Richnj

@Snatcher Well this is why I hate people defending bare minimum ports, collections, and cheaper genres as being worth full price.

Apparently everything is worth the same as a brand new Zelda or Mario, so long as you want it bad enough.

The pricing should be in line with the size of the project. Otherwise, in trying to make everything have value, you're just devaluing the larger projects.

@benchan "Well that answers the question of narcissism"

If you say so.

"I don't know if you're intentionally dodging the point that selling hacked game files on licensed software has little to do with "enjoying your property""

You didn't make that point though. The only point you ever made was "but it's illegal, therefore it's illegal" And you are literally deflecting right now. My point was that modifying your property is a right, and saying "it's illegal, and therefore not your right" isn't just a bad take, but the worst of takes. We can have a broader discussion about if you should be able to sell modded files, but you never once brought that up, so don't pretend you did.

"but it leads me to believe that you're a customer of these types of services."

I'm not. I don't even buy official microtransactions from companies, why would I buy modded saves?.

But this is part of your attitude that's making me roll my eyes. You're jumping to some big assumptions to back up your own opinion.

"Japan doesn't have an anarchy."

This is the second time you've tried to conflate questioning laws with anarchy. You do understand that it is perfectly reasonable for an individual to question laws without advocating outright breaking the laws?.

And that questioning laws leads to people wanting to change them. Again, this fundamental lack of understanding of how societies change is what lead you to think I just thought I could write one comment on a nintendo website forum and get a law changed in Japan.

"piracy of DLC content"

This is not DLC content. Again, a lack of understanding of rights has lead you to a stance that is just wrong. Nintendo are not selling an alternative of this. They do not sell modified game saves. The modder selling this is not hurting Nintendo financially and as far as a I can tell is not a security risk to the nation either. Which is what lead me to believe this was a violation of human rights. And why, Japan has not justified the arrest for as afar as the details given here.

What's more, if you take this road, where data created by an individual using works created by a company is outright illegal, we end up in a position where video game mods are in questions also.

"Selling hacked/pirated content should be illegal for the sake of everyone who purchases it honestly, and for the sake of those who created the content who've had the profits stolen from them. Happy?"

There you go. You made an argument.

Pirated content, sure I guess. Again, if a company is actively selling the product and you doing the pirating actively hurts their sells, then sure. There's actually a much deeper conversation here, but in principle I agree.

Hacked content. Let's talk about this.

1) What harm does selling hacked content do?

2) And do you see a difference in selling a hacked save file and selling a hacked game?

3) Do you believe in the 'free market'?

@KnightsTemplar Because none of the work contained here (as far as I can see) is copyrighted.

You can't copyright a genre, game design, game mode, or style. The actual pokemon designs will have been copyrighted and their names trademarked.

As long as all music and designs are original (even if derivative) and does not use any designs from the pokemon games, then it's all legal, and so it should be.

@benchan "lol if you think people online are being influenced and internalizing your ideals, you're a narcissist."

I don't think my eyes have ever rolled so hard.

"No one is being apathetic towards anyone's property rights. It even states in your article that property can be taken away if not used within the confines of the law. While enjoying your property lawfully is absolutely legal, altering licensed software and selling it is not."

You might want to try re-reading and understanding your rights. I don't know if you are being intentionally misleading and conflating legal with moral, but it's scary.

It does not say they can take it away if it's illegal, it says" There are some situations in which public authorities can take things you own or restrict the way you use them. This is only possible where the authority can show that its action is lawful and necessary for the public interest". In short, the government have to justify their restrictions. Otherwise they could just make anything illegal and stop you doing it "because it's illegal"

You haven't even attempted to justify the law. You've only defended the law based on its already established status of being law. That sounds very authoritarian to me.

"Happy virtue signaling"

Oh...

@benchan The ideas that are shared become internalised by those that read it. If everybody is apathetic towards property rights, then no one cares when rights are taken away. If people care, then it's harder to take away rights without backlash.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-1-first-protocol-protection-property

Freedom to enjoy your property is a basic human right.

