Wexter

@Narrator1 agreed. Those are solid points that I think put Yuzu in check from Nintendo's side.

I think the biggest lesson learned here is don't monetize your emulator. Dolphin has been fine because they don't monetize and only got Nintendo's lawyers attention (and was more flagged by Valve) when they tried to get it up on Steam. Dolphin has not been taken down or sued by Nintendo only blocked from Steam and Xbox. And Nintendo only took action when they absolutely has to.

Seems like not taking action against TotK pirates in addition to monetizing their emulator is what finally got Nintendo to take action against Yuzu. Don't poke the bear's tentpole releases is probably the best policy.

Nintendo seems willing to play dumb when money or official releases are not on the table.

@naxuu indeed. This does not change legalities at all! Settlements are more optic victories than anything as Nintendo gets a "win" in the sense that it will deter people from making emulators for their consoles in the future.

Based on the results seems like Nintendo was more interested in the optics than the legal precedent. They would still need to overcome previous precedent if they sued another developer in the future.

@Frailbay30 Oh I very much agree! I remember owning a bunch of awesome retro games that got damaged in a flood. Since then, I've been far looser with how I play these games and tend to get re-releases through Steam (or Switch if a collection isn't on Steam). It is just easier that way. And far less costly then re-investing $1000+ dollars into my hobby for games I was probably not going to play anyways.

As for preservation standpoint, I think as an overall industry and audience we should collectively be doing better. Which is just educating ourselves on how we can best preserve how these games were intended to be played and be more willing to reach out to preservationist groups and see what we can do to help. Even if it is just sending in old strategy guides, magazines, etc to help them not just preserve the games, but also the context around them.

@Vexx234 It's all good! This is just a very complicated subject so word usage is important! Glad you enjoyed my word vomit.

And yeah I wish more games I loved got re-releases like the N64 Bomberman games. I miss them dearly...

@Vexx234 There is one thing here I think we need to set straight. Preservation is not availability, availability is only an aspect of preservation.

Let's look at Star Wars for a moment. You can go watch Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope right now!!! The film is available, there is a catch though, it is not the original cut of Star Wars. Now, if we put the original cut up on Disney+ that would be awesome, but there are about two other cuts of the movie that are not available. Those too would need to be made available even if the differences can be seen as minor. And there are other aspects of the original movie that we need to look at outside of just the film.

i.e. the props, interviews with news papers, TV spots, magazines, toys, comics, behind the scenes information (such as presented through documentaries) etc. as these were all parts of the film outside of just the film itself. And is watching the film on the Disney+ the "intended way" for it to be watched? Star Wars as a Hollywood blockbuster was meant to be watched in theaters. So, is it preserved if the only way to experience it is through a streaming app? Because studies have been done and depending on the setting and environment of how you consume the media, the media is interpreted differently by the viewer. And some directors have been very clear like James Cameron that home video is not how he made his films to be watched.

What about directorial intent? George Lucas is a perfect case study here as every release of Star Wars had some change to it. Like the opening crawl, effects works etc. Lucas was very clear that he was never 100% happy with how Star Wars was released in the 70s as he kept tweaking it for years!! And he is not the only director who did this so many movies have had alterations and changes that you would never know happened unless you look at them side-by-side. This is why film preservation is a complicated conversation on its own.

Now if we go to video games there are a bunch of comparisons we can make to Star Wars alone. Persona 3 is a perfect example here. Persona 3 has four versions of the game, the original PS2 version, the FES edition, Portable and Reloaded. Atlus is only currently selling Portable and Reloaded on modern consoles. FES is only available to purchase on PS3. And the PS2 original is just stuck in physical only PS2 jail.

Now, in the aspect of game preservation from your definition of it. Persona 3 is "preserved" because Reloaded and Portable are available. BUT, Persona 3 is not preserved by your own definition as well. Because Persona 3 and Persona 3 FES are not on modern systems. But, by directorial intent Portable and Reloaded are the "definitive" ways of experiencing Persona 3 despite being radically different from the original game from a mechanics, visual standpoint and even story differences. Persona 3 is getting to a point where it is impossible to preserve the traditional way as the original game and how it was intended to be experienced is being lost despite Persona 3 being one of the most released games in gaming. And, in an era of patches, DLC, and "definitive editions" this is an extremely complicated issue that is almost exclusive to this medium.

