Wexter

@BaldBelper78 the entire saga has really put egg on the Sony camp the worst (Nintendo and Steam looking the best). With all the leaked emails from the Sony side about "not caring about the deal" and "knowing Microsoft won't pull COD from Playstation even without a 10 year deal" and even "withholding information about the PS6 from Activision" it all comes across as petty and trying to keep Microsoft from getting a new toy. Which is fair I guess, but it really does not make them look good or even say positive things about their business model when to the public they're playing the "Microsoft would cripple Playstation sales if they pulled COD and purposefully make the Playstation version worse" card... Play me a song on the world's smallest violin Sony when Nintendo has done the best they've probably ever done with a system that has not a single COD title on it and their worst selling home console had two COD titles out of the gate (Black Ops II and Ghost)... Having or not having COD is not a solid indicator for how a console will do at all.

@Ralizah I don't like the argument because it breaks down gaming too much. I tongue in cheek claimed Nintendo has a monopoly on modular home-to-handheld gaming then if Sony and Microsoft are high powered consoles. The term sounds ridiculous, but so is the term the FTC coined. Because if it's just about raw power then what about the fact all three compete for the same third party titles, create exclusives to entice console ownership and all three charge in similar price ranges ($250-500). That and with how mobile chips and architecture are closing the gap quickly with dedicated console quality GPUs and CPUs how long before the Switch-style console can just play the same games at generally the same quality. Despite it's niche market the Steam Deck is proving that games like Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Elden Ring and Final Fantasy VII Remake play pretty good on it with minimal sacrifice to graphical fidelity and with very minimal optimization. The next Switch won't have nearly the power gap to the PS5 and XSX then some might think it will.

It's a really narrow scope and a term that will age like warm milk within the decade, not in a decade within this decade. It just feels out of touch.

By the FTC's logic does that mean Nintendo has a monopoly on the modular home-to-handheld gaming market? Because despite the Steam Deck being a thing Nintendo's I dunno 125 million sales to Steam's 3 million would imply so if they're not competing with Microsoft and Sony.

@MythTgr I get the principle, but Nintendo has always been one to capitalize and repackage remasters. There were like what 7 "New Play Control" games on Wii, the amount of anniversary or trilogy collections on the Wii as well. The Wii U even had a few GameCube remasters the most notable being Windwaker and Twilight Princess and even rereleased Xenoblade on the Wii U eShop... And that is before we talk about Xenoblade remaster on Switch and the New 3DS port. That and the 3DS N64 remasters...

My point is Nintendo will Nintendo even when Nintendo is not saying they're Nintendoing. I think Prime 2 & 3 might get remastered, but the Prime remaster felt more like a proof of concept for the dev team like Windwaker was for the Breath of the Wild team.

@Serpenterror I'd much prefer Revengence over MGSV for Switch. The game is great and P* games run smooth as butter for the most part on Switch. That and I think it is a nice epilogue to MGS4 dealing with the fallout of that game and Raiden. Thematically it would be an instant fit. I approve that list!!!

@sketchturner I think we need to give up on Twin Snakes ever getting a major rerelease. With how things ended for Silicon Knights who knows what legal issues are around that title. Let alone all the little Nintendo Easter eggs that would need to be removed from the game.

I think MGS4 would be quite doable on Switch rather easily (by all accounts in recent interviews they stated they had the game running on Xbox 360). But, MGS4 is an investment of a game to say the least... you need to be familiar with at LEAST MGS1-3 before playing and that is before we talk about Portable Ops, or the original Metal Gear games. As for MGSV... I'm meh on it. I think it do well on Switch with its more mission selection styled structure than the linear storytelling of the previous games. It is basically large scale Peace Walker.

@Sam_TSM it's out today so we'll find out with people's first impressions. With how good Prime remaster was the Wii versions were I think we all have high expectations for this one.

