Topic: Boredom and Nintendo

[Dinar87]

I don't argue that we need Metroid Prime 4, but my reasons are more selfish than anything. I think, with the approaching midway point in the year, we'll get a more tangible look at what is in store for us for the Switch's final holiday season. Whether that's more ports or MP4 as a last hurrah (similar to the Wii U era, where Nintendo seemed committed to following through with their claims of "we're making a Zelda for this console, trust us") will be up to how much pressure Nintendo feels at this point to maintain momentum for Switch or keep their most loyal customers ravenous for the Switch successor.

Nintendo could easily give us nothing this year and still be fine. So my worry is because of this, games like metroid prime 4 (even though it's rumored to be already finished) will be made to wait longer to coincide with the launch of the next nintendo console.

[Evan_B]

But if they’ll be fine, why worry?

[Khushrenada]

I think that extra power for the GameCube might be another reason why it gets more fondly remembered for that era. 

It's the entire reason.  Most people get hung up on the fact that the Gamecube was comparable to the competitors while Nintendo has been a generation behind since. 

Maybe for some but I'm as a GameCube fan it took me a long time to even think of that point and only after doing some reflecting on that generation and being reminded of the performance difference in Resident Evil 4 for GameCube vs PS2.

The Switch on the other hand despite being a generation behind, was designed to handle the various game engines that most developers were using, so they could scale their games to run on the Switch much easier.  So even before the Switch gained the massive sales it did, many third parties where able to have games ready for the system even if they didn't have much faith in it because it was easier to port games for it then they could back in the Gamecube era.  And then when the Switch gained the massive sales it did, we started seeing ports of some of the more popular titles from the PS4 era because the hardware once again allowed for such a thing.

This is why when I've seen comments from some Gamecube fans saying the Gamecube was the last Nintendo system to have good third party support I have to roll my eyes so hard they literally fall out of my head.  The Gamecube was still Nintendo designing hardware for their own developers without a thought to third parties.  The Switch on the other hand was the first Nintendo system actually designed with third party support in mind and as a result, has by far the best third party support in Nintendo history.

I would have to disagree with you a little bit on this. I think you are misremembering the Switch's first year. Switch had a small launch line-up. Third party retail titles when it launched were Just Dance 2017, Skylanders: Imagination and Super Bomberman R. Third party retail titles from launch (Mar. 3) to end of June were The Binding of Isaac: Afterbirth+, Has Been Heroes, Fast RMX, Puyo Puyo Tetris, Rime, Disgaea 5 Complete, Redout, and Dragon Quest Heroes 1 & 2. That doesn't seem like a lot of third parties having their games ready for the console. It wasn't until the end of 2017 that you saw bigger name third party titles like DOOM, Skyrim, WWE 2K18, L.A. Noire and even Sonic Forces. I commented on it in the past but Bethesda actually releasing games on a Nintendo system really helped change the third party narrative with Nintendo systems. I do agree that Nintendo did seem to rethink their hardware design by making a system that would be much easier for third parties to port their games to but I also think that third parties still waited awhile to see how the Switch launch turned out before deciding if they would actually bother with the system or not. Nintendo really carried the Switch in that first year and the effort was noticed. I made a thread at the time that 2017 might be Nintendo's best year ever for quality software released. Nintendo carried that momentum of Breath of the Wild and kept the Switch selling so that there was no collapse of system sales after the launch window like the Wii U and 3DS experienced.

Even during the 2017 summer with Switch selling hot, third parties were reluctant about bringing software over. Famously, Cliff Bleszinski said he didn't think he could port the game Lawbreakers to the Switch because "I think the hardest part with the Switch is the controls. Look at the game that we have right now, and we just literally by the skin of our teeth put the entire game and the control pad that the PlayStation has. That means that we could probably make it work for the Xbox One in someway, right? But if you’re looking at the Switch the base controller that’s on the unit, it doesn’t have as many buttons." You'd see comments still of developers unsure about the Switch's ability to run their games that they were putting on PS4 and XBox One or saying that maybe if enough people ask them to on Twitter or something to show there is demand then maybe they'll think about porting something.

