Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

overkill.wtf

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 709 posts

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#411

Post by johnnyanmac »

freedomben wrote: post #210
dev1ycan wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean Valve literally had a trailer with a nintendo emulator as an app installed... Valve doesn't need to do RND for its games because they can just use whatever is on steam that is playable on the deck plus a ton of games from nintendo consoles via emulators as a selling point.

Nintendo could do the exact same thing if they made their platforms open like Steam does. That the switch is limited to only Switch games is entirely a choice they made because their whole existence they've been all about proprietary and locked down.

Steam isn't open, Windows OS isn't even open. Windows is "semi-open", in that Microsoft can't stop you for developing and publishing whatever they want on the platform, while still not sharing source code.

Microsoft only has (de facto) control of the Microsoft Store.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#412

Post by kristofferR »

coffeebeqn wrote: post #404
WithinReason wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if you want to do it legally.

As a owner of previous modded Nintendo consoles - they certainly don’t share your view

Yeah, you might as well pirate it, that's just as bad in their view.

Same with ripping DVDs/Blu-rays, it's illegal to rip them anyway, so might as well just download them.

Especially now that they're suing emulator developers, it's almost unethical to buy Switch games anymore.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#413

Post by crtasm »

judge2020 wrote: post #387
rightbyte wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need some sort of legal entity to receive the money, with ties to some real persons. It makes some corp. going after you so much easier, compared to trying to get to 'rightbyte' or 'judge2020' for doing git commits.

Not the best idea to try to get around lawsuits by simply staying anonymous. Nintendo can sue GitHub and you as a John Doe to compel GitHub to give up all info it has on you, like IP address access logs (which can then be used to compel your ISP to hand over their records on you).

In that scenario, why would you have connected to Github from any IPs that link to your identity?

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#414

Post by johnnyanmac »

Liquix wrote: post #379
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #359

When the game isn't be sold any more, along with the console, emulation makes sense. But the switch emulation for at least 2 years now has been more than good enough to run games of a current gen system, and you're absolutely kidding yourself if you think any meaningful percentage own the game. The emulator also requires Nintendo data they're not actually allowed to ship (there's a number of resources to download it…

> and you're absolutely kidding yourself if you think any meaningful percentage own the game. respectfully disagree. nintendo has fought hard to capture the casual/normie demographic and they have consistently sold more switches than M$ has sold xbox ones every month since launch. switch emulation is alive and well but doesn't jeopardize their position as the non-techie's console of choice. therefore they have taken…

Is "well they sold a lot I can just take it" ever a good defense?

>they have taken to only pursuing legal action when an emulator is being packaged up for the masses to one-click install on steam

Well, this breaks that trend. AFAIK Yuzu has none of that. Their general argument is that it made too much patreon money over Tears of the Kingdom.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#415

Post by mattmaroon »

roughly wrote: post #342
mattmaroon wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there isn’t. Companies choose to put games on Nintendo, many games are available on multiple consoles including Nintendo, and depending on the generation Nintendo is not even always the biggest player. There’s no illegal monopoly. One is certainly allowed to have a monopoly over their own products, that’s what trademarks and patents are for. It’s hard to argue a game developer is forced to play ball with Nintendo…

Why does this logic fall down for Apple? Is it size? Is the argument different if it were Microsoft doing similar with XBox?

Well, Apple is part of a duopoly. Nintendo is not. It’s kind of silly to call somebody a monopolist when they only have a small percentage of market share. In fact, they aren’t even in the top three video game companies, and their hardware is just a reason to sell software. 85% of the revenue comes from first party games. Their revenue is less than 10% of the entire gaming industry. For some reason, people insist on thinking of them as a hardware company that also makes games, when the reality has been the reverse for decades.

There are a whole lot of ways to distribute a video game. Three major consoles. Computers. Things like the steam deck. Smart phones. You could ignore any one or two of them, and still have a great business. In fact, lots of companies do. A whole lot of people have access to more than one of these platforms. You could ignore anyone or two of these platforms, and still sell your product to most of the people in the market. It is a highly competitive environment. If you don’t like Nintendo’s policies, just sell on Xbox and PlayStation and steam. People do this. If an environment is competitive, then by definition, nobody has a monopoly or an unfair advantage.

The Earth has 8 billion people, most of whom have a smart phone, all of which are using one of two operating systems. Not many people have more than one. If Apple says your app cannot be in their App Store, half of humanity, cannot use your app. It is a much different scenario.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#416

Post by crtasm »

threeseed wrote: post #125
deelowe wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yuzu has amazing compatibility. I'm guessing it's getting too good for Nintendo. Their concerns with TotK are not without merit. I played it on Yuzu (on PC) because it was a much better experience than on the switch. Within a few days of the game being out, there were resolution and fps patches which made the game run much better. That said, I'm not sure how Yuzu can be blamed for TotK piracy. Guessing Nintendo is th…

> Yuzu can be blamed for TotK piracy But they can be legally blamed for not taking any steps to prevent it. Which means there are two avenues for Nintendo to attack this situation.

What steps could they take? The emulator can't tell if the game dump I load into it is from my own cartridge or obtained elsewhere.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#417

Post by johnnyanmac »

bigpapikite wrote: post #285
xnx wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read rumors, and it seems very plausible, that Nintendo's next console might be able to play Switch games at higher resolution and/or framerate.

That's probably the case (as I don't know what else would make it worth buying), but the ultimate problem with Nintendo will still remain. They're bullies and they get away with it because they make some of the most consistently high quality first party games. Microsoft took the plunge first, but everyone is realizing that the future is an open platform. Turns out if you make a quality game and make it widely availab…

>They're bullies and they get away with it because they make some of the most consistently high quality first party games.

You can look at it this way: Nintendo makes the most consistent high quality first party games and have the lowest hardware spec. So they are most prone to piracy and unauthorized emulation and thus get the most attention when lawsuits come up.

MS has 99% of its games on PC and Playstation specs are so hard (or maybe lack of interest. Probably many things) that gen 7 tech is still difficult to emulate in Gen 9. So Nintendo has the biggest target.

>but everyone is realizing that the future is an open platform.

If "release a port 2-3 years later on Windows OS to double dip" is "open platform", I kinda get why Nintendo defends their platform so rigidly. They are all closed down source games on closed down source OS's hosted on closed down source storefronts. There's no legal distinction there, just technical preferences of the minority who take the time to figure out how to setup emulation.

And despite all that, Nintendo sells more on one system than both competitors on all platforms combined. I don't think they are worried about sales. Especially since they aren't chasing 300m dollar productions with 10 hours of cinematics.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#419

Post by ShamelessC »

WithinReason wrote: post #164
andy_ppp wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can play Switch games on Steam Deck!?

Yes, better than on the Switch. (now I'm awaiting legal action from Nintendo)

> better than on the Switch

That simply isn’t true.

Downvotes don't make the statement magically more true.

Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

#420

Post by SllX »

fnimick wrote: post #371
SllX wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct, but so is the parent (although I wouldn’t have put it quite like that). Laws are there to serve society. Some of the ways it serves society is when it restrains society, but people are not stupid and understand when they’re being unreasonably restrained. Unreasonably being the key word, as I’d like to think we’re all generally anti-murder around here, even if we can argue to death about things like A…

While I agree taxi regulation was done badly, effectively removing all regulation I don't think is the answer. There are huge negative externalities to people who are neither drivers nor riders that should be protected by the law as much as the 'customers' wishes are. (just like the airbnb example, imagine someone cycling in a busy commercial area dodging uber drop-offs throwing open doors, double parking, etc)

The environmental hazards to cyclists are far beyond any extra danger Uber and Lyft provide and they lose to more popular constituencies regularly because most people in America even in the cities are not cyclists and often resent cyclists.

We prioritized cars a long time ago, and we’re still paying for it. I’m not happy about that fact either. You can absolutely argue that cyclists are victims to a tyranny by majority much as I can argue that that the presence of Uber and Lyft is a net benefit versus the status quo that existed prior to their coming onto the scene, and I’ll just say both things can be true. People also lose in democracies.

Post reply on HN