assume you mean 3DS. And yeah, there's no way a 3DS software update will remove games from your account.

It was either human mistake or some unicorn-level bug.

It's not iOS.

@Yosheel I'm pretty sure Nintendo is run by robots. Or lizard people.

One thing people forget about digital licenses on console when comparing to PC is that you are not just "upgrading your hardware", you're buying a totally different platform. Some of that isn't about digital rights, where neither digital nor physical have an advantage. If you upgrade your 3DS to an N3DS, your X1 to an X1X, your PS4 to a PS4 Pro, you're upgrading your hardware, and your licenses (and discs) transfer. When you upgrade your PC from WinXP to Win10 (does that count as upgrading or downgrading?) and a P4 to an i7, you're upgrading your hardware. Same platform, same instruction set on the CPU, same OS API (more or less), same executable format. If on the other hand you switch from Windows to Mac, you're going to have to rebuy most of your games. You need the MacOS version. Linux is gray thanks to Steam's effort, but so few major games run on the Linux build anyway.

With consoles, NOW they're all x86. Maybe backward compatibility will be the norm. In the past though each console gen was a little hardware bubble and the next version was all new hardware with new instructions, a new OS, everything. Digital or physical, the old games won't run on the new machine, it's a whole different thing. Early PS3 supported PS2 and PS1 games, but that was by including the actual PS2 hardware in the early PS3 models and emulating PS1 in software. WiiU ran Wii and Wii ran GCN because all 3 of them were more or less the same hardware platform. X1 can run some X360 and XB because they're emulating it in software.

But the nature of consoles at least until this gen had each of them as an isolated time capsule, a platform unique from the others that was incompatible with what came before. That may change now. But selling old games on new hardware won't go out of style even if you have backward compatiblity.....HD remasters will still be desirable.

@LuckyLand "It's not like if I try to put my PS2 discs on my PS4 I will be able to play them.
In my opinion it is the opposite, often digital games offer more guarantees than physical ones. You can't lose them, they can't get broken, if the hard disk/SD card/whatever get broken you just need to buy a new one and you (almost) immediately have all your games again.
And there is nothing in digital purchases that makes them less compatible with newer hardware than physical copies"

But if your account gets locked, banned, hacked, stolen, or the account gets damaged/corrupted/whatever....there goes every game you've ever owned all at once. There's still big risk. Especially regarding hacks.

@redd214 That would require that I had proof of purchase.
or some other way to show that I have user rights for the games.

At that time the amount did not matter.
Because I thought Nintendo was gonna store license on the Nintendo Account.
And the amount was so small that it was not worth the effort.

@Octane human mistake on the user's part

@Slitth if it was a digital game it would have been tied to an account of some sort. It would have been ridiculously easy to prove purchasing of that content.

@Alikan But the way I see it is the huge differentiating factor with physical and digital is if you have a huge Atari collection as long as you can get your hands on a working Atari or Atari clone that accepts cartridges you can play any of your physical games just the same as you did the first day you bought them.
With digital, there is zero guarantee that in X number of years any of your legally purchased digital games will run on anything other than the one console you have them registered. Even if I have all my games backed up on a disk, unless I have a means to transfer to or get them transfered to another working console, all those digital games would be worthless. At least if I own a disk or cartridge that is working, and I can find any working console, I have a good chance of being able to play the game.

You say, just buy another console, sure that works right now in the short term. But that logic most likely will not work 40 years in the future. I mean just think if all your Atari games were somehow tied to your original 2600 with no way legal way of transferring rights to play on another 2600.

I do not think any sane person should expect an Atari cartridge to play on a Nintendo. But I would fully expect that I should be able to play any of my games from one Atari 2600 to another Atari 2600. But that is not our current situation without some type of transfer procedure. So if the console that the games are tied to dies before you are able to transfer and lets say the company no longer exists. All your data is worthless.

But your advice is wise, maintain your current console! It would be nice if it was possible to maintain two consoles. One as a backup that has full rights as your main console. But is just sits boxed up.