Notice how this is starting to give you a headache. IF we look at game preservation only from availability standpoint how flawed this perspective is? Because we can argue that most games even re-released ones are not the original versions, and are not being played how they were intended to be played (arcade games are a MASSIVE preservationist headache). This is more than just owning the rights to the games, as even the best "re-releases" are not what you think they are.

This is not a simple issue of just make it available therefore it is preserved.

@Dr_Lugae Let's ignore emulation atm. I agree, availability =/= preservation. And preservation encompasses far more than just the game itself like source code, development documents, development builds etc. And Nintendo has proven to have the best track record of preserving that information, compared to contemporaries like Konami, Capcom, Square Enix and even western publishers like Atari. Now, is Nintendo obligated to release that information? No. Should they preserve it? Ooooh yes! Even if it is just to make future titles easier to release on modern systems.

I do get tired of arguments like "they should just release the entire insert console here backlog on NSO then they wouldn't have this problem." As if that is remotely reasonable expectation. Between music licenses, engine licenses, hardware compatibility or even just simple things like publishing agreements; video games are one of the hardest mediums to make available on modern eco-systems. It isn't as simple as music or film to find the rights holders (even in those mediums good luck with some of that) and put it on a streaming service or burn it to a blu-ray/DVD. Even emulators require meticulous testing to make sure things are working correctly and even then there can be problems (just look at some PSOne remasters, they got problems like the infamous Final Fantasy IX jump rope minigame). From a technical, and legal standpoint making games available on modern consoles and storefronts suck!!! for any interested party.

Do I agree with what Nintendo is doing here? Hard to say as I don't have all the information. But, I do think people overly simplify the "preservation issue" at bit too much where it becomes a disingenuous debate of nonsense.

@Faruko I dunno if I agree. Xenoblade games are extremely deep, but they function well and Xenoblade 3 made a lot of progress to make the combat more accessible (and Xenoblade 1 & X are pretty damn straightforward, just have a ton of daunting depth).

I think if they do a more action oriented Xenoblade I'm okay with that, but I don't want them going Final Fantasy on us where the series has a fractured identity and insists on completely ripping the ground up and redoing the gameplay every main entry (this has been the case since FFXII some 18 years ago).

I think they just need to explain the basics of their mechanics better and allow people a more easier way of accessing that deeper combat progressively. Kinda like what they did with Future Redeemed.

@LikelySatan I'm curious as well. It's a pretty fun fan game! Though yeah, I can understand why fans are upset, and Palworld is a good game so I can see why people defend it. It's a weird situation.

@LikelySatan oh 100% it's a weird issue that has emerged and a weird dissonance. If the creatures didn't look like Pokemon I doubt this would even be a headline. Monster collection games have been around since what Shin Megami Tensei? But, what's weird is Pocketpair says they took no inspiration from Pokemon, but you look at the UI for their box and party system and it's basically ripped from Legends Arcus, and a number of Pals are clearly based on Pokemon (you can't tell me you don't see the similarities between Dark Mutant and Mewtwo Y).

It's so weird, and interesting, just bizarre. It's clear that PocketPair can make a good game, but they clearly don't care as soon as you look at their previous games it's clear that to them "inspiration" is just lifting whole art designs, mechanics and even fonts from other games.

Such a disappointment as on principle this would be a lot of Pokemon fans jam.

@pupypup you understand though that the issues people have with Palworld is the designs legit lift a number of Pokemon and just remix them. There is no parody to it either as confessed by the developers. It's legit just lifting a design due to lack of creativity and/or lack of artistic integrity. Which is what is pissing people off as outside of that it's a really well made game which means the developers are capable of making something legitimately good! And they are not just doing this to the big mean Pokemon Company they are apparently also lifting Fakemon and other fan designs... So what about that? This isn't a copyright issues for writers and artists this is an artistic integrity issue. No one wants their hardwork lifted for someone else's profit. And if they have the balls to do this with the Pokemon Company then what about smaller indi devs who don't have the resources to investigate and possibly sue? Try thinking about that scenario.

