The Unknowns of Emulation: A Breakdown of Yuzu V. Nintendo

logo.png

If you have been in the gaming community for a while, you most likely have heard of the term "emulation", which can be best described as recreating or imitating, in this case, actual gaming hardware--consoles, computers, or handhelds--into other devices. During the 1990s, computers were reaching a technological standpoint in which it was becoming feasible to replicate the behaviour of early or older consoles and hardware, with one of the earliest emulators documented being a Famicom emulator having a timestamp of December 1990.

However, as it's always the case when it comes to emulation, it goes hand in hand with the legalities surrounding the scene, with many citing that it's just another instance to allow piracy of any given software, to others citing that it's a requirement to be able to preserve videogame software in its many forms throughout the years, past the original hardware's lifespan.

What's the turning point between legal emulation and piracy? What entices legitimate usage of an emulator, and what are the limitations of it from a legal standpoint? Or at least from the known factors and actual legal cases. With the current state of big corporations like Nintendo going after videogame emulators like Yuzu, it's important to delve into these topics, and clear up some information floating around in regards to emulation, and talk about others which are still unknown in the wide scheme of things.

Back in February 27th, 2024, news broke out about Nintendo filing a lawsuit against the company in charge of the Yuzu emulator, Tropic Haze LLC. The legal documents provided on the initial filing of the court case focused on several points, from which there are three important factors that were touched upon the most in the court document:
  • The Yuzu development team utilizing a Patreon for EA (Early Access) builds, which saw an important rise in support during the release of "The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom", amounting to 30k USD per month before the takedown.
  • The Yuzu emulator facilitating piracy, sometimes even allowing street dates to be broken prior to some games' release dates.
  • The Yuzu emulator circumventing copy protection measurements put in place for the Nintendo Switch, and using said circumvention to play "unauthorized" copies of Switch games in "unauthorized" hardware.
Now let's cover these points one by one:



1. Yuzu team utilizing a Patreon.​
In this day and age, it's not uncommon for anyone doing any kind of service, commission, or work online, to open up a Patreon. Some Patreon users to utilize this as a way to incentivize money gain by locking certain works, or adding "perks" and early releases to people that are donating to the Patreon at hand, and in some cases, this exclusive content being done through Patreon is not shared publicly.​
However, in the specific case, nothing from the Yuzu emulator was locked behind a paywall, as the emulator was open source, and the latest commits of it (from which the EA builds are made from) could easily be compiled and run without the need of a Patreon account or donation. Additionally, the idea of an emulator being "sold" is not new, as was the case back when Sony filed a lawsuit against Bleem!, which was a commercially sold emulator, and the ruling was in favour of Bleem! (even if it took Bleem! out of business in court fees).​
Despite this, and for the sake of being "safe" when handling emulation software of any kind, it's better to rely on a fully open source environment without any form of financial incentive.​



2. Yuzu allowed users to play games with broken street dates before an official release.

To delve into this point, we have to cover several points of interest, and most of them probably got by for people that weren't around the scene during the times in which games with broken street dates leaked, particularly that of Tears of the Kingdom.​
  • A game being leaked before release is not new for Nintendo (and certainly not for the Switch), and this held true for games even back during the Wii days with New Super Mario Bros. getting leaked before release, with a specific court case being brought up in which the leaker had to pay Nintendo a hefty amount. The same applies for games on Wii U, 3DS (and now the Switch), and it's important to note that most of those consoles didn't have a fully working emulator (that booted commercial games at playable states) until almost 3 years into their commercial lifespan.

  • The Nintendo Switch was hacked on year-one of its release date. Modded Switches (with additional tweaks) allow for playing personal backups or pirated copies of games in it, being also a base point for piracy for the system (and most likely still the primary method for Switch piracy).

  • A key factor that comes into play for leaked games is that the game dumps that were therefore distributed online were made using original modified/homebrewed hardware. In order to dump a game (more specifically, a ROM image of the original game, as discs or ISOs are most likely dumped using actual PC DVD/Blu Ray drives), the user requires the original hardware to be able to dump the ROM itself out of the game cart, as was the case for the DS, 3DS, and now the Nintendo Switch. To summarize, a game dump (or pirated copy for the purposes of this topic) wouldn't be possible without a hacked or modified console first when it comes to modern consoles. Additionally, the requirement of the Switch-specific keys that Yuzu asked users to provide on their own in order to work also has to come from an original Switch.

