10 ms·

I didn't realize developers were still publishing Gamecube and Wii games. Can you share some of the newest games that have been released?

gjsman-1000 3y ago
What are you talking about? Every game developer licenses with Nintendo to publish to Switch. Nintendo takes about 30% royalties, which stings if their platform is insecure. Only Nintendo can make physical cartridges. Nothing with the status quo there has changed. Also, the last original Wii game was Just Dance 2020. Not joking, a Wii game was released 3 years ago.
- fzeroracer 3y ago
  I was specifically asking about Gamecube and Wii games, not Switch. Dolphin is a Gamecube/Wii emulator, both of which no longer have active games being released for them. Your argument might have some application if it was a Switch emulator being propped up.
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    I would say it’s more about establishing legal boundaries. The Wii was the first console to use digital signatures; which would make it the first console to really invoke DMCA Section 1201 when prior consoles did not. Establishing out the gate that this tramples on 1201 could be extremely important in the future. Section 1201 is also what overrides Bleam and other prior emulator lawsuits - they didn’t have cryptographic keys protected by law flying around. Because, how long until Yuzu is on the Steam store? And if Nintendo didn’t take action for the Wii (the first one protected under the title), defending against Yuzu is much harder.
    - fzeroracer 3y ago
      Cryptographic key doesn't matter. It's covered explicitly under the exemptions listed in Section 1201. Discovering the cryptographic key using reverse engineering and using it for system interoperability is legal. They explicitly call this out: > to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; Nintendo has no standing.
      - gjsman-1000 3y ago
        If only it were that easy. The EFF had long warned that the interoperability exception is legally much weaker when it conflicts with 1201 than it appears, and is (in their view) legally almost useless. “The "act" prohibition, set out in section 1201(a)(1), prohibits the act of circumventing a technological measure used by copyright owners to control access to their works ("access controls"). So, for example, this provision makes it unlawful to defeat the encryption system used on DVD movies. This ban on acts of circumvention applies even where the purpose for decrypting the movie would otherwise be legitimate. As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. The "tools" prohibitions, set out in sections 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b), outlaw the manufacture, sale, distribution, or trafficking of tools and technologies that make circumvention possible. These provisions ban both technologies that defeat access controls, and also technologies that defeat use restrictions imposed by copyright owners, such as copy controls. These provisions prohibit the distribution of "DVD back-up" software, for example. Section 1201 includes a number of exceptions for certain limited classes of activities, including security testing, reverse engineering of software, encryption research, and law enforcement. These exceptions have been extensively criticized as being too narrow to be of real use to the constituencies who they were intended to assist.“ https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-years-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-year... This comes up elsewhere on this Hacker News thread, because Dolphin actually does contain a Nintendo encryption key. Which makes Dolphin almost indistinguishable from, say, a DVD ripper or counterfeit DVD player, which this law was specifically designed to crush. If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar, where Psystar broke Apple’s DMCA 1201 locks to run macOS on unofficial hardware with “interoperability between hardware” being one of their many legal defenses. They were squashed in hearing after hearing and declared bankruptcy after having exhausted all legal options.
        smoldesu 3y ago