@pupypup I wouldn't say they're in the legal clear. We are talking about two Japanese companies that will need to settle this in Japanese court if it comes to it. As for North American court we do have examples of issues like this such as Disney's objections to "Howard the Duck" from Marvel. We could see a similar settlement here where they'll need to change the infringing Pals. But, this is Japanese court so this could go very south fast for Palworld.

As for morally speaking... It's very ill-moral to do this. You can't deny just lifting Pokemon designs and "remixing them" is very sus and not really what game creators should be doing.

@MegaVel91 I think you hit the nail on the head. I was a little skeptical at first over the similarity of designs... but Anubis is 100% a Lucario knock-off. People say, well they are both based on the Egyptian god Anubis, so that is why they look similar. Well, no... look at the design language of both creatures, they look way too similar to say they both took inspiration from the same source.

There is even an unreleased Pal in the code of the game, that is legit just Mega Mewtwo Y!!! You can't look at the two and not go "well, Dark Mutant and Mewtwo Y look the same because they're both based on cat embrios... " if you're making that argument you're just being disingenuous.

The comparison between well Pokemon and Digimon are both similar looking and well, they are never gotten into legal dispute... well have you seen what Digimon look like? They are not even close to Pokemon in design and have very few design overlaps. And both have been around for 30 years! One would think with the amount of Digimon and Pokemon there are they'd have far more overlap.

So, if anyone is making that argument they can't make it in good faith. Palworld clearly ripped some Pokemon designs and remixed them. If that be because of laziness, for controversy, or just simply using AI to design their Pals... it's not a good look from just an artistic integrity lens. And, from a legal standpoint that is for a judge to decide. But, bringing Digimon or even TemTem into this is sheer laughable. If it were that easy to just have monsters look like Pokemon because "from the same inspiration" we'd have far more examples from similar franchises that overlap with Pokemon then we do just from the numbers game.

While we can talk about the merits of Palworld and there are a number of good points. Its a good game despite being extremely derivative by design. Let's not lie to ourselves as the developers are not shy about what kind of games they make. But, some of the designs do lean way too hard into Pokemon. There is taking inspiration from the same sources, as I've heard people say Pokemon took inspiration from Dragon Quest, and Dragon Quest took the same amount of inspiration from DnD. Inspiration is great! Palworld seems to have used direct assets from Pokemon which is a HUGE legal no-no.

But, even then while we can talk about legal no-nos in the West, both companies are Japanese. This will be resolved in a Japanese courtroom if it comes to legal action and if we have learned anything about Japanese copyright law is that it is FAR more strict than US, EU or UK copyright laws. So, it would had been beyond dumb for Pocketpair to directly crib direct assets from the most popular IP in the world. I hope they haven't, but if they used even a whiff of Pokemon assets (even if their CEO says they didn't take inspiration from Pokemon... yeah right) then this is an open and shut case as far as a Japanese judge is concerned.

That's my 2 cents as I don't see this going anywhere good for Palworld if this lands in a Japanese courtroom.

@Kevlar44 I honestly finally understand why Greg requested the content he was in gets pulled from the channel. The way Jirard did him dirty, made him sign and NDA and gave him no cut of the business he helped build is disgusting. Greg always hit me as very genuine and Jirard not so much... Which is odd considering I felt like this since I first watched the show. This just confirmed that guy feeling.

@themightyant Persona and well Shin Megami Tensei in general are really niche games. Persona 5's popularity is a pretty major outlier in the series as generally they're pretty underground games despite the hype. Granted Persona 4 did widen the reach pretty massively and P5 made it even bigger. We'll see how the series does when the P3 remake comes out.

@LikelySatan that would be for the best. I'm okay if it went the Metroid Prime route too. Considering the team members that made Turok went on to to make Prime. It be poetic and make logical sense for the franchise... But a big dumb shooter like the new Wolfenstein or Doom games would be perfect too!!