  • A videogame emulator, Yuzu in this instance, is specifically designed to simulate or imitate actual hardware (Switch). If the programming of the emulator is accurate enough to achieve an imitation of the hardware at a decent level, it will of course run games designed for the actual hardware with little to no tweaks (as seen with homebrew games released past the consoles lifespan). During the Tears of the Kingdom leak (which is cited as a primary example in the legal document), Yuzu didn't work at all with the game, giving a black screen. Other Switch emulators did boot the game, but with a lot of bugs and glitches. During the whole time frame before the official release of the game, none of the emulators committed any actual code addressing issues with leaked games. It wasn't until the game was officially released that code started to be worked on for the game in hand.
    For Tears of the Kingdom specifically, the manner in which users managed to run the game through Yuzu was through unofficial forks and builds being made from the GitHub repository, with these builds being shared through different outlets online, and a lot of people working to provide patches and modifications that made the game run. As an additional note regarding this time frame, the Yuzu emulator team frequently refused Pull Requests and Issue reports on their GitHub based on Tears of the Kingdom during the time frame between the start of the leak and the official release date, and only started work on it once they got a legitimate copy of the game on release.

1709744550622.png

The Yuzu emulator running on Valve's Steam Deck

To close up this point, it's entirely plausible that one of the main reasons why the Yuzu team was sued over piracy claims is that they very well could have been sharing ROM files between themselves for the development of the emulator, or just engaging in piracy themselves and being caught on. This is certainly a possibility, and some images from the lawsuit document seem to hint at this as well. Getting legitimate copies of the games that are being worked on for compatibility with the emulator would have been the best course of action for this (or at least not brag about it openly).​



3. Yuzu circumvents Nintendo's DMCA copy protection measurements

This is the major point of debate, and one that hasn't been proven in a modern legal case yet. This could also add to the whole point of the homebrew app Lockpick being hit by a DMCA some time ago as well, so let's dive into the DMCA Exemption rulings for the US, specifically for videogames​
US Federal Register: Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies said:
Section 1201(17)(i)(A): Permitting access to the video game to allow copying and modification of the computer program to restore access to the game for personal, local gameplay on a personal computer or video game console​
However, the section regarding the circumvention of copyright protection systems under the US law states the following:​
17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems said:
Section 1201(17)(a)(1)(A): No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.​
To add to the previous point of circumvention in regards to reverse engineering, and interoperability:​
17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems said:
(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.​
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.​
(3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law other than this section.​
(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term “interoperability” means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged.​

This all makes it seem as if indeed circumventing Nintendo's copy protection measures are in violation of the DMCA. However, there's still Personal Use and Fair Use, which according to the University of Melbourne sums up to the following:

University of Melbourne said:
Personal Use limitations:
  • Ownership of a physical or digital copy of the material being reproduced. (Please note this does not include streamed material, where a licence fee is paid for accessing material. Streaming services do not give users ownership of material on their sites. Material on these sites is leased or rented.)
  • Private use.
  • Includes the full copying of works.
  • Lending or sharing of copies is not allowable

The University of Salisbury also has an entry regarding Fair Use and Personal Use, which could be worth a read.
Additionally, Personal Use also allows for format shifting, which means that a copyrighted material such as a video recording being transferred into a DVD, and other examples in the same vein, enter into Personal Use as well.

To add to this point, there's also the guides that Yuzu provided to dumping your own keys out of the Switch, that could very well enter into the DMCA section for copy protection circumvention, making it another possible key factor into the lawsuit. For this case, it'd be better of just mentioning that the user requires their own "legitimately" dumped keys, without providing any actual steps on how to do it, like other emulators do for bios files and other requires files, where they simply mention the file needed, but not how to get it.

With all that said, it is still unknown exactly if a copy protection circumvention would fall under a DMCA exemption for Fair Use / Personal Use, since most of the copyrighted material nowadays comes with some form of copy protection, be it from music, movies, games, computer programs, etc. This point still remains to be properly tested in a modern legal court case, as it would certainly pave the way for what actions companies might take against emulators for video game consoles that use encryption of any kind.

The following video by Hoeg Law goes in depth about the lawsuit between Nintendo, the DMCA and Yuzu, which could help to better explain the whole legal standing of the situation.





While the Yuzu emulator was shut down due to the settlement with Nintendo for 2.4 million USD, the company and devs behind it were previously and originally working on another emulator for a Nintendo system, that one being the Citra emulator (which emulates the Nintendo 3DS), and inadvertently, the Citra emulator was caught in the crossfire as well, being shut down alongside it's younger emulation sibling, Yuzu.

