.jpg) |
| The PhobGCC, attempting to survive the inevitable discontinuation of Gamcube controllers |
Now, the problem is that there is a stampede of elephants in the room. One issue has to do with certain people simply not caring as of now. I say “now” because those who appear to not care about this appear to skew much younger. This makes some degree of sense, considering that I was like that when I was younger. I always wanted the newest thing. In my mind, new meant better; more advanced. Every time a new system was announced, I would devote myself to that new system fully, leaving my old consoles in the dust. I even sold some of them, which in retrospect, I deeply regret. But then I grew up, and there were times where I thought: “Man, I really want to go back and play Star Fox 64”. I didn’t have my Nintendo 64 anymore. I tried on the Wii virtual console, and while it wasn’t exactly perfect emulation, it did the job for me at the time. It brought me comfort to revisit something that brought me so many joyful memories. But also, with Virtual console, I discovered the YS and Shining Force series, and I went back to discover some of those old gems. Virtual console was not perfect, but it allowed me to expand my tastes, and revisit old favourites. As you grow older, you start to yearn for old, familiar experiences. It’s like seeing an old friend after being away for a long time. As such, while these younger consumers don’t care, they will in due time, and it will be too late.
 |
| The virtual console, initially a good idea for preservation, but instead of improving on it, was replaced with a predatory subscription model. |
Another elephant is business. Corporate bodies are not incentivized to keep games readily available, and when they do so, it is in a very predatory manner. A corporation’s mission is to maximize profit and growth. Preservation is not one of their priorities. As such, controlling your access to products they offer is their MO. With control, they can keep selling the same software over and over again as they let older versions of said software fall into disrepair, making them technically “available”, but more scarce and difficult to use. Unless you are skilled at hardware-modding for instances, most of your classic systems simply cannot even connect to newer TVs, and most of the “easier” solutions for those who are unwilling to spend a premium come with major setbacks such as massive input lag… and that’s if you can even track down the necessary hardware and software. While re-releases are a possibility, not all games get this chance, and when a game is remade, there are times when some prefer features in an older version. For instances in The Legend of Zelda, Ocarina of time, the Gamecube has a Master Quest disk, which gives you remixed dungeons. However, if you play the 3DS version, it isn’t the true Master Quest, and instead, flips the whole game and increases damage taken. Both games have the “same” mode, but that is in name only. Heck, if you look at Super Smash Bros. Melee, the standard is to use the NTSC version, due to PAL versions having seemingly small, but significant balance changes. Even version differences matter to people.
 |
| These are the differences for Fox and Falco between NTSC and PAL. There some all accross the cast. Many would heavily affect the meta. |
As such, just remaking a game isn’t enough to preserve gaming history. Ideally, having the ability to roll back to older builds, as is evidenced by World of Warcraft players, is a valuable feature. Furthermore, anyone who enjoys games like Silent Hills might not really enjoy the remakes that remove the fog and have major visual glitches. Now, I’m not arguing that companies should be compelled to support older systems until the end of time, but they ought to offer solutions for continued ownership. Some argue that a service-based catalogue is advantageous, but I find it a very lacking solution. On one hand, this requires DRM. If you do not connect online regularly, you will lose access. This also means that access to your games will inevitably wane as the online service is discontinued. All of your progress will be lost, and every month where you didn’t play games on the service will be wasted money. Subscription models only exist to nickle and dime you continuously. Yet when they do discontinue the service, you will lose said progress anyways, and if that’s important to you, this is essentially ransomware. You must keep paying, or you will lose access to your saves. This also gives all of the power to the corporations, which can decide to withhold access at any time. If you break the End–User agreement that they force you to accept after you already gave them your money and have no recourse to be compensated upon refusal, they can simply choose to take the games away. Furthermore, the service-only model simply removes your ability to straight-up buy games and own them into the future. So while I can technically play Donkey Kong Country 2 on SNES online, I have no option to buy and keep it on my Switch when the service ends. You simply do not have a means to keep these games. They will disappear, and you cannot do anything to prevent it.