@SalvorHardin it's a niche, but very loved franchise. That and it's Miyamoto's pet project and I don't mind Nintendo having that one quirky of odd IP that gets love consistently. That and Pikmin seems to be a franchise constantly pushing the needle and fits the RTS slot in Nintendo's rotating lineup.

While I'd like some F-Zero I dunno if Nintendo sees it as fitting in their long-term lineup. And they seem like they've been interested in a reboot, but never found the develop willing to take it on.

@Serpenterror I dunno these surprise remasters have been pretty great! Even if it's not quite the gems people want we're still getting Pikmin 1+2 and the Baton Katos duology in the same year. That's pretty good start. I have a feeling if we get Thousand Year Door it will be as a remake of Super Mario RPG does really well.

@CharlieGirl it's probably never going to be released on newer consoles unless Nintendo does NSO for GameCube. With the legal issues around Silicon Knights, I just don't think it will happen

@Cashews So if the Switch 2 comes out and outsells PS5 will that then shift the goalpost of it being a next gen console and no counting? All of that aside the Switch has done beyond what anyone has expected and deserves all the praise it gets for basically revitalizing the Nintendo brand after the downswing since the Wii and DS.

Honestly, the amount of people bemoaning Prime 4 taking so long tend to forget that development was completely rebooted from the game (probably in Alpha form by a rumored internal Bandai Namco team) announced in 2017. Considering the game has only been in real development for 4 years it's probably in beta at Retro. I don't think we're that far away from some sort of announcement. And Nintendo plus Retro did recently shadow drop the Prime 1 remaster (to critical and commercial acclaim) so, it's not like Retro has not been doing other things outside of Prime 4.

Was the game announced too soon? Yeah, probably. But, considering Tears of the Kingdom was announced in 2019 and released this year to critical acclaim... I think Prime 4 getting a 2024 release date it not unrealistic to hope for.

@JohnnyMind historically the UK has not been a Nintendo stronghold. But, they've done impressively well for the past 5-6 years. Curious if Nintendo going to start transitioning to Switch 2 or if they're going to drop Prime 4 news in the coming weeks..

@Simon97 That still does not make them niche though. I mean Dark Souls is hard, but Soulsborne games are super popular. I just think it is because of how the community presents itself more than anything. As far as sales are concerned Fighters tend to do pretty well and the top hitters can go pound-for-pound of most other genre heavies.

@SmashFan347 Where is the idea that fighting games are niche from? Mortal Kombat 11 sold 15 million units that is not niche. And that is before we discuss titles like Dragonball FighterZ at 10 million units, and Street Fighter IV sold 9 million units, and Street Fighter V sold 7 million units. Tekken 7 sold 10 million units, Dead or Alive 6 has sold over 2 million copies and was considered a commercial flop that is more than the first two Xenoblade games sold.

For comparison Splatoon 2 sold 13.3 million units, Mortal Kombat 11 out sold that. Street Fighter V's sales numbers are comparable to Monster Hunter Rise on Switch. These are not niche little titles. When compared to games like Devil May Cry V which has sold 6 million units, Shadow of the Tomb Raider has sold roughly 9 million units, Witcher 3 (on PS4) sold 13 million units. Like I mean these are not Animal Crossing number or Call of Duty numbers, but those are the anomalies. And that is before we talk about Smash sales numbers which is a fighting game...

Where is this idea that fighting games is a niche genre coming from?

@Simon97 Indeed. No idea why the English just do not like ice hockey considering the rest of Europe (especially Eastern and Nordic counties) obsession with it. Maybe they're afraid of slipping on the ice eh?

All in good jest English commenters,

@SBandy1 All good bro. I did a skim-read so, I missed that.

@Snatcher Indeed! I think people who have a PS5 or an XSX/S will feel very satisfied by the end of the year. Good for them, and hey as I said Switch owners have a few bangers to end the year on before we even get a Summer Direct.

@SBandy1 I think it's a bit unfair to compare the Switch's 6 year run with the PS5 and XSX/S... They are finally starting to hit their stride while the Switch is in its twilight years with probably one of if the best games library in Nintendo history. Granted so far year six has been a banger for the Switch with little room for slowing down with TotK, Metroid Prime Remaster, Fire Emblem Engage, Octopath Traveler 2, Xenoblade 3 Future Redeemed and we're still waiting on Disgaea 7, Mortal Kombat 1, Hollow Knight Silksong and Pikmin 4... It's been a pretty good year to be a Switch owner.

Though the PS5 is getting Final Fantasy XVI, Assassin's Creed Mirage, Spider-Man 2, Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth and they did just get Street Fighter 6. There is still a bit a ways left to go for the PS5 to not just feel like the system that plays PS4 games, but better... but I think 2023 is finally the year where it's library feels like its own thing.

EDIT: For those saying, but the PS5 had GOTYs last year like Elden Ring and God of War Ragnarok... yeah it did... but they also came out on PS4 so they did not give massive incentives to get a PS5 just for those games. Unless they wanted them to look nicer. Hence why for a lot of people, the PS5 has just felt like a PS4 PRO PRO, rather than a fresh new console their first few years on the market.

@SBandy1 ignore them. Anyone who has played even an hour of TotK (or watch the opening hours via a let's play) can tell you his complaints aren't real. Even the parts of the map reused in TotK from BotW have been majorly overhauled. And yes TotK doesn't need to revolutionize Zelda (arguably it has with the amount of creative freedom it gives players via the ultra hand), as much like Majora's Mask or Wind Waker before it, now they're just refining what was already revolutionized by the entry before it (in those titles cases Ocarina of Time).

For those saying this is not impressive as fighting games are "niche" a quick reminder that Mortal Kombat 11 sold 15 million units, Street Fighter V did 7 million (just on PS4 & PC as it never had a Switch release), Tekken 7 sold 10 million units. And that's just the big 3 fighters not including games like Dragon Ball FighterZ (10 million), or Super Smash Bros. Ultimate (31 million).

Yes, Street Fighter V did the "worst" between the big 3, but SF6 has had a major hype machine behind it compared to its predecessor... So, yes this is still very impressive.

@Seacliff Ahhh okay that makes more sense! Thank you for the clarification. Though it still sucks as the general confusion like the one I had could lead to more people being disappointed and not support the release. Though, I do wonder how well EOU 2 did as this would had been an almost perfect time to do EOU 3. Though, I still don't quite like paying close to $100 for the collection or individually for $50 when the Untold games did have more content for about the same price.

But, I hope to be optimistic it does well to scratch that EO6 or EOU3 itch I've been having for about 6 years now.

@MegaVel91 The problem with preservation as a term is that it can mean very different things. One is how far is preservation? Is it just the access to the software or is also the materials to development? Does this include, source code, concept art, archival builds etc. Because all those do count when having the discussion and why the term is murky. For example film preservation also includes trying to replicate the original viewing conditions, not just duplication and archival. Is that also part of preservation for games? This is why I say it is murky to have that discussion as it means many different things rather than just the blunt response of accessibility which 9/10 times is what most gamers are talking about not preservation.

This is where I tend to have the "bigger fish to fry" argument because so much of the medium is lost on the daily. A lot of devs have no idea is they can find the source code for things they developed just five years ago, let alone twenty. And this is where we really need to put the devs feet to the fire. As with better archival practices we can get more efficient ports and remasters of older games. The reason Panzer Dragoon Saga has not been re-released is because of poor archival practices. While let's be honest Nintendo 1st party games will always at some point get re-releases (especially fan favorites like Super Mario Bros. Zelda, Kirby, Xenoblade etc.), those are not necessarily the games most in danger of being lost (Nintendo even re-released StarFox 2 and Earthbound Beginnings which never had official releases) rather it is the lesser known ones that may have lost their publishers years ago or exist in the belly of other uncaring companies who have no idea they have the rights to them.

As for accessibility, that too is complicated as while in principle I think it is extremely important and I think is a high priority from our perspective. But, from a dev perspective the important parts of preservation tends to get lost as those are key to allow for accessibility in the future. So, we need to be far more vocal about the nitty gritties of preservation and not just use it as a catch all for accessibility.

@MegaVel91 That is where the ethical part of the debate is important to have. I mean I agree for the most part that players should not have to pay higher than MSRP prices for a game... but at the same time as someone who owns a few very valuable games like Devils Third which goes from $450-900USD I'd have a hard time parting with it for anything under that amount. The used game debate is a hard one to have especially for games that are finite and in some cases were not that well circulated in the new market to begin with.

This is why I do agree that accessibility should be a far higher priority in these discussion than preservation. As the former is far more beneficial to people than the ambiguous later term which can get people quickly into a semantic quagmire.

@Tipehtfomottob Okay this is going to get messy so strap in Megaman.

The secondhand debate is more so because that copy of the game was already bought and the developer was compensated at some point. You are paying the person to own their license to the software. You are exchanging ownership of the game through a transaction. The developer was already compensated at some point is the key point and the key here is transfer ownership. The seller no longer has the software as they have transferred you their copy and while you may be giving them money, you are compensating them for ownership of their purchased good. The developer was already compensated in the initial purchase of the one copy of software. We can discuss if it is ethical to sell the game to someone else for above MSRP, but in the realm of supply and demand it's messy, but legal.

This is also a debate developers and publishers have had since the 1980s with services like Blockbuster. Do they deserve a cut of the transfer of ownership (even if it is a temporary transfer). But, that is a different debate.

The difference with piracy is that instead the software is being copied and now another copy is being given to you without ever compensating the developer for this new copy. The uploader and the downloader both have access to the software while (potentially) the developer was only compensated for one of these copies. Now multiply that for how many people downloaded the software without compensation and now we get into the ethical quagmire as the developer in theory was only ever compensated for one of those possibly thousands of rouge copies that they never authorized.

Now, we can debate the ethics of this such as abandonware, or if it's ethically okay to download a game if the game is no longer available on newer platforms. Generally though that is why a used copy is seen as more ethically permissible than the pirated copy in most people's eyes.

@FightMikes No. By the letter of the law you can't just go online and download the game. If this was let's say 2005 the same would apply you'd need to get a different copy of the game. Just because you "owned" the game at some point does not entitle you to a copy online.

It's the same with the Switch. Just because let's say you bought I dunno... Doom (2016) for PS4 does not mean you get the Switch version for free. Or let's say you bought the physical version on Switch does not mean you just get a digital copy on the same platform. A similar concept applies to emulators. The only protection we generally have to rip our own ROMs/ISOs is through the right to backup software (section 117 of the Copyright Act).

But, what exactly is "preservation" has never been properly defined in these debates. If the debate is that the original ROM/ISO file is archived and protected would mean the game is preserved. But, if it means the game is widely accessible that is different. It's very difficult to have this discussion in generally as very few people actually hammer down on the key talking point. What exactly makes something "preserved" or not.

@Beefcakeyamato The part that ruffles my jimmies is more why? I get there are the original games, but the Untold games had the originals included so their exclusion is weird... maybe they didn't want to make Untold 3 and for the sake of the collection excluded the first two for consistency? I dunno. Maybe we'll get them along with 4-5 in the future.

The lack of Untold content keeps this from being a day one for me. I'm sure modders will add it, but it's hard to justify the price for a game with less content than the one I got for the same price on 3DS. I think I'll get these on sale at some point, but I can't do full price.

@mikegamer I was completing Microsoft a fair bit. Nintendo is better than others, but could use work. Granted Microsoft has a far easier time with backwards compatibility than Nintendo as for the most part it's been similar controllers, disc-based media and similar architecture. Nintendo does not really have that benefit as the media has been vastly different between consoles. Even Wii U games cannot be just played on the Switch even if we ignore the disc v. cartridges argument. And, unless Nintendo released an official ripper getting anything from physical games from the NES-N64 or GB-3DS would be extremely difficult. Even DS games on the Wii U was rather difficult to implement because of the duel screens were rather different from eachother in implementation.

I consider Nintendo Switch a clean break and expect the next Switch to be fully backwards compatible. But, that's why I was also classifying Nintendo as stingy with GCN-Wii as the games they have re-released have been exceptionally limited. Maybe this will improve, but they have made their published back catalogue from NES-N64 pretty easily available through NSO. But, there is room to grow. Due to how Nintendo handled business in the past they have a harder avenue because of their innovation so their GCN-Wii U catalogue is harder to make available without doing native ports.

Aka... they're getting there, but they still have growing pains to workout.

@PrincessKatamari not to play the semantics game (I'm actually am), but that is the definition of entitlement. Even if the game is no longer available you don't just get to have it because you played it as a kid. Not how that works considering there are a bunch of other ways to do it like buying the game used and using an after market console. I mean live and let live, but really bad example.

I don't think Square Enix is losing sleep over you downloading it online and playing it... But you can't say that's not entitlement when that legit is an example of entitlement. It be better to just argue I doubt Square Enix cares too much if you did download it online as they've not done much of anything with Taito's back catalogue.

@ValZ it's a bit more complicated.

1) Emulators like any software are legal provided they don't have another company's copyrighted code or assets (provided it's unlicensed).

2) ROMs/ISOs and bios can be legal provided they are ones you dumped yourself and not being distributed online.

So you're kind of right. Like most things is complicated.

@mikegamer How Nintendo handles their legacy content is a different discussion. And one I'm okay having. Nintendo compared to Microsoft has been at best stingy with their legacy content past the N64. Though they are better than most, there is room for them to grow for accessibility of their content. Though from what I can tell Nintendo has treated Dolphin pretty good. They've generally live and let live and had to be contacted by Valve before they did anything. So, from what I can tell unless Dolphin wants to take Nintendo to court (probably a bad idea) Nintendo will probably leave them alone.

https://mastodon.delroth.net/@delroth/110440301402516214

@mikegamer When did I say I was against emulators? And if you're legally backing up your own games then you have zero issues... All I pointed out was SCOTUS didn't rule on it. Which is fine, I don't care. On a personal level go do what you want to do my personal opinion means nothing in the matter. But, from a legal standpoint emulation is legal provided it is not using anything copywritten. And as we've learned about SCOTUS it tends to change on issues over time so with a more Republican leaning court it is possibly 3rd party emulators that ship with a BIOS or encryption keys could be classified as illegal entirely. But, that is purely speculation as luckily a case involving emulation has not been heard by SCOTUS and hopefully wont any time soon.

@Spider-Kev it is on Amazon my friend. And the game came out in 2017 compared to Xenoblade DE which was 2020 and Xenoblade 3 which was last year. So, yeah it will not be as available because it is an older game in a niche series with traditionally lower sales. I also would not compare the availability of Xenoblade with a Mario game. It would be more comparable with Astral Chain or Tokyo Mirage Sessions FE.

Though I have found you a copy it is on Amazon US right now for under retail price. Go buy it have fun: https://www.amazon.com/Xenoblade-Chronicles-2-Nintendo-Switch/dp/B01MZ94DLA/ref=sr_1_1?crid=7P6JZIS0QAL0&keywords=Xenoblade+2&qid=1685383721&sprefix=xenoblade+2%2Caps%2C144&sr=8-1

@1SDANi But you were asking if you're allowed to make a DVD player and sell it. To make one you need a license because the format is not open source. So, your question has a very simple answer.

@mikegamer They didn't rule on it. You said SCOTUS made emulation legal when it was not actually heard by the Supreme Court. They rejected listening the appeal. There is not an official ruling on emulation or the use of ROMs/ISOs. Though generally emulation is considered legal PROVIDED it is reverse engineered and does not use copywritten code.

And my point is Nintendo has not gone after emulators only the distribution of ROMs/ISOs. And as far this case went it was Valve that alerted Nintendo and Nintendo responded with it should be taken down. And it is not about Nintendo releasing the games now, but the ability to do so in the future like they have with the NES, SNES, N64, GB, GBC and GBA. And Nintendo has also released GCN games through remasters like the ones listed earlier.

@1SDANi read up on the DVD Forum and DVD FLLC and get back to me.

@1SDANi But, you still need a license to make DVD players as it is not open source which was your question.

@mikegamer can you cite the case that SCOTUS has actually listened to? From what I can find there has only been four cases for emulation and most settled outside of court and SCOTUS has never made an official ruling on emulation itself :

https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/1998-99/copyright-infringement/emulationlawsuits.html

https://www.theregister.com/2000/10/14/supreme_court_refuses_to_rule/

There has never been an official ruling, but Nintendo has not go after emulators. They have only gone after illegally distributed ROMs/ISOs and the programs that allow you to circumvent their DRM software. Which is perfectly okay under the law.

It is also not about Nintendo selling certain games now, but the ability to in the future. If Nintendo wants to add GCN games to Nintendo Online lets say next generation they don't want people making money off that now. And considering Nintendo has a GCN emulator I would not be surprised if a next gen Switch will be able to. That and Nintendo has even done remasters of select GCN games such as: Zelda Windwaker and Twilight Princess, Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime and Luigi's Mansion. So Nintendo is working through their GCN back catalog.

@1SDANi That is exactly what you have to do. To even use the DVD logo on your products you need a license. You also need a license to make a DVD player as DVD is owned by the DVD Forum which a number of different companies that own the format. To even use some formats of DVD or even the DVD logo you need to apply for a license from the DVD FLLC.
Enjoy https://www.dvdfllc.co.jp/logo/lg_who.html

@JohnnyMind Indeed. There are unrealistic expectations in some these articles comment sections that somehow Nintendo must keep every game ever made on their platform available... somehow. The NES alone had 716 games on it and a large chunk of that was license games by studios that either do not exist or are now absorbed into larger publishers who may have no idea they even have the rights to said games.

My point is that expectation is completely unreasonable. Even the rose-tinted Virtual Console only ever released at most 95 NES games on the platform at a time. Though it comes down to what can be a reasonable expectation? How can Nintendo make these games available? Apparently Switch Online has 94 NES games on its platform so as far as that platform goes, they're about on par with the Wii.

So, as far as availability goes of their retro catalog Nintendo has been Nintendo. Though what I have enjoyed seeing is Konami and Capcom stepping up big time with their collections and the Final Fantasy Pixel Remasters are no slouches either.

This industry has a major problem with accessibility, but I think they are heading in the right direction and all this hate directed at Nintendo seems at best misguided and at worse disingenuous. Though there are some much bigger first to fry as far as their retro catalogue being just unavailable... EA...

@Spider-Kev Because it is currently out of print. Nintendo can only keep so many games available at a time due to limited number of factories. You can still get the game fairly easily with minimal markup on Amazon US right now if you want it (I saw it as low as $54.99 USD which is actually bellow market).

@JohnnyMind I think my issue has always been confusing preservation with accessibility. People talk about Nintendo not "preserving their games" when out of any major publisher Nintendo is one of the best at this. The difference is having their games accessible and Nintendo has been sometimes great, sometimes not so great at this. But, I always will get my feathers twisted when people beg for certain games to get a re-release and then pirate the game anyways when said game finally gets a re-release.

I just dislike hypocrites and don't care if people want to emulate it but, at the very least support the re-releases of these games. People wanting to download ROMs/ISOs online to play on an emulator have zero to do with preservation and they should just be honest about it.

@Stocksy The thing is what allows 3rd party emulators to be legal is the fact they are reverse engineered and don't use proprietary code. Emulation is perfectly legal as they are used by every major publisher in some way shape or form. The unauthorized distribution or ROMs/ISOs have always been illegal. The thing is 3rd party emulation has always had to rely on the fact they use original code and not the code of other companies. However, because Dolphin has used Nintendo's copywritten code without authorization this does mean Nintendo can seek damages as the unauthorized code has allowed the execution of their software without their consent. And Dolphin was in use during the Wii-era which means Nintendo can argue the loss of profit due to the use of this code and potential further profit as they have re-released some of those games through the Wii U and Switch (Xenoblade, Skyward Sword, and Mario Galaxy being three most notable). Will Nintendo go this route? I don't think so, but they can and odds are would win the case rather easily.

AKA, if Nintendo really wanted to put the screws to them they can and that does have large sweeping consequences to emulation as a whole if they do. You should never and repeat never use proprietary code of another company ESPECIALLY one as litigious as Nintendo or even Sony.

@Stocksy I don't think that is what @RupeeClock means. The main defense of emulators is it has to be reverse engineered with 100% original code. The fact they found Nintendo's proprietary code which they've used as recent as the Wii U and was in circulation with Dolphin since the Wii was on store shelves is a big no-no and could get the Dolphin dev team in serious *****.

@NinjaWaddleDee The thing is the part that bothers a lot of people (myself included) is when people claim their use of emulators is about "preservation" and yet we see articles, upon articles of people pirating new Nintendo Switch games (which has nothing to do with preservation as you can buy 99.99% of the Switch's library right now). The thing is as someone who grew up in the 00s when PSP and DS piracy was extremely high I learned people don't actually care about "preservation" when they use emulators. Because back then NES, SNES and N64 games were extremely cheap... didn't stop people from downloading the games online for free and I'm not talking about obscure Japanese only games, I'm talking about stuff you could get at a local pawn shop for $5-15 at the time (Contra, Super Mario Bros., Ocarina of Time, Castlevania Symphony of the Night, Final Fantasy VI) or even through the Virtual Console, Xbox Live or through the PlayStation Network.

The thing is with me is people should just be honest. The amount of times I get in these discussions and ask if people ripped their own GCN or Wii games to use with Dolphin and get radio silence really does say it all. Or when publishers do re-release their games, you always get that one snarky person who says why bother buying the collection when they can emulate them for free. And then those are the same people on these very articles talking about "if they just released the game on modern systems I'd buy them" which is a complete U-turn of their previous comments. You can find those users its not hard.

I have zero issues if people want to emulate and pirate games, just be honest about it and don't shove the world "preservation" around when that is not what you're doing.

EDIT: And to make it clear I'm not talking about people who dump their own ROMs or ISOs. That is fine and your legal right to backup your software. I'm talking about people who claim they only use emulators for "preservation" while downloading new games online and don't actually support the re-release of classic games because they can get those games free through shady websites.

@johnvboy considering Pokemon almost never happened and Red and Green had a nightmare development, this is a major accomplishment. I really liked the new games, but the sales have been beyond what I could ever imagine..

ETA before delay? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

In all seriousness I'm excited

@HeadPirate Sony has always been arrogant p***** though. This is just the Sony I remember from the PS3 generation (go back and read interviews about the launch price and the cell). Though this current attitude is a stark contrast compared to how Sony talked about the Wii U and the Switch early-on. I just think they believe they own the gaming market and now see Nintendo as a rival again so need to knock Nintendo down a peg.

@HeadPirate Sony's recent comments on Nintendo make me wonder what happened to the all the love. They seem annoyed the Switch surpassed PS4 sales in half the time and possibly could overtake the PS2. But, Microsoft seems the most keen to work with Nintendo. Probably to diversify their portfolio and profit margins.

@Roibeard64 MGS∆ is confirms to be coming to PS5 XSX/S and PC. I don't think a Switch port will happen till next gen. Silent Hill 2 is confirmed PS console exclusive