Games
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Authorized Regular Threads
Related communities
PM a mod to add your own
Video games
Generic
- !gaming@Lemmy.world: Our sister community, focused on PC and console gaming. Meme are allowed.
- !photomode@feddit.uk: For all your screenshots needs, to share your love for games graphics.
- !vgmusic@lemmy.world: A community to share your love for video games music
Help and suggestions
By platform
By type
- !AutomationGames@lemmy.zip
- !Incremental_Games@incremental.social
- !LifeSimulation@lemmy.world
- !CityBuilders@sh.itjust.works
- !CozyGames@Lemmy.world
- !CRPG@lemmy.world
- !OtomeGames@ani.social
- !Shmups@lemmus.org
- !VisualNovels@ani.social
By games
- !Baldurs_Gate_3@lemmy.world
- !Cities_Skylines@lemmy.world
- !CassetteBeasts@Lemmy.world
- !Fallout@lemmy.world
- !FinalFantasyXIV@lemmy.world
- !Minecraft@Lemmy.world
- !NoMansSky@lemmy.world
- !Palia@Lemmy.world
- !Pokemon@lemm.ee
- !Skyrim@lemmy.world
- !StardewValley@lemm.ee
- !Subnautica2@Lemmy.world
- !WorkersAndResources@lemmy.world
Language specific
- !JeuxVideo@jlai.lu: French
view the rest of the comments
Lol, why even buy such a piece of shit then? Even when in the EU, the fact they do this is enough.
Because Banana!
But no, seriously, you can rage all you want about brands and corporations, but in cultural industries content is always king.
That's why you need regulation. You can't expect people to not play or watch cool stuff just because you're aware of and latched onto some particular moral, ethical or economical transgression. It's res publica to prevent the misbehavior so people don't have to have a stance on the extent of licensing for software/hardware combo services whenever their kid wants the cute gorilla game.
And yes, I do own a Switch 2.
Same for veganism. Taste is always king :/
It's not a terrible example. You can have delicious vegan food and you can have moral objections to the process of eating meat.
But if your reasoning is to enact some larger impact on climate or the practices of industrial meat production your own consumption habits are mostly irrelevant and you should focus on regulating those things instead.
The difference is that food isn't a licensed product. You can have very sustainable meat at home. You can't source sustainable Mario Kart.
Veganism is mostly about animal suffering. You cannot have meat at home without suffering, though I agree it can be very much less than current industrial scale of death.
As for mariokart, you could find or fund open source or ethical alternative developers
That's why the intent matters. If your concern with meat is that you're unwilling to inflict any suffering to an animal for food, then sure, that's independent from the wider effects. If you don't care about the larger impact beyond the small impact you have then by all means, your individual actions are all that matters.
But if your concern is systemic: how the meat industry functions, the climate impact, sustainability and so on, those things are a bit different. One, because you can bypass those issues and still eat animal products, on a personal level, but also because your not eating animal products doesn't have much of an impact at all in the overall issue.
The other thing is misunderstanding how products, brands and commerce in general work. I mean, if you can go and fund the, what? Fifty to a hundred million dollars Mario Kart World must have cost, by all means be my guest. I have a couple of pitches I may want to run by you.
But even in that scenario I'm afraid people don't particularly care for your open source knockoff. They want to play Mario Kart. Because it's Mario Kart. For some it's branding, for some it's because their friends are playing and they want to play together, for some it's nostalgia from their childhood, for some it's just that they don't care or know and that's the name they recognize.
You could fund half the game's industry to be free and open source and people would still play Mario Kart.
So if you want Nintendo to not be dicks about it you need to regulate them, not put your money where your mouth is.
I don't disagree with you
Luckily I don't have kids and hence don't have to buy them such crap 😁
But yeah sure, I'm all in for regulations. But voting with your wallet is still the most basic way to say "lol no". If I'd be hellbent on gaming on-the-go I'm sure there are alternatives that come close at least. If not, the I guess I'd carry a laptop around for that
No it is not.
Voting with your wallet does nothing. It's a neoliberal fiction capitalism uses to pretend regulation is unnecessary.
Voting with your wallet is dependent on everybody else with a wallet even knowing that there's something to vote about. Most people don't.
And voting with your wallet means you have a tiny wallet in a world with a TON of tiny wallets and a few very big, huge-ass humongous wallets, so your wallet vote doesn't count for crap compared with your one-vote-per-person vote, if you have access to one of those.
So no, voting with your wallet is barely useful at best, just the normal flow of the market ideally, entirely pointless at worst.
Sure, regulations would do it much better, but the best I can do is exactly that. Not consume the shit. Not my fault the vast majority are just unreflected consumers.
So your suggestion is that I should buy one too (Assuming i needed one) because my "vote" doesn't matter anyway?
No, my suggestion is your buying or not buying stuff isn't a political action. Your political action is political action.
If you want to make sure it is not an option for hardware manufacturers to arbitrarily brick hardware you own for monetization or licensing issues what you need is a law that makes it illegal.