@XandertheWise I played Turok 3. For its time the game really is a treat!!! Maybe not as good as Turok 2, but still really good! The only bad Turok game is Evolutions. I'd say even Turok (2008) was pretty good if a bit generic. The IP could really use a reboot.

@Dimjimmer I think the price had to do with the fact that Turok 3 never had a PC port and I think the source code was missing. So they had to rebuild the game from scratched compared to 1&2 which required less work as they had something to build from. I think that is a fair exchange compared to what they could have done which would would be slap the game into a proprietary emulator and call it a day (which has its own problems outside of the obvious performance hit as N64 emulation is notoriously finicky). A complete remaster without the original source code is extremely difficult, read developer interviews from Kingdom Hearts 1.5 Remix, it should give an idea how difficult this is to do... and Silent Hill HD Collection an example of how easy it is to botch.

@rjejr market footprint. Microsoft just wants products out in the wild for no other reason than the have one. The Xbox could sell miserably and lose Microsoft money, but they can write it off because they make unbelievable amounts in other departments. Having a console (even if Gamepass is on other systems) is more for brand recognition and to have a foot in the market. That and they can still have exclusives and other services only through an Xbox console.

I think Gamepass on other consoles would be for only games that are on said console natively. So Doom Eternal would be on a Switch version, but Dishonored, probably not. That is unless Microsoft wants to use Xcloud streaming to close that gap. But, with what Google Stadia proved cloud gaming is just not there yet (maybe in 10 years).

I'm sure there are other reasons outside of vanity sake, but those are me spit balling.

@Edwirichuu it depends really. Some people who own a Switch and on a budget will do trade-ins, wait till deep discounts, or borrow from friends and family. There are ways to game on a budget with the Switch fairly easily. Gamepass is great if there is a game you're unsure on and want to try it out for $20. It's like renting back in the 80s-90s. At least that's how I approach Gamepass, it did save me from getting Starfield at full price.

Honestly Gamepass is a good deal though and Microsoft does do promotions that allow you to get it cheaper. So, it is a pretty good budget option in that way. As for the full year... I think most prefer doing monthly so they can cancel whenever.

@larryisaman agreed. Despite how dumb and artificial the term is, it would not be good for consumers for Sony to be the only "high-end" game console. We already see how anti-consumer they are when they just have the lead.

@eltomo One would assume Nintendo would get a cut of any Gamepass subscription that is linked to a Nintendo Switch/Switch 2 console. From Nintendo's perspective it maintains player retention on their system, and they'd still get a cut of what is sold through the eShop. The only concern would be 3rd parties who may not like having their games on Gamepass for Switch, but have it on PC or Xbox.

I'm fine with it. Gamepass is an overall pretty great service, and I like the fact you can buy games you like from it at a discount. How would I feel with it on Switch (or Switch 2 at this point)? Pretty ambivalent. I'm neither for, nor against it as it gives people options and for people who can't afford to drop $100+ a month on each new game that interests them, if it is on Gamepass they can enjoy it for $20 instead for the month. Pretty solid deal overall. That and if it includes game streaming at an usable framerate then that opens the doors for Xbox 360 and Xbone compatible games without the need to port them to Switch. Even if I personally cannot get down with game streaming.

Waiting to be called a heretic because I'm not ride-or-die on physical only. I'm just all for options and it's nice to have them. Gaming is expensive and Gamepass saves people money.

@SilvercatMoonpaw 100% the 90s-era bishounen link needs to be adjusted to suit the environment more. Look at FFVII's original art by Tetsuya Nomura. If you translate that 100% faithful to a realistic environment it looks terrible. This is why FFVII Remake had to change so much of it while keeping true to the clothing and silhouettes of the original characters.

@WaffleRaptor01 I think the biggest issue is not the model itself, more the lighting and how the eyes move. The eye movement looks a little un-natural and the skin needs more surface detail. With everything else having hyper realistic textures and surfaces the "rubbery skin" looks out of place. Like how @Maxz pointed out. So they either needs to embrace the realism like Final Fantasy VII Remake did... or solve it in a different way.

