7 ms·

The fact that Nintendo were always like this does not mean it is okay. If there's anything wrong with this story it's how everyone seems to silently accept it i

The fact that Nintendo were always like this does not mean it is okay. If there's anything wrong with this story it's how everyone seems to silently accept it is okay for a company to tell you what you can run on the hardware that you "buy" but not really own.

roblabla 8y ago
If nintendo didn’t put DRM, publishers would avoid the platform, as they would see it as insecure. Blame the laws allowing this.
- failrate 8y ago
  Sure, just like developers never make games for Windows PC.
  - shittyadmin 8y ago
    Or like they already don't make them for the Switch... https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/comments/9lspva/complete_switch_hackingpiracy_guide/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/comments/9lspva/compl...
    - baroffoos 8y ago
      Switch piracy is massively easier than on PC. You just have to hack the console once and now you have access to every game. Also the games are signed by nintendo and the piracy installers verify that no one has modified the game since nintendo verified it so there is no risk of malware
  - philpem 8y ago
    Developers who make games for Windows PCs tend to fill them with so many "DRM" and "anti-cheat" measures that they might as well just sell them as a prebaked rootkit.
    - krageon 8y ago
      They are prebaked rootkits. They're marketed as such and I think they never pretend otherwise. The truly sad thing is the amount of people that still send money to people who knowingly compromise their entire machine. Then they are thankful for it.
    - failrate 8y ago
      DRM is typically sold by a third party vendor. It is typically not effective against software pirates. You are overstating its use, however.
      - philpem 8y ago
        I was thinking of the Sony rootkit, and the Starforce and VAC exploits.
        failrate 8y ago
        The Sony toolkit debacle was its own thing. In addition, that rootkit was on music CDs. I worked for a game division of Sony at the time, and we were furious at the mothership for that incident.
jdietrich 8y ago
That's not the story at all. Rajan entered a voluntary agreement with Nintendo, through which his game would be distributed on their platform. He deliberately deceived them about the presence of a potentially security-critical feature, thereby breaching that agreement; Nintendo took the perfectly reasonable decision to remove his game from their platform. There is a perfectly reasonable debate to be had about bootloader unlocking, sideloading and consumer choice, but this is not that debate. The issue here is fundamentally about someone intentionally deceiving a business partner. Sidebar: There are no shortage of tablet-ish computers that will run arbitrary code. The Joy-Con controllers are class-compliant and will work with any Bluetooth host. There are open alternatives, but a lot of people buy the Switch specifically because it offers a curated experience with clear age ratings and effective parental controls. To meaningfully contribute to the debate on walled gardens, it is first necessary to acknowledge their relative popularity compared to open platforms. If walled gardens were universally and unconditionally bad, it is implausible that they would have such broad market acceptance. In the case of Nintendo, this issue is particularly acute - many informed observers credit the NES10 chip and the Nintendo Seal of Quality with saving the video games industry.
- inflatableDodo 8y ago
  I think that a legal fudge I would be satisfied with is where a manufacturer wants a branded store and some lock-in, that they nevertheless must allow secondary marketplaces, with the legal protection provided for both users and the original manufacturer that any secondary marketplaces can be contractually required to be clearly labelled as such.
- xkcd-sucks 8y ago
  So all one needs to do to make exploits/jailbreaks/backup loaders for switch is to get a Nintendo developer account? Sounds like a win
  - rococode 8y ago
    Apparently, getting a Nintendo developer account is pretty difficult. You have to pitch a specific game to them and follow a bunch of rules to make your game and code secure. That's also why Nintendo treated this incident as such a big deal - they are very strict about access to the platform, and this blatantly broke their rules.
uponcoffee 8y ago
It's easy to continue the line of thought to absurdity, so I leave that as an exercise to the reader. There's a few lines here that need to be drawn somewhere. Nintendo sells access to a platform to developers. It's not unreasonable that they aren't allowed free reign to control what's run; at some point one developers free reign would conflict with anothers. Should the consumer have free control over what's running on their hardware? Perhaps. Let's for the sake of argument assume yes. Then how should Nintendo and third party developers deal with hackers? Completely cut their access to Nintendo/game services? Now they have a brick. The lines drawn for developers and consumers with respect to game consoles make sense and generally work for all involved. I think your point has legs in other contexts (i.e. Apple products, right to repair, etc) just not here. If people feel differently they should vote with their dollars, but managed walled gardens will always be greener in some aspects.
- chris_wot 8y ago
  Why is it reasonable to be given free reign to control what is run on their platform? this is why Apple gets away with anti-competitive practices like pulling apps that compete with newly released features, even though the apps weren't a problem before. These are truly walled gardens. Worse, these walled gardens are monopolies that can and are abused by large companies.
