Nintendo Switch is only 1.1 million units behind PlayStation 2 in lifetime sales

[Noctosphere]

Actually, how can it not be anti-consumer?
I am not saying it is fair, or it is not fair, or legal or illegal.

But if we consider the act of "banning the consumer's console when the consumer does something something the business doesn't like", you can consider it either:
1. anti-consumer: benefits the business in spite of the consumer
2. pro-consumer: benefits the consumer.

I believe it is quite obvious it classifies as (1.), and not as (2.).

Well, let's say it, if your console gets banned, we all know what you did with it (you modded your console and playing video game for free on it. Let's not lie about it, that's the main reason we all mod our consoles).
Preventing you from playing online because you are shamelessly playing their game without paying them is not "anti-consumer", it's just common sense.
Let's say you create a video game, you put year(s) of effort on it, you want to sell it online for 20$, and peoples start cracking it, playing it for free, and cheating online, ruining the experience of everyone who actually paid for the game, what would you do?
You would let them keep on because "banning them would be anti-consumer"? I doubt it.

And as I said. Nintendo banning people who bought a used game because of the one who sold them the used game is NOT Nintendo's fault. Nintendo have an automated system that makes no distinction between the victims (those who bought the used game and got banned) and those who legit mod their consoles. It's true, it's really sad, maybe Nintendo should do something about it, but the main culprit is the MIG Switch.

 

[_47iscool]

To clarify:

Someone buys a game (and this was even before the Mig Switch IIRC) and dumps it. Then they play on a modded system, sell the game, Nintendo detects it is not running from the original ROM PCB, someone else buys it and tries to play it, and sees that it is banned/blocked and wonders why.

The second person has basically a useless bricked cart and the fault is not even their own. Putting unique ID's on ROMs is a very stupid idea.

The best thing to do would be to put a null ID on the ROM so when it is played on the Switch it cannot be used to identify the original hardware.

 

[Noctosphere]

To clarify:

Someone buys a game (and this was even before the Mig Switch IIRC) and dumps it. Then they play on a modded system, sell the game, Nintendo detects it is not running from the original ROM PCB, someone else buys it and tries to play it, and sees that it is banned/blocked and wonders why.

The second person has basically a useless bricked cart and the fault is not even their own. Putting unique ID's on ROMs is a very stupid idea.

The best thing to do would be to put a null ID on the ROM so when it is played on the Switch it cannot be used to identify the original hardware.

Then it's the fault of the guy who sold the cartridge he dumped before. Are you really trying that hard to say "Nintendo bad bad bad because Nintendo" and that those who do dirty trick with their console are not to blame at all?

 

[_47iscool]

Then it's the fault of the guy who sold the cartridge he dumped before. Are you really trying that hard to say "Nintendo bad bad bad because Nintendo" and that those who do dirty trick with their console are not to blame at all?

(This defense of Nintendo reminds me of YouTuber Harman Smith, except Harman hates modding and emulators)

I agree it is the fault of the dumper. But Nintendo knows the cart is running on a different Switch. No point in doing such a thing.

 

[Haymose]

Before the Switch launched there was a poll here asking ppl how much they think it would sell. Wish I could find it, coming off Wii U sales ppl were not optimistic.

 

[Noctosphere]

(This defense of Nintendo reminds me of YouTuber Harman Smith, except Harman hates modding and emulators)

I agree it is the fault of the dumper. But Nintendo knows the cart is running on a different Switch. No point in doing such a thing.

Yes, and that "other switch" could also be owned by the same guy who dumped the game. Before talking about "not the same IP" or "not the same country", VPN are a thing and it's easy to fake.

 

[Marcio_D]

in other news, the world also has 2 billion more people in it now than it did when the ps2 came out. hmm...

This leads to another point to consider. Birth rates in developed countries are VERY low right now. If something doesn't change, Japan's current 125 million population will be down to 50 million by the year 2100. That's only a bit more than 75 years away.

Other places in Asia such as China, Hong Kong, and South Korea are experiencing birth rates of 1.0 to 1.3 per woman. You need at least 2.1 to replenish a society. In the U.S. and Canada, the birth rate is 1.5 to 1.7, but they compensate by bringing in lots of new immigrants. However, there's not an unlimited supply of immigrants for those countries over the next 75 years.

The point is, if the world population plateaus and then declines, don't expect any consoles of the future to break the records set by PS2 or Switch. Fewer people on earth means fewer customers of many things, including game consoles. Which is why a capitalist like Elon Musk is literally freaking out about it in the media lately.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Well, let's say it, if your console gets banned, we all know what you did with it (you modded your console and playing video game for free on it. Let's not lie about it, that's the main reason we all mod our consoles).
Preventing you from playing online because you are shamelessly playing their game without paying them is not "anti-consumer", it's just common sense.

How it isn't?

I does not benefit the consumer, it hurts the consumer. It is anti-consumer.
The consumer can't use the console online anymore, it has been harmed.
I don't mean it is fair or not, or that it is illegal or not.