        > As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. Strictly speaking, this is true. It is not unlawful to plug a DVD player into your iPod and play the DVD back digitally though. That's basically what Dolphin is doing - it runs unmodified disc images, copy protection and all. They've even abstained from using code or insights gained from the Wii's source code leak. The emulator should be clean, outside of any legal complaints about "damages". You're correct to highlight that it's still an ambiguous area, but in a post-Bleem! world it's hard for Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony to find the legal willpower to stop these people. They'll settle for easy wins like harassing Valve's legal staff with scary looking letters instead. > If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar There's more recent precedent with Corellium. Their commercial product is allowed to create iOS VMs on unofficial hardware. Running their code is considered fair use, the most valid legal claim Apple had for shutting them down was their violation of icon and wallpaper trademarks.
    - scarface74 3y ago
      Video games have had digital rights management since the first Nintendo game system in the mid 80a
    - brirec 3y ago
      I can say pretty confidently that the original Xbox had (and verified) digital signatures.
      - gjsman-1000 3y ago
        I’m sorry, I should have said first Nintendo console. The earlier Nintendo consoles had no ROM encryption and used heavily physical protection methods (odd disc sizes, lockout chips).
  - wtallis 3y ago
    Why are you ignoring the issue of games being re-released on newer platforms? Even if the Gamecube and Wii are more or less dead platforms, that doesn't mean the games are no longer valuable IP that the studios want protected in any way possible.
    - p1necone 3y ago
      Imo if a publisher wants to retain rights to a game, they should have to make it available for sale. If you don't provide some legal way to acquire a game for some number of years (5? 10?) it should go into the public domain (the game itself, not the related IP).
      - replygirl 3y ago
        most games are available on amazon. popular games like rayman raving rabids for wii, motorstorm for ps3, and underground 2 for ps2 are still available new. more niche games like frequency for ps2 and older gen games like crash warped for ps1 are still available refurbished. pretty much any console game from the last 25 years that didn't totally flop is available in good condition from a major retailer. the rest are around at boutiques and on the used market. we get public domain in 70 years just like everything else, and i can't think of an argument for any game being more of a public good than works of other types like lolita, the search for animal chin, or paul's boutique.
        jrm4 3y ago
        70 years AFTER THE THE DEATH OF THE AUTHOR. Still sound reasonable?
        musicale 3y ago
        > is available in good condition from a major retailer I don't think Nintendo gets a cut of used game sales; †he first-sale doctrine should still apply.
        wtallis 3y ago
        > we get public domain in 70 years just like everything else, Nitpick: video games are almost always a work-for-hire, so it's 95 years after publication (or 120 years after creation, in the unusual event that publication gets delayed long enough for this deadline to expire first).
  - bsder 3y ago
    Metroid Prime: Remastered just got released on Switch and sold a million units. Anybody who thought that was a good game is now looking for the second and third installments in the trilogy which Nintendo offically said they weren't going to develop (oops). So those are effectively only available on Dolphin/Wii. Yeah, Nintendo got caught with their pants down (Metroid Prime sold way better than they expected) and are losing future sales for every person who pulls up Dolphin and the next two Metroids.
  - ksec 3y ago
    You do realise the developer who develops for Gamecube and Wii, also developers for Switch, right?
    - KomoD 3y ago
      That is not relevant, this is about dolphin any not any other thing made by the dev
      - ksec 3y ago
        I think you should read my parent and Grand parent's comment.
- andylynch 3y ago
  Not surprising it was _Just Dance_ The 2019 one was the last XBOX 360 title too.

