[HN Gopher] Valve's latest Steam Deck trailer briefly plugs a Ni... ___________________________________________________________________ Valve's latest Steam Deck trailer briefly plugs a Nintendo Switch emulator Author : angry_cactus Score : 96 points Date : 2022-10-08 18:58 UTC (4 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.gamedeveloper.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.gamedeveloper.com) | IceWreck wrote: | While Valve shouldn't have done this, Yuzu (and emulation) is | completely legal. Nintendo cant do anything unless they want to | go hard against emulation itself which brings us to the same are | APIs copyrightable debate. | Madmallard wrote: | Emulation has been deemed legal? Since when? You're not paying | for the system or the games and playing them freely? | monocasa wrote: | Since Sony vs. Bleem. Bleem even won a protective order | against Sony's public statements. | ElCheapo wrote: | what has emulation got to do with not paying for the games? | Madmallard wrote: | Oh right. Legal distinction | matsemann wrote: | Why would Valve advertise you could emulate if not for | pirating games? | some-human wrote: | To play the wide range of homebrew switch software | created by the vast homebrew community the switch has, of | course. | | https://switchbrew.org/wiki/Homebrew_Applications | matsemann wrote: | Yeah, no one _really_ believes that. | yjftsjthsd-h wrote: | In the same way that nobody torrents linux isos? Just | because it's less popular than other uses doesn't mean it | doesn't happen. | matsemann wrote: | No, in the way that advertising that your product can | play a few homebrew games when it already can play | thousands of Steam games makes no sense. It's obviously | to hint at playing Nintendo titles. | cauefcr wrote: | Why does that matter? It's like torrents and Linux | distributions, perfectly legal, it's not the software | developers intent that makes the file sharing be legal or | not, it's the users usage of such software. | Gigachad wrote: | Just like no one believes stores selling "decorative | glass vases" that look like bongs. But it doesn't matter, | because it's still legal itself. | squeaky-clean wrote: | So you don't have to travel with both your Switch and | your Steamdeck. So you can play games at higher | resolution and fps than the Switch. So people can make | playthough and tips/tricks videos of Switch games without | needing to buy a capture card. So you can use game mods | without jailbreaking your switch. | atomicnumber3 wrote: | It's also worth noting that afaik dumping carts you own | and playing them on an emulator is fine too. As long as | you don't redistribute them. | Dylan16807 wrote: | 1. Then you don't have to carry a steam deck _and_ a | switch. | | 2. This way you can buy physical copies of games, keeping | full control and the ability to resell them, while also | carrying your current game library on an SD card. | | Edit: I forgot modding! That's a huge use of emulation. | amelius wrote: | At least since Wine. | | https://www.winehq.org/ | extragood wrote: | Emulation of a device is totally legal. | | For instance, I run qemu all the time to emulate various | android devices. | | I suspect that you're thinking specifically of game emulation | though. | | Running software on an emulated device is fine legally as | long as it doesn't violate copyright law. | | For instance, you can legally backup software that you own in | the US [1] - that extends to games as well - and because | emulators themselves are legal (although you may also need to | backup the device's BIOS), you can have a completely | legitimate archive of copyrighted games to run via an | emulator. | | That said, it's unlikely that most people archive software | themselves, and it is _not_ legal to distribute backups in | the US, even if both parties have legitimately acquired | copies of the source material. | | [1] https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html | Fargren wrote: | Emulation is legal. Freely sharing roms of copyrighted | content isn't. You can dump a cartridge you own and emulate | it on a device you own. | Madmallard wrote: | It's weird because the system costs money too | stoplying1 wrote: | Wait, why should Valve not have done this? I know Nintendo | likes to bully smaller folks but it's not like Valve is small | or that they rely on keeping good terms with Nintendo, right? | | Edit: I guess I didn't realize Portal was on Switch. | saagarjha wrote: | Because it ruins their relationship with Nintendo. | daniel-cussen wrote: | hyperhopper wrote: | Ah yes, everybody should just bow down to bullies that | abuse the legal system. | saagarjha wrote: | Whether something is "morally correct" does not make it | prudent to do, unfortunately. | TaylorAlexander wrote: | Sometimes when you have a sensitive relationship, it can | be helpful to support the thing that makes the other | company uncomfortable without openly advertising it. | smegger001 wrote: | what relationship? Valve is pretty much PC only other | than some ports of old source engine games. Nintendo is | first party console and handheld with couple of | iOS/android apps. their isn't really any relationship to | be sensitive. | gs17 wrote: | Do they have that much of one? I think they've had one | Switch title (the Portal collection) and Nintendo doesn't | really have anything on Steam as far as I know. | PuppyTailWags wrote: | I would guess its much more subtle than this. Consider | potentially nintendo