Common sense is just another way of saying "brainwashed into acceptance".

 

[KingVamp]

If a capitalist like Elon would get out of the way, we could do more programs to incentivize and help families. Instead of trying to force things and ironically making people afraid to even do IVF.

 

[Noctosphere]

How it isn't?

I does not benefit the consumer, it hurts the consumer. It is anti-consumer.
The consumer can't use the console online anymore, it has been harmed.
I don't mean it is fair or not, or that it is illegal or not.

Common sense is just another way of saying "brainwashed into acceptance".

I do download games for free, I do mod my consoles, I do all these stuff, but I also live with the consequence of doing so (like not being able to play online). If you want someone to spit on mega-corporation's logo because they release low quality games and mock their consumers because they still buy it, count me in, I will be the first to complain. But I'm not "brainwashed" to the point of saying that everything is their fault because "Nintendo bad".

Now, are you telling me "if I make a game, and people start cheating online on it and ruining the experience of those who legitly bought it, I would NOT ban them, because it would be anti-consumer"?
I want an answer to this before we go further.

 

[sarkwalvein]

I do download games for free, I do mod my consoles, I do all these stuff, but I also live with the consequence of doing so (like not being able to play online). If you want someone to spit on mega-corporation's logo because they release low quality games and mock their consumers because they still buy it, count me in, I will be the first to complain. But I'm not "brainwashed" to the point of saying that everything is their fault because "Nintendo bad".

Now, are you telling me "if I make a game, and people start cheating online on it and ruining the experience of those who legitly bought it, I would NOT ban them, because it would be anti-consumer"?
I want an answer to this before we go further.

It still is anti-consumer. I don't state Nintendo is bad or not, and I am not saying:

"if I make a game, and people start cheating online on it and ruining the experience of those who legitly bought it, I would NOT ban them, because it would be anti-consumer"

I make no evaluation about that. And also cheating is a different animal, we are talking about "banning people's console who don't pay for their game". In the former case (not paying for the game) there is no benefit for the consumers in general, in the latter (cheating online, a different case) you could argue that it ruins the experience of other consumers.
I am just being objective: it does not benefit the consumer, it benefits the business.

I am not saying it is fair, or it is not fair, or legal or illegal.

But if we consider the act of "banning the consumer's console when the consumer does something something the business doesn't like", you can consider it either:
1. anti-consumer: benefits the business in spite of the consumer
2. pro-consumer: benefits the consumer.

I believe it is quite obvious it classifies as (1.), and not as (2.).

 

[The Real Jdbye]

Still a glorified Android.

And home consoles are glorified PCs. Your point being?

Post automatically merged: Aug 18, 2024

How it isn't?

I does not benefit the consumer, it hurts the consumer. It is anti-consumer.
The consumer can't use the console online anymore, it has been harmed.
I don't mean it is fair or not, or that it is illegal or not.

Common sense is just another way of saying "brainwashed into acceptance".

If you aren't buying their games, you're not a consumer, you're just a pirate. Anti-consumer implies paying customers.

 

[sarkwalvein]

And home consoles are glorified PCs. Your point being?

I guess people call it "glorified Android" because it runs on ARM... but actually even PCs are moving from intel to ARM more and more often, why not call it a glorified Windows 11 (arm) machine then, like those new Snapdragon based notebooks?

I believe the "glorified Android" moniker is really getting old, just call it "underpowered" if that is what you want to say, but the "Android" part of it is getting very silly, specially considering it does not run Android, and there are plenty of PCs nowadays (running Windows 11, macOS, Linux, etc.) that are ARM based.

Post automatically merged: Aug 18, 2024

And home consoles are glorified PCs. Your point being?

Post automatically merged: Aug 18, 2024

If you aren't buying their games, you're not a consumer, you're just a pirate. Anti-consumer implies paying customers.

The ban applies to the console not to the games. You are a consumer of the product that got banned. Simple and easy.
(and again just to be clear, I am not saying it is unfair or that I am against it, I am just calling it what it is: anti-consumer)

 

[Noctosphere]

I am just being objective: it does not benefit the consumer, it benefits the business.

Well, to be more precise, not paying for the game does not benifit the company, so it's "anti-business" or whatever you would call it. Not paying for the game (Anti-business) and getting banned (anti-consumer) is two negatives, so it makes a positive, so everything is fine.
If you do something illegal (punching someone in the street), you get arrested and setenced to a year in jail, would you call the police forces and the judge "anti-civilian"? Because this is the exact same logic here.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Well, to be more precise, not paying for the game does not benifit the company, so it's "anti-business" or whatever you would call it. Not paying for the game (Anti-business) and getting banned (anti-consumer) is two negatives, so it makes a positive, so everything is fine.
If you do something illegal (punching someone in the street), you get arrested and setenced to a year in jail, would you call the police forces and the judge "anti-civilian"? Because this is the exact same logic here.