  - uponcoffee 8y ago
    Continuity. Standards and limitations keep the platform usable which makes it valuable to all involved. For walled gardens to be successful, both consumers and developers must both buy into them. So, either people are painfully stupid or a managed platform has some appeal over free ones. Continuity, ease of use, various warranties/guarantees make walled gardens attractive. If consumers have free reign and brick their device, it's hard to expect the manufacturer to have/honor any warranty. If developers have free reign there's no guarantee another application won't break theirs or that they won't break someone else's... or that it'll work with whatever the consumer is doing. Yes, an obvious counter point is *nix systems, but there is some authority in that ecosystem which keeps most things working. It's still not painless to setup/use which prevents it from effectively competing with windows/Mac OS. Simply put, the price of admission into a walled garden comes with some perks/guarantees/warranties which aren't readily available elsewhere.
beenBoutIT 8y ago
It is okay, just don't buy anything made by Nintendo unless you're ok with Nintendo's restrictive 'nanny console' TOS. You can run Linux and play GTA and Mortal Kombat on other consoles. Nintendo is geared towards people who like Nintendo.
- SantalBlush 8y ago
  I think the "Just don't buy it" mantra has been applied too broadly. It implies that people have no right to complain about a company, which I completely reject.
  - beenBoutIT 8y ago
    The ability to complain about companies is a fundamental right, although it's I important to understand that no one at Nintendo is listening. I personally hate Nintendo and despise the way they prevent young people from modding/hacking their consoles and playing GTA games. Those are the two things I want out of a gaming console, so I don't buy anything Nintendo makes.
    - analognoise 8y ago
      I have discovered the world's smallest hill to die on. This is it.
- eridius 8y ago
  Sony removed the ability to run Linux many years ago, after it was determined that it was impossible to prevent a jailbreak as long as the second OS feature existed. I’m not aware of Xbox ever supporting this.
  - beenBoutIT 8y ago
    Sony did technically 'remove it', although it's still something that can be done if you're really interested in doing it. Nintendo seems to prioritize jailbreaking above everything else and for most of their consoles there's literally nothing interesting that can be done outside of using them to play Nintendo games.
wnevets 8y ago
Nintendo gets a pass on a lot of crap other companies would get torched for by the internet community, DRM, DCMA take downs, etc. Nostalgia is powerful
- rizzin 8y ago
  It's not just nostalgia. Nintendo keeps providing excellent gaming experience that no one else does. Super Mario Odyssey is awesome not because it's the same old Mario guy from NES, but because it is just a great game. Nintendo games are not polluted by the games-as-service and free-to-play monetization mindsets as badly as other platforms. I don't like a lot of their rigidity, such as takedowns or still not getting rid of having stuff segregated by regions, but I appreciate what they contribute to the world of video games.
  - chii 8y ago
    > providing excellent gaming experience ... not polluted by the games-as-service and free-to-play monetization mindsets as badly as other platforms. But why does this have to do with draconian lock-down rules? Presumably, allowing homebrew code is not gonna affect the above at all.
    - krageon 8y ago
      The fact that they are so strict in a very real way keeps a lot of crapware and annoyances (that I do see on other platforms, more or less linearly following the openness) off of the marketplace. I go from liking it to hating it more or less on a yearly cycle, but I have never hated it enough to stop owning their devices. When I want something with solid gameplay that doesn't just sell because the graphics are so good (or whatever marketing flavour of the month is in vogue at the moment), a Nintendo console is what I go to.
      - chii 8y ago
        The quality of software available on the nintendo store has nothing to do with how locked down the hardware is! Of course nintendo (or any other platform holder) would like you to believe otherwise, because by controlling the platform, they are able to maximize the profit extraction. Hardware lockdown and quality of the curated store has nothing to do with each other. Nintendo can (and should) continue to curate their store. But if i want to produce homebrew for my own machine, I'd have to get permission from nintendo. I also have to pay for that priviledge, when the hardware is something i have purchased.
paxys 8y ago
You, the customer, are allowed to do anything with your device. What they are doing is blocking a developer that makes money on their marketplace for not following rules. They wouldn't allow anyone to sell pornography, malware, defective/broken software etc. either.
Digit-Al 8y ago
That's a bit of a silly argument. A games console is specifically sold as a device upon which you can play games, and nothing else. If you want to be able to perform other computing tasks and/or write your own programs you buy a general purpose computer not a games console. Your argument is a bit like saying "why can't I fry burgers with my fridge?"
- threezero 8y ago
  Uh...not at all similar. Refrigerators don’t have the capability to fry burgers, and if someone came along and figured out a way to do that, the refrigerator manufacturer couldn’t say “your banned from making any modifications to our refrigerators”.