One might say “Buy physical, you’ll have these games forever!” and fair enough, it “helps”… but it is not enough. I was recently made aware that Scott Pilgrim VS the World, handled by Limited Run Games requires you to have a Ubisoft Connect account to add Knives to the game. This may seem like a small hassle, but what would happen if Nintendo Online or Ubisoft Connect died? It means that any future physical copy owner would be unable to get Knives at all… and this is despite LRG priding themselves on fostering games preservation. The fact is… even physical games are not immune to loss of content. Many games like Xenoblade Chronicles X are “playable” without updates, but suffer without them. This game requires you to download 15 GB of data packs to reduce loading times and improve performance. Yes, you could play Xenoblade Chronicles X… but it would be a heavily-compromised version of it. Some games will not even load without a day 1 patch. Your game just becomes a glorified paper-weight. And that isn’t taking into account the many games that do not have a physical version, or rely on online components to even function. And even if the physical copies had all of the content, if you look at the state of the second-hand market, it’s hardly affordable anymore. It also doesn’t help that some companies like Nintendo feed into this by selling classic games at above MSRP.
 |
| An actual Nintendo listing above MSRP |
Then what are our alternatives? There is only one; emulation. Most people will support a developer when they feel like it’s a good deal. Buying from the official source means signaling your interest in the product and future similar products. It also is far more convenient than going around security features, and losing access to key services. Besides, Steam has proven that convenience will convince people to forego piracy. However, with their unwillingness to adopt a Steam model, where games continue to have an enduring library with actual ownership, people’s hands are being forced. Furthermore, modding is an alluring feature that allows everyday people to breathe new life into the games they already own, and can even result in brand new experiences altogether. However, video game providers often try to stifle such endeavors instead of encouraging them. This is akin to telling someone with a broken table that they are not allowed to use another piece of wood to repair one of its broken legs because it wasn’t their piece of wood. It’s like telling someone that they can’t renovate their home because the builder didn’t want you modify their work. If you pay for something, you logically ought to own it and do whatever you want with it. Money exchanged hands. You bought a good, it is yours. Most emulate out of necessity.
 |
| Project M stage list, a competitive game with even a stage-striking feature to aid tournaments go smoothly. |
But what about its legality? It’s entirely legal as seen in the videos below:
Indeed, the art of reverse-engineering is legal. It does mean that one simply cannot steal code, but recreating it… absolutely legal.
Examples of how reverse-engineering has occurred in the industry, even from companies that publicly shun it:
Granted, some countries like Japan do not make this distinction, but Japan law is not world law. Most western countries allow it, and most emulation is reverse-engineering. Granted, sharing roms is… more contestable, but many could argue that this may be the only way to experience media that has long been-forgotten. There is legally right, and morally right. The right things to do isn’t always what is the legal thing to do.
Companies like Disney have made copyright far too skewed towards IP owners, to the point of insanity. Mickey Mouse will enter public domain after 95 years in 2024, and that’s if Disney doesn’t push lawmakers to extend it:
While I am not against people being able to leverage their property, the current way that the world works is a problem. On one hand, 95 years to own anything is ridiculous. It stifles creativity and prevents people from building upon what was already created. I am fine with letting companies have exclusive rights to their products for about 5 years, which will be where the bulk of purchases tend to happen. After 5-7 years of initial-release (and even after patches), this specific version of the game doesn’t even have to fall into public domain, but it must at the very least allow for rom-sharing and emulation. Furthermore, any and all fan modifications and works that is not monetized must be protected, and any attempts to take people to court over this must be quashed before lawyers need to be involved.
Access to justice is a major issue when it comes to copyright law. Due to letting anyone sue anyone, large multi-billion dollars corporations can simply go after individual fans and smaller entities, and whether they are right or wrong, it does not matter. You will eventually capitulate, as you simply cannot compete with their litany of lawyers, and the accruing debt from ever-increasing court costs will get to you. As such, non-commercial use of IPs ought to simply be made legal without a shadow of a doubt.
Furthermore, I think that offering a rental service is fine, but all games in said service ought to be purchasable separately, and it should be enshrined in law that when a game is no-longer supported, a minimum effort should be made to make the features accessible. Whether it is providing means to download DLC for your physical games, keeping games available into the future digitally, or even enabling games to be connected online through peer to peer connections / custom servers, incentives must be put in place to punish the destruction of art. Even if it is "your art" it doesn't give you the right to take it away after taking money for it. Once money exchanges hands, it becomes a good.
These are extreme measures, but extreme situations demand extreme solutions. We have let things go out of hand, and even our current solutions let certain pieces of art through the cracks. If corporations refuse to do right by consumers, then consumers should demand their rights back and force them into law.
