What are your thoughts on emulation?

Discussion in 'Classic gaming' started by Sykikal, Feb 24, 2009.

  1. The gaming industry has been around for around three decades now, not even close to many original content creators within said industry from being dead for very long. So.
  2. Slate

    Slate Begin Your Adventure

    Really?? "He doesn't agree with my stance on copyright law so he must be in favor of SOPA AND PIPA!!"

    Never once did I mention that we should have additional laws to protect copyright holders. Everything I have argued involves current copyright law. I think our current copyright law is just fine the way it is. Downloading unauthorized ROMs off the internet already illegal.

    SOPA and PIPA have so many flaws I don't even feel the need to mention all of them. If I remember correctly SOPA made it a felony to stream copyrighted content which could have lets players or people who accidentally had music playing in the background during their stream felons. It also gave the government the power to censor entire websites just because certain specific parts of the website violated copyright, which could have resulted in certain sites eg. an early YouTube to be taken down. Is that your whole argument against me?? "Bet your in favor of SOPA!"

    I just glanced through the "PC Master Race" thread. Yes, you're so against dumb strawman arguments and you're always in favor of real substantive arguments.. Except when you want to use strawman arguments, that's different.

    I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I remember making your own backup copy is actually legal in USA. Though sharing with others obviously online isn't, and the copies have to be "linked" eg. you can sell or loan the original game with the copy, but not sell or loan them individually. It also doesn't mean you can download a version of the game online even if you already bought it. You have to dump the game yourself from your own authentic cartridge. It looks like the threads you linked to involve Europe's law, not USA.

    What I was getting at earlier in this thread is that the vast majority of people who use emulators don't actually do this and they use the "backup" copy rule as an excuse to promote the development of emulators so they can use them to play ROMs that they downloaded illegally ROMs from the internet.

    Then again in USA many modchips/flashcarts for example have been made illegal even though they have another legitimate use, for example to disable region locking, enable cheats, let you read ebooks or use other small applications, etc. I don't mean just illegal to just use the modchip to play "backup" ROMs, I mean just owning or installing these modchips is illegal. The DMCA basically decided that because the vast majority of people use it primarily for an illegal purpose, it was just easier to ban modchips as a whole and assume that if you have a modchip you're breaking copyright rather than investigate every single modchip installation. It is similar to why USA bans landmines and grenade launchers, even though there might be some legitimate people who want to buy them.

    Europe is just taking that logic a step farther than USA. It's a gray area in my opinion, and it sucks that legitimate people are caught up in it. Though I understand why Europe/USA have those laws that in some cases catch innocent individuals considering how difficult it is to enforce copyright law. Though I was arguing against abandonware and the notion that copyright should expire in four years if the owner is no longer selling the product at the time. Not the backup/archival law.
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2014
  3. Shadow

    Shadow ಠ_ಠ


    Depends on their age and their health technically, anyone can die at any age. My point is if it were to happen we have no laws in place right now to preserve some games, not saying they won't come along because I'm almost positive we'll get a law for it but right now we don't.

    ---------- Post added at 07:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:44 AM ----------

    But shouldn't the artist get money if someone has their music on in the background of a Youtube video without their permission? I mean they could just go around watching videos with music in the background without paying for it.
    Wouldn't people prefer to do that than just buy it


    Careful. I think we should stick to THIS thread though, no need to go digging up stuff elsewhere. Kinda like how politics try to dig up dirt to try and hurt the credibility of their competition.

    Actually you're right you're allowed to make backups for games, no issue there however you're never allowed to USE those backups. You'd need to mod your console in order for it to read a non-retail disc and that is illegal.

    Some games you just can't make copies of period Is it illegal to make backups of your owned playstation 2 games for your own use - in the US?

    If you do make a copy/backup of a game and you lose the original copy then you must destroy the backup so it's useless.
  4. This is assuming a video is monetised in the first place.

    And then, a lot of larger Youtubers are licensed to use the music they do.

    Not to mention that this example makes little to no correlation with assuming that someone who supports current copyright law is in agreement with SOPA.
  5. Lavitz

    Lavitz Inactive Staff Member

    WasNotWhyNot likes this.
  6. Shadow

    Shadow ಠ_ಠ

    Doesn't have to be monetised to violate copyright

    A lot of youtubers are covered by their network but I'm not talking about the larger ones.

