I have been playing Sly Cooper on a PlayStation emulator, I never owned a console in my youth and now I have a pretty solid PC. Getting my setup working took a bit but now I'm all ready jump back into a totally different era of game design (an era I think did more right than wrong). However in getting my emulator and USB controller setup I ran into a bunch of articles and things about how the companies are against emulators.
I don't understand it. They aren't making new copies of old games or hardware so it's not like they are losing money. They aren't making these old titles available on modern gear either. To me, emulators are like digital libraries and it's open-source. I mean to say if I checkout a book from the library (especially an older out of print one) the book publisher isn't making any money because they already made their money. Maybe a better analogy would be used goods stores in general, but again emulators are open-source and are more concerned about the sharing of this information for free. Real-ass hacker ethos.
Could someone explain why companies think emulators are bad? I don't even understand the "this is piracy" angle, as they aren't steal anything that's available. There a few companies like CAPCOM (as a random example) who release their classic catalog on digital storefronts so maybe I get that, but for the most part old games can't be played through "proper" channels so why the hell do MEGACORPS care about emulators? Is it an IP thing?
if you're playing old games you aren't buying new games and generating profits
companies hate libraries too and would get rid of them if possible
Please we beg you, come play our new game.
It's kind of like our old game that you love so much but it's not as fun but we added a casino where you never get what you want. It also costs $15 a month to access.
Also it's not finished, no we do not know when it will be finished. Also our executives are sex pests.
Do you like NFTs?
If they give you an inch, you might realize how stupid IP laws are.
iirc IP law forces you to defend your IP or it seizes to be protected
thats only trademarks. copyright has nothing like that in general
Because they want to be able to sell them digitally to you over and over again on every system you buy until you die.
Because it cannibalizes demand for their new, expensive titles.
G*mers only have so many hours in a day to be horrible to other people online. If they're playing old games, they're not buying new ones.
I came in to assert the opposite. What if I never gave a shit about Mario games, but then read about the history of gaming jumping from 2D to 3D and then tried SM64, then watched a speedrun of it and liked it? Suddenly when Super Mario Odussy comes out I'm super jazzed about it when before I wouldn't have looked twice. Many such cases! These companies spend billions on advertising and it seems like the positive effects of not fucking with the emulators would help that advertising cause FOR FREE. I felt the same way with music on YouTube. When a 14 y/o finds an AMV that they like, they're more open to watching the anime and listening to the band in the future.
Or how about this - you buy da fuckin' Mario game because that's what on the shelf and we shut down every other option so you have no choice? We pay for advertising already, and our shareholders don't want to risk these unlicensed emulators being used to make Mario porn vidya games, so we can't have 'em!
Nintendo making games
:big-cool:
Nintendo every time they make a decision ever
:monke-beepboop:
Different companies have different reasons. Nintendo nuked a lot of ROM websites a couple months before announcing that the Switch's internet service would include "official" emulators. Their libraries are really small, though, and don't include GC/Wii titles.
Oh yeah, and Nintendo DMCA'd the Metroid fangame AM2R the same day it was released, despite not having developed any real metroidvania style games in years.
Love to pay for a subscription to have the honor of playing a 30 year old title.
Aside from the other correct answers, emulators also mean lack of control for corporations. Can't be letting the people have any control in their lives now, can they?
It's commonly accepted that emulators are in direct competition with modern games. Even if they aren't selling Sly Cooper anymore, it is believed by the executives and investors that if you're playing an old emulated game, you're not playing a recent release that you had to pay for.
These corporations pay massive fees to their legal departments so it is all a form of grifting realy, if the lawyers and firms working for these corporations don't actually do anything how are you justifying spending millions on legal fees per year?
There is no requirement to send DMCAs or protect your copyright either this is a myth.
The second reason is these Japanese companies are run by even more backwards corporate executives than the west, they don't want to understand how the internet works, how word of mouth works, how much they are gaining from passive marketing through streaming and emulation etc.
These idiots are living in 1992 and behave like it. They'll fight for what they believe is right based on the ideology that lead these ghouls to become corporate executives not based on any technical research or evaluation of the pros and cons.
They believe that fandom just appears out of thin air and not for example from deep roots in various communities that carries over between generations(GenX/Millenials/Zoomers). They are idiots and it is not worth analyzing their motivations.
Honestly, corporate executives are mostly old and not that smart. It's really as simple as that.
I'm by no means a legal expert, but I think current IP laws mean you cannot allow ROMs of your games to spread without also legally giving up the IP itself. This is a realm of madness we're descending into and it is wrong for this legal system to exist at all, but my understanding is this:
There is no one to sign a contract with. They might actually want to give away some old games for free if they don't have a way to make more money from them planned, but they can't do that without just letting go of the property itself. I think. There actually are games being given out for free when there is someone to sign a contract with. At least the Epic Games store - maybe others too, I don't actually keep up with this news - has a few games free every week, usually I think when the developers are about to release something new. Those are pretty much always much more recent titles than old SNES/PS1 games, so I cannot imagine they would not be willing to give up some old games that they are never planning on selling again just for publicity. But they still demand control, so unless there is some central ROM service, they will maintain that it is illegal piracy, even if - as I think will often be the case - they actually wnat you to download and play their old games.
I’m by no means a legal expert, but I think current IP laws mean you cannot allow ROMs of your games to spread without also legally giving up the IP itself.
FYI there is no such requirement, it is a common mistake this requirement is for patents not copyright.
It is not for patents either. Patent trolls rely on the concept of 'submarine patents' to wait for companies to develop 'infringing' technology and reap parasitic income. The only ways patents are eliminated are expiration, or demonstrating prior art.
"If you don't use it, you lose it" is how trademarks work. If you don't jealously defend your trademark, people can begin calling generic copy machines 'xerox machines' without being held liable.
That said, all IP law should be abolished with the possible exception of a heavily reformed trademark system which eliminates vendor lock-in and solely ensures people can verify their products are manufactured by a specific organization.
