this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
384 points (98.7% liked)

PC Gaming

8615 readers
1255 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nintendo has hundred of games that people are willing to pay massively inflated prices to play, but Nintendo would rather sue emulation projects.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Your comment is 100% true, but has nothing to do with what I was asking about, lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nintendo shouldn't be allowed to litigate against people they accuse of cutting into sales of not-for-sale games. They know there is a demand for their old catalog but do not release it for sale, forcing a market for piracy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ok, but why should not offering old games for sale be a crime? Lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's the combination of suing for sales that do not exist because they choose not to make those sales. I can't type it any slower, man.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I don't like that Nintendo can sue people for something I don't think should be illegal. So what THEY do should be illegal instead!

Is that what you're getting at? Lol