    Of course it makes no correlation to SOPA, I wasn't referring to it. Just used it as an example that not every copyright claim is valid just because it's a "law"

    This is why YouTube is having the issues with videos being flagged for music and gameplay now that it wasn't before.

    ---------- Post added at 01:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 PM ----------

    Not sure what's funny. Are you assuming Nintendo will live on forever?
  7. Slate

    Slate Begin Your Adventure

    Maybe they should get money for it. That is a gray area. There's also fair use and it depends on how much they use.

    YouTube already has ways for artists to monetize their songs on other videos though, or take the videos down. Worse comes to worse, I suppose an artist could sue someone for using their music up on YouTube. There is no need to have a law that also makes the people who put the music in the background felons as well. The current copyright law is fine as is.

    The difference is I didn't assume that your argument was wrong just because I pointed out the fallacy or make it the sole point of my argument. I had an argument against your stance. Pointing out the fallacy was just a bonus.

    I didn't use pointing out a fallacy as a way to avoid criticism. Using this logic, every time someone pointed out in an argument that someone used an argument fallacy, that in itself would be a fallacy. Sure, I used information from a different thread to help point out how hypocritical it seemed of you to make an argument like that, but I didn't even really have to use that other thread. Even if we were just going by this thread alone, "Sounds like you'd be in favor of things like PIPA and SOPA" is still a lousy argument.

    I'm pretty sure you only have to destroy the backup copy if you transfer ownership of the original copy, such as when you sell it or give it away (or you can transfer the backup along with the copy). If you lose the original copy, or it gets damaged, or stolen, then you can use the backup/archival copy.
    17 USC 117, Limitation on exclusive rights: computer programs (BitLaw)

    Again, not a lawyer, but my take on the manual situation is that anyone can claim anything they want in the manuals, terms of service, End User License agreement, etc. The terms of service on the website could say "You agree not to talk about any subjects mentioned in this site in any outside venue, and not to quote anything from this site" but that doesn't mean it'd be taken seriously.

    A lot of companies have a general notion that when it comes to their EULAs that they should have the policy of just disallowing everything possibe, just so they always have more options when it comes to what they decide to fight in court later. Under a very strict interpretation of some EULAs just taking a photograph of a music CD and putting that online could be seen as a violation of EULAs.

    In the event Sony or some other company decided to fight someone who was just making their own backup/archive companies for personal use, I really doubt they'd win.

    I interpret the statement from copyright.gov as a way of saying that publishers don't have to specifically enable a way for you to create backup copies. For example, it could be like PlayStation 3 games or some other console where it is just very difficult from a technical standpoint to create a backup.

    Unless/until someone decides to challenge this in court (which I don't really foresee happening anytime) it is difficult to say what exactly is legal to do but considering it hasn't happened yet(at least not to my knowledge) it is as good as legal for all intents and purposes as far as I'm concerned.

    Like I said, it sucks for the few legitimate people who want to use modchips but can't. Though I think modchips/emulators are a gray area since the vast majority of people probably use it for an illegal purpose. It would be very difficult to enforce modchips on a case by case basis and ensure each person is using them legitimately. I'm unsure if the few exceptions like the museums are worth legalizing modchips for everyone. Whether or not I support them, emulators are already legal in the United States, and people can use those to play their "backup" games.
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2014
  8. If it has no correlation to SOPA, why even bring up SOPA in the first place? You're jumping topics over and over. All I said was that emulation is still piracy, and in a lot of cases, games are currently too young for there to by a huge laundry list of abandonware. Emulating Earthbound when you can still buy it on the Wii U's virtual shop is still denying Nintendo money for a product that you were so pressed to play, but didn't want to pay for.

    It is bad in the sense that you're basically complacent in harming the producer of content that you enjoy.

    Youtube is a grey area. Is the music being put in the background of a review? Or is it just being uploaded to listen to for free? Those kinds of things matter. This holds nothing to the subject the thread was founded on, though, so I don't know why are deciding to talk about it.
  9. Shadow

    Shadow ಠ_ಠ

    Well see then you have to wonder about places like gamestop. Devs don't see any of that money either. Granted the original copy was purchased yes but that used copy can make its rounds to a few dozen people who could have just bought the game themselves

    EDIT: I will add more to this post later, just wanted to say that right now
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2014
  10. How does that justify outright stealing a game?
  11. Shadow

    Shadow ಠ_ಠ

    Is it not stealing a game in a "legal" manner? If I go and get a used game have I given anything to the devs or publishers?
  12. I don't personally purchase used games, as I think Game Stop is a disgusting business. Obviously you haven't given anything to the devs or publishers, but you have aided the business that supplies your games.

    Your argument is straying far from proving anything on your end.
  13. Slate

    Slate Begin Your Adventure

    I don't know why you're still responding to Daisy about this used game trivia when you still have not gotten around to the much larger post I made. I already mostly addressed the reason why used games are okay last week. One reason why people tolerate paying $60 for a console game when it is available for a fraction of the price on PC is because it comes with the knowledge that they'll be able to sell it later. It's also one of the reasons why people pay more for physical versions of games like Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes than their digital counterpart. Part of what makes it worth more is the license to re-sell it.

    On top of that, the devil is in the delivery method. With a physical game, sure, you can transfer it around a lot, loan it to friends, but only one person can play it at a time (not counting multiplayer games obviously). If multiple people want to use it at the same time, they each have to buy their own copy. Just like how on Netflix they charge you more if you want to have up to four streams going simultaneously rather than two. That is way different from piracy where one person can buy one copy, and then that one copy can be used simultaneously by thousands, or even millions of people all around the world.
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2014
  14. Lavitz

    Lavitz Inactive Staff Member

  15. Shadow

    Shadow ಠ_ಠ

    Because it actually takes me time to respond to multiple people, format the post in a neat manner etc than just quickly replying to a smaller post.

    Also I'm sorry but I don't see how people buying a game for $60, selling it for $10 when I could have gotten the game for 75% off on steam and have the game forever no matter what.

    I'm not saying lending a game is piracy. It's strictly about if the devs get paid of not.

    New game = devs get paid
    Used game = devs get paid once and the copy can circulate the used game shops for years
    Pirated game = devs getting paid once, thousands are able to play it and at least 25% or more of those people will end up buying a legit copy, telling their friends and supporting the dev

    Game devs hate places like Gamestop more than piracy.

    Some examples of saving money as opposed to the little bit you'd sell a used physical copy for, that's hoping that the copy you're selling is in near mint condition because if it's scratched there goes your resell value down the drain unless you can catch a sucker

    Oh and I don't know why but the PlayStation 3 digital code for Batman AO was actually $10 more than the physical copy and even the used copy of Thief was more than Steam and I'm still able to share my games with friends.



    As an old console gamer, that pretty much hit the nail on the head, turned in so many of my old games to try and scrape money to get a new, used game and only got change in store credit and that was with whatever little card/deal/VIP thing they had going on. On top of this right now Walmart is now supporting used game and hardware trade-ins

    I'm not entirely saying piracy is better than used games (though it is how I feel most of the time) but that neither is very beneficial to the devs/publishers in the end. Just kinda tired of hearing all this piracy bashing and yet you can turn around and sell/buy used games without remorse.

    Already happening and people are still buying retro games from PSN, XBL, GOG, Steam, etc

    On a side note this is pretty funny, a commercial emulator for the PS1 Bleem!
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2014
  16. Slate

    Slate Begin Your Adventure

    How much time do you need? Are you very busy with something else? I'd have thought a week would have been enough.

    Where did you come up with $10? Even places that have notably bad trade in values like GameStop take the games back for 40%-60% of new retail value. Though you can probably do better by selling to an individual. People might not even be looking to make a profit, they could just be planning on giving the game away. The ability to transfer their license later has a value.

    Where did you come up with the 25% figure? I don't even think it is possible to come up with an exact figure for something like piracy because there's no way to know exactly how many people pirated the game. There's also no way to know how many of the people who buy a game previously pirated it.

    Also, who's to say people who buy a used copy are not equally likely to tell their friends to support the developer? Devs getting paid once per dozen users or so is better than the devs getting paid once per several thousand users, although I think one used game being circulated among more than five or six different owners would be really rare.

    I read through the article twice. Yes, it says developers don't like used games but I don't see anywhere in the article where it says developers hate it more than piracy. I don't think the article even mentions piracy.

