Support NeoGAF

[equippedwithtowel]

Of course it does. Look at the phrase "possession is nine-tenths of the law." That's a handy shorthand to encode the moral instinct at play here: if you can hold and use something, you own it; if you need someone else's permission just to make use of it, you don't.

If you have a console disc (again, or a DRM-free executable of a PC game), you control it. You can use it as you see fit, with no external restrictions -- and especially no post-purchase restrictions -- standing in your way. You can physically move it wherever you like -- to other people's houses, across borders, whatever. Your ability to hold onto that content becomes exactly equivalent to your ability to protect any other physical property -- if you maintain the physical object well, and you keep it safe from theft or destruction, you'll retain access regardless of your actions elsewhere. You can't have it taken hostage over some unrelated factor like your online conduct on a gaming service. You don't have to even acknowledge the possibility that someone in some far-away place can step in and disrupt your use of the thing you paid for. It is in every way like owning a chair or a coffee maker, while DD games from DRM-based providers are like "owning" a hookup from the electric company.



I am not sure you understand what that phrase means.

This is semantics.

The Disc and the Download are two different products which contain the same content, one is a disc, one is hardware locked but they are yours until they cease to function. You own both, they just have different properties, one of which is more limiting then the other.

The bolded just applies to the console and not the disc itself. And the notion of having it revoked due to conduct has no precedence on a Nintendo system as far as I'm aware.

 

[redcrayon]

It kind of is. I shouldn't have to jump through hoops and deal with customer service to maintain control over my content if the whole grab of the concept of digital content is supposed to be that it's easily accessible, secure, and maintainable because it's not physically there. Nintendo actually goes through effort to make the opposite true. I just don't fucking like it. It's offensive to me that Nintendo actually actively attempts to make being a digital owner worse than a physical owner, when services like Steam do the opposite.

Oh come on, that's just hyperbole. You think they actually sit thinking of ways to keep the digital option worse than physical, despite all the digital promotions they have run on 3DS and WiiU in the last 12 months? I think my 3DS is up to about 23 free games from the various schemes, that's not exactly a company trying to deliberately make digital games unattractive. By all means put it down to them being incompetent, archaic, or worried about piracy etc, but the idea that they go out of their way to piss off their customers by making the service their own marketing campaigns now revolve around deliberateky less attractive is just bonkers. I'm far more annoyed about the way they want us to pay twice for portable and home versions of NES games, and find that a pricier everyday issue than the one time in 25 years a Nintendo console of mine broke and they replaced it and restored the games within 10 days.

In an ideal world, their account system would work like everyone elses, but while its a slight inconvenience if you are unlucky enough to break your console etc, its not exactly a Herculean task to send an extra phone call or email either. The concept of ringing up customer service to get something replaced just seems to be a frightening thing to some people. If your PC breaks or is nicked, you are still going to be claiming on insurance if you have it (which will still require a police report in the case of theft) or shelling out for a new one and then redownloading stuff, that is still a significant time factor, it's just the extra human interaction thing on top of the hoops you will have to jump through with insurance and the police that seems to bother people to the point of being a deal breaker. It shouldn't be necessary, I get that, but just don't see why its such a big deal rather than a small inconvenience when it might never happen and if it does its a quick conversation and a matter of sending it off for repairs the same way you would anything else. Seeing as getting banned from Steam or XBL etc, whether its your fault or not, is also capable of removing your access to 'your' games with little recourse due to the ToS of all these systems, its not as if any digital options are entirely 100% secure.

If people are really worried that, if their WiiU breaks, Nintendo might refuse to restore all your content, then sure, fair enough. I just don't think that's particularly likely when they have a record of exactly what your machine, not just the account, has downloaded in its lifetime. It does get a bit hazy with secondhand consoles and trading them in, selling the content/account etc, that's why I'd always suggest people set up a club Nintendo account so your purchases are tied to an email address (that you can use to communicate with Nintendo) as well as the hardware.

But, y'know, you don't like it and that's cool. Believe me, I want a proper account system too, at this point their legacy games/virtual console are a huge part of their charm that they both a) charge too much for and b) fail to capitalise on.

 

[charlequin]

This is semantics.

How is it semantics? It's exactly the opposite of semantics. I'm talking about the factual ability to do various things with the game I paid money for. The physical presence of bytes of data on a storage medium is irrelevant relative to the actual question of what I can and can't do in terms of playing the game.

And the notion of having it revoked due to conduct has no precedence on a Nintendo system as far as I'm aware.

