3 ms·
> The apps would be tied to the game itself, and would only be able to run when loading up that game, but you can see why Nintendo would take issue with its imp
by robrtsql 7y ago
> The apps would be tied to the game itself, and would only be able to run when loading up that game, but you can see why Nintendo would take issue with its implementation.
I have a few guesses, but no, I don't see why Nintendo took issue with this. Is it because users could damage their devices with access to something like this? Is it because this could somehow be used to undermine Nintendo's DRM or cheat in online games?
- kro92kfmrzz 7y agoThere’s definitely an argument to be made about how this dev should only be shipping to hundreds, thousands, or millions of personal devices via Nintendo’s infra only what’s printed on the tin. My hacker nerd side is all giggly. My security and consumer conscious sides bristle at the idea some dev thought it was a great little in-joke to ship this to unsuspecting users.
- sucrose 7y ago> dev should only be shipping to hundreds, thousands, or millions of personal devices via Nintendo’s infra only what’s printed on the tin That's a very long-winded way of saying, "He should only sell what was advertised." > unsuspecting users Nobody is forcing anyone to find or access Easter Eggs. It wasn't malicious nor annoying, it wasn't even accessible unless you attached a keyboard. I haven't seen any backlash from "unsuspecting" buyers, only Nintendo. I see the potential worries from a security perspective, but as an "unsuspecting" consumer, why would you care?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- zach_garwood 7y agoI agree. I can see Nintendo being upset because it's not a game, but I'm failing to see why this is such a big deal?
- beenBoutIT 7y agoBecause Nintendo prides itself on being the least hackable/least interesting gaming console on the market.