    I don't know why either. It could be that the retailer is selling under retail price to get more sales, or they're running out of room and want to make room for new games so they are taking a loss. I'm just speculating, hard to say for certain. Just in general I see a better deal for digital games than physical games, of course there will always be exceptions. The steam images you link to just prove that point if anything. I think everyone agrees that steam, in general has cheaper deals than console games for the same games. No one is disputing that.

    Lets say people lost interest in used games. They only wanted to pay around $30 for them instead of $50. That would drastically decrease the market, and thus trade in price of used games. If instead of getting $35 back for their new game they could only trade it in for $20. If that happened odds are there would be less people willing to shell out $60 for a new game. Buying a used game also reduces the amount of used game copies in circulation. Buying used games ultimately helps the developer, just not as much or as directly as buying a new game does.

    I didn't say there would be absolutely no people buying retro games because of piracy, just that the demand would go down. Of course, nobody can measure exactly how far down it has gone because not even the people who pirate the games likely know if they would have bought the games had the option to pirate not been available.
  17. Sykikal

    Sykikal Very mentally stable admin Staff Member

    Interesting stuff, I couldn't find the text for Bleem anywhere other than that image on the back.

    I took the time to type it out.


    If you already own a Playstation, there's always somebody trying to sell you some gadget to "enhance your gaming experience."
    Yeah, right. Why "enhance" your hardware when all you really care about are the GAMES?
    You want enhancement? How about the 3X-higher resolution, advanced filtering, for realistic fire and effects, and lightning-fast load times?
    With your 3D-accelerated PC and bleem, you'll get next-gen graphics from the games you already own - and get them NOW, not next year.

    Even if you're a die-hard PC-fan, every now and then you'll see a TV ad for a PlayStation game, and want it... but you don't want to give up the PC-quality graphics you're used to, and you're not about to go out and buy a console. So you hope, "Maybe they'll make it for the PC." Why wait? With bleem, you can play hundreds of the games you've lusted after - most of which have NEVER been released for the PC. And with a good 3D card, you'll get high resolutions and special effects that'll make "console snobs" green with envy.

    With bleem!, you can finally rent games to play on your PC before you waste your hard-earned cash on another "so-so" title.

    Now you can play your favorite games any-where there's a PC - even on a laptop! And if the PC you're on doesn't have a good 3D card, you can still play at standard PSX resolutions with bleem!'s own software-based renderer.
    So forget about fighting over the PlayStation and stop waiting for the high-quality games and graphics you can have TODAY. Get bleem!

    Reviews on the right column


    "Games will look heaps better on your PC than they ever did on your TV.

    "TOTAL SCORE: 9 bleem!'s oversimplified interface is perfect."

    "... almost like getting a sneak peek at at the PlayStation 2" (grammatical error is on the box, I'm just quoting it)

    "...load times are almost nonexistance... takes the PlayStation to a whole new level"

    "8 out of 10. It's extremely easy to use ... works like a charm."

    "... I will never play Gran Turismo on the PSX again... it would be too much of a step backwards."

    Text on the bottom (hard to read)

    TYPICAL PLAYSTATION GRAPHICS: This image represents a game screen at the ???x??? resolution. The textures video used on the TV blurs edges a bit so the "blockiness" might not be as aggressive, especially on small TVs.

    ENHANCED BLEEM! GRAPHICS: This is what the games can look like with bleem! resolution at 1157x570 so your PC bleem! uses your 3D card to get MUCH higher resolutions with smoother effects and textures.

    The rest of this I'm copying and pasting from their archived bleem! store.

    From their manual

    I would read manuals if they were all this entertaining.
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2014
  18. So as long as people are buying the games you are pirating, it is okay to pirate it. That is what I am taking from this statement.
  19. Shadow

    Shadow ಠ_ಠ


    Slate said

    However that is already happening, been happening since the beginning of computer games and there is still much demand for the retro games on a console so there really is no point in his statement. His was an if statement but didn't make much sense since it's already happening and there is still a high enough demand for them on a console. Like most people say, they prefer to play with a controller and console.

    I'm not going to get into the fact the hardware it's played on doesn't matter and you can use any controller on a PC. That's not the point.

    I was just saying that even when people pirate, money is still made for the dev in the process regardless at some point.
  20. Lmfao that still doesn't justify anything.

Share This Page