We know that Nintendo both can remotely delete content from 3DS/Wii U systems and that they have used this capability.

 

[xJavonta]

I guess it's like selling movies digitally first like on iTunes before the physical release. Do people have issues with that?

Did you even read the post?

 

[GhostTrick]

Well, Nintendo online system is sure flawed. IMO it prevents a lot of people, including me, from going all digital with them. Now, I don't think it's that bad to prevent people from buying some games on eShop. Plus, it seems they know about that issue so it may change in the near future. It would be a better thing for them if they want people to go digital only.

 

[H_Prestige]

A physical game doesn't stop working if your console dies. You can also run it any system. That's a pretty important and fundamental difference between buying retail and buying digital on Wii U.

 

[fates]

In practice it's not terrible but...

It honestly does feel like Nintendo trying to push the eShop in ways they shouldn't. They realize (I'd hope) that a lot of people still are wary of it, and they should try to address those issues and then do promotions like this.

 

[HawthorneKitty]

In practice it's not terrible but...

It honestly does feel like Nintendo trying to push the eShop in ways they shouldn't. They realize (I'd hope) that a lot of people still are wary of it, and they should try to address those issues and then do promotions like this.

What is the correct way to push their eShop now then?
Would you like it to flounder like the Wii's online store?

 

[equippedwithtowel]

We know that Nintendo both can remotely delete content from 3DS/Wii U systems and that they have used this capability.

News to me.

 

[jet1911]

Where do you buy your consoles?

Futureshop. Pretty sure they'll be fine without my Wind Waker money.

 

[Wario64]

Did you even read the post?

Yes?

 

[Marlowe89]

If you have a console disc (again, or a DRM-free executable of a PC game), you control it. You can use it as you see fit, with no external restrictions -- and especially no post-purchase restrictions -- standing in your way. You can physically move it wherever you like -- to other people's houses, across borders, whatever. Your ability to hold onto that content becomes exactly equivalent to your ability to protect any other physical property -- if you maintain the physical object well, and you keep it safe from theft or destruction, you'll retain access regardless of your actions elsewhere. You can't have it taken hostage over some unrelated factor like your online conduct on a gaming service. You don't have to even acknowledge the possibility that someone in some far-away place can step in and disrupt your use of the thing you paid for. It is in every way like owning a chair or a coffee maker, while DD games from DRM-based providers are like "owning" a hookup from the electric company.

If you have a console with software ingrained in the system, you control it. You can use that software as you see fit, with no more external restrictions than that of the disc -- and especially no post-purchase restrictions -- standing in your way. You can physically move that console and its software wherever you like -- to other people's houses, across borders, whatever. Your ability to hold onto that content becomes exactly equivalent to your ability to protect any other physical property -- if you maintain the physical object well, follow laws or license agreements and keep it safe from theft or destruction, you'll retain access regardless of your actions elsewhere. You can't have it taken hostage over some unrelated factor like your online conduct on a gaming service. It is in every way like owning a chair or a coffee maker, while uninstalled services are like "owning" a hookup from the electric company.

Also, can you please provide an actual example where Nintendo remotely controlled a consumer's entire console and deleted their software for "bad conduct"? I've never heard of this. I've heard of them revoking licenses when the user connects to their eShop servers for explicitly breaking clearly defined rules relevant to the game itself, but I've never heard of them literally controlling another console and deleting code because of an unrelated action.

I am not sure you understand what that phrase means.

The very fact that you apparently fail to comprehend that both the physical AND digital options merely encompass software installed on either a piece of hardware or a physical medium in your possession and are not possessed by outside forces unless that medium breaks (which in that case would apply to both the HDD and the disc) makes me question whether you understand what ownership entails at all or how basic software installation even works. You seem to be switching the argument to a battle of semantics over what Nintendo being capable of deleting games off of other consoles for poor behavior means for this subject, which I'm not even sure is true, but the fact that it is stored on something you yourself own is hardly irrelevant to the question of ownership. Otherwise you might as well argue that no one owns anything because some authority can revoke it, or because consoles and computers are capable of being limited remotely and games on discs are incapable of being accessed without those consoles.

Seriously, what part of "THE GAME COPY IS TIED TO THE SYSTEM AFTER YOU DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL IT AND NO LONGER STORED ONLINE" do you not understand? It is factually and legally yours. If an employee under Nintendo prevents you from accessing your stuff for no relevant reason, that's certainly a problem and it's one that should be dealt with immediately, but it doesn't magically erase the fact that the coding is still within your console.