@benchan That's a terrible take.

If something shouldn't be illegal, we don't shrug and go "oh well, the law is the law" we should go "hey, that shouldn't be illegal".

@HeadPirate That's not much better, since modifying your hardware and using emulation shouldn't be illegal.

It leaves a Switch Pro to be a Switch 2.

Go the same route as MS and Sony. Release next gen hardware, with much better hardware, and with proper chat and feature support this time, with the ability to bring forward all the old Switch titles, but with power to move forward.

Don't know what's worse, Nintendo charging more money, or people paying it.

REV 1 & 2 are again, the only ones with proper discounts.

@piecez the Xbox One X and PS Pro didn't make the slim models obsolete, and a Switch Pro wouldn't have made the base Switch obsolete.

I guess I won't be getting a new Switch for Christmas then.

Edit: Nintendo showing Samus impotently firing off, and having no effect, is perfectly chosen for this reveal.

@BloodNinja @Generic_Username Celebrating differences has become a necessity because anyone deviating from the norm can become a target for hate.

Pretending we are all the same hasn't worked.

Making our differences pronounced, makes not being the same, normal. So rather than "Hey you might be missing an arm but at least we both have two legs in common", it's "I have four limbs, and that's me, and you have three, and that's you, neither of us is more or less than the other".

@Dezzy If you want different political agendas in games media, why don't you go make them yourself?.

You shouldn't be able to force someone else to change their content to suit you.

@OldMcGroin "we celebrate people who rip us off now?"

Welcome to Nintendolife.

I love how you've tried to use 1-2 Switch to justify how low cost games can be price at whatever the publisher wants, while then having to concede that it doesn't actually justify anything.

1) "Publishers should be able to charge what they want". "but 1-2Switch should have been a packaged game"

2) "if a publisher over prices their games then don't buy it and wait for a sale". "although Nintendo don't drop the prices of their games or really do proper sales"

3) "if a game is over priced, don't buy it. I didn't buy 1-2 Switch". "but 1-2 Switch did sell like 3 million copies and was a success".

4) "Nintendo games sell loads and stay pricey" which is a might makes right. Just because this happens doesn't mean it should.

These are all such bad justifications for why you are OK paying $60 for a game.

If you personally would pay $60 for 2D Metroid, then just say so. We have idiots that pay $100 for a game and then still throw money at the game through microtransactions and justify it by saying "devs gotta eat". What you would pay is fine, it's your money.

You aren't making an argument for why the game should be $60, you're just making an excuse for when you put down that money.

How about we talk about game budgets?, and how a game like 1-2 Switch or cheap and quick Wii U ports clearly would not have the same budget as a 2D Metroid game, and how a 2D Metroid game wouldn't have the budget of a full blown Mario or Metroid Prime game.

If 1-2 Switch and low budget games are worth full price then no game, even Breath of the Wild, plus all the DLC isn't worth $80 or whatever it is, the pokemon games, and anything else that has a price above $60, isnt worth that price, because you've made the distinction that the budget, and the size of the development that went in to making of the game, doesn't matter.

"We’re delighted to bring Nintendo Switch owners the retail version, meaning players can bring Crysis Remastered on the go with them and not take up precious memory space,"

I'm taking this to mean that there's no silly '2nd and 3rd games are a download code', in which case, I'm in.

@Yorumi Idealistically, I agree with you.

But I've seen enough of the "muh free speech" to know that when someone calls "the side of tolerance" intolerant, it's a dog whistle for "don't challenge me, just let me keep and spread my ignorance".

@Mountain_Man If you were offering a "contrary fact" that slavery wasn't all bad, would you expect people to tolerate it?

Funny how you feel that you have the right to disagree with others here but if they don't automatially accept your opinion, they are intolerant.

Another example of an obviously bad Nintendo move turning out to be obviously bad.

Being different isn't always innovative, sometimes it's just worse.

