Yeah, I have zero desire to give them money. Luckily, there are solid options that aren't them, notably the steam deck for portable gaming and pc/xbox/ps5 for home gaming.
Console Gaming is a lot less worse than Nintendo, but if you (or someone else) wants to be 'pure', they are also not recommended. Consoles are locked-down PCs controlled by the companies, not you, and they abuse their captive consumers by charging multiplayer online, having less promotions (and getting worse with time at that, by eliminating the physical disks), demanding subscriptions with ever more grades and higher prices, tying games to a digital account they can revoke, and not letting the users use the hardware as they see fit in general. PC gaming avoids most or all these issues, with steam excelling in everything (sans the digital license tied to the account, but even that is mitigated because their DRM is weak, and games frequently are found on the high seas if needed), and GoG (and itch.io, etc) respecting completely its customers (offline instalers, completely at your control).
And Nintendo fans will respond by obediently lining up to immediately buy the Switch 2 and every single re-re-re-rereleased game for it the second it launches.
Just finished it today on yuzu, only issue I had was some of the coloring on the rifts in the overworld. I used the 18.1.0 firmware for anyone that wants to know
Due to an amendment in December 2018 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act in Japan, certain gaming-related activities and services have now been declared illegal. This includes:
Distribution of tools and programs for modifying game saves
Selling product keys and serials online without the software maker's permission
Game save and console modding services
As such, sales of products such as Pro Action Replay and Cybergadget's "Save editor" have been discontinued.
It's meant to ban sale of hardware devices and services that allow playing pirated games on Switch and such, but due to the way it's worded it just bans them all.
We really need to push for more right to repair laws and things not produced by the copyright holder (say for 5 years) should lose all copyright protections.
Nintendo does still make good games, and they're the only ones who seem to care about multiple people playing together while sitting on the couch, as opposed to focussing only on online multiplayer across multiple systems.
Which is why it's so annoying that they do evil shit on the side like this. Nintendo are litigious to an absolutely callous degree. Wankers.
Plenty of couch coop indies out there. Big corpos only care about their money, Nintendo would also jump on the multiplayer wagon if they thought their fanbase would follow them.
Game engines and servers are great candidates for developers to collaborate their ideas into FOSS projects, but the model is harder to sustain for complete works.
While internet games can have subscription models where you pay them for doing game master type activities, moderation, and access to a hosted game server, static games are more like static art where you run into issues getting food and housing when you make your work output available for free. Crowdfunding / patreoning (in the larger sense of the word, not necessarily the app) creators / collectives can be a way for that to work, and we need to support more creators trying that model if we want to see more of it.
People generally don't want to make games free because often 99% of what makes a game good is not the software aspect. People like games for interesting mechanics, story, art, and music. Those aren't things that generally haven't worked well being free and open
FOSS generally works because people use foss to create end products, and have an incentive to contribute because it benefits them financially (and the side effects is that it benefits others too).
Making a game FOSS rarely benefits the creators since it is the end product, even if it benefits the game or community.
There are cases where it works though, such as rhythm games, where the end product requires immense collaboration, but those often exist on the borderline of acceptability (due to copyrighted music use) and they end up with a need to be foss since licensing 10,000 songs is basically impossible.
"Nintendo targets free marketing that's much more effective than their really, really weird ads featuring skinwalkers from an alternate reality attempting to appear like normal humans doing the gaming."
Really hope that when one day Nintendo dies due to their own incompetence/negligence, everything they've ever done becomes lost media and they fade into complete obscurity.
If they don't want to have their shit preserved then so be it, they'll be forgotten and the world will move on without them.
Yet another abuse of the DMCA. They seem to think the takedown process applies where any copyright infringement takes place. It only applies if the material is copyrighted by them. Even if the game was pirated and someone in the video explicitly said that, DMCA takedowns would NOT apply.
Maybe they fear switch 2 sales would plummet if emulation and PC handhelds stick around when they launch. I disagree coz the two attract different kinds of gamers, but they aren't cool like that.
How would they know it's emulated and not video captured from a real device? Are they only targeting when emulators are mentioned / shown in the window?
More reasons to switch to owning your content and hosting on your own platform or a PeerTube instance instead of only hosting on YouTube / Twitch - you can actually fight the takedown notice in court instead of having to accept that YouTube doesn't. Not a legal expert but this seems like a winnable fair use case if you can prove you own the game legally and are using your own rom dump.
Lots of channels getting strikes are showing anbernic and steam decks and the like running the roms featuring Nintendo games being emulated on said device and not just a video capture of the game
It doesn’t matter if it’s emulated legally or not. They can issue a takedown for showing gameplay captured from an NES hooked up to a CRT if they want.
A fair use defense has to be defended in court, and it’s not just about whether you’re right but also about whether you can afford to fight.
It’s also not certain that a fair use defense would fly. One of the elements for determining whether fair use is market impact, and I suspect that Nintendo’s lawyers would argue that demoing that their games can be emulated - even if the specific demoed games are not being sold - has a negative market impact, since it makes people who might buy a Switch and a Nintendo Online membership to play the official emulated games less likely to do so.