Who cares about anticivilian or whatever is that? Punching someone in the street is illegal.
Illegal is what matters in order for a sentence or the police to be called.
Being anti-consumer is not illegal. (being anti-business is not illegal either, but piracy in the other hand is)

 

[Noctosphere]

Who cares about anticivilian or whatever is that? Punching someone in the street is illegal.
Illegal is what matters in order for a sentence or the police to be called.
Being anti-consumer is not illegal. (being anti-business is not illegal either, but piracy in the other hand is)

You do something against Nintendo (playing their game on their console without buying it) you get punished (your console gets banned). If you think you can do whatever the hell you want without having the consequences that comes with your action, then you are delusional.
I say it's the same logic because it is.

 

[sarkwalvein]

You do something against Nintendo (playing their game on their console without buying it) you get punished (your console gets banned). If you think you can do whatever the hell you want without having the consequences that comes with your action, then you are delusional.
I say it's the same logic because it is.

That is not how it works, the one that punishes you in a law-abiding country is called a "judge". When other "citizens" take "justice" in their hands you get mobbing.

And in any case, the amount of brainwashing that goes into this being considered common sense specially bothers me when e.g. the blame is pushed into a second-hand buyer of a completely legitimate product in case the console is for some reason already "banned" when he tries to use it. It is obviously an additional way to achieve planned obsolescence, sell more shit to make a profit, and waste resources, that should be illegal (and I hope someday everything related to discouraging second-hand purchases and implementing planned obsolescence becomes illegal).

 

[Noctosphere]

That is not how it works, the one that punishes you in a law-abiding country is called a "judge". When other "citizens" take "justice" in their hands you get mobbing.

And in any case, the amount of brainwashing that goes into this being considered common sense specially bothers me when e.g. the blame is pushed into a second-hand buyer of a completely legitimate product in case the console is for some reason already "banned" when he tries to use it. It is obviously an additional way to achieve planned obsolescence, sell more shit to make a profit, and waste resources, that should be illegal (and I hope someday everything related to discouraging second-hand purchases and implementing planned obsolescence becomes illegal).

ok, now this will be my last answer
As I said earlier, about getting your console banned because you bought a used cartridge that was flagged is not on Nintendo, it's on the one who sold the cartridge.
Now, I am blocking you because you are clearly either a troll, or a brainwashed conspirationist.
As I said earlier, if you want someone to bash on big corporations who mock their consumers by only selling them shitty games, I will be the first in lane to join your cause. But if you want someone to say "Nintendo is bad" just because they protect their assets (like any companies, not just video games companies), if you want someone to put 100% of blames on corporations and act like consumers can do whatever the fuck they want because "they are just consummers and should not be blamed", you will not find me there. If you want to talk about "brainwashing", you should take a mirror because all your arguments sounded like someone who was always told "fuck capitalism" and who now only abide by this.

 

[sarkwalvein]

ok, now this will be my last answer
As I said earlier, about getting your console banned because you bought a used cartridge that was flagged is not on Nintendo, it's on the one who sold the cartridge.
Now, I am blocking you because you are clearly either a troll, or a brainwashed conspirationist.
As I said earlier, if you want someone to bash on big corporations who mock their consumers by only selling them shitty games, I will be the first in lane to join your cause. But if you want someone to say "Nintendo is bad" just because they protect their assets (like any companies, not just video games companies), if you want someone to put 100% of blames on corporations and act like consumers can do whatever the fuck they want because "they are just consummers and should not be blamed", you will not find me there. If you want to talk about "brainwashing", you should take a mirror because all your arguments sounded like someone who was always told "fuck capitalism" and who now only abide by this.

Block me all you want, but if you consider politely discussing what is anti-consumer and what is not anti-consumer "trolling" or "conspirationist" and a reason to block somebody, what can I tell you... You really have disappointed me (not that you would care).

In any case a good reason to stop completely this discussion is that it has derailed this thread in a stupid way, this thread is not about what behavior is anti-consumer or not... But really, man, what a disappointment you ended up being Nocto. What the hell. And even to keep putting words in my mouth, like that "Nintendo is bad", when I explicitly stated that is not what I am saying, but I am starting to guess you didn't even read or thought over what I meant. The hell, I am reporting all this derailment for what it is. No wonder the world can't talk to each other and ends up with all the conflicts we see today if just this would lead someone to stop trying to listen to what somebody else says.

Hell, reading again all the misinterpretation (perhaps intentional) of what I say I am sure you didn't get a word of what I was saying (quite probably because you didn't try to think about it). E.g. "you want someone to put 100% of blames on corporations" or "they are just consummers and should not be blamed" are things opposed to what I think, I never said that. I thought of you as somebody that could do text comprehension and that could hold a conversation, but I overestimated you it seems. And yes, I am offended by the twisting of my text and misquoting, you putting words in my mouth.

 

[_47iscool]

"And home consoles are glorified PCs. Your point being?"

I have no 8th (or later) generation consoles. I prefer to use systems that work offline without the need for internet.

Post automatically merged: Aug 18, 2024

I found a thread on here about it.

https://gbatemp.net/threads/caution-nintendo-now-banning-physical-game-carts.508168/post-8072500