Again, Bethesda ended a lot of those excuses but I do wonder if they would have decided against releasing stuff if Switch had slowed down in sales. But by basically showing that it was duplicating Wii level sales, that seemed to get third parties to start taking the system more seriously and you began to see a result of that in 2018. That's when third parties started showing up which is good as Nintendo had to start looking at ports and other ways to fill in their software lineup as their development teams started anew after all their 2017 stuff. They had Smash Bros. which they used to keep up the hype and excitement. Yet it may have ended up being a bit beneficial as it did allow third party software to get more of a spotlight and perhaps get better sales than it might have had it released during the system's early launch. Even though they were old, previous Final Fantasy games getting ported to a Nintendo system in 2019 was another big signal that third parties might now be viewing the Switch different from past consoles. Yet, why couldn't Square have had ports of Final Fantasy VII or FFX ready for launch? Did it really need to take them two years to figure out how to port those games? Porting games may have been easier but it took awhile for third parties to actually take the Switch seriously and do it. Nintendo was further aided in the slow growth and momentum of the PS5 and XBox series X. With third parties releasing games that also had PS4 and XBox One versions to try because of the smaller userbases and expense of development for titles on those system in their first few years, it's kept the Switch as a key piece of the market for a longer time with its large userbase and hardware that they should know pretty well by now.

(And I didn't even get into the whole waste of time that is stuff like cloud versions of games like Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2. Square still pulling crap when it comes to bringing their games to the Switch. Or ports with issues so that they still run better on consoles three generations ago like the Metal Gear Solid collection. It's crap like that which can make third party support seem better on a console like GameCube because while it was a smaller quantity at least the quality was usually pretty good. Or at least, that's how it gets remembered now thanks to forgetting the bad and remembering the good that comes with nostalgia.)

Oh and Gamecube fans are complete fucking hypocrite when you praise games like Luigi's Mansion 1, Wind Waker, Paper Mario TTYD, but then turn your nose at the recently released Princess Peach Showtime.  Quite a few of these highly praised Gamecube titles were incredible easy game, and yet the same people we now praise these games, say they have no interest in the recent Princess Peach Showtime because it looks too easy.  Give me a fucking break.

Seriously, this is why I have no respect for opinions like this.  This are the very definition of peak nostalgia blinding people.  Seriously, if Princess Peach Showtime was released on the Gamecube 20 years ago, the same people who refuse to play it now because it's an easy looking game, would be praising it as a masterpiece like they do to many of these extremely easy Gamecube era games.

I don't know who these GameCube fans are that you keep encountering with those crap opinions. I will say that since Super Mario Wonder, Princess Peach: Showtime is the only Nintendo game that has been released or announced that I actually want to play and is the type of software that I wish they were releasing more of. I absolutely agree that it reminds me a bit of the GameCube era of trying to do something new with their IP in a sort of spinoff way like Luigi's Mansion or Wario World or Battalion Wars. It's rather annoying to me to see you speak of GameCube as having written off something like Princess Peach when I've never done that and makes it seem like you don't know what you are talking about or are just making things up when you label all such fans as one. Perhaps not your intention but it creates a disconnect for me when reading your posts with the phrasing that way.

It's Princess Peach that actually is why I agreed about having the same feeling of boredom that Dinar87 was expressing. Let's go with August 2023 as a starting point. When I think of the period from August 1, 2023 to July 31, 2024 and Nintendo developed software for the Switch that instantly appealed to me or stood out, I can only think of two titles which are Wonder and Showtime. That's a whole year in which Nintendo released just two games I'm excited to play for Switch. I had to look up to check what I might be forgetting as everything just seemed to be ports or remasters like Super Mario RPG. There was Detective Pikachu Returns and WarioWare: Move it!. Both are games I'll likely pick up when the price is right for me but they aren't big motivators to make me excited about the current state of Nintendo releases. I also wish I could just buy the Wii Another Code game that didn't get released in NA rather than both games but that's still a game that was made for Wii and not Switch. Now, if you want to say I'm being selective and if I moved back my timeline to include July 2023 which had Pikmin 4 then go ahead and shift the date so that there are now three top Switch games instead of two but I don't think it's great that a company like Nintendo can only put out about three fresh games in a year. Moreover, we still don't know how Nintendo is planning on padding out the rest of this year. If the rumours are true that the Switch 2 will be 2025 then Nintendo's could be very boring for over a year and a half. Save us, Professor Layton! I really need you now to give the Switch some life. It's not quite a Nintendo franchise but it feels like it sometimes.

[Khushrenada]

Nintendo definitely got deservedly punished with the mini discs and cartridges, fucking over developers in an evil attempt to stop piracy (which is morally correct). But the games themselves were amazing.

