I do wonder what a more permanent solution for these sorts of situations could be, as right now these things are case by case. Either Nintendo tolerates the use of cloned cartridge IDs (which is something no game company/publisher/whatever have you would ever accept), or they bring down the ban hammer on random people who just bought a used game and had no idea it was used for copying (which is just a dick move). Nobody buying a used game is going to have any real idea where it came from, and in a lot of used stores the carts probably get mixed around anyway. Having any sort of checker for cloned IDs would also be difficult, as Nintendo’s systems probably only catch it when both are in use at the same time. Perhaps they could use some system to look for MIG Switch use specifically, and only block that cartridge? That would probably be the best way to go about it, but I’m not so sure about the technical details that would make such a thing work, as it would require some reverse engineering of the MIG Switch.
EDIT: I do think as well this article is too generous to Nintendo. The writer focuses on how easy it was to get unbanned, rather than the ban in the first place. Nintendo should at least start sending an email warning or something before deciding to block online. That would give people a change to figure out what is going on, instead of waking up one day to find they can’t access the eShop or GameChat.
There’s a darker solution, which is what nintendo would love more: kill the second hand market.
And these moves might very well do it. If news spread and people start getting scared of buying a used game, second hand sales will drop and eventually die. Something that can only benefit nintendo.
Don’t give them any more ideas!
No, but actually, this might be an unfortunate consequence of this whole thing. Locking it to a console would get rid of MIG Switch, but at the cost of killing a big used game industry. I think they wouldn’t try it, due to the sheer amount of blowback they would get (far beyond anything else they’ve done before), but we never know.
Would they really? I mean, the way I see it, they are pushing for the all digital market more and more. It’s really in their best interest to kill a market that gives no money to them.
Besides, they don’t need to outright kill it, just spread the fear of bans if you buy used. Enough to indirectly kill the market by making people believe buying used is dangerous.
You have a good point. As long as that fear is in the used games market, people will be incentivised to only buy new cartridges (if not digital) as they can’t trust any used ones. The only sales then would be between people who know each other and are swapping their games, which is a far smaller market. It is somewhat ironic that the MIG Switch, a device made by people who have nothing to do with Nintendo, might end up helping Nintendo revenues by making it so that nobody can trust that used games weren’t cloned.
Some claim “unfortunate consequence”, for others and probably the correct interpretation"working as intended". The fact that some believe oterwise is naive.
As in they would never allow that to happen under any circumstances. Companies are already clamping down on other platforms due to piracy (just look at how many Steam games have Denuvo in addition to the Steam DRM, Steam’s protections get cracked fairly easily nowadays), so not surprising Nintendo want to nip any copying problems in the bud before shit hits the fan.
You just contradicted yourself. Steam accepts it. They just don’t want to actively enable it, so they have the kind of DRM that prevents using copied game files.
It is extremely unlikely that Steam are accepting of piracy. They may be negligent (maybe not investing enough into copy protection), but being even somewhat accepting would immediately tarnish their reputation with game publishers. Denuvo seems like more of a quick fix, not a real solution, that was put on after publishers started to lose patience. Even for their own self interest, they would be losing money on their own published games.
I do wonder what a more permanent solution for these sorts of situations could be, as right now these things are case by case. Either Nintendo tolerates the use of cloned cartridge IDs (which is something no game company/publisher/whatever have you would ever accept), or they bring down the ban hammer on random people who just bought a used game and had no idea it was used for copying (which is just a dick move). Nobody buying a used game is going to have any real idea where it came from, and in a lot of used stores the carts probably get mixed around anyway. Having any sort of checker for cloned IDs would also be difficult, as Nintendo’s systems probably only catch it when both are in use at the same time. Perhaps they could use some system to look for MIG Switch use specifically, and only block that cartridge? That would probably be the best way to go about it, but I’m not so sure about the technical details that would make such a thing work, as it would require some reverse engineering of the MIG Switch.
EDIT: I do think as well this article is too generous to Nintendo. The writer focuses on how easy it was to get unbanned, rather than the ban in the first place. Nintendo should at least start sending an email warning or something before deciding to block online. That would give people a change to figure out what is going on, instead of waking up one day to find they can’t access the eShop or GameChat.
There’s a darker solution, which is what nintendo would love more: kill the second hand market.
And these moves might very well do it. If news spread and people start getting scared of buying a used game, second hand sales will drop and eventually die. Something that can only benefit nintendo.
And if anyone wants to play the original red&blue can pound sand, in their view.
Don’t give them any more ideas! No, but actually, this might be an unfortunate consequence of this whole thing. Locking it to a console would get rid of MIG Switch, but at the cost of killing a big used game industry. I think they wouldn’t try it, due to the sheer amount of blowback they would get (far beyond anything else they’ve done before), but we never know.
Would they really? I mean, the way I see it, they are pushing for the all digital market more and more. It’s really in their best interest to kill a market that gives no money to them.
Besides, they don’t need to outright kill it, just spread the fear of bans if you buy used. Enough to indirectly kill the market by making people believe buying used is dangerous.
You have a good point. As long as that fear is in the used games market, people will be incentivised to only buy new cartridges (if not digital) as they can’t trust any used ones. The only sales then would be between people who know each other and are swapping their games, which is a far smaller market. It is somewhat ironic that the MIG Switch, a device made by people who have nothing to do with Nintendo, might end up helping Nintendo revenues by making it so that nobody can trust that used games weren’t cloned.
Some claim “unfortunate consequence”, for others and probably the correct interpretation"working as intended". The fact that some believe oterwise is naive.
I have a foolproof way to never get banned on switch 2.
Same would and did happen on Switch 1 though
I have revised my foolproof plan.
Ok, then don’t. Nobody’s forcing you to.
Define “accept”. Do you mean “like” or “not go out of their way to harass their customers”? Or something else?
As in they would never allow that to happen under any circumstances. Companies are already clamping down on other platforms due to piracy (just look at how many Steam games have Denuvo in addition to the Steam DRM, Steam’s protections get cracked fairly easily nowadays), so not surprising Nintendo want to nip any copying problems in the bud before shit hits the fan.
You just contradicted yourself. Steam accepts it. They just don’t want to actively enable it, so they have the kind of DRM that prevents using copied game files.
It is extremely unlikely that Steam are accepting of piracy. They may be negligent (maybe not investing enough into copy protection), but being even somewhat accepting would immediately tarnish their reputation with game publishers. Denuvo seems like more of a quick fix, not a real solution, that was put on after publishers started to lose patience. Even for their own self interest, they would be losing money on their own published games.
Seems we have different definitions of accept in our minds.