As we established, this already happened with SX OS and Nintendo banned those games. You said there was an impact, however it was small. I saw no evidence of such an impact. There were no news articles discussing the outcome of these bans nor any effect on Nintendo's sales. If there was an impact, then you have to provide evidence of such an impact.
People complaining about it happening is evidence. The fact that it was
noticed is evidence. There is no simple equation that translates it from second-hand buyer reluctance to Nintendo hardware valuation, but it shouldn't be a mystery that the variable does have weight. It exists! Writing it off because you don't how to math it is reckless, and not something a company could simply do without acknowledging the risk.
No, you said it was speculation as a countargument rather than taking apart the claim itself. You dismissed it before entertaining the possibility that it may be true. Meanwhile you made entirely unbased speculative statements that you want me to entertain? That is where the hypocrisy lies.
The claim that it is speculation is admission that it can be true and it can be false. It's not a fact, which you claimed is the only thing you speak.
Also its not entirely speculation as there is objective evidence that a successor is already being developed.
Not "entirely". So you are confident--doesn't change the point.
Just try using your brain for one second. This has already come to pass once so hackers, who will most likely be using Mig Switch
I don't know if that's true. I don't plan on buying a Mig
because I know how to do CFW.
But even then, since apparently the dumper is being sold separately
That's a new development which changes my prediction, btw.
Not to mention, you have to go to the effort to purchase and resell the games which already isn't easy but doing it for multiple games is even harder.
No. You just have to work at gamestop.
Lastly, as I stated earlier, Mig Switch is inferior to SX OS in its heyday.
Okay, that is new information compared to what you said before. It's still an opinion, not an objective fact, but at least we have some more clarity.
Even if that were to happen, there is no proof to suggest there would be an impact if any.
Yes, there is. You just don't like the fact that we cannot measure the impact. We can objectively know that there is an impact. Even if one person becomes more reluctant to buy a second-hand game, that's impact. You shouldn't just ignore it because you don't know how to measure it. You should try to figure out how to measure it.
You suggest "negative public opinion" as a potential fallout but one quick Google search will show you that Nintendo already has plenty of negative public opinion if they are regularly associated with the words anti-consumer.
Here's the thing, you seem to be operating under the belief that because Nintendo has created bad press, that they
want to create bad press. It's called collateral damage, and it's not as simple as "yes or no". They have to evaluate variables, predict the outcomes, and try to determine if the potential outcome is worthwhile.
If anything at all, people might just be less likely to buy games with online play secondhand but non-online games will be fine. Or they will do the smart thing and do their research before buying a game from a stranger.
Stranger, gamestop, or even gamefly is on the menu here.
No it just means you cannot deny my facts as facts and have no arguments on them being my "opinions".
The nuance is that numbers and facts don't speak a message or a narrative. You mix up your opinions with the facts that you are using and believe that they are one in the same, by association?
To Nintendo? Otherwise what else would have stopped them from banning those games when they were being abused by SX OS? If Nintendo sees evidence that the games have been tampered, then its within their authority to step in just like they would a console no matter whose hands its in.
It's their "authority" to ban certs even if they aren't being cloned. Do you know the fine print that says it's okay? That poses an anti-consumer risk, don't you think? Cloning games is not tampering with them. It's reading them.
Actually there has during the 3DS days back when, funnily enough, another flashcard was highly prevalent called the Gateway. It too, like the Mig Switch, allowed users to go online with cartridges that could be dumped. What a surprise that Nintendo banned headers during the 3DS days as well if more than one was caught going online.
I don't know about that. It must have been surprising to those who experienced it. My experience was Nintendo banning "LocalFriendCodeSeedB", but it seems they later gave up.
I am. You aren't paying attention is the real problem here.
I don't believe you. Is that an unverifiable fact you are presenting?
Then don't talk about the potential of the future and I won't. But you haven't pointed out a single contradiction. On the other hand, I've pointed out plenty of yours.
I've pointed out few contradictions that you should be concerned with if you are interested in logical consistency. Mainly that you think that you aren't saying opinions, but only facts. Another notable situation is when you said that I have no evidence that Nintendo isn't prioritizing cert bans, that system bans were more prevalent, and then you proved me right. Your reaction to me saying so was a complete pivot that couldn't acknowledge actual facts. Yet, another, is the idea that you think that Nintendo wants to suicide itself because they've had bad press.
I don't recall you pointing out my alleged contradictions. Please refresh me.
I'm totally okay with the fact that Nintendo has banned certs in the past. I just can't see it being a sustainable method when it comes to stopping MIG.
Source