Aaaaaaannnnddd, you lost me with that take.



Deservedly punished? Piracy is morally correct? Now I feel bad for agreeing with you about being bored with Nintendo's release schedule of late. 

[Khushrenada]

I never ended up buying a Switch because I was waiting for whatever upgrade was going to come out. It would have been the OLED Switch, but that came out so late I thought  "what was the point?" So, I never bought that either. I pretty much skipped this generation. I got gifted a ps4 in 2017 and just bought up some of the main games there.

At the same time. I have a Wii U. So, it isn't like I missed out on 1/4 of the games that came out for Switch.

It was a weird generation because I turned my room into a Mario room with blue turquoise sky walls and all and played ps4 the whole time. My office room I turned into horror themed.

Honestly, with what the videogame market is like these days, part of me has started to wonder if the smart thing to do is skip a console generation. Just buy into every other generation. Because by doing that, videogame makers will be porting over all their stuff from the previous generation anyways but either upgraded for the new console or in a complete form with all the previously released DLC or something. Or with backwards compatibility you might be able to pick up games at a lower price point from that previous gen and save money that way. The trade off is that you might miss out on some multiplayer games. For instance, skipping Wii U means you'd have missed out on Splatoon 1 but you'd have had Splatoon 2 to play on Switch. Or missing out on Call of Duty multiplayer for the previous generation but having new CoD games to play on the new system you get into.

[Dinar87]

But if they’ll be fine, why worry?

THEY'LL be fine, we won't be. Nobody makes games like Nintendo does, so when they don't put out the entire industry suffers.

[Dinar87]

Nintendo definitely got deservedly punished with the mini discs and cartridges, fucking over developers in an evil attempt to stop piracy (which is morally correct). But the games themselves were amazing.

Aaaaaaannnnddd, you lost me with that take.



Deservedly punished? Piracy is morally correct? Now I feel bad for agreeing with you about being bored with Nintendo's release schedule of late. 

Yes, deservedly punished. Nintendo's entire reason for using mini discs for the gamecube was to stop piracy. This made development unnecessarily harder for third parties which punished nintendo by not porting their games to the console. I may love the gamecube but that was an objectively terrible decision on nintendo's part. If they'd of just used dvds like the competition I guarantee you the gamecube would've had far better third party support.

And yes, I think piracy is morally correct (unless it's indie devs) as many companies, including nintendo themselves, want you to "own nothing and be happy". That's why they won't let you access the majority of their old games, and that's why you can no longer outright buy legacy titles on the switch. Virtual console? Gone, now it's a subscription and you lose everything once you stop paying.  I want to OWN my games, not rent them. Not to mention nintendo's toxic behavior when it comes to fan games and emulation, while never bothering to rerelease most of their old games.

Piracy preserves old games that companies no longer provide access for. There's even been many cases where old games are delisted from online stores either because of a new rerelease or because of licensing issues.

Nintendo makes great games, but as a company they are bad.

[NWR_insanolord]

That's just nonsense. It's really pathetic the way some people try to justify their entitlement like that

[Dinar87]

That's just nonsense. It's really pathetic the way some people try to justify their entitlement like that

Entitlement? For the record I don't mean pirating switch games or any current gen games. I mean old games nintendo refuses to be made available.

As I said with the gamecube, the mini discs decision was a bad one and nintendo made things a lot harder for third parties for no good reason. There will always be people who pirate the latest games, but they're a minority. Decisions like forcing minidiscs which had less memory than standard dvds turned away third party companies.

Unless you think being able to access old games like pokemon emerald and super mario sunshine is "entitled" in which case you're a fanboy.

[Adrock]

In the Yuzu lawsuit, Nintendo claimed Tears of the Kingdom was pirated ~1 million times. Sure, those people are the minority when talking about a game that sold ~20 million. Contextually, that’s still a significant number even if some of them wouldn’t have played the game had they not been able to steal it.

I’ll die on the emulation hill as I consider it essential while acknowledging some people use it in bad faith. Piracy is dicier. Tons of games never left Japan and/or are likely stuck on original hardware forever because they’re not popular enough to rerelease. I generally look the other way even if I, personally, try to buy loose copies. Citing games that either have been rereleased or likely will be rereleased (again) is wild to me.

[Evan_B]

Emulation is justifiable. Piracy is not.