So 5 arguments and 3 of them were "it's a new game"

By this logic, every single game ever should be £50.

And this logic of "new games deserve to be full price" assumes that old games do not, and directly contradicts Nintendo's own practice of ports and sales.

For £50, these should all be bundled with Dread.

@EndUser77 No, no and no.

I don't need hard figures to be able to decide that something is bad for a community. Any action that limits that community's freedom and choices is bad. Any change to how the communities operate would need to be evidently beneficial or explained how it's beneficial by the one forcing the changes. Since neither seems to be the case, I'm pretty confident in believing the change wasn't done to benefit the community.

Criticism is not negativity. Or at least, decrying criticism as negativity is a really bad argument. We are allowed to criticise. In many cases, as customers, it's our job to. My positivity is reserved for when a company does something right. Even if that something right is 'we are just releasing enjoyable games and not doing anything overtly bad adjacent to that'. Not as a default response to something with potential negative consequences.

I don't need to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt. I owe them nothing, and they owe me nothing. They put out products and services and I purchase those I'm interested in. That is the absolute extent of our relationship. If you, or anyone else, is anymore deeply involved than that, you should seriously think about reassessing that relationship.

@EndUser77 I never said you said that Nintendo were flawless. I said "you argue as if they were infallible", and "For this to be a persuasive argument, Nintendo would have to be flawless in their execution of businesses decisions". The closest I came was saying you had "passively" argued it. As in, generally touting Nintendo's achievements and using them to justify trust in Nintendo's decision.

But since we're now on the same page as to Nintendo's track record, you can start asking how this decision affects their business and the gaming communities. And since generalities like "there is no way of recognizing a mistake without the benefit of hindsight" don't argue for or against the decision. You might as well say "I don't know" or nothing at all, for what it adds to the conversation. We can ignore any unforeseen circumstances.

So, was costreaming hurting Nintendo?. I doubt it. Probably just made it harder to see engagement. But probably didn't hurt actual sales. Maybe, this decision will really help Nintendo. Maybe miraculously make them billions, and is just really good for Nintendo.

Does removing costreaming hurt the community? Yes. It's harder to build up on communities when you copy strike videos and ban streams of your games. The communities find it harder to build around your IPs. Making communities feel less welcome.

If this decision hurts gaming communities, then the decision was wrong. And short of someone being able to argue that this will help communities in the long run, or that Nintendo has a history of being super pro community, this decision continues to be wrong.

@EndUser77 "after four decades of blazing the trail for the entire gaming industry, it might be wise to assume Nintendo knows something we don't. 🤷🏼‍♂️"

For this to be a persuasive argument, Nintendo would have to be flawless in their execution of businesses decisions. Things like the Wii U prove otherwise.

" Sure they've made missteps along the way. I mean, wouldn't you if you were blazing the uncut trail for everyone else?"

Of course I would, but I wasn't passively arguing that I or Nintendo has been flawless. You were.

And the logic goes like this. If Nintendo has made mistakes in the past, then it's safe to assume they can make mistakes again. Therefore, blocking co-streaming can be one of those mistakes, and your argument of 'trust Nintendo, they know what they are doing' falls apart.

@romanista Considering the core gameplay looks identical. I'd say this fits as a remake. Unless they change the story and maps drastically.

A good rule of thumb for me is;

1) Any collection or next gen style ports. Like MCC, Borderlands, Bioshock.

2) Resident Evil 1 on GC, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot.

3) Goldeneye Wii, Resident Evil 2 and 3.

4) Prey.

Remaster = original game with updated or replaced assets, and additional features.

Remake = brand new game, new engine, new assets, all built to literally remake the game from scratch.

Reimagining = completely brand new experience built with the intent to retell the same story in a different way. Normally fits within an existing series.

Reboot = completely restarting an entire franchise/series from scratch.

@EndUser77 You say this as if Nintendo are infallible.

Let's pretend Nintendo have never made a single misstep in their entire history, so that we can claim they know 100% what they are doing here too. Pro logic.

