Yeah I don’t get that leap either but I did my best.

If I understood it correctly, this is actually simpler than most SovCit insanity. Taxes are owed on the transaction, but they’re owed to the government, which represents the people, aka you, personally, so you can tell them to just not charge the taxes and file the zeroed out receipt with their tax returns to prove that they already paid the taxes to you personally by not charging you.

All hail the orphan crushing machine.

Well, I suppose that’s a good thing.

TLDR: “It’s not our fault, it’s the market!” and “We price every game individually based on its particular characteristics. It’s a wild coincidence that they all have the exact same price except the one we knew everyone would buy, which was more expensive”.

How did she respond?

The current CEO of Microsoft.

At least somebody thinks so.

This is more like a hype wagon, really.

Sure I am! Making new friends is always a good thing. =)

I explained the nuance, but if you want to ignore it, go ahead. As for the rest of your comment excluding the final part, we are in agreement and have been since the beginning.

Yeah, I used to fool myself with that line too. Look, I know you don’t believe anything I said, but nonetheless you seem like a great person going through an awful time and I wish you the best. It does get better. Don’t give up.

Hey there. I’m Paulo, he/him, former lawyer, studying mechanical engineering. Nice to meet you. What branch of the military were you in?

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 from ever 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. Nintendo 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 player character or NPC who is totally or partially obscured behind an opaque object. This is an obvious solution, and one of the requirements for a patent is that it be non-obvious.

We live in a complex world. It is possible to be in the right and still be an unethical overreaching asshole about it.

That actually makes sense. I wouldn’t hop on one foot, though. That increases the odds of falling flat.

Okay, that’s fair.

Snes9x, no$gba, Higan and literally dozens if not hundreds of other emulators were developed as hobby projects, many of them by a single person in their spare time, so you, sir or madam, are completely full of it. Go fanboy somewhere else and let the grown-ups talk.

So you still think life is worth living, even though you claim that it isn’t. Well aren’t you a happy little hypocrite? Welcome to the club.

Nintendo used to make unique hardware. The Wii, Wii U, DS, 3DS and even the Virtual Boy innovated and brought something to the table that nobody else was offering. Even the Switch’s erasure of the handheld/console divide was unique. This Switch 2, though? It’s a Switch on steroids. This is the same uncreative shit that Sony and Microsoft have been doing, just an iteration on their previous offering.

Nintendo’s innovations have purchased it a lot of good will from consumers. When the innovations stop, expect the good will to follow suit. That’s only natural.

You are completely wrong.

The Yuzu team was profiting from game leaks and piracy, and that’s illegal. Their software was not illegal. Nintendo’s lawsuit was riddled with bullshit claims about circumventing encryption and other made-up offenses, and resulted in the 100% legal development of both Yuzu and Citra being forcefully terminated. The actually just solution would have been to forbid them from monetizing their projects by promising fixes for unreleased software.

Here’s a simple analogy: if you own a 3D printer and sell objects made with that printer, some of which are illegal for whatever reason (e.g. parts for making untraceable firearms), should a court forbid you from ever using a 3D printer ever again, even if it’s to make a kickstand for your tablet, or should it forbid you from making illegal parts only?