roblabla 8y ago

If nintendo didn’t put DRM, publishers would avoid the platform, as they would see it as insecure. Blame the laws allowing this.

failrate 8y ago
Sure, just like developers never make games for Windows PC.
- shittyadmin 8y ago
  Or like they already don't make them for the Switch... https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/comments/9lspva/complete_switch_hackingpiracy_guide/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/comments/9lspva/compl...
  - baroffoos 8y ago
    Switch piracy is massively easier than on PC. You just have to hack the console once and now you have access to every game. Also the games are signed by nintendo and the piracy installers verify that no one has modified the game since nintendo verified it so there is no risk of malware
- philpem 8y ago
  Developers who make games for Windows PCs tend to fill them with so many "DRM" and "anti-cheat" measures that they might as well just sell them as a prebaked rootkit.
  - krageon 8y ago
    They are prebaked rootkits. They're marketed as such and I think they never pretend otherwise. The truly sad thing is the amount of people that still send money to people who knowingly compromise their entire machine. Then they are thankful for it.
  - failrate 8y ago
    DRM is typically sold by a third party vendor. It is typically not effective against software pirates. You are overstating its use, however.
    - philpem 8y ago
      I was thinking of the Sony rootkit, and the Starforce and VAC exploits.
      - failrate 8y ago
        The Sony toolkit debacle was its own thing. In addition, that rootkit was on music CDs. I worked for a game division of Sony at the time, and we were furious at the mothership for that incident.

jdietrich 8y ago

That's not the story at all. Rajan entered a voluntary agreement with Nintendo, through which his game would be distributed on their platform. He deliberately deceived them about the presence of a potentially security-critical feature, thereby breaching that agreement; Nintendo took the perfectly reasonable decision to remove his game from their platform. There is a perfectly reasonable debate to be had about bootloader unlocking, sideloading and consumer choice, but this is not that debate. The issue here is fundamentally about someone intentionally deceiving a business partner. Sidebar: There are no shortage of tablet-ish computers that will run arbitrary code. The Joy-Con controllers are class-compliant and will work with any Bluetooth host. There are open alternatives, but a lot of people buy the Switch specifically because it offers a curated experience with clear age ratings and effective parental controls. To meaningfully contribute to the debate on walled gardens, it is first necessary to acknowledge their relative popularity compared to open platforms. If walled gardens were universally and unconditionally bad, it is implausible that they would have such broad market acceptance. In the case of Nintendo, this issue is particularly acute - many informed observers credit the NES10 chip and the Nintendo Seal of Quality with saving the video games industry.

inflatableDodo 8y ago
I think that a legal fudge I would be satisfied with is where a manufacturer wants a branded store and some lock-in, that they nevertheless must allow secondary marketplaces, with the legal protection provided for both users and the original manufacturer that any secondary marketplaces can be contractually required to be clearly labelled as such.
xkcd-sucks 8y ago
So all one needs to do to make exploits/jailbreaks/backup loaders for switch is to get a Nintendo developer account? Sounds like a win
- rococode 8y ago
  Apparently, getting a Nintendo developer account is pretty difficult. You have to pitch a specific game to them and follow a bunch of rules to make your game and code secure. That's also why Nintendo treated this incident as such a big deal - they are very strict about access to the platform, and this blatantly broke their rules.

uponcoffee 8y ago

It's easy to continue the line of thought to absurdity, so I leave that as an exercise to the reader. There's a few lines here that need to be drawn somewhere. Nintendo sells access to a platform to developers. It's not unreasonable that they aren't allowed free reign to control what's run; at some point one developers free reign would conflict with anothers. Should the consumer have free control over what's running on their hardware? Perhaps. Let's for the sake of argument assume yes. Then how should Nintendo and third party developers deal with hackers? Completely cut their access to Nintendo/game services? Now they have a brick. The lines drawn for developers and consumers with respect to game consoles make sense and generally work for all involved. I think your point has legs in other contexts (i.e. Apple products, right to repair, etc) just not here. If people feel differently they should vote with their dollars, but managed walled gardens will always be greener in some aspects.