I feel sorry for the, presumably, one guy in a cave working on these updates.

Aloy is looking pretty good now, huh?

I supported other collections like Bioshock and Borderlands on Switch (and would have supported Mass Effect), so I'll support this.

@Moonlessky PSA: Do not lick or eat your consoles, controllers, or cartridges. They taste horrible.

Give me a steam based hybrid, between £250 - £450 and I'll jump right in.

Partly due to being use to quick access grenades, partly due to enjoying popping heads, but I'd just sell all mine to ugrade my weapons.

Also fish. I'd kill all the fish, and sell them. If you ever wondered where the merchant got food from, it was me. I was bringing him fish like a cat brings its owner dead birds.

Can't wait to be recommended an £8 calculator

It feels more like the golden age for the companies more so than it does the actual players and developers.

That's right, pull a Konami and waste a great horror franchise on bloody pachinko machine.

In fact, the only horror franchise Nintendo should even have is Luigi's Mansion. Fatal Frame and Eternal Darkness need to be set free.

@Ganner I was about to say, this game looks like it was made without a creative director, or at least one without a clear vision.

It's a shame too, because what they are trying to do has a lot of potential.

@nessisonett Well, as I said to my partner, the way Musk came out with his Autism came across as being about him, rather than being about autism.

If it was about autism he may have felt compelled to research the condition's history with the show.

I'll attack companies all day long, I'll even criticise individuals all day long. But targeted harrasment, of anybody, is not acceptable.

It's not even helpful to your side of the argument. You aren't proving this guy wrong, and you aren't proving yourself right. You're just trying to bully your world view in to existence. And this guy doesn't even have the power to give you want you want any more. It's not helping anything. It's just hate for hate's sake.

But this is a major problem with the gaming community. There's far too many people who have their emotional happiness tied to a product, and they will defend the product, the company and anyone that provides them as long as they help maintain that world. Regardless of whether that person or company really deserves it.

And the second someone threatens that world view, whether it be a fellow gamer or even a dev, that person will get attacked endlessly.

@Zebetite it was satire.

@ChakraStomps What Nintendo games aren't pirate-able?

@RudeAnimat0r @Zebetite

I'm am genuinely out of patience with people who Stan companies.

I love lots of things, like xbox, PS, Switch, Halo, Resistance, Metroid, Disney movies, Marvel movies, and over the years I've spent a lot of money in these things. But people really need to detach their love of a property or product from the business that provides it.

I think there'd be an issue for many if they had to admit to themselves that they aren't giving their money away to a corporation that "deserves" it.

@GrailUK "But to even suggest it's the last time we all see these games is nonsense"

That's not really the issue though, you know that, right?

"wanting to capitalise on the goodwill of another company (usually by aquiring them.)"

I must have misread the part of the story where Epic were trying to aquire Sony, or MS, or Nintendo. Again, my mistake.

"celebrating an anniversary with a collection of oldies"

Maybe, if wish it hard enough, Epic were just trying to celebrate first party titles by bringing them to their platform.

It could have been a nice trip down memory lane for anyone on the EGS. You just aren't believing hard enough.

I mean, if anything, Epic are the good guys, because they just want everyone to have access to more games, and because their plastic toys don't cry out for the toys their child owners don't have. Now that, that is some very consumer friendly business by Epic.

@GrailUK I thought you were against money grabs with zero creativity... My mistake.

@GrailUK Did you criticise the 3D All Stars collection?

"would probably take a year with a 4-5 person team, full-time, by itself."

You have 600 people working on one title nowadays, for 3+ years. 5 people working to get MP3 working on Switch sounds reasonable to me.

@AllieKitsune I thought Black Isle was defunct.

Indie devs are out there paying for artists, designers, writers, and all sorts of other positions not needed for straight ports, and charging less, and we honestly have people defending a £30 straight port.

@Ryan_Again Article 19

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

https://web.archive.org/web/20080705115024/http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

You needed this.