refusing to port games that were on | steam, or demanding more money/control over games that | have overlap with steam. | scheeseman486 wrote: | Punishing publishers for choosing to release on a | competitors platform they don't like would hurt those | publishers more than Valve. Nintendo's relationship with | third parties is already often strained, doing anything | like you suggest would in particular cause indies, which | Switch relies on to fill the gaps between Nintendo | releases, to flee the platform. | uni_rule wrote: | Even then the relationship more Valve repo acces and | licencing > Nvidia's First Party Studio > Nintendo. And | obviously Nividia has a good relationship with Nintendo | because of the Tegra X1 powering the switch so it's not a | situation of Valve communicating with Nintendo as much as | it's Valve letting Nvidia make ports out of their back | catalog by occasionally going "I will allow it" whenever | Nvidia Lightspeed Studios asks politely enough. | ouid wrote: | Why would they need one? Just use an emulator | aeturnum wrote: | It seems like Valve has re-uploaded without the emulator, | but I think there's a case to be made that this sets | expectations for Valve and Nintendo in an important way. | | Valve is not selling a walled garden product and if you are | expecting them to administer the steam deck like one you | will be disappointed. If that's not for you then you should | not go into business with Valve - it would be painful for | both parties. | squeaky-clean wrote: | What relationship with Nintendo? Nintendo has no games | listed on Steam, and the only Valve game on any Nintendo | platform is the recent Portal port. | devwastaken wrote: | The more emulation becomes mainstream the more money Nintendo | will invest to illegalize it. You cannot legally get roms of | commercial games, even if you own the game. Breaking of DRM | is automatically copyright infringement according to the | DMCA. | wildzzz wrote: | If there is a way to make a backup of a game you own while | still preserving whatever DRM exists, it would be legal. | Like if you had some device that could dump the contents of | the Switch cartridge without cracking any DRM, then your | backups would be legal. The hard part is that "cracking | DRM" could mean anything since it could be construed that | any sort of electronic signals between your backup device | and the cart that emulates a retail Switch is bypassing | DRM. Ripping a CD or making a completely intact copy of | retail software are probably the only legitimate backups | you can make without technically breaking the law. Really | the only "legal" thing you could do with Yuzu is to play | homebrew. It would be like owning a really fancy bong in a | country where weed is illegal, surely you could put legal | tobacco in it but it really works a lot better with weed. | scheeseman486 wrote: | This is a very hazy area, made more hazy by the main method | of getting games off of a Switch being a dev mode | implemented by the hardware designers at Nintendo/Nvidia | that is enabled by bridging two pins on the JoyCon | connector which completely bypasses the DRM. Is using | hardware features as designed "breaking" DRM? Hard to make | that argument when they left the door wide open, unlocked | and trivial to use. | zerocrates wrote: | The DMCA's language is something like "circumventing an | effective technological restriction," but I don't think | "effective" really gets much juice. Like, despite the | total brokenness of DVD CSS by now, it's still going to | be "effective." On the other hand "circumvention" sweeps | up conduct that just bypasses DRM rather than actually | breaking it. | | Edit: for accuracy, it's "circumvent a technological | measure that effectively controls access" to a | copyrighted work. | danhor wrote: | There's also an exploit in the USB stack of the boot ROM | involved, so it's not quite "using it as intended". I'd | argue ntrboot on 3DS is much closer to what you're | suggesting, using a built-in repair access mechanism | dependent on long(er) broken crypto. | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: | I will admit that I am mildly concerned with this myself. I | dislike that everywhere now there are youtube videos | showing off how you can make play Switch games, but on | Deck. We are effectively forcing Nintendo's hands. While it | was a niche thing, they mostly didn't have to care and now | they might have to.. | | Things MAY work out to the benefit of regular users ( | though often they work out to the benefit of those with | best lawyers ). All I am saying is, if push comes to shove, | as much as I would like to believe Gabe will actually fight | this should Nintendo go after them somehow ( and I will | actually spend money on Steam to fund it if needed ), it | would have been so much better if it stayed a hobbyist | thing. | | Edit: And for the record. I love my Deck. I love that in | the sea of closed off crap, Steam made it all this magic | come together. | p1necone wrote: | Emulation hasn't been a niche thing since the 90s, | emulating older systems has always been wildly popular. | | Emulating the Switch specifically is maybe a niche thing | because the emulators are relatively new, the system is | still sold and you can easily buy the games. | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: | Yes, but in the 90s there were no esports, gaming wasn't | a billion dollar industry ( with advertising[1] to | support that ). | | <<Emulation