I'm fairly certain that Ryujinx is a hobby project as well, which would contradict your claim that developing emulators for later-gen systems requires funding. However, I may be mistaken. Regardless of if I am right about Ryujinx, your claim that I am "cheering for another company" just because I called a spade a spade with regards to Nintendo's legal trickery in the Yuzu case is still wrong. As I said, the Yuzu team was wrong to profit off of adding patches for leaked games. They deserved to get their Patreon shut down for that. However, the sentence forbade them fromever working on a Nintendo emulator again, which is excessive because *developing an emulator is not and should not be illegal*. For another example that might clarify my position: I believe that Palworld is in many ways a blatant rip-off of Pokémon IP that obviously marketed itself on its similarities with Nintendo's franchise. Nintebdo was quite right to sue them. However, the lawsuit evoked patents whose very existence is the epitome of bullshit, such as using a drawn outline to represent the position of a pkayer character or NPC who us totally or oartially obscured behind an opaque object. We live in a complex world. It is possible to be in the right and still be an unethical overreaching asshole about it.

Ryujinx got caught in a crossfire. I’m pretty sure Nintendo wouldn’t dare to harass them, similar to Dolphin, if it wasn’t for all the publicity Yuzu was bringing to Switch piracy. Nintendo shouldn’t have done that but here we are and it’s Yuzu that started this by breaking unwritten rules and playing dumb. Yuzu was a commercial enterprise. The moment you start taking money for this kind of work it’s no longer a hobby project and should bear all of the legal consequences. Yuzu guys were smart, they played a scrappy underdog but if your whole business idea hinges on breaking multiple laws for the purpose of making money (and they made much more than covering current expenses) you’re asking for trouble. They also enjoy a bit of a revenge from the grave with all the people angry over their toys being taken away doing black PR for Nintendo. Everyone is free to do as they please but what I’m seeing is just a hissy fit so there isn’t that much nuance to this.

Nintendo couldn’t pirate their own stuff because they own it. They downloaded ROMs because they can’t be arsed to dump them themselves, similar to 99% of population. Kind of hypocritical with all the DRM related laws that they support but at least they recognise they’re unenforceable.

Ok, then Nintendo benefitted financially from piracy and made no efforts to hide the fact that they obtained games through the exact same methods that pirates use.

Piracy of what?

Booty and gold, of course

I love nintendo, but they are one of the worst companies to their consumers....

How can Nintendo pirate a thing they own?

Using someone else’s rip as their own software

I accused you of autistic-like behaviour, there’s nothing fascinating about it because it’s so common amongst immature gamers.

What did they pirate specifically and why nobody is suing them for it? Please go ahead.

What I said in my last comment was >Nintendo benefitted financially from piracy and made no efforts to hide the fact that they obtained games through the exact same methods that pirates use. I'm not sure why this didn't satisfy your pedantry before, but maybe you didn't read it when you replied to it last time.

Law is a pedantic thing.

Ok, I see now. I was saying that they benefitted from other people pirating their games. You thought I meant that they benefitted from pirating their own games. I can see how what I wrote could be interpreted that way. But no, I meant that they benefitted from their games having been pirated in the past by pirates.

I think you misunderstand the root of the argument. You’re referencing Nintendo copying someone’s rip and that seems illogical - DRM circumvention is illegal under DMCA, right? Nintendo is a license owner for those things however so they can’t really circumvent anything and therefore there is no law against that. Nintendo can download Mario roms off the internet legally because they are the publisher and won’t sue themselves obviously.

No, I've understood this whole time that you're saying "Nintendo is legally allowed to do this with their own games". What I'm saying is "Nintendo benefitted from their game having been pirated because they sold the exact version of the game that someone illegally pirated". Nintendo didn't do anything illegal. Someone did something illegal, and Nintendo saved time and effort (and therefore money too) because of the illegal thing that someone did.

I love nintendo, but they are one of the worst companies to their consumers....

So you’re literally hung up on the fact that Nintendo used someone’s rip. Are there some scene rules to prevent that or what because I’m deeply confused.

What are you confused about? I don't understand what your angle is. It feels like you're really trying to win an argument, except you seem to be the only one arguing. I've been trying to sort out a misunderstanding, and it looks like you're trying to win something. The misunderstanding is sorted out. So, I guess you win, too?

I’m asking you to clearly formulate what it is that you’re accusing Nintendo of. I’m seeing lots of hand waving so far to cover that you just want to dunk on Nintendo for taking toys away, sorry. Also think this is pointless.