I do know how to measure it. Its called statistical analysis and its very simple to do. You take the data from before your variable was introduced and compare it to after the variable was introduce then measure the difference. In this case, you would look at secondhand market sales before SX OS was released then you take the same data sometime after SX OX was released. This isn't rocket science. All I'm saying is the onus of proof lies on you to backup the claim that it had an impact.
You are now suggesting that correlation implies causation, which is the opposite of what you were arguing before.
The fact that we are talking about it is enough proof that it is impacting. I can tell you, for a fact, that I will not buy super smash bros. used, because of this. It might not be "significant" but it's enough proof of impact, even if it's $30 that is not in Nintendo's pocket. That might translate to a %0.00000001 decline in the second-hand hardware valuation, impacting Nintendo's stock at %0.000000001 as a result. Whether they gain %50 from the other side of things doesn't change the fact.
That wasn't my point. Claiming "complaints" alone is a dangerous statement to make because they simply do not. The lawsuit is what ultimately led to a change, not the complaints by themselves.
Maybe not your point, but it was mine.
I'm interested in both cause and effect. Complaints don't exist in vacuum, and their effects on the market (or in this situation, instigating a lawsuit that forces a change) are not direct. The fact that they aren't direct makes it hard for statistical analysis to account for everything. As a result, risk analysis is what companies do in response.
That is a false assumption to make. Banning certificates will not hinder usage of the Mig Switch. It will only reduce the incidence of people dumping games and reselling them on the secondhand market. Furthermore, banning certificates or even consoles do not address the inherent problem which is Mig Switch itself. Outside of Nintendo ceasing the distribution or production of Mig Switch, Nintendo cannot stop it.
It will hinder the usage of Mig switch to facilitate playing pirated games online, which directly translates to hindrance on the usage of Mig switch. Nintendo will probably try to invest in legal remedy, but I assume it will fail as the Chinese clones take over.
Fine, it is a foolish experiment. What if you get caught? What if the copy isn't perfect? What if you're successful and set a new precedent for copying?
If the copy is tampered, Nintendo should ban the copy and not the original, imo.
I do not have to answer that because as you've failed to understand numerous times, I do not state my opinions. But considering that you cannot comprehend this due to your illiteracy, I don't even think you'll understand the difference between a yes or no. Instead I point you to my original post where I said Nintendo deems this as tampering, not me.
Obviously you do not have to answer. I am asking you to because I want to understand, not because I want to "win a discussion". I am aiming for consensus, and you have been on guard ever since I challenged your authority. I don't think Nintendo has been successful in deeming it as tampering. Copyright infringement, maybe? They don't need a reason for their banning behavior if they aren't legally challenged on it.
You cannot because you haven't. By the way, you still owe me that formally written apology letter, Mr. Clown-face.
Yeah, you think you are more important than me, but you are still seeking my submission. I don't need your permission to deny your claims.
I will, lol especially when you have to backtrack on your false pretense of being bored because I exposed it to having fun. You make this too easy.
Have fun and stay safe.