hasn't been a niche thing since the 90s, | emulating older systems has always been wildly popular. | | Compared to today it was popular amongst some | enthusiasts, who already self-selected from perceived | social outcasts. Gaming has only recently become more | mainstream, socially acceptable AND ridiculously | profitable. | | The target is that much bigger. I stand by my 'it used to | be a niche', because even being interested in computers | was not a mainstream interest. | | [1]https://www.gameskinny.com/ggtms/10-best-video-game- | commerci... | | edit: | | Seems I was off with a billion number, but it is still | nowhere near 2017's 100b global video game industry | estimate. | | [2]https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Video_game_industry | wudangmonk wrote: | They can invest in it but they cannot predict the outcome. | I'd like to see DMCA go up against property rights. | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: | It is a big gamble. I mean, if any company can pull it | off now, it is Steam. It has money, position and fairly | vocal customer base, but are you sure this would be | enough to stave off a relentless swarm of lobbyists | descending upon WH? | Gigachad wrote: | The DMCA does not exist in all countries. It's perfectly | legal to break DRM in many places. | [deleted] | manojlds wrote: | Because Valve wouldn't want you to emulate Steam games as | well (which people do, for online stuff). Valve and Nintendo | are on the same side of this. | Dylan16807 wrote: | I'm confused. Please define "emulate Steam games". | jtvjan wrote: | There are replacements for steamapi.dll that let you play | games without needing to have Steam open (e.g. | "Goldberg"). These are sometimes called 'Steam | Emulators'. | squeaky-clean wrote: | Given how Proton works, one could even make the argument | that the SteamDeck's primary function is to emulate steam | games. | lights0123 wrote: | _Pirating_ games. Valve doesn 't care if you play games you | buy not on their hardware (being their original business), | while Nintendo doesn't want you playing Switch games on a | computer even if you bought the game. | oneoff786 wrote: | Can you play the same game on two devices from the same | steam account without hiding offline? | ThrowawayTestr wrote: | At the same time? Not that I know of. But then doing so | would be a violation of the game licence. | dleslie wrote: | Steam's presence API only supports one playing device at | a time. It wouldn't be able to understand multiple active | playing games on one account. | squeaky-clean wrote: | So it claims, but many games let you click X on that | dialog and play other games. I have an old laptop which | is basically a dedicated Civ 6 machine. I can still play | any other steam game on my desktop while the laptop has | Civ open. | Gigachad wrote: | Steam doesn't enforce DRM. You can usually go to the game | files and just click the launcher from the file manager | and the game will run without steam getting involved. | Sure its not the most officially supported, but they | hardly prevent you from doing it. | ErneX wrote: | I think it's pretty obvious most people using Switch | emulators are getting the games on the net for free. So it's | awkward to show that on promotional material of another | handheld device. | redox99 wrote: | Only because it's _very_ hard to pay for switch ROMs. As | gaben himself said, "Piracy is almost always a service | problem and not a pricing problem". | | If getting switch ROMs were as easy as buying any other | game on Steam, most people would probably pay, the same way | most people already pay instead of pirating PC games. | bakugo wrote: | >I think it's pretty obvious most people using Switch | emulators are getting the games on the net for free. | | Have people already forgotten what Gabe himself said all | those years ago? Piracy is a service problem, Nintendo does | not provide any way to obtain these games legally for | emulation (and often does not provide any way at all of | accessing their games from previous platforms), so of | course people pirate them. I thankfully still have a fully | working launch year Switch so I can do whatever I want but | it's not particularly convenient and most people don't have | this privilege at all. | Gigachad wrote: | Tbh Nintendo does make it particularly hard to pay and | emulate. To legally emulate switch games you have to buy | and then dump them, but if you hack your switch to dump | them, you get banned from the estore so you can no longer | buy them. | | Personally I'd be happy to pay money and get access to the | game ROMs to run on an emulator because I find it more | convenient to play them in an emulator than to switch a | bunch of cables to put the switch on my monitor. | bakugo wrote: | >but if you hack your switch to dump them, you get banned | from the estore so you can no longer buy them. | | You actually don't, and I have to give credit to nintendo | for this one, there are only a few ways you can get | banned (the main one being installing pirated games, the | switch has telemetry that sends back data about the | signatures of the games you have installed) but just | running simple homebrew isn't one of them, you can load | up custom firmware and run a game dumper without getting | banned just fine. You can even play online with it active | (I have done it). | | The bigger problem is that only very old models of the | console can be hacked without having to solder a modchip | so