Many popular people and developers online have gone ahead and made their own points about the situation, such as former homebrew developer now turned video game developer Modern Vintage Gamer; who has worked on officially released games for the Nintendo Switch and other platforms, YouTubers ReviewTechUSA, Linus Tech Tips, Some Ordinary Gamers (to name a few), with some of them having strong opinions in regards to emulation being a necessity for the preservation and personal use of gaming as a whole for the future.

While this doesn't necessarily give a modern legal precedent for gaming companies against emulation given how the case was settled before it even got to the court room or a judge, it certainly has made waves worldwide about what the future for emulation would be in a world where the DMCA, copy protection and anti-circumvention tactics disallow users who legitimately own their games to play them after the inevitable demise of the actual original release and hardware.
 

IssMare

Active Member
Newcomer
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
31
Trophies
1
XP
349
Country
Mexico
This reminds me of the Megaupload situation, while it was an useful tool for some, others used it for distributing piracy.
It got shut down, then it got reformed into Mega, and it distanced itself from legal trouble in their terms and conditions (if I recall correctly).
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangy57 and tsam2

James_

aka Underscore_ or 'that Meowstic guy'
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Oct 2, 2019
Messages
732
Trophies
2
Age
18
Location
Outside, I wandered off
XP
4,851
Country
United Kingdom

AdenTheThird

The Apathetical Atheist
Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2018
Messages
1,041
Trophies
1
Location
Pacific Ocean
XP
2,301
Country
United States
Well, you weren't wrong.
Lol

Nintendo's reputation, to an extent, is deserved. They're hyper-protective of their property, to the point where they can even be seen as anti-consumer (remember Pokémon Prism?). They have that right, as it IS their property and they get to decide how lenient they are with their products, but that hasn't stopped them from aqquiring this less-than-ideal reputation. Nintendo may seem trigger-happy with lawsuits, but they play their cards very carefully.

As they should, since they were a playing card company, after all...
 

ShadowOne333

QVID PRO QVO
OP
Editorial Team
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
12,200
Trophies
2
XP
33,928
Country
Mexico
ShadowOne333 first of all thank you for a very detailed and well written piece.

@AdenTheThird 100% in agreement with you Nintendo did nothing wrong.

Tried my best to articulate well the whole ordeal, and while it sure might seem like Yuzu did some shady things, I still wouldn't side with Nintendo, like ever.
 

Ryab

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
3,239
Trophies
1
XP
4,476
Country
United States

If you have been in the gaming community for a while, you most likely have heard of the term "emulation", which can be best described as recreating or imitating, in this case, actual gaming hardware--consoles, computers, or handhelds--into other devices. During the 1990s, computers were reaching a technological standpoint in which it was becoming feasible to replicate the behaviour of early or older consoles and hardware, with one of the earliest emulators documented being a Famicom emulator having a timestamp of December 1990.

However, as it's always the case when it comes to emulation, it goes hand in hand with the legalities surrounding the scene, with many citing that it's just another instance to allow piracy of any given software, to others citing that it's a requirement to be able to preserve videogame software in its many forms throughout the years, past the original hardware's lifespan.

What's the turning point between legal emulation and piracy? What entices legitimate usage of an emulator, and what are the limitations of it from a legal standpoint? Or at least from the known factors and actual legal cases. With the current state of big corporations like Nintendo going after videogame emulators like Yuzu, it's important to delve into these topics, and clear up some information floating around in regards to emulation, and talk about others which are still unknown in the wide scheme of things.

Back in February 27th, 2024, news broke out about Nintendo filing a lawsuit against the company in charge of the Yuzu emulator, Tropic Haze LLC. The legal documents provided on the initial filing of the court case focused on several points, from which there are three important factors that were touched upon the most in the court document:
  • The Yuzu development team utilizing a Patreon for EA (Early Access) builds, which saw an important rise in support during the release of "The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom", amounting to 30k USD per month before the takedown.
  • The Yuzu emulator facilitating piracy, sometimes even allowing street dates to be broken prior to some games' release dates.
  • The Yuzu emulator circumventing copy protection measurements put in place for the Nintendo Switch, and using said circumvention to play "unauthorized" copies of Switch games in "unauthorized" hardware.
Now let's cover these points one by one:



1. Yuzu team utilizing a Patreon.​
In this day and age, it's not uncommon for anyone doing any kind of service, commission, or work online, to open up a Patreon. Some Patreon users to utilize this as a way to incentivize money gain by locking certain works, or adding "perks" and early releases to people that are donating to the Patreon at hand, and in some cases, this exclusive content being done through Patreon is not shared publicly.​
However, in the specific case, nothing from the Yuzu emulator was locked behind a paywall, as the emulator was open source, and the latest commits of it (from which the EA builds are made from) could easily be compiled and run without the need of a Patreon account or donation. Additionally, the idea of an emulator being "sold" is not new, as was the case back when Sony filed a lawsuit against Bleem!, which was a commercially sold emulator, and the ruling was in favour of Bleem! (even if it took Bleem! out of business in court fees).​

Despite this, and for the sake of being "safe" when handling emulation software of any kind, it's better to rely on a fully open source environment without any form of financial incentive.​



2. Yuzu allowed users to play games with broken street dates before an official release.

To delve into this point, we have to cover several points of interest, and most of them probably got by for people that weren't around the scene during the times in which games with broken street dates leaked, particularly that of Tears of the Kingdom.​
  • A game being leaked before release is not new for Nintendo (and certainly not for the Switch), and this held true for games even back during the Wii days with New Super Mario Bros. getting leaked before release, with a specific court case being brought up in which the leaker had to pay Nintendo a hefty amount. The same applies for games on Wii U, 3DS (and now the Switch), and it's important to note that most of those consoles didn't have a fully working emulator (that booted commercial games at playable states) until almost 3 years into their commercial lifespan.

  • The Nintendo Switch was hacked on year-one of its release date. Modded Switches (with additional tweaks) allow for playing personal backups or pirated copies of games in it, being also a base point for piracy for the system (and most likely still the primary method for Switch piracy).

  • A key factor that comes into play for leaked games is that the game dumps that were therefore distributed online were made using original modified/homebrewed hardware. In order to dump a game (more specifically, a ROM image of the original game, as discs or ISOs are most likely dumped using actual PC DVD/Blu Ray drives), the user requires the original hardware to be able to dump the ROM itself out of the game cart, as was the case for the DS, 3DS, and now the Nintendo Switch. To summarize, a game dump (or pirated copy for the purposes of this topic) wouldn't be possible without a hacked or modified console first when it comes to modern consoles. Additionally, the requirement of the Switch-specific keys that Yuzu asked users to provide on their own in order to work also has to come from an original Switch.

  • A videogame emulator, Yuzu in this instance, is specifically designed to simulate or imitate actual hardware (Switch). If the programming of the emulator is accurate enough to achieve an imitation of the hardware at a decent level, it will of course run games designed for the actual hardware with little to no tweaks (as seen with homebrew games released past the consoles lifespan). During the Tears of the Kingdom leak (which is cited as a primary example in the legal document), Yuzu didn't work at all with the game, giving a black screen. Other Switch emulators did boot the game, but with a lot of bugs and glitches. During the whole time frame before the official release of the game, none of the emulators committed any actual code addressing issues with leaked games. It wasn't until the game was officially released that code started to be worked on for the game in hand.
    For Tears of the Kingdom specifically, the manner in which users managed to run the game through Yuzu was through unofficial forks and builds being made from the GitHub repository, with these builds being shared through different outlets online, and a lot of people working to provide patches and modifications that made the game run. As an additional note regarding this time frame, the Yuzu emulator team frequently refused Pull Requests and Issue reports on their GitHub based on Tears of the Kingdom during the time frame between the start of the leak and the official release date, and only started work on it once they got a legitimate copy of the game on release.

View attachment 424191
The Yuzu emulator running on Valve's Steam Deck

To close up this point, it's entirely plausible that one of the main reasons why the Yuzu team was sued over piracy claims is that they very well could have been sharing ROM files between themselves for the development of the emulator, or just engaging in piracy themselves and being caught on. This is certainly a possibility, and some images from the lawsuit document seem to hint at this as well. Getting legitimate copies of the games that are being worked on for compatibility with the emulator would have been the best course of action for this (or at least not brag about it openly).​



3. Yuzu circumvents Nintendo's DMCA copy protection measurements

This is the major point of debate, and one that hasn't been proven in a modern legal case yet. This could also add to the whole point of the homebrew app Lockpick being hit by a DMCA some time ago as well, so let's dive into the DMCA Exemption rulings for the US, specifically for videogames​

However, the section regarding the circumvention of copyright protection systems under the US law states the following:​

To add to the previous point of circumvention in regards to reverse engineering, and interoperability:​


This all makes it seem as if indeed circumventing Nintendo's copy protection measures are in violation of the DMCA. However, there's still Personal Use and Fair Use, which according to the University of Melbourne sums up to the following:



The University of Salisbury also has an entry regarding Fair Use and Personal Use, which could be worth a read.
Additionally, Personal Use also allows for format shifting, which means that a copyrighted material such as a video recording being transferred into a DVD, and other examples in the same vein, enter into Personal Use as well.

To add to this point, there's also the guides that Yuzu provided to dumping your own keys out of the Switch, that could very well enter into the DMCA section for copy protection circumvention, making it another possible key factor into the lawsuit. For this case, it'd be better of just mentioning that the user requires their own "legitimately" dumped keys, without providing any actual steps on how to do it, like other emulators do for bios files and other requires files, where they simply mention the file needed, but not how to get it.

With all that said, it is still unknown exactly if a copy protection circumvention would fall under a DMCA exemption for Fair Use / Personal Use, since most of the copyrighted material nowadays comes with some form of copy protection, be it from music, movies, games, computer programs, etc. This point still remains to be properly tested in a modern legal court case, as it would certainly pave the way for what actions companies might take against emulators for video game consoles that use encryption of any kind.

The following video by Hoeg Law goes in depth about the lawsuit between Nintendo, the DMCA and Yuzu, which could help to better explain the whole legal standing of the situation.





While the Yuzu emulator was shut down due to the settlement with Nintendo for 2.4 million USD, the company and devs behind it were previously and originally working on another emulator for a Nintendo system, that one being the Citra emulator (which emulates the Nintendo 3DS), and inadvertently, the Citra emulator was caught in the crossfire as well, being shut down alongside it's younger emulation sibling, Yuzu.

Many popular people and developers online have gone ahead and made their own points about the situation, such as former homebrew developer now turned video game developer Modern Vintage Gamer; who has worked on officially released games for the Nintendo Switch and other platforms, YouTubers ReviewTechUSA, Linus Tech Tips, Some Ordinary Gamers (to name a few), with some of them having strong opinions in regards to emulation being a necessity for the preservation and personal use of gaming as a whole for the future.

While this doesn't necessarily give a modern legal precedent for gaming companies against emulation given how the case was settled before it even got to the court room or a judge, it certainly has made waves worldwide about what the future for emulation would be in a world where the DMCA, copy protection and anti-circumvention tactics disallow users who legitimately own their games to play them after the inevitable demise of the actual original release and hardware.

Thank you. I was waiting for someone to actually fully analyze the situation here. Whilst it is fun to hate on Nintendo I do have to admit that the Yuzu team is very much at fault here. They screwed up and mismanaged their project. I feel bad for the community. Not the Yuzu team. Well... I feel bad for the part of the community who uses it legally.
 

Lostbhoy

HEY YOU GUYS!
Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
2,498
Trophies
2
Age
44
Location
Scotland
XP
5,161
Country
United Kingdom
They provided a tool that CAN be used for unofficial and illegal means... By the user... Lockpick is a great example and appropriately named as I could buy a Lockpick, burgle someones house (which involves the removal of actual items, not copying!) and it would never ever be the manufacturer of said Lockpick that would be sued!

However, your point regarding providing the means and knowledge on how to rip your keys from your console does certainly hold them accountable. Should they have left that info for others to divulge? It would certainly distance them further from the whole what people do with this is not our responsibility. They did seem to attempt many such tactics like the TotK leaks info you provided.

I feel there was enough to make them shit themselves however I also think they should have argued many of the points. I will never succumb to the we lost millions on TotK because of yuzu excuse!

Skys falling down man!
 

Kioku

猫。子猫です!
Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Messages
12,007
Trophies
3
Location
In the Murderbox!
Website
www.twitch.tv
XP
16,144
Country
United States
FAFO, doesn’t mean I have to agree with the outcome. Still, this does offer some relief as long as other emulators and their respective teams learn from this (if they haven’t already).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi

James_

aka Underscore_ or 'that Meowstic guy'
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Oct 2, 2019
Messages
732
Trophies
2
Age
18
Location
Outside, I wandered off
XP
4,851
Country
United Kingdom
Agree with Nintendo completely. We should be going after the knife manufacturers not the stabbers. After all, no knife, no stab.

Wait a minute.

knives.png


Oh-

Oh my god.
 

gbatempfan1

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
200
Trophies
1
XP
1,201
Country
To close up this point, it's entirely plausible that one of the main reasons why the Yuzu team was sued over piracy claims is that they very well could have been sharing ROM files between themselves for the development of the emulator, or just engaging in piracy themselves and being caught on.​

One of the largest problems is that the development team was both large and international, so you had members who did not care about US copyright law and members whose own country's had different legal standards about downloading roms. There is an image of one of the devs downloading Xenogears from what he calls a "stash" on discord, that was leaked during some internal strife years ago. Nobody really cared at the time and it doesn't seem that the dev was from the United States, so maybe it was alright in their country, or an extremely minor offense.

But the problem is that Discord is in the United States, and that opens up logs and PMs to discovery, and they would of found lots of messages about rom sharing used in the development of Yuzu, regardless of the legality in country it was shared in, which would of been a death blow.
 
Last edited by gbatempfan1,

deinonychus71

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
912
Trophies
1
Location
Chicago
XP
2,849
Country
United States
Agree with Nintendo completely. We should be going after the knife manufacturers not the stabbers. After all, no knife, no stab.
You know it's interesting. I keep hearing that argument in the defense of guns.

The thing is...
Most knife owners don't use them to kill users.
In comparison when TotK was released Yuzu's popularity and support allegedly went all the way up during the time of the prerelease when playing this game couldn't have possibly been done legally.

Again, don't want Nintendo to kill emulation, don't help them by making it obvious you're pirating and bragging about it online.
 

osaka35

Instructional Designer
Global Moderator
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,743
Trophies
2
Location
Silent Hill
XP
5,972
Country
United States
Well-written article, very thorough.

I still side completely with emulators and absolutely no sympathy or agreement with nintendo here. There's a reason why they settled rather than make an example of yuzu. You can criticize poor decisions by the yuzu team and still think nintendo is completely in the wrong. They're not mutually exclusive.

nintendo obviously has no respect for the end user or the law. They're a business, they're amoral. They've used open source emulators to build their own online services, but take any possible avenue to take emulators down, legal or illegal. They haven't stopped trying to make emulators illegal since the galoob days. But they'll still use whatever opensource stuff they can.

I am happy there's at least two emulators which have taken up the torch from yuzu. Sad about citra though. it was closed source, right? They should have open sourced it and then checked out.
 

gbatempfan1

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
200
Trophies
1
XP
1,201
Country
I am happy there's at least two emulators which have taken up the torch from yuzu. Sad about citra though. it was closed source, right? They should have open sourced it and then checked out.

Citra is open source at least the windows version, not sure about the android version but guessing that one as well, you might be thinking of Exophase's emulator on the play store that is closed source, but they are opening that one as well soon, they say it was always the plan but this Nintendo law play motivated them to do it sooner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: osaka35

ShadowOne333

QVID PRO QVO
OP
Editorial Team
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
12,200
Trophies
2
XP
33,928
Country
Mexico
Well-written article, very thorough.

I still side completely with emulators and absolutely no sympathy or agreement with nintendo here. There's a reason why they settled rather than make an example of yuzu. You can criticize poor decisions by the yuzu team and still think nintendo is completely in the wrong. They're not mutually exclusive.

nintendo obviously has no respect for the end user or the law. They're a business, they're amoral. They've used open source emulators to build their own online services, but take any possible avenue to take emulators down, legal or illegal. They haven't stopped trying to make emulators illegal since the galoob days. But they'll still use whatever opensource stuff they can.

I am happy there's at least two emulators which have taken up the torch from yuzu. Sad about citra though. it was closed source, right? They should have open sourced it and then checked out.

I completely wholeheartedly with this.
I'll always side with the emulators, Nintendo has always been one of the most anti-consumer companies out there, and they're going further and further each time.
As for Citra, it was open source, it simply got ditched a while ago to favour Yuzu, since they both shared developers.

We still have the RetroArch core for Citra though, so not all is lost, although that one sure is outdated compared to the main Citra code.
Hopefully other Citra forks appear, just like with Yuzu.
 

ChanseyIsTheBest

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2022
Messages
390
Trophies
0
Location
Australia
XP
1,053
Country
Australia
This is a good article from someone who knows what they are talking about. Far superior then the typical slop article from people who don't know what they are talking about.

Very good that you brought up that it was only yuzu forks that had no involvement from the yuzu developers who could run TotK early.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2: Lol rappers still promoting crypto