How you get that law is very dependent on where you live and what your political system is, so hey, I'm sorry if you need some sort of regime change before this becomes an option. But the "voting with your wallet" thing doesn't stop being a capitalist fiction just because you landed in a system where consumer protections have been written out of the lawbooks.
Oh I'm not a murican and already am protected as much as one could. Doesn't change the point though.
Yet voting with my wallet is my local political action. Nothing else I could do besides actually getting involved with politics. Not my fault the majority doesn't understand how they get screwed. If roughly 10-20% would actually not buy it, assuming they would have if it weren't shite, it would matter a lot. 5-10% would already be noticeable.
So, according to your point, you could also just buy another one, doesn't matter anyway. And any other critical customer, who wanted to skip it, could too. As long as we're below the noticeable 5%-treshhold. "It's not my fault I have to buy this switch, it's the government's lack of regulation!"
No, hold on, you get past the "other than get involved with politics" part very quickly there.
You can ABSOLUTELY get involved with politics. Go get involved with politics. Why are you not?
You can just vote, which is way more impactful than making purchasing decisions based on performatively affecting political involvement. That's getting involved with politics. If that doesn't do it then the next recourse isn't to spend money for posturing, it's to decide if you care enough about the issue to be activist about it or to break into the system in some capacity where you can implement change.
That's what you can do.
What you can't do is change how consumer protections work by spending money. That's not a thing. Nintendo has literal billions to spend marketing their products and the vast majority of people who will buy them as a result would not care much about the edge case you care about, would never encounter it and don't care enough about computing hardware to have an opinion in the first place You wanna change that? Go do politics.
This is why voting with your wallet pisses me off as a concept. It lets people say "but what else could I do besides getting into politics" and pretend they've done something by buying some shit over some other shit.
Nah, man, that's not how that works. You can do something or do nothing. Doing nothing is fine. You don't need to crusade for every single minor annoyance the legal system allows to enter the fringes of your life. You have no obligation to take on Apple or Nintendo or Google on any one specific crappy thing they decide to do.
But just to be clear, "voting with your wallet" is doing nothing. That's the choice you're making.
I don't get political because i don't care enough. Already got enough hobbies to fill the day and no offspring to make this world a better place for.
And your point isn't just exactly correct. Examples where wallet-voting indeed changed things that just come to mind:
Netflix acc-sharing witchhunt. Salesdrop lead to back ruddering.
#deleteuber-movement lead to 200k uninstalls and hence forced über to adapt
Nestlé's hideous water-scandal lead to effectively make them ditch the whole project
EA and its battlefront 2's microtransactions. Massive Säle drop made them change it.
Bud light boycot seriously affected bud.
Probably more like those. Might not be a universally a viable tactic to vote with your wallet (and maybe even voice that) but often certainly is or was.
To be clear, I agree that you don't have to be into politics. Not caring enough is fine. Social media expressions of opinion are always black and white. AI is the end of the world, Nintendo's piracy stance is a war crime, Windows is the antichrist... You're allowed to be bummed out by any of those and not do anything about it because you're not bummed out enough. That's a refreshing degree of online moderation, if anything.
What I take issue with is confusing those sorts of market results with actual political action. A brand can decide something unpopular isn't worth pursuing for PR reasons, but they can also decide it IS worth it. To my knowledge the people I shared Netflix accounts with that were impacted by the location checks are still impacted by those. Your EA and Uber examples were barely impactful at all until regulators got into the mix, and regulators got into the mix hard about those issues. I invite you to go look up how both of them played out, because, man, is there a difference between how fast the companies reacted once there was someone in a public position going "hey, maybe we need to take a look at this".
Mistaking how a brand manages its public perception for effective political actions is dangerous. Letting corporations appease you through those means only serves to set up a bad precedent when those brands decide the time has come to squeeze and go hard on monetization. You need public institutions that are strong and vigilant enough to put some bite behind that public displeasure.
Can a boycott work? Sure. As a coordinated political action, the consumer-side equivalent of a strike. This takes just as much work and coordination as any other political activity.
But spending your money based on the outrage that reaches you through social media is not a functional way to generate change. It's just you being part of the mass of consumers brand manage with their messaging tools. You're a rounding error in a stat, part of the manipulation of the market that is built into every corporate action. When you do that you're a focus group data point, not a political actor.
Can a boycott work? Sure. As a coordinated political action, the consumer-side equivalent of a strike. This takes just as much work and coordination as any other political activity.I guess we might slightly miss each others point. It really really should not take "as much work" if only people would just not be dumb consumers only. If at least 20-30% would actually only buy shit when it's not shit, even excluding your point with "not caring ENOUGH", it would be enough in each case. But we won't.
Microsoft is the Antichrist, but I need office!
I hate Apple's isolation, but look at this sleek design!
I hate not owning games anymore, but steam has SPÖ many!
Netflix is the worst, but everyone saw this show hence I need to too!
etc. It just hurts to see the obvious and most simple solution to be so rarely effective. And I'm surely not the epitome of intelligence and knowledge.
We won't indeed. And that's why the neoliberal fantasy where the market self-regulates is bullshit.
We won't because our set of incentives isn't infinitely fluid to the point where every negative, hostile or illegitimate action is unprofitable. And we shouldn't have to, because there already is a mechanism to account for that fact, and it's the law.
We're not meant to judge our spending money in fungible commodities and entertainment based on political stances and larger considerations about long term convenience. We're not meant to weigh whether Nintendo has a right to disable our device remotely as part of the choice to play a cute racing game.
That's not the sphere where those choices belong. We've been told it is by neoliberal capitalists who don't want a government to tell them what they can and cannot do, so they keep insisting that they can be as crappy as they want because if they do something the public won't like they will "vote with their wallet" and the market will settle in the optimal spot of profit vs service. And if it doesn't a competitor will give people what they want and they'll buy that instead.
But that's a lie. It never worked that way, and it doesn't work anywhere close to that way in a global online oligarchy. You're meant to be able to buy whatever the hell you fancy because there is supposed to be a state regulating things to be safe, fair and protected when you engage in small commercial exchanges.
Because you need Office, Microsoft doesn't get to be the Antichrist. Because Netflix has the show everybody wants to watch it doesn't get to be the worst. The idea is those companies are supposed to be held to the level of being-the-worst-Antichrist we all deem minimally acceptable. Market forces can play within that space, and no further.
So you want Netlfix to not be the worst? Get a legislator to enforce it and watch Stranger Things to your heart's content. Because whether you like Stranger Things isn't supposed to be connected in any way to how Netflix conducts its business or how abusive it can be in the process of doing so.
Yea, distribution and creation of art has to be separate. Only way I see against enshitification.
Like, there must be a choice between ad spreader datahoarder low price offer and premium low data no ad offer. There must be no monopoly over distribution of a specific art piece if it is no unique art form, like a hand drawn picture. (Like music, games, movies, series, trading card game, tabletop games, apps etc.)
Meaning, nintendo, netflix, apple, disnay and similar would have to offer distribution licenses according fair market rights and not limit those licenses to themself as self distributor.
At least, that is my opinion
Seriously! Just buy a used 3DS and hack it to run every game, emulator, etc. You can actually play DOS games and ScummVM games on it!
You can't play Donkey Kong Bananza
Sounds fine to me. But I bet there are a handful of "nice" exclusives.
Because I have no intention of playing pirated games so I'm at no risk? Also I'm in the EU so I'd be fine regardless?
Which is fine until the piracy detection system has a false positive and you lose your Switch. Or you buy a second hand copy of a game the original owner made a copy of and continues to use and your switch gets bricked. I understand you're in the EU, but this kind of nonsense would definitely put me off a system that's already inordinately expensive.
To each their own. 👍 I hear your points. Surely the false positive should be refutable and able to be appealed. At least in the EU? 🙃
How does Nintendo know if someone makes a copy/dump of a physical game card?
If you're offline only, they can't afaik. In the case of online I'm lead to believe each individual cart is signed with a unique certificate so they can tell if that cart has been used in more than one console. If there's two instances of the same thing online at the same time it must be pirated.
In terms of reversal - I'll work from the premise we agree that it's unacceptable a customer loses access to a device they purchased and own because the company doesn't like it. But let's say it happens, how much hassle is it going to be to undo it? The console is bricked so it's presumably not running/able to go online? Do I need access to a PC to fix it? Do I need to send it off to Nintendo? Go to a game store?
Fwiw I like tinkering with consoles and devices - not necessarily because of piracy, I just like running weird software on them or making them do things they weren't meant to. It's not a common use case, but it's valid enough. Why should Nintendo control that.
Yeah, I bet it would be a bitch, no doubt.
Agree completely. They shouldn't.
Pirated games can be one or several of the following:
More directly relevant to you: the money you give Nintendo goes to their legal teams, to continue to find loopholes around the protections you have. They're the ones fighting the "Stop Killing Games" movement. Nintendo recently won a lawsuit against 1fichier in France for hosting emulated games. It has been marked as a "significant" win against any level of piracy in the EU. Nintendo is continually working to make sure that despite living in the EU, you won't be fine regardless. Your purchase directly funds that.
Maybe you have no intention of playing pirated games, but I hope you can appreciate that this is larger than just some teenager feeling powerful because they stole something?
Definitely a balance between funding their legal team and just wanting to play the games they put out, indeed. Currently I just want to play. We'll see if I take the high road later. Having too much fun with my kids at the moment though.
It's already happened that Nintendo remotely bricked a switch 2 because its owner bought an used game, but that game was dumped by its previous owner.
You also have no intention of buying 100% genuine original, but used, games?
I have no intention of buying used games, no. Never bought a used game for the original Switch either. I always buy my shit on launch because I want it fast. 🙂