 

[Javier]

News to me.

I can vouch for this. It hasn't happened to me personally, but a friend of mine had his Club Nintendo account suspended for putting in an invalid address. After that, the games he downloaded from the eShop using Club Nintendo coins were deleted from his 3DS.

 

[Marlowe89]

No its not that simple. How is not being able to lend or share or play on any device you want the software is built on not relevant toward ownership?

Because it isn't? That doesn't refer to ownership in any form, it refers to the portability benefits of one medium over the other.

I don't think you're reading my posts, because I wasn't defending Nintendo's account system at all.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Because it isn't? That doesn't refer to ownership in any form, it refers to the portability benefits of one medium over the other.

I don't think you're reading my posts, because I wasn't defending Nintendo's account system at all.

Ownership entails control over the product. What ownership do I have over the digital version if I can't do anything but play it on one device? I seem to have portability benefits on every other service, this isn't a physical medium exclusive feature.

What exactly are you trying to do then?

 

[Marlowe89]

Ownership entails control over the product.

Ownership entails possession over the product. Having an "inferior" version of something with less benefits than the other version of some game doesn't mean I don't own that specific version or product. Are you honestly disputing this? I have as much control over my digital version of Wind Waker HD as I do my actual console. It's just tied to the system, and for me, that's okay.

Why should I have to explain to you exactly what point I'm trying to make when I've already done so several times in this thread? If it falls on deaf ears, oh well.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Ownership entails possession over the product. Having an "inferior" version of something with less benefits than the other version of some game doesn't mean I don't own that specific version or product. Are you honestly disputing this? I have as much control over my digital version of Wind Waker HD as I do my actual console. It's just tied to the system, and for me, that's okay.

Why should I have to explain to you exactly what point I'm trying to make when I've already done so several times in this thread? If it falls on deaf ears, oh well.

If you owned the game, you could do what you like with it. Considering you can't, seems more like the Wii U you bought it on owns it more than you do.

Because I don't think you've done it very clearly. What point are you trying to make? That this is a good thing? That people should be okay with this just like you? That Nintendo shouldn't become like everyone else? That ownership on harddrive/flash memory is equivalent to physical discs?

 

[equippedwithtowel]

If you owned the game, you could do what you like with it. Considering you can't, seems more like the Wii U you bought it on owns it more than you do.

Because I don't think you've done it very clearly. What point are you trying to make? That this is a good thing? That people should be okay with this just like you? That Nintendo shouldn't become like everyone else? That ownership on harddrive/flash memory is equivalent to physical discs?

My car won't drive as fast a Ferrari, even though I've tried to make it.

Guess I don't own it.

 

[WrenchNinja]

My car won't drive as fast a Ferrari, even though I've tried to make it.

Guess I don't own it.

Not Driving fast as a ferrari = not lending, sharing and transfering and having no control over the stuff you "own"?

Because we shouldnt expect stuff physical discs are capable of even though you can do this on every other service?

Okay sure, whatever you say dude

 

[Darryl]

Ownership entails control over the product. What ownership do I have over the digital version if I can't do anything but play it on one device? I seem to have portability benefits on every other service, this isn't a physical medium exclusive feature.

What exactly are you trying to do then?

Well I personally feel like with my Windows laptop that I own both my laptop and my copy of Windows even though I can't separate the two. Lots of other people do as well. I think the concept of software being attached to hardware isn't as foreign to mass consumers as some people around here are putting off. It's kinda common.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Well I personally feel like with my Windows laptop that I own both my laptop and my copy of Windows even though I can't separate the two. Lots of other people do as well. I think the concept of software being attached to hardware isn't as foreign to mass consumers as some people around here are putting off. It's kinda common.

So you're equating an operating system, something that you kind of need for a computer to function in the multitude of ways that most people need and isn't generally sold separately from laptop cause laptops are generally preinstalled...with a video game, something well known to not be tied down to one hardware device.

Since youve kindly brought up Microsofts decision with OS licensing with one computer one os, I'm sure you're also aware of something else that's also common, people tend to switch iDevices pretty often, and download songs, apps and games pretty often. And their software, get this, isn't tied down to the hardware. But I'm sure they would be okay with it if it was, as you pointed out.

Sure, everyone who's okay with Windows licensing and ownership would be okay if everything they do on their computer is also tied down to to their computer. That would fly really well with people.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

Not Driving fast as a ferrari = not lending, sharing and transfering and having no control over the stuff you "own"?

