21
TalkBack / Re: Indie World Announces A Dozen Future Released For The Switch
« Last post by NWR_insanolord on April 19, 2024, 05:14:23 AM »I would love to see SteamWorld Dig 3, 2 was amazing, but I'm glad they're doing Heist 2 first.
You and your boyfriends first made the claim that piracy hurts game sales before me.Your logical fallacy is [ad hominem].
BTW, this started because you first claimed that piracy is morally correct. There's no point in discussing this further when you've Neo-dodged every criticism about the original claim.QuoteStealing implies someone had something taken from them. Piracy never takes the original game away from the dev, it just makes a copy. You're talking about nintendo like they're a starving indie company when they're the richest company in japan period.Your logical fallacy is [strawman].QuoteThey have sold over 140 million switches, made over 1 billion dollars of profit on software sales and the switch is on pace to become the best selling console of all time. I think they won't lose sleep if a few million pirate their games, especially as the switch has been pirated day one.Your logical fallacy is [special pleading].
Won't lose sleep? Nintendo literally sued Yuzu into oblivion because of people pirating Tears of the Kingdom.QuoteIf piracy hurt sales as you pretend it does, the switch would of failed.Your (informal) logical fallacy is [false dilemma].QuoteAt least someone here comprehends how piracy preserves old games. But tbh yall sound like boomers who bought the "you wouldn't steal a car" anti piracy campaigns, and can't move on and accept that publishers do a piss poor job of providing access to their legacy titles.LOL, no one was saying otherwise (though there's more nuance than you presented). The difference is you're the only one claiming its "morally correct".
I think we’ve come to an impasse where your definition of piracy and emulation are dissimilar to my own. I see emulation as an act of preservation, while piracy is an act of theft. The thing is already preserved, you are stealing it because you don’t want to access its method of preservation.
Where this becomes morally gray- which, despite the tendency to shout “**** nuance,” is a thing that does exist- is how that preservation is taking place. I suppose it has something to do with ownership, as well. I know disclaimers on software exist, and that they state that illegal copying and redistribution of a product can land you in legal trouble. The law of man is a self-fabricated one, however, and I think it would be better to have a discussion about what constitutes illegal redistribution, because no, I don’t think an individual distributing game that is no longer accessible on the Nintendo 3DS eShop for the purposes of emulation is piracy because you can no longer reasonably purchase that software, but yes, an individual distributing Tears of the Kingdom a week after it was released for the purposes of emulation is piracy.
If you have some counter to this mentality, I’d genuinely be curious about your reasoning, because I’m open to a discussion and I am not going to insult you for disagreeing with my interpretation.
I don't think it's "morally right" to pirate brand new games that are in no danger at the moment of becoming unavailable or inaccessible. I'm absolutely onboard with preserving games from previous generations however you can, but to me the line stops there.
The **** happened here?
People were bored talking about Nintendo. It's on-topic.