[Khushrenada]

Yes, deservedly punished. Nintendo's entire reason for using mini discs for the gamecube was to stop piracy. This made development unnecessarily harder for third parties which punished nintendo by not porting their games to the console. I may love the gamecube but that was an objectively terrible decision on nintendo's part. If they'd of just used dvds like the competition I guarantee you the gamecube would've had far better third party support.

I'm a third party. I've got a game I want to release on a console and I've got two choice. On one console, it would be a little simpler to format my game to work on it. On the second console, it would take a little extra effort. However, if I release it on the first console, it will be very easy for some people to pirate the game. On the second console, it will be harder for people to pirate the software. Which should I choose? I'll go with the second. Anti-piracy measure will help to ensure people actually buy the product we put the time and money into making instead of someone uploading it for free and hurting our sales.

But wait! The first console has five times the userbase size as the second console. 50 million potential customers compared to 10 million customers of the second. Since the first is a bit easier to develop for, I guess we'll prioritize that even though there may be some loss due to piracy. Whew. That was close. Can you believe we almost chose the second console for a moment? They were actually trying to help protect our sales; Can you imagine that?! What a bunch of losers! Screw them and their console! I hope it goes out of business. In fact, let's tell our friends at other third parties to also not release stuff on that second console to teach them a lesson about how we are cool if our stuff gets pirated.

Your logic is flawed, Dinar87. Mini-discs were not the deciding factor for third parties when it came to releasing stuff on GameCube. If PS2 had mini-discs to also combat piracy, third parties when it have been cool with it. They wouldn't have all flocked to Xbox because it was the only one to use DVDs in this hypothetical. It was about the userbase and potential customers. (It was also about Sony and MS throwing money at third parties to help get some exclusive games and spur development. A problem with the industry that has continued for years but that's a whole other thing.) Quit creating a false narrative or buying into one that third parties wanted to "punish" Nintendo because of anti-piracy measures.

(And, for the record, I always though mini-discs were cool. It seemed like another leap to the future. They could create a store these huge games on these small discs. Wii with DVDs seemed like a step back.)

[Adrock]

(And, for the record, I always though mini-discs were cool. It seemed like another leap to the future. They could create a store these huge games on these small discs. Wii with DVDs seemed like a step back.)

Opting for a miniDVD based format was such an unnecessary unforced error especially in hindsight given Wii used full-sized 12 cm discs. Nintendo forced publishers to make compromises Sony and Microsoft weren’t and during a time it really couldn’t afford to be doing that stuff coming off of Nintendo 64. Some of them chose to squeeze data into one disc. I’m still salty that Skies of Arcadia Legends has worse sound fidelity than the original on Dreamcast.

On a more positive note, the disc eject button GameCube and the smooth edge of Wii U discs were both 🤌.

[Khushrenada]

(And, for the record, I always though mini-discs were cool. It seemed like another leap to the future. They could create a store these huge games on these small discs. Wii with DVDs seemed like a step back.)

Opting for a miniDVD based format was such an unnecessary unforced error especially in hindsight given Wii used full-sized 12 cm discs. Nintendo forced publishers to make compromises Sony and Microsoft weren’t and during a time it really couldn’t afford to be doing that stuff coming off of Nintendo 64. Some of them chose to squeeze data into one disc. I’m still salty that Skies of Arcadia Legends has worse sound fidelity than the original on Dreamcast.

On a more positive note, the disc eject button GameCube and the smooth edge of Wii U discs were both 🤌.

Perhaps normal DVD's would have made some difference instead of mini-disc. It's hard to say. (But would we have still gotten that great cube shape?) Xbox used DVDs but its not like they did phenomenally better in hardware sales or had way better third party support. Maybe Nintendo does do N64 levels of hardware with using DVDs and does get a bit more cross platform support because of it. Yet, is that really considered much more of a success compared to where PS2 would likely still have ended up?

A huge thing that helped favor the PS2 was its ability to also play movie DVDs and act as a sort of home theatre that can play games and movies as a sort of all-in-one device. That made it appealing to a lot of consumers as DVDs were coming out and replacing VHS and showing how high quality the video could look on discs compared to cassette. Why buy a DVD player and a game console for two separate costs when you could buy them together for a lower cost? Nintendo was always going to just focus on it being a gaming machine and not start trying to fight Sony in home electronics.

