Pokemon Game Discussion 2.0 - Page 248 (2024)

SomeknowmeasXeno wrote:Nintendo hasn't done anything wrong, they're defending their property and punishing the pirate pricks accordingly. No punishment is too harsh in this situation, and I'd be sueing them so I still think Nintendo is holding back. Their property they should do and can do as they see fit to defend it.

Define taking away access to their eShop games as alright, and I call you a hypocrite. Going by your comment, stealing in your eyes is only fine when it's perpetuated by the company itself. They can pull ROMs from the internet that aren't their property, download and repackage it to sell, but if anyone else does it, it's wrong? That's frankly absurd double standards, or it indicates how Nintendo itself cannot preserve their own games to save their lives.

And stop parroting the same line because it's clear you haven't read a damn iota of my comment, where I expressly defend Nintendo's right to defend their copyrights. But that at this moment, they're doing it in the exact same way EA did it, and its purely draconian. If this was them or some other developer, people would be crying outrage, but somehow people have this tendency to defend Nintendo even if it's for dumb actions like this.

UltramanGoji wrote:Are we STILL skreeonking arguing about how online privileges are being rightfully hindered because people were impatient boys who pirated licensed products before their release date?
Like...really? Does this warrant sixteen thousand thoughtless paragraphs?

Like....really? Does this warrant an insult because you don't agree with what I have to say? At least actually debate me instead of skirting around the issue like some Tumblrina does with their hypocrisy and safe spaces. To be honest, this mere sentence delineates how much of a lack of a thought process this argument ultimately has because it just parrots the same industry nonsense so they can defend a faceless corporation that only cares about their money.

eShop as a "privilege"? If piracy is considered stealing, and digital games are seen as with the same right as digital property, taking people's access away from their purchased content on the store and hand waving as an "online privilege" is then saying it's second class to physical rights.

Ergo, you have decide. Either digital content equal to most physical rights, or it has none and it's fair game. Nintendo and other companies akin to them shouldn't be able to selectively choose what is stealing and what is not. Unlike regular theft, piracy is merely copying a file. Instead of keeping said copy to yourself as the law argues, you distribute it to other people without the consent of the rights holder, which is where it falls under stealing.

If it's the former, then Nintendo can't block access to the eShop since those games the people purchased are their property, while the gamers themselves can't copy and distribute it to other people.What Nintendo did when they yanked the eShop from under these people signifies a selective choosing of what's property.

It would be akin of them coming to your house grabbing all your cartridges to take them away. Because isn't that what these industries been saying for years that piracy is stealing? But I guess selectively ignoring the past when it's absolutely convenient to our arguments is a nice way to debate, isn't it?

And the people who made that ad were outed for stealing the music behind the ad.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/ ... 678851.htm

Hellblaze wrote:
Nintendo isn't stealing from customers, it's customers that are pirating the games like what happened 2 weeks ago are the people that is stealing from Nintendo and I'm glad those that played the game early and leaked everything online while playing online on Nintendo's network, deserves to get banned.

How the hell is yanking away their eShop content not theft? Or profiting off of piracy in some cases in the Virtual Console store not hypocritical enough?

Oh wait. You're a mindless fanboy who bows at his corporate masters, not able to actually defend any of your own points and beliefs, because you lack and cogent or coherent argument to do so. If you can't understand the sheer disgusting notions that are spewing from your mouth, I can only have pity for you.

I stand by what Nintendo did to them and their actions.

What you're really saying. "I'm standing by the side of a corporation, no matter how terribly anti-consumer they are.." They don't care about you, and only care about private property rights as it suits them and their bottom line.

Yes it's a major company they make a hell alot of money for their systems and games. Other players here agree with what Nintendo did.

You're using the ad populum logical fallacy.

Are you hearing yourself right now?

Other players here seem to have their heads up in the sand, like many fanboys do, covering their ears unable to see the whole picture for what it really is. It's not as if any of their contracts are legally binding as what happened with Apple

So since you have a problem with it..

So witty. I'm shaking in my boots...if I had any.

Pokemon Game Discussion 2.0 - Page 248 (1)

Any more logic fallacies and ignorance people want to throw at me?

I love how people here don't even read anything I have to say. Just mindlessly parrot the same garbage over and over again with snide intentions lurking expecting me to cave in. Just because I find some of Nintendo's actions reprehensible doesn't mean I in any way agree with pirates or piracy. I just would rather have actual consistency in how property is treated, regardless if it's digital or physical media. If they're both equal, they need to be treated equally by corporations as well as by the law.

Here's what I directly said:

While these are idiots and don't feel sympathy in that respect, Nintendo's response is hypocrisy. They can steal from their customers, but the players can't steal?

I pointed out the absurdity of both sides because I find both of them have their fallouts, though more on the pirate's side than Nintendo's. It was in the context of Nintendo taking away access to the store. In the EU, one of its only saving graces is that customers are protected from this Anti-Consumer behavior from companies. While I don't care that the other online features are banned, it would certainly strengthen Nintendo's position legally if they unblocked the eShop for sure.

That and it would also deal a major blow to the pirates' arguments if t hey have access to their games from the store itself. Problem solved.

And here:

I don't feel entitled to download products for which I have no ownership.


This would indicate that I'm not for piracy. But sure, just put words into my mouth like everyone else does.


That said, I'll likely buy this in January and transfer everything over then.

Pokemon Game Discussion 2.0 - Page 248 (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Wyatt Volkman LLD

Last Updated:

Views: 6302

Rating: 4.6 / 5 (66 voted)

Reviews: 81% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Wyatt Volkman LLD

Birthday: 1992-02-16

Address: Suite 851 78549 Lubowitz Well, Wardside, TX 98080-8615

Phone: +67618977178100

Job: Manufacturing Director

Hobby: Running, Mountaineering, Inline skating, Writing, Baton twirling, Computer programming, Stone skipping

Introduction: My name is Wyatt Volkman LLD, I am a handsome, rich, comfortable, lively, zealous, graceful, gifted person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.