NINTENDO NEWS THREAD

Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

Rip Intellectuals of Miiverse
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

infinite8 said:
It is nice to give the Wii U an update for patch fixes, but the bad news is

There are no patch "fixes" at all. All they did was remove a browser exploit used to load mods. This is not a "nice" thing to do.
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

i dont see what's wrong or unexpected about a developer patching out ways to hack their system
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

Because who benefits from it, exactly? Maybe to curb piracy? Even though there are plenty of other ways to play pirated games?
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

Baby Luigi said:
Because who benefits from it, exactly

nintendo, that's why they did it.

even if it's not the only way to pirate shit, do you just expect them to sit around and do nothing?
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

Kumiko Oumae said:
do you just expect them to sit around and do nothing?

Yes, because it's the fucking Wii U.
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

believe it or not the wii u is still a system that's actively receiving new games, is being marketed in stores (at least over here), and has running online services.
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

Yeah, but Wii U production has pretty much been stopped and Nintendo themselves has stopped supporting it a long time ago, with no new Nintendo-published games coming out for it. The upcoming games I've seen are thinly stranded and few. The Switch came out, yes, but no console's death has been immediate as soon as the new system comes out, and with the Switch around, there's little reason to continue supporting it in Nintendo's perspective.

Nintendo pretty much stopped caring about that system mid-way through its life cycle anyway. And with this recent update doesn't benefit the regular customer in the slightest, not even Nintendo themselves would arguably benefit from it in any meaningful way, I can describe it as ultimately superficial.
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

i mean if it was that superficial they wouldnt have done it lol. I'm pretty sure Nintendo has enough strategists to know what to spend their development time on.
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

No, they had done superficial updates in the past, the most notable being Wii update 4.2, which was their most pathetic attempt at blocking out Homebrew that not only hackers found an exploit soon after, but they bricked unmodded consoles as well. They really don't know what they're doing, and you're giving them way too much credit.

And the better strategy is? Leaving the scene alone. Considering that any attempt to stifle attempts consists of more exploits to be found. Hell, with this system update, all they did was got rid of loadiine. Users can opt out of updates with a custom DNS, easily, while other exploits, including permanent Homebrew applications like Haxchi are completely unaffected.

Along with a blight of other problems, Nintendo strategists usually don't know what they're doing most of the time, especially with modding, custom fangames, etc are involved.

I also love that your only argument is that "Nintendo knows what they're doing, so it's not superficial" without explaining what exactly is not superficial about their action. Surely if it wasn't superficial, we would have seen the benefits by now.
 
Re: NINTENDO NEWS THREAD (E3 Presentation Supposedly 30 Minutes Long)

okay now you're just being unreasonable. There's been a history of this on the 3ds and they have been partly successful at locking out common types of flashcarts at the time they started going more strongly against piracy (iwata has been quoted on this one time, i have other things to do rn so im not digging it up).

I'm not giving them way too much credit, I'm just saying this is the business decisions of a let's say pretty big company and I don't think either of us are knowledgeable enough about what is going on behind the scenes there to judge how superficial or unecessary of a move this was.

I mean I'm not against hacking. I'm not saying this is a thing they absolutely should've done. But from a publisher point of view, I think this makes a lot of sense, and you can hardly disagree with that.