[Dinar87]

In the Yuzu lawsuit, Nintendo claimed Tears of the Kingdom was pirated ~1 million times. Sure, those people are the minority when talking about a game that sold ~20 million. Contextually, that’s still a significant number even if some of them wouldn’t have played the game had they not been able to steal it.

I’ll die on the emulation hill as I consider it essential while acknowledging some people use it in bad faith. Piracy is dicier. Tons of games never left Japan and/or are likely stuck on original hardware forever because they’re not popular enough to rerelease. I generally look the other way even if I, personally, try to buy loose copies. Citing games that either have been rereleased or likely will be rereleased (again) is wild to me.

I mean I agree with you that piracy can be bad for current gen games, especially indie games. I never pirate indie games. But if it was 1 million people pirating something like virtual boy wario land? There's no harm being done because nintendo isn't even selling it.

Even then for AAA games, there is no good evidence that 1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale. Especially because publishers rarely make demos anymore and a lot of people use piracy to demo games to see if they'll actually like them. Only steam has good refund policies afterall. It inherently relies on an assumption.

[Dinar87]

Yes, deservedly punished. Nintendo's entire reason for using mini discs for the gamecube was to stop piracy. This made development unnecessarily harder for third parties which punished nintendo by not porting their games to the console. I may love the gamecube but that was an objectively terrible decision on nintendo's part. If they'd of just used dvds like the competition I guarantee you the gamecube would've had far better third party support.

I'm a third party. I've got a game I want to release on a console and I've got two choice. On one console, it would be a little simpler to format my game to work on it. On the second console, it would take a little extra effort. However, if I release it on the first console, it will be very easy for some people to pirate the game. On the second console, it will be harder for people to pirate the software. Which should I choose? I'll go with the second. Anti-piracy measure will help to ensure people actually buy the product we put the time and money into making instead of someone uploading it for free and hurting our sales.

But wait! The first console has five times the userbase size as the second console. 50 million potential customers compared to 10 million customers of the second. Since the first is a bit easier to develop for, I guess we'll prioritize that even though there may be some loss due to piracy. Whew. That was close. Can you believe we almost chose the second console for a moment? They were actually trying to help protect our sales; Can you imagine that?! What a bunch of losers! Screw them and their console! I hope it goes out of business. In fact, let's tell our friends at other third parties to also not release stuff on that second console to teach them a lesson about how we are cool if our stuff gets pirated.

Your logic is flawed, Dinar87. Mini-discs were not the deciding factor for third parties when it came to releasing stuff on GameCube. If PS2 had mini-discs to also combat piracy, third parties when it have been cool with it. They wouldn't have all flocked to Xbox because it was the only one to use DVDs in this hypothetical. It was about the userbase and potential customers. (It was also about Sony and MS throwing money at third parties to help get some exclusive games and spur development. A problem with the industry that has continued for years but that's a whole other thing.) Quit creating a false narrative or buying into one that third parties wanted to "punish" Nintendo because of anti-piracy measures.

(And, for the record, I always though mini-discs were cool. It seemed like another leap to the future. They could create a store these huge games on these small discs. Wii with DVDs seemed like a step back.)

That assumes piracy would significantly affect the sales, which there is no proof of such. Only claims made by the companies themselves, again with them providing no proof. You cannot prove that the pirates would of bought your game if they weren't able to pirate them. A lot of pirates also come from third world countries where they couldn't afford the latest games anyways. Game of thrones is the most pirated tv show of all time afaik. Also one of the most successful tv shows of all time. Totk has already sold over 20 million copies. The switch is heavily pirated and is about to become the best selling console of all time. But sure, piracy is definitely significant 

If mini discs weren't an issue, why did the gamecube barely get any third party support compared to even the xbox, which sold similarly to the gamecube? The xbox has over 300 more games than the gamecube. If there was no difference, why 300 more games?

Same with the n64 cartridges. If they weren't a big deal for third parties, then why did the ps1 sell so well? How come the n64 didn't get games like final fantasy 7? The answer is square enix tried to port final fantasy 7 to the n64 but nintendo's dumb decision to use catridges and less powerful hardware at the time made it impossible.
https://automaton-media.com/en/news/20240215-27218/

[Luigi Dude]

Totk has already sold over 20 million copies. The switch is heavily pirated and is about to become the best selling console of all time. But sure, piracy is definitely significant 

I mean for super popular stuff like Zelda, Mario and Pokemon they can survive, but pirates don't just stop at these games.  How would you feel if Metroid Prime 4 gets pirated over 1 million times?  Even if not every single one of those pirating the game would buy it, for smaller franchises, just getting a few hundred thousand more sales can be what makes the difference between companies greenliting sequels or deciding it's not worth continuing this franchise.

Companies like Nintendo kind of have to do all they can to fight piracy to protect all kind of games on their systems.  If it was something that became easy to do that wasn't being fought against I can guarantee you Switch software sales would be taking a much bigger hit.

That's why I always laugh when some gamers act like Nintendo is the worst company in the world for going after companies like Yuzu.  I mean, Yuzu was literally encouraging people to pirate Switch games and was even making money off of said piracy.  It's like seriously, if Nintendo didn't do anything it would just be encouraging others to do the same thing and before you know it, piracy is a much bigger issue that's easier for the average person to do as well.

[Adrock]

I mean I agree with you that piracy can be bad for current gen games, especially indie games. I never pirate indie games. But if it was 1 million people pirating something like virtual boy wario land? There's no harm being done because nintendo isn't even selling it.

You moved the goal post, and I’m not interested in going down that rabbit hole here. If you want to have that conversation, start a new thread or use this one I created in 2022.

Even then for AAA games, there is no good evidence that 1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale. Especially because publishers rarely make demos anymore and a lot of people use piracy to demo games to see if they'll actually like them. Only steam has good refund policies afterall. It inherently relies on an assumption.

LOL, what? That’s irrelevant.

I mean for super popular stuff like Zelda, Mario and Pokemon they can survive, but pirates don't just stop at these games.  How would you feel if Metroid Prime 4 gets pirated over 1 million times?  Even if not every single one of those pirating the game would buy it, for smaller franchises, just getting a few hundred thousand more sales can be what makes the difference between companies greenliting sequels or deciding it's not worth continuing this franchise.

I agree with the rest of your post. Just wanted to highlight these bits.

While Nintendo’s methods may often seem draconian, no company can afford to set a weak precedent. It becomes that much harder to fight it the next time when bad faith actors push a little farther.

[Dinar87]

Totk has already sold over 20 million copies. The switch is heavily pirated and is about to become the best selling console of all time. But sure, piracy is definitely significant 

I mean for super popular stuff like Zelda, Mario and Pokemon they can survive, but pirates don't just stop at these games.  How would you feel if Metroid Prime 4 gets pirated over 1 million times?  Even if not every single one of those pirating the game would buy it, for smaller franchises, just getting a few hundred thousand more sales can be what makes the difference between companies greenliting sequels or deciding it's not worth continuing this franchise.

Companies like Nintendo kind of have to do all they can to fight piracy to protect all kind of games on their systems.  If it was something that became easy to do that wasn't being fought against I can guarantee you Switch software sales would be taking a much bigger hit.

That's why I always laugh when some gamers act like Nintendo is the worst company in the world for going after companies like Yuzu.  I mean, Yuzu was literally encouraging people to pirate Switch games and was even making money off of said piracy.  It's like seriously, if Nintendo didn't do anything it would just be encouraging others to do the same thing and before you know it, piracy is a much bigger issue that's easier for the average person to do as well.

If metroid prime 4 got pirated 1 million times, it would be great as said pirates would inevitably spread positive word of mouth, making the actual game sales higher than they would have been.

Your theory about ease of pirating being a potential threat is flawed as indie games almost always can be easily pirated, especially if they're on gog with no drm. But indie games haven't been negatively effected by piracy.

By fighting piracy you're also killing game preservation as the license holders prefer to manipulate the market with artificial scarcity (disney vault stuff) instead of individually selling all their legacy titles for a reasonable price (not $60), no subscription, no drm. Nintendo's virtual console used to be similar to this, but now it's a subscription so "you will own nothing and you will be happy"

[Dinar87]

I mean I agree with you that piracy can be bad for current gen games, especially indie games. I never pirate indie games. But if it was 1 million people pirating something like virtual boy wario land? There's no harm being done because nintendo isn't even selling it.

You moved the goal post, and I’m not interested in going down that rabbit hole here. If you want to have that conversation, start a new thread or use this one I created in 2022.

Even then for AAA games, there is no good evidence that 1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale. Especially because publishers rarely make demos anymore and a lot of people use piracy to demo games to see if they'll actually like them. Only steam has good refund policies afterall. It inherently relies on an assumption.

LOL, what? That’s irrelevant.