Because we shouldnt expect stuff physical discs are capable of even though you can do this on every other service?

Okay sure, whatever you say dude

Do you own your laptop os?

What about the airbags in your car?

Ownership is not some magical state of perfect consumer rights.

 

[Darryl]

So you're equating an operating system, something that you kind of need for a computer to function in the multitude of ways that most people need and isn't generally sold separately from laptop cause laptops are generally preinstalled...with a video game, something well known to not be tied down to one hardware device.

Since youve kindly brought up Microsofts decision with OS licensing with one computer one os, I'm sure you're also aware of something else that's also common, people tend to switch iDevices pretty often, and download songs, apps and games pretty often. And their software, get this, isn't tied down to the hardware. But I'm sure they would be okay with it if it was, as you pointed out.

Sure, everyone who's okay with Windows licensing and ownership would be okay if everything they do on their computer is also tied down to to their computer. That would fly really well with people.

I just do not understand you. What exactly do you think a home console is? It's something that you buy and you keep until it is gone. Finished. That's why I was equating it with a windows laptop. Those two are much more conceptually similar. Most people dispose of their Windows license when they bail on the hardware. That goes to the next guy who you give the laptop to. They don't think about it because it is something that is useless without that hardware. Wii Us aren't iDevices at all and you do not switch every year.

 

[Goodlife]

Probably not related, but my COD Wii u disc has snapped in half (bloody kids).
Can I get Nintendo to replace it, does anyone know?

 

[WrenchNinja]

Do you own your laptop os?

What about the airbags in your car?

Ownership is not some magical state of perfect consumer rights.

Are laptop's OS and airbags lent and shared with friends and family without the laptop and car? No.

Are downloadable video games capable of being lent and shared without the consoles? Yes.

Are you going to continue making these ridiculous comparisons to justify Nintendo's crummy download management?

I just do not understand you. What exactly do you think a home console is? It's something that you buy and you keep until it is gone. Finished. That's why I was equating it with a windows laptop. Those two are much more conceptually similar. Most people dispose of their Windows license when they bail on the hardware. That goes to the next guy who you give the laptop to. They don't think about it because it is something that is useless without that hardware. Wii Us aren't iDevices at all and you do not switch every year.

They're only conceptually similar if you were comparing it to console operating systems and if you've only ever owned Nintendo platforms in the last seven years. You're comparing it to video games which is preposterous.

You don't need to switch every year to move around downloadable software. Do you seriously not know anyone who manages multiple iDevices? Parents with kids?

 

[Darryl]

They're only conceptually similar if you were comparing it to console operating systems and if you've only ever owned Nintendo platforms in the last seven years. You're comparing it to video games which is preposterous.

You don't need to switch every year to move around downloadable software. Do you seriously not know anyone who manages multiple iDevices? Parents with kids?

I think it's funny that you're gonna call me out for bad comparisons and line them up with awful "only owned nintendo" insults but then go on to compare Wii Us to smartphones. You are always so eager to make a point that you completely lose that self-reflection. Home consoles are meant to be lasting additions to your home entertainment systems. Smartphones aren't even close to that. Might as well start making comparisons to digital clocks.

 

[WrenchNinja]

I think it's funny that you're gonna call me out for bad comparisons and line them up with awful "only owned nintendo" insults but then go on to compare Wii Us to smartphones. You are always so eager to make a point that you completely lose that self-reflection. Home consoles are meant to be lasting additions to your home entertainment systems. Smartphones aren't even close to that. Might as well start making comparisons to digital clocks.

I'm comparing Wii Us to smartphones when it comes to software management cause you brought up the beyond silly point about how everyone is okay with software locking cause of Windows. I can just as easily compare it to PS3 and 360. Oh golly gee, I can move my downloadable games to my friends place. Wow, what a concept!

Maybe, I dunno, maybe act like you've used more than one hardware manufactures console?

Yeah, they are supposed to be lasting. So what? That means the software has to be locked to the hardware? That means when revisions come out you shouldn't upgrade?

 

[masud]

That's too bad for you but I like it. The issues people have with Nintendo's eshop don't concern me. I'm all digital on my Wii U.

 

[mugurumakensei]

It's an option. I doubt they held back the retail release for the eShop. It's likely the case they simply chose not to hold back the eShop release for retail.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

I'm comparing Wii Us to smartphones when it comes to software management cause you brought up the beyond silly point about how everyone is okay with software locking cause of Windows. I can just as easily compare it to PS3 and 360. Oh golly gee, I can move my downloadable games to my friends place. Wow, what a concept!