this is completely inaccessible to most switch owners. | fit2rule wrote: | bravetraveler wrote: | I don't really get the buzz, it's Linux and has flatpak. You want | to emulate it? Install it | [deleted] | knaik94 wrote: | While this is legal, Nintendo is very vocally anti-emulation. | Nintendo and Denuvo announced anti-emulation measures for switch | games in August 2022. There's a big difference between support | and marketing support. Nintendo doesn't care what other companies | do internally, but cares a lot about what is shown publicly. I | remember when Nintendo took down a bunch of youtube videos | showing how to jailbreak the original switch. Nintendo isn't | coming to PC anytime soon though, so I can't imagine this having | any major impact, but it is bad manners. Video and thumbnail | edited out Yuzu. | confident_inept wrote: | Emulation aside, the Steam Deck has been compared to the Switch | in some capacity or another in almost every single review I have | ever seen of it. While I wouldn't think it's had any negative | impact on Switch sales, it's a absolute fact that the Deck can | emulate a multitude of games at performance parity or _better_ | than the Switch itself. The deck is constantly lauded as an | emulation powerhouse and the Switch appears frequently in the | discourse. | | Emulation legality aside, Nintendo would certainly be the company | I would expect to pressure Valve for a case against enabling and | abetting piracy given their history of legally attacking | perceived "competition". | lousken wrote: | And what's the problem exactly? It's just emulation - if anything | should cause a stir, it should be nintendo for their anti- | consumer behaviour | numpad0 wrote: | That only worked because Nintendo HQ didn't have good | visibility of markets outside ground transportation ranges from | it. | hyperhopper wrote: | Exactly. Whats the worst that can happen to valve? | | Nintendo: "oh no, how dare you show that your product can do | something that's perfectly legal and a very common use" | mgraczyk wrote: | "Portal 3 will not be available on Switch" | hyperhopper wrote: | It's okay it has a 3 in the name, it won't be on steam | either | scheeseman486 wrote: | That sucks for Nintendo more than Valve. Portal 1 & 2 | weren't even a Valve push, Nvidia Lightspeed was the lead. | edmcnulty101 wrote: | Side note, is anyone using one of these as a daily driver | computer for development? | | The specs look decent enough and the price is cheaper than a | laptop. | dewey wrote: | Cheaper than a laptop? You could get a cheaper laptop with | better or equal specs if you buy used or get something from a | previous year. A lot less hassle than trying to get something | on custom hardware to run with no real upside. | ThatMedicIsASpy wrote: | Used T480(s) T490(s) is starting at 400-500EUR | yjftsjthsd-h wrote: | Is it cheaper than a laptop? For $400 you can get a pretty good | chromebook that has a full size screen and keyboard. | | That said, it would probably work so long as you connected an | external keyboard. | TillE wrote: | There aren't a lot of serious use cases, but if you're a casual | / indie game developer, it's great as sort of a complete Linux | dev kit that's also a fun toy. | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: | Not exactly, but I ssh'ed into my mine, because my sausage | fingers couldn't handle messing around with correcting | corrupted emudeck profile. It is basically a PC. It ran Kingdom | Come and CP77 well with heatwave being the only apparent | notable side effect. I am sure people will soon be posting all | sorts of weird deck setups:> | jeroenhd wrote: | The stock OS comes with some weird stuff preconfigured (no | encryption, weird partition layout, etc.) so it depends on how | you use it. For example, you'll need to mount the system | partition r/w for things like kernel updates and I wouldn't | dare enable AUR on an OS explicitly designed to be updated | through a third party update system without having a recovery | disk handy at all times. This limitation has some impact (i.e. | installing DisplayLink drivers can be a challenge) but it's | still Arch but fancy. | | Hook it up to a dock and it should work and perform like a | laptop. With a decent CPU, quick SSD and 16GB of RAM you should | be able to do certain types of dev work quite comfortably if | you hook up a display or two, a mouse and a keyboard. | | The thing just runs Flatpak so stuff like VS Code and Jetbrains | products will run perfectly fine. | jitl wrote: | Oof, the linked trailer on YouTube shows "This video is private" | for me. | priner2 wrote: | Looks like they reuploaded it, with Yuzu cut out. (around 1:40 | in the video) | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRnZrSBK3R4 | RajT88 wrote: | Oddly enough, the light that Humble Bundles have shone into | gaming revenue cycles has made me question our copyright system | as a whole. | | Stay with me. | | In Europe during the time of Mozart, composers were incentivized | to be prolific by only getting royalties off the first public | performance of their works. Now that is not fair today because of | course we can losslessy reproduce such things infinitely. | | However, Humble Bundles (and really, steam sales and other | similar discounts and give-aways) work because the vast majority | of the money a game is ever likely to make is early in the | revenue cycle. Not 20 or 10 or even 5 years later. | | We don't know the revenue Nintendo derives from