this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
880 points (97.7% liked)

Games

33228 readers
1216 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee 11 points 14 hours ago

"please buy our new switch"

nah, i m good.

[–] SoftTeeth@lemmy.world 9 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

If they spent half their lawyer money on making good games they wouldn't be losing money to competition

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 hours ago

Arguable, but I think they do both.

[–] b34k@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I think Nintendo first party games are great. And I certainly don’t think they’re losing money… the Switch has the most global sales of any current console by a lot. In fact, the PS2 is the only non-Nintendo console to have sold more.

[–] SoftTeeth@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago

Strange that they targeted Palworld but not any of the other monster collector games that came out in the last 10 yesrs that weren't nearly as successful.

They don't need the money, but them wanting other developers money is what makes them do these petty lawsuits. And if they really wanted the money then they could have just made the pokemon game that Palworld ended up filling the niche for.

But they're lazy and greedy instead of a fun games company so they choose to hire lawyers to suppress real competitors

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 5 points 18 hours ago

More like nintendon't!

[–] hmmm@sh.itjust.works 3 points 16 hours ago
[–] sma3in@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (2 children)

we know emulation is legal, but we're still going to legally have a legal reason to take y'all emulators to court angry face

[–] IMALlama@lemmy.world 13 points 23 hours ago

See also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (also known as SLAPP suits or intimidation lawsuits), or strategic litigation against public participation, are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition

There are many, many variants. The idea is the smaller player can't really afford to fight in court, so even if the larger actor has shaky legal claims they will still win.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] g1ya777@lemmy.world 74 points 1 day ago (48 children)
load more comments (48 replies)
[–] mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I prefer my nintendont 2 (aka steam deck). Fuck Nintendo bastards and taking down all cool emulator free software projects.

[–] secret300@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 1 day ago

Nintendo needs to burn. The fact they can just shut down whatever they want is disgusting and needs to be stopped.

[–] IceFoxX@lemm.ee 84 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So the lawyer says that Nintendo, despite knowing that the emulators themselves are legal, has unlawfully caused take downs and reputational damage. Sounds kind of illegal

[–] egerlach@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Not really. It sounds like they haven't gone after them for emulation, but instead for emulation-adjacent things: copying ROMs, circumventing digital locks, etc.

They explicitly mention (one of?) the developers of Yuzu sharing ROMs in the article.

In other words, the emulator itself isn't illegal, but in order to use the emulator the way most people want, you have to do illegal things, and that's what they go after you for.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Razzazzika@lemm.ee 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What bugs me is i thought it was cause of the switch 2 pending, but turns out the switch 2 won't be fully backwards compatible

[–] stooth64@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (8 children)

The Switch 2 has a new hardware size and some software (like Labo and Ring Fit) has a physical component that is sized to the original Switch/Joy-Con. It could be referring to that.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Our new console is backwards compatible*

* It isn't

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 135 points 1 day ago (18 children)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›