I honestly think they should draw more from how Dragon Quest XI solves this issue. The textures are hand drawn (even if the lighting and particle effects are rather realistic) with strong outlines in varying locations to make it look more animated. This I think would solve 90% of the issues you both are experiencing with the model which is a bitty taste of uncanny valley.

https://youtu.be/NdFgFABSkhQ?si=rjwV64Rm_PLvRBh5

EDIT: Noticed you're talking about the "Ghibli" video... yeah... it's not very good and looks extremely choppy.

@Znake Don't want to be that guy... but not everything needs to be Ghibli... there is a reason OoT looks the way it does is because it is trying to invoke a high-fantasy aesthetic found in the 1990s. It is colorful, is bright with bold colors rather than washed pastels. There is a strong art design reason why Nintendo did this and changing the style to just be "Ghibli" is a gross disservice to the original team... Especially considering Zelda's bold history of unique and vibrant art directions. The art dictates so much of the game design itself.

As for this video I appreciate it. Looks like a very strong model and pays respects to the original art. I personally would prefer if they remake the game to stick closer to how something like Dragon Quest 11 looks, but obviously with the original art style. But, for a fun fan process braking down how someone would do it... color me impressed.

@cookiki Both are excellent games!!! And considering Baldur's Gate 3 probably won't come to Switch anytime soon (it would probably be a Switch 2 title) it would probably scratch that itch for a lot of people. Plus just being a pure classic CRPG by the mad lads at pre-EA Bioware.

@AlCamus a DS Castlevania collection I'm sure is coming... But it will have some technical hurdles like how to handle the duel screen, touch screen and microphone integration. For the touch screen it be easy-ish on Switch in handheld mode, but odds are for PC, PS5 and XSX/S it will prove difficult. They either need to gut those features (which means reworking those games to rebalance them) or figure out how to implement them on modern systems...

I'm sure Konami will do them soon (probably 2024/2025) but it will probably be not as easy as slapping some roms into an emulator and calling it a day. Which seems to be their tactics with these collections.

@Jacket_p That sucks to hear about Wheel of Time... I was really looking forward to getting into that series... :/

@Jacket_p it's purely a writing issue. The cast was fantastic from top-to-bottom excellent casting. Even if they don't "look like the characters" Anya Chalotra is perfect as Yenn. She is firey, flirty, passionate and just oozes charm!! Henry Cavil... I mean do I need to gush about him? Freya Allen is just a joy as well!!! The production values are fantastic with excellent set design, costuming (sans that Nilfgaardian armor from S1). The writing just really lets down such an overall work of passion by the actors, directors and every level of production.

Such a shame as season 1 showed such promise.

@HeadPirate I dunno man the Netflix series had 99 problems, but Henry ain't one. All joking aside the nitpicking from the games' fans was rather irritating. Like Yennefer and Geralt having a toxic relationship... Like that's kinda the point of their relationship in the books...

But, after season 3 it's kinda hard to excuse the shows problems outside of those nitpickers. You can honor the books by it adapting the books and just sneak some Easter eggs for game fans (like the game's version of the pendent). But, as far as just the books go... Netflix did a pretty bad job as a whole past season 1 (which was pretty damn good changes and all)..

@ottoecamn Ghibli also does not do adaptations. Any adaptations they have done were more "in name only." I like Ghibli's work as much as the next guy, but terrible choice for a Zelda moving. It would probably be pretty, but it wouldn't be Zelda.

@RupeeClock Agreed. Most people tend to get a footing in the creative fields by doing fan works and very rarely are they leaping directly into the deep end of an original works. Bioware used their creation kits around the time of Neverwinter Nights to help narrow down their hiring process. Even Bethesda has done the same with the Fallout 3/NV/4 and Skyrim moding scene. So, there is precedent of studios and publishers finding future employees within these scenes.

Fan works are not inherently bad. I can argue I think it would be better for the creatives to make original works like Undertale, Stardew Valley, Hollow Knight, but fan works are a safer playground to be creative in learning the ropes.