virtual console | sales, but you can be assured that virtually none of it is making | it to the creators which is who copyright is designed to protect. | ajsnigrutin wrote: | I'd prefer a system, where the author has to actually and | actively be trying to make money in a specific market, before | the copyright can be applied in that specific case (as with | trademark law, where the owner has to actively protect the | trademark). | | Some nintendo games are currently not available anywhere (from | nintendo or from original publisher), but if you copy/download | that rom, you can get fined due to fictional losses for the | copyright holder. What losses? If you're not selling the game | anymore, how can you have losses from it? If you're not selling | that movie in my country, how can you show a loss from me | downloading it? | EMIRELADERO wrote: | > We don't know the revenue Nintendo derives from virtual | console sales, but you can be assured that virtually none of it | is making it to the creators which is who copyright is designed | to protect. | | I too have many gripples with copyright but this is simply | wrong. Copyright is designed to protect the _rightsholder_. | Whether it is a person or a company is irrelevant. This isn 't | a conspiracy or cynical-type explanation, this is _by design_ | [deleted] | ece wrote: | I'm not an author or artist, but you only need to search for | tweets about copyright on Twitter to see it benefits the | rightsholders a bit too much. If the term was shorter, maybe | it would be different. Of course the reason the term is | longer is because of rightsholders. | dleslie wrote: | Very few humble bundle products are financially successful. | It's easy to think otherwise because of the standout few. | zerocrates wrote: | In terms of moneymaking, copyright's long term is more relevant | for video games in that it includes the right to make | derivative works (i.e.: sequels). Certainly there are | franchises that have lived longer than 20 years. | | Ports, remasters, official emulation, and subscriptions have | given a longer "tail" for at least a handful of classics but | even without that it's "the IP" that would be most jealously | guarded. | grayfaced wrote: | I think it'd be a stretch to say sequels are covered by | derivative works. Trademark would be the primary protection | and would function for sequels with no copyright protection | at all. | zerocrates wrote: | Sequels that share or build on characters, plot, and so on | with their predecessors are definitely derivative works. | (Let's ignore the literal sharing of assets and bits of | code that's also common for sequels since that's obviously | more straightforward, and not strictly necessary.) | | Trademark definitely comes into play, and is probably the | more important form of IP here in practice (and for some | series may be the only really effective protection). But | you still couldn't go out and make a game with Master Chief | or Nathan Drake even if you called it something other than | Halo or Uncharted. | | Trademarks are also interesting and somewhat unique for | video games: the typical rule is that the title of a book | or movie, etc. is not eligible for a trademark. You need a | name that's being used for a series to get a trademark. But | video games are excluded from this rule and can (and almost | always do) get trademarks for their titles even when | they're standalones. | jimbob45 wrote: | _We don 't know the revenue Nintendo derives from virtual | console sales, but you can be assured that virtually none of it | is making it to the creators which is who copyright is designed | to protect._ | | An advocate for the devil would claim that those creators were | compensated upfront rather than over the lifetime of the | product. Therefore, the company is rightfully collecting the | revenue that the creator left to them that they always paid | for. | dewey wrote: | To the people saying "it's completely legal, what can Nintendo | do" it might be worth considering that not everything is about | legal / not legal. Companies and people have relationships and | it's not always about if something is technically allowed, it's | about how it's being understood by the other party and in this | case it's pretty clear that Nintendo is not a big fan of | emulators. | squeaky-clean wrote: | Nintendo also isn't a big fan of people playing Super Smash | Bros competitively. They're allowed to have their opinions but | I don't see why anyone needs to respect such silly opinions. | dewey wrote: | There's a difference between a random consumer respecting | their opinions and businesses working in the same industry | not trying to put them in a weird position. | jareklupinski wrote: | makes sense | | I've seen a lot of formerly xbox and playstation exclusive | titles start popping up on Steam... so you wouldn't need an | emulator for those... | | No other way to get Mario on Steam yet though ;) | scheeseman486 wrote: | Valve include access to Flathub on the Deck by default, a | repository that distributes Yuzu. The degree of separation is a | little larger than outright distributing on Steam, though must | be said, Valve already distribute Nintendo emulators on the | store including Wii/Gamecube via RetroArch. Switch is more | recent, but Nintendo are still selling games that released on | those platforms. | | The only thing I can see this threatening is native JoyCon/Pro | Controller support on Steam (more specifically use of their | controller glