• Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Lol, why even buy such a piece of shit then? Even when in the EU, the fact they do this is enough.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Because Banana!

      But no, seriously, you can rage all you want about brands and corporations, but in cultural industries content is always king.

      That’s why you need regulation. You can’t expect people to not play or watch cool stuff just because you’re aware of and latched onto some particular moral, ethical or economical transgression. It’s res publica to prevent the misbehavior so people don’t have to have a stance on the extent of licensing for software/hardware combo services whenever their kid wants the cute gorilla game.

      And yes, I do own a Switch 2.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          56 minutes ago

          It’s not a terrible example. You can have delicious vegan food and you can have moral objections to the process of eating meat.

          But if your reasoning is to enact some larger impact on climate or the practices of industrial meat production your own consumption habits are mostly irrelevant and you should focus on regulating those things instead.

          The difference is that food isn’t a licensed product. You can have very sustainable meat at home. You can’t source sustainable Mario Kart.

      • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Luckily I don’t have kids and hence don’t have to buy them such crap 😁

        But yeah sure, I’m all in for regulations. But voting with your wallet is still the most basic way to say “lol no”. If I’d be hellbent on gaming on-the-go I’m sure there are alternatives that come close at least. If not, the I guess I’d carry a laptop around for that

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 hours ago

          No it is not.

          Voting with your wallet does nothing. It’s a neoliberal fiction capitalism uses to pretend regulation is unnecessary.

          Voting with your wallet is dependent on everybody else with a wallet even knowing that there’s something to vote about. Most people don’t.

          And voting with your wallet means you have a tiny wallet in a world with a TON of tiny wallets and a few very big, huge-ass humongous wallets, so your wallet vote doesn’t count for crap compared with your one-vote-per-person vote, if you have access to one of those.

          So no, voting with your wallet is barely useful at best, just the normal flow of the market ideally, entirely pointless at worst.

      • Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Yea, distribution and creation of art has to be separate. Only way I see against enshitification.

        Like, there must be a choice between ad spreader datahoarder low price offer and premium low data no ad offer. There must be no monopoly over distribution of a specific art piece if it is no unique art form, like a hand drawn picture. (Like music, games, movies, series, trading card game, tabletop games, apps etc.)

        Meaning, nintendo, netflix, apple, disnay and similar would have to offer distribution licenses according fair market rights and not limit those licenses to themself as self distributor.

        At least, that is my opinion

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Seriously! Just buy a used 3DS and hack it to run every game, emulator, etc. You can actually play DOS games and ScummVM games on it!

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Because I have no intention of playing pirated games so I’m at no risk? Also I’m in the EU so I’d be fine regardless?

      • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        It’s already happened that Nintendo remotely bricked a switch 2 because its owner bought an used game, but that game was dumped by its previous owner.

        You also have no intention of buying 100% genuine original, but used, games?

      • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Which is fine until the piracy detection system has a false positive and you lose your Switch. Or you buy a second hand copy of a game the original owner made a copy of and continues to use and your switch gets bricked. I understand you’re in the EU, but this kind of nonsense would definitely put me off a system that’s already inordinately expensive.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          14 hours ago

          To each their own. 👍 I hear your points. Surely the false positive should be refutable and able to be appealed. At least in the EU? 🙃

          How does Nintendo know if someone makes a copy/dump of a physical game card?

          • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            13 hours ago

            If you’re offline only, they can’t afaik. In the case of online I’m lead to believe each individual cart is signed with a unique certificate so they can tell if that cart has been used in more than one console. If there’s two instances of the same thing online at the same time it must be pirated.

            In terms of reversal - I’ll work from the premise we agree that it’s unacceptable a customer loses access to a device they purchased and own because the company doesn’t like it. But let’s say it happens, how much hassle is it going to be to undo it? The console is bricked so it’s presumably not running/able to go online? Do I need access to a PC to fix it? Do I need to send it off to Nintendo? Go to a game store?

            Fwiw I like tinkering with consoles and devices - not necessarily because of piracy, I just like running weird software on them or making them do things they weren’t meant to. It’s not a common use case, but it’s valid enough. Why should Nintendo control that.

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 hours ago

              how much hassle is it going to be to undo it?

              Yeah, I bet it would be a bitch, no doubt.

              I like tinkering with consoles and devices. […] Why should Nintendo control that.

              Agree completely. They shouldn’t.

      • LycanGalen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Pirated games can be one or several of the following:

        • a means of participating in a chosen culture when players can’t afford/justify the price tag (one Nintendo game now costs the same as a week’s worth of groceries for two people where I live)
        • a form of archive because game publishers are notorious for killing games
        • a form of backup because things happen to disks/cartridges
        • a form of backup because servers go down
        • a form of backup because not everyone’s internet is reliable
        • a means making the game more accessible by adding features (eg. the option of infinite lives/health for someone with muscular dystrophy)
        • a form of protest over ever-increasing prices at the same time as ever-increasing layoffs, and ever-decreasing quality.

        More directly relevant to you: the money you give Nintendo goes to their legal teams, to continue to find loopholes around the protections you have. They’re the ones fighting the “Stop Killing Games” movement. Nintendo recently won a lawsuit against 1fichier in France for hosting emulated games. It has been marked as a “significant” win against any level of piracy in the EU. Nintendo is continually working to make sure that despite living in the EU, you won’t be fine regardless. Your purchase directly funds that.

        Maybe you have no intention of playing pirated games, but I hope you can appreciate that this is larger than just some teenager feeling powerful because they stole something?

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Definitely a balance between funding their legal team and just wanting to play the games they put out, indeed. Currently I just want to play. We’ll see if I take the high road later. Having too much fun with my kids at the moment though.