I think my personal issue is more the permissions aspect than anything with how fan works treat the publication of their works. i.e. how some fans think that just because they make a fan work that entitles them to make money off it, or remove them from potential legal consequences of their works. Think DMCA take downs, or how a cove artist had their album taken down because they didn't get a cover license and just complained about it when Nintendo had the album pulled.

Can people please stop calling everything bright and pastoral Ghibli? Very impressive piece of 3D animation, but this is far from being Ghibli (specifically the works and style of Hayao Miyazaki). The faces are similar and inspired by, but there is more to Miyazaki's work than just the style he draws faces, from his camera work, to color choices, ambiance and how he directs a scene. I don't want to bag on the animator either, but when you invite the comparison, the comparison you will get. This is not even NintendoLife inviting the comparison, I just feel bad dogging on the person like this.

Good work by the animator overall, but needs a bit more polish.

@boxyguy I honestly think it's just due to the amount of goodwill he has. Think of some of the best games with long stretches between releases. We tend to be okay with it because of how good the previous games were. I find the eye rolling happens more when we all know the publisher is taking longer with the game because of mismanagement more than making the best game possible. With Toby we know it's more him and his team trying to make the best game possible.

@CutchuSlow the relationship is more what Microsoft offers to Nintendo. Nintendo gets Minecraft, CoD, and access to Rare's IPs along with access to select Microsoft IPs. It's more a win for Nintendo. What Microsoft gets is good PR, extra revenue and penetrating a market that may traditionally not have interest in their consoles.

It's more one direction as far as IP sharing goes.

Anyone who thinks Microsoft's internal emails released through court documents will harm the two companies relationships don't really understand how the business side works. They basically said "if we could buy them we would, but that's not happening" is more of a complement than anything. It didn't contain plans to do a hostile takeover, or plans to screw over Nintendo, it was basically saying due to Nintendo's strong IP history they'd put Microsoft in a better position in the market. That is a duh! If Sony could aquire those IPs you don't think they would? You think even corporate outsiders like Disney wouldn't sniff around Nintendo if they think they could score Mario, Zelda or Donkey Kong? Pokemon alone would put Microsoft in a much better position, let alone Nintendo's other IPs.

The thing is Microsoft and Nintendo will remain to have a healthy relationship provided they continue to benefit from it. It's really that simple. Nintendo doing a major course correction and possibly jeopardize not getting Crash, Banjo, Doom, Wolfenstein, or in the future CoD over a leaked email that was mostly complementary are fooling themselves.

As for Microsoft, they have inquired twice about owning Nintendo and both times were told to take a hike. It's really not going to happen unless Nintendo has multiple Wii Us in a row and even then they'd probably just go the Sega route before being bought out.

@Freddyfred I mean... Star Fox has only had one game since Command (that was not a rerelease)... and Star Fox Zero was pretty much a reboot to try to capture an audience that may not be familiar with anything past 64. Though the company mandate to integrate the gamepad hurt that game way worse than the story. Even if I personally enjoyed the game, it got issues. Though it was sick they gave us Star Fox 2 after all these years of it being on the shelf.

@YoshiFlutterJump Funny enough Miyamoto doesn't even like Sticker Star. He found it boring... I think all of us would be okay with slightly less story if the gameplay was fun. Miyamoto was even okay with an RPG. And even if he limited them to already pre-established Mario characters they didn't have to limit themselves to such vanilla choices...

Sticker Star was all Intelligent Systems fault and follow-up interviews for Color Splash and Origami King paint and even less "Miyamoto ruined Paper Mario" and more "Intelligent Systems dropped the ball" message.

@CammyUnofficial People seem to be confused about something. Miyamoto is not the end all be all at Nintendo. He does not get final say in a game's fate. He does not personally cancel games, he has an opinion if the game is already on the block he'll give his opinion, but devs don't have to follow through. For starters it is a myth that Miyamoto demanded Dinosaur Planet become a Star Fox game. Rare decided to make the change to work with another (at the time) A-list Nintendo IP after Miyamoto's observation. Same with Paper Mario Sticker Star there are plenty of quotes about his disappointment regarding how boring the gameplay was. Tanabe thought it made the game better not Miyamoto. So if Miyamoto is the end all be all at Nintendo why did Tanabe continue using a battle system that Miyamoto said (as quoted from Aoyama) "boring." I think we can all agree with Miyamoto about that.