Yeah, they are supposed to be lasting. So what? That means the software has to be locked to the hardware? That means when revisions come out you shouldn't upgrade?

It's not a great product. It's a genuinely poor offering considering the market.

Nobody is arguing with that. What I am disputing is the notion that I need to give a shit about transferring to the point I refuse to buy digital games or respond to digital initiatives because I'm starting the slippery slope of losing ownership of my electronic toys.

 

[WrenchNinja]

It's not a great product. It's a genuinely poor offering considering the market.

Nobody is arguing with that. What I am disputing is the notion that I need to give a shit about transferring to the point I refuse to buy digital games or respond to digital initiatives because I'm starting the slippery slope of losing ownership of my electronic toys.

I dunno, going by this thread some people are arguing that.

If you don't give a shit, why are you even here to argue? You're not going to convince anyone who's against it to be okay with it, and no one is going to convince you to care.

 

[charlequin]

If you have a console with software ingrained in the system, you control it.

This is a totally unreasonable angle. Game discs are severable from one another, downloads on a single system are not. You can loan out five disc games to five people at once; you can play them on two different systems in two different rooms of your house. Nintendo's download system can't duplicate any of that functionality, nor does it even offer any additional benefits to counterbalance this drawback.

Also, can you please provide an actual example where Nintendo remotely controlled a consumer's entire console and deleted their software for "bad conduct"?

The case we saw reported recently had to do with the $30 SMT/FE credit.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

I dunno, going by this thread some people are arguing that.

If you don't give a shit, why are you even here to argue? You're not going to convince anyone who's against it to be okay with it, and no one is going to convince you to care.

Can't you extrapolate that to the whole debate...

This is a totally unreasonable angle. Game discs are severable from one another, downloads on a single system are not. You can loan out five disc games to five people at once; you can play them on two different systems in two different rooms of your house. Nintendo's download system can't duplicate any of that functionality, nor does it even offer any additional benefits to counterbalance this drawback.

Less sales tax, support devs directly, boot without disk and 10% cash back

That it literally all I need to balance it in my eyes. The lending is a non issue to me and I would imagine a number of other consumers

 

[equippedwithtowel]

edit:

DP, my bad

 

[Marlowe89]

This is a totally unreasonable angle. Game discs are severable from one another, downloads on a single system are not. You can loan out five disc games to five people at once; you can play them on two different systems in two different rooms of your house. Nintendo's download system can't duplicate any of that functionality, nor does it even offer any additional benefits to counterbalance this drawback..

And here you are, posting something that isn't even slightly reasonable by trying to equate irrelevant benefits with ownership. Amazing analysis.

I guess I don't own the games stored on my 5 arcade game Namco Plug & Play because I can't detach them from the unit. Can't loan any of them out without loaning out the whole unit, can't move a specific game to another unit. Obviously none of those games are actually mine simply because they have limited functionality and portability, obviously I'm being "totally unreasonable" because I'm not applying these extremely arbitrary rules to the definition of ownership like you and Crewnh just to support a logically flawed conclusion.

The case we saw reported recently had to do with the $30 SMT/FE credit.

Except that case didn't involve an "unrelated factor", and in fact it was clarified in that thread that the user outright broke the rules of the promotion. Not really an example of what you just described. I'll be frank here - I think you're either making shit up to suit your argument or having a kneejerk reaction to a thread you didn't bother to read.

I'm done. There is literally no point in discussing this subject with people who refuse to adopt a rational or unbiased approach to this. To argue that one version is inferior is one thing, but to tell digital consumers that they don't "own" their products by using very selective logic and not sticking to the objective meaning of the word is both rather condescending and just flat-out wrong.

 

[Vidiot]

Getting that Ganondorf figure makes up for it to me.

 

[PumpkinPie]

I can get a £50 eshop card for £40 via one of my mates and his staff discount. That would be ideal for Wind Waker.

Or you can get the physical version with a lovely box to look at for £36 from CDWOW. They need to sort the eshop pricing out ASAP.

 

[frankie_baby]

Or you can get the physical version with a lovely box to look at for £36 from CDWOW. They need to sort the eshop pricing out ASAP.

but he'll also get 8% back in premium point so that works out the same

while the eshop pricing seems bad its more due to some retailers (mainly online retailers) selling their copies at almost no margin