chris_wot 8y ago
Why is it reasonable to be given free reign to control what is run on their platform? this is why Apple gets away with anti-competitive practices like pulling apps that compete with newly released features, even though the apps weren't a problem before. These are truly walled gardens. Worse, these walled gardens are monopolies that can and are abused by large companies.
- uponcoffee 8y ago
  Continuity. Standards and limitations keep the platform usable which makes it valuable to all involved. For walled gardens to be successful, both consumers and developers must both buy into them. So, either people are painfully stupid or a managed platform has some appeal over free ones. Continuity, ease of use, various warranties/guarantees make walled gardens attractive. If consumers have free reign and brick their device, it's hard to expect the manufacturer to have/honor any warranty. If developers have free reign there's no guarantee another application won't break theirs or that they won't break someone else's... or that it'll work with whatever the consumer is doing. Yes, an obvious counter point is *nix systems, but there is some authority in that ecosystem which keeps most things working. It's still not painless to setup/use which prevents it from effectively competing with windows/Mac OS. Simply put, the price of admission into a walled garden comes with some perks/guarantees/warranties which aren't readily available elsewhere.

beenBoutIT 8y ago

It is okay, just don't buy anything made by Nintendo unless you're ok with Nintendo's restrictive 'nanny console' TOS. You can run Linux and play GTA and Mortal Kombat on other consoles. Nintendo is geared towards people who like Nintendo.

SantalBlush 8y ago
I think the "Just don't buy it" mantra has been applied too broadly. It implies that people have no right to complain about a company, which I completely reject.
- beenBoutIT 8y ago
  The ability to complain about companies is a fundamental right, although it's I important to understand that no one at Nintendo is listening. I personally hate Nintendo and despise the way they prevent young people from modding/hacking their consoles and playing GTA games. Those are the two things I want out of a gaming console, so I don't buy anything Nintendo makes.
  - analognoise 8y ago
    I have discovered the world's smallest hill to die on. This is it.
eridius 8y ago
Sony removed the ability to run Linux many years ago, after it was determined that it was impossible to prevent a jailbreak as long as the second OS feature existed. I’m not aware of Xbox ever supporting this.
- beenBoutIT 8y ago
  Sony did technically 'remove it', although it's still something that can be done if you're really interested in doing it. Nintendo seems to prioritize jailbreaking above everything else and for most of their consoles there's literally nothing interesting that can be done outside of using them to play Nintendo games.

wnevets 8y ago

Nintendo gets a pass on a lot of crap other companies would get torched for by the internet community, DRM, DCMA take downs, etc. Nostalgia is powerful

rizzin 8y ago
It's not just nostalgia. Nintendo keeps providing excellent gaming experience that no one else does. Super Mario Odyssey is awesome not because it's the same old Mario guy from NES, but because it is just a great game. Nintendo games are not polluted by the games-as-service and free-to-play monetization mindsets as badly as other platforms. I don't like a lot of their rigidity, such as takedowns or still not getting rid of having stuff segregated by regions, but I appreciate what they contribute to the world of video games.
- chii 8y ago
  > providing excellent gaming experience ... not polluted by the games-as-service and free-to-play monetization mindsets as badly as other platforms. But why does this have to do with draconian lock-down rules? Presumably, allowing homebrew code is not gonna affect the above at all.
  - krageon 8y ago
    The fact that they are so strict in a very real way keeps a lot of crapware and annoyances (that I do see on other platforms, more or less linearly following the openness) off of the marketplace. I go from liking it to hating it more or less on a yearly cycle, but I have never hated it enough to stop owning their devices. When I want something with solid gameplay that doesn't just sell because the graphics are so good (or whatever marketing flavour of the month is in vogue at the moment), a Nintendo console is what I go to.
    - chii 8y ago
      The quality of software available on the nintendo store has nothing to do with how locked down the hardware is! Of course nintendo (or any other platform holder) would like you to believe otherwise, because by controlling the platform, they are able to maximize the profit extraction. Hardware lockdown and quality of the curated store has nothing to do with each other. Nintendo can (and should) continue to curate their store. But if i want to produce homebrew for my own machine, I'd have to get permission from nintendo. I also have to pay for that priviledge, when the hardware is something i have purchased.

paxys 8y ago

You, the customer, are allowed to do anything with your device. What they are doing is blocking a developer that makes money on their marketplace for not following rules. They wouldn't allow anyone to sell pornography, malware, defective/broken software etc. either.

Digit-Al 8y ago

That's a bit of a silly argument. A games console is specifically sold as a device upon which you can play games, and nothing else. If you want to be able to perform other computing tasks and/or write your own programs you buy a general purpose computer not a games console. Your argument is a bit like saying "why can't I fry burgers with my fridge?"

threezero 8y ago
Uh...not at all similar. Refrigerators don’t have the capability to fry burgers, and if someone came along and figured out a way to do that, the refrigerator manufacturer couldn’t say “your banned from making any modifications to our refrigerators”.