The thing is Miyamoto can be a bit of a d*** when something is not working regarding him personally. But, there is a "bit of a d***" said tongue in cheek vs. Miyamoto is the final say regarding everything at Nintendo.

@babel116 link to the article please. There is context to this quote I'd like to read. Secondly duh Miyamoto needs to be happy with the state of a game, but the article is talking about that developing the game, features, narrative is not about making him happy. He's a producer he wants a game to ship at a certain standard that should be obvious.

@babel116 receipts please. And I'd like authoritative sources, not he-said-she-said internet gossip. Most of the actual toxic "industry professional" have records that have been reported on extensively. Miyamoto is not one of those pros except by people reading way too much into developer quotes. Ands not just because the Japanese development scene is more hush-hush either. Kenji Inafune and Yuji Naka are all Japanese devs with a clear record of bad practice and at one point both were as influential as Miyamoto.

@Switch_Pro I feed that is the reason Nintendo is okaying this. The issue I feel is less emulation itself and more the active piracy of current Switch software. Odds are Nintendo will invest heavily in Switch 2 anti-piracy which is kinda sad considering the girth of grade-A content on Switch that Nintendo even okayed this.

As for my thoughts on this... well... it was going to happen when Switch piracy is so publicized and widely known. We can't expect Nintendo and DRM developers to not do something to alive 3rd parties that their software is "safe." Sadly this will only hurt preservationists in the long run.

@zgillet I wouldn't call this a cash grab. A little overpriced considering the age of the game (to be fair to R*, Nintendo themselves have released ports like this at similar price points). However, there was a ton of work put into this port to bring it to Switch and PS4. Let's also not pretend this won't get a major discount come Black Friday or Boxing Day for those who can wait. Plus with the soon to be closure of the 360 storefront and the PS3 storefront games like these should be ported to modern supported hardware to keep the game accessible. RDR was a landmark game and should be accessible on modern hardware.

For the record I've not bought the game.

@Stamina_Wheel Thank you! I remember following this story years ago. The fact this game is out of the 7th gen dungeon is a miracle considering the development cycle it went through (and the obvious issues it had on PS3 and Xbox 360). The lack of a PC port up until now (and still none in sight) should be fairly obvious this game had major issues keeping it off newer hardware without serious elbow grease or even porting it to a new engine which is a major task for any release.

@DennisReynolds The point is comparing the game against the original A) The original game on original hardware and B) the other comparable recently released port aka the PS4 version. The game runs better on Series X/S because it is an old game running on vastly better hardware than both Switch and PS4, added that Microsoft personally makes sure all backwards compatible games are running optimally and taking advantage of the larger hardware headroom. So, duh I don't think any Switch owner realistically expects the game to run as well as on Series X/S, they just want to know if it is comparable to the PS4 version and if it runs better than the 360 version.

So, yes the game runs better than the original on an Xbox 360; that is a fact. If we were to compare it to Series X/S models than sure it does not run as well. But, that is not what the point of the analysis was.

@Snatcher you can transfer him in through Home already. But if you don't want to he's been in the game for a while and I'm sure someone can trade him to you.

Why do people keep commenting they either owned or played Red Dead Redemption on Steam/PC? The game never had a PC port. You may be confusing it with it's sequel or maybe you've emulated it... I guarantee you do not own this game on PC.

@Deviant-Dork how do you have this on Steam Deck when the game has never been on Steam?

This is the first rerelease it has had in almost 15 years. If it has all the DLC I'd say that's a good deal. Other 7th gen released games have gotten the 50-60 dollar treatment (Skyward Sword cough) so why can't Red Dead? Also this is not even on PC so... Eat that Steam Deck Stans??? I kid, I kid. Glad the game is out of the 7th gen dungeon.