gjsman-1000 3y ago

What are you talking about? Every game developer licenses with Nintendo to publish to Switch. Nintendo takes about 30% royalties, which stings if their platform is insecure. Only Nintendo can make physical cartridges. Nothing with the status quo there has changed. Also, the last original Wii game was Just Dance 2020. Not joking, a Wii game was released 3 years ago.

fzeroracer 3y ago
I was specifically asking about Gamecube and Wii games, not Switch. Dolphin is a Gamecube/Wii emulator, both of which no longer have active games being released for them. Your argument might have some application if it was a Switch emulator being propped up.
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  I would say it’s more about establishing legal boundaries. The Wii was the first console to use digital signatures; which would make it the first console to really invoke DMCA Section 1201 when prior consoles did not. Establishing out the gate that this tramples on 1201 could be extremely important in the future. Section 1201 is also what overrides Bleam and other prior emulator lawsuits - they didn’t have cryptographic keys protected by law flying around. Because, how long until Yuzu is on the Steam store? And if Nintendo didn’t take action for the Wii (the first one protected under the title), defending against Yuzu is much harder.
  - fzeroracer 3y ago
    Cryptographic key doesn't matter. It's covered explicitly under the exemptions listed in Section 1201. Discovering the cryptographic key using reverse engineering and using it for system interoperability is legal. They explicitly call this out: > to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; Nintendo has no standing.
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      If only it were that easy. The EFF had long warned that the interoperability exception is legally much weaker when it conflicts with 1201 than it appears, and is (in their view) legally almost useless. “The "act" prohibition, set out in section 1201(a)(1), prohibits the act of circumventing a technological measure used by copyright owners to control access to their works ("access controls"). So, for example, this provision makes it unlawful to defeat the encryption system used on DVD movies. This ban on acts of circumvention applies even where the purpose for decrypting the movie would otherwise be legitimate. As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. The "tools" prohibitions, set out in sections 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b), outlaw the manufacture, sale, distribution, or trafficking of tools and technologies that make circumvention possible. These provisions ban both technologies that defeat access controls, and also technologies that defeat use restrictions imposed by copyright owners, such as copy controls. These provisions prohibit the distribution of "DVD back-up" software, for example. Section 1201 includes a number of exceptions for certain limited classes of activities, including security testing, reverse engineering of software, encryption research, and law enforcement. These exceptions have been extensively criticized as being too narrow to be of real use to the constituencies who they were intended to assist.“ https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-years-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-year... This comes up elsewhere on this Hacker News thread, because Dolphin actually does contain a Nintendo encryption key. Which makes Dolphin almost indistinguishable from, say, a DVD ripper or counterfeit DVD player, which this law was specifically designed to crush. If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar, where Psystar broke Apple’s DMCA 1201 locks to run macOS on unofficial hardware with “interoperability between hardware” being one of their many legal defenses. They were squashed in hearing after hearing and declared bankruptcy after having exhausted all legal options.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        > As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. Strictly speaking, this is true. It is not unlawful to plug a DVD player into your iPod and play the DVD back digitally though. That's basically what Dolphin is doing - it runs unmodified disc images, copy protection and all. They've even abstained from using code or insights gained from the Wii's source code leak. The emulator should be clean, outside of any legal complaints about "damages". You're correct to highlight that it's still an ambiguous area, but in a post-Bleem! world it's hard for Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony to find the legal willpower to stop these people. They'll settle for easy wins like harassing Valve's legal staff with scary looking letters instead. > If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar There's more recent precedent with Corellium. Their commercial product is allowed to create iOS VMs on unofficial hardware. Running their code is considered fair use, the most valid legal claim Apple had for shutting them down was their violation of icon and wallpaper trademarks.
  - scarface74 3y ago
    Video games have had digital rights management since the first Nintendo game system in the mid 80a
  - brirec 3y ago
    I can say pretty confidently that the original Xbox had (and verified) digital signatures.
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      I’m sorry, I should have said first Nintendo console. The earlier Nintendo consoles had no ROM encryption and used heavily physical protection methods (odd disc sizes, lockout chips).
- wtallis 3y ago
  Why are you ignoring the issue of games being re-released on newer platforms? Even if the Gamecube and Wii are more or less dead platforms, that doesn't mean the games are no longer valuable IP that the studios want protected in any way possible.
  - p1necone 3y ago
    Imo if a publisher wants to retain rights to a game, they should have to make it available for sale. If you don't provide some legal way to acquire a game for some number of years (5? 10?) it should go into the public domain (the game itself, not the related IP).
    - replygirl 3y ago
      most games are available on amazon. popular games like rayman raving rabids for wii, motorstorm for ps3, and underground 2 for ps2 are still available new. more niche games like frequency for ps2 and older gen games like crash warped for ps1 are still available refurbished. pretty much any console game from the last 25 years that didn't totally flop is available in good condition from a major retailer. the rest are around at boutiques and on the used market. we get public domain in 70 years just like everything else, and i can't think of an argument for any game being more of a public good than works of other types like lolita, the search for animal chin, or paul's boutique.
      - jrm4 3y ago
        70 years AFTER THE THE DEATH OF THE AUTHOR. Still sound reasonable?
      - musicale 3y ago
        > is available in good condition from a major retailer I don't think Nintendo gets a cut of used game sales; †he first-sale doctrine should still apply.
      - wtallis 3y ago
        > we get public domain in 70 years just like everything else, Nitpick: video games are almost always a work-for-hire, so it's 95 years after publication (or 120 years after creation, in the unusual event that publication gets delayed long enough for this deadline to expire first).
- bsder 3y ago
  Metroid Prime: Remastered just got released on Switch and sold a million units. Anybody who thought that was a good game is now looking for the second and third installments in the trilogy which Nintendo offically said they weren't going to develop (oops). So those are effectively only available on Dolphin/Wii. Yeah, Nintendo got caught with their pants down (Metroid Prime sold way better than they expected) and are losing future sales for every person who pulls up Dolphin and the next two Metroids.
- ksec 3y ago
  You do realise the developer who develops for Gamecube and Wii, also developers for Switch, right?
  - KomoD 3y ago
    That is not relevant, this is about dolphin any not any other thing made by the dev
    - ksec 3y ago
      I think you should read my parent and Grand parent's comment.
andylynch 3y ago
Not surprising it was _Just Dance_ The 2019 one was the last XBOX 360 title too.