I mean for super popular stuff like Zelda, Mario and Pokemon they can survive, but pirates don't just stop at these games.  How would you feel if Metroid Prime 4 gets pirated over 1 million times?  Even if not every single one of those pirating the game would buy it, for smaller franchises, just getting a few hundred thousand more sales can be what makes the difference between companies greenliting sequels or deciding it's not worth continuing this franchise.

I agree with the rest of your post. Just wanted to highlight these bits.

While Nintendo’s methods may often seem draconian, no company can afford to set a weak precedent. It becomes that much harder to fight it the next time when bad faith actors push a little farther.

You know what, I take back what I said. Pirating modern games is good actually  . AAA companies like scumbag nintendo who shut down fangames, never rerelease the majority of their old games, force you to pay for online multiplayer like the other consoles, constantly treat consumers like ****-they don't deserve any respect.

There has never been a single case of piracy hurting a games sales. Ever. I dare you to prove me wrong.

It's relevant. Before Steam piracy was far more rampant on PC, but in the eternal words of Lord Gaben- "piracy is not a pricing issue. It’s a service issue". Steam gave the consumer a good experience and a good service, and now they're one of the biggest gaming companies in the world and the number one store on PC.

Having a precedent of piracy being allowed would be an objectively good thing for consumers and even developers. If companies refuse to consistently put out demos, and refuse to allow access to their older games, piracy will find a way.

[broodwars]

All I have to say on the matter of piracy is that companies have no right to bitch about it if they aren't making the games available to legally purchase. I would give Nintendo; Sega; etc. so much money if they remastered or even just ported GameCube games like Skies of Arcadia, Eternal Darkness, the remaining Prime games, etc. to modern platforms. I have the physical edition of that Baten Kaitos Collection on my shelf. I will give them money to let me play these games. But Nintendo did not give a **** about the GameCube's library until VERY recently. So yeah, I have no sympathy for these companies when pirates do a better job preserving gaming history than they do. We are losing SO many games from that generation, some of which probably no longer have viable source code if the companies even bothered to keep them, and that's even if those companies still exist.

Now, pirating modern games that are widely available is a different story. People should not be doing that.

[Khushrenada]

LOL! This thread...

As a passionate fan of Nintendo, I wish they'd announce and release some really cool sequels for series I love like Mario, Metroid and Fire Emblem ... which I'll then be justified to pirate because they are a greedy **** company that doesn't deserve my respect!



What a ride it's been!

[Luigi Dude]

LOL! This thread...

As a passionate fan of Nintendo, I wish they'd announce and release some really cool sequels for series I love like Mario, Metroid and Fire Emblem ... which I'll then be justified to pirate because they are a greedy **** company that doesn't deserve my respect!

Seriously, and some of you wonder why I get so angry at times.  If you go on some of the larger video games boards on Reddit, 4chan, Reset Era, this type of attitude is extremely common.  In terms of big publishers, Nintendo by far is the best at delivering a constant supply of games as well as updating new installments in beloved series, and yet many act like they're the worst publisher in the industry who deserves to be pirated.

I mean, the fact that we keep mentioning Metroid Prime 4 is already proof enough.  When they decided to make a new installment they originally gave it to Namco Bandai who was going to make it at their new Singapore studio.  Well when development was going terrible, they then took it back and gave it to one of their own internal studio's Retro to make, which delayed the game several years and probably untold millions to do.  Let's not forget the fact that Retro's previous 2 Donkey Kong games outsold the entire Metroid Prime series COMBINED.  They took ones of their own studio's that could have worked on a more successful IP, but had them work on one of their lower tier ones instead. 

Any other publisher would have either outright canceled Prime 4, or just had Namco Bandai finish working on the mess they were making and see if they could pull a fast one on consumers like Microsoft tried to do with Redfall around this time last year.

[Adrock]

There has never been a single case of piracy hurting a games sales. Ever. I dare you to prove me wrong.

Your logical fallacy is [burden of proof].

As a passionate fan of Nintendo, I wish they'd announce and release some really cool sequels for series I love like Mario, Metroid and Fire Emblem ... which I'll then be justified to pirate because they are a greedy **** company that doesn't deserve my respect!

LOL, the hoops some people jump through because they can't admit they simply want to steal.

Companies aren't your friends. I view it as a purely transactional relationship. I exchange money for goods and services, and if a company doesn't or no longer provides those, they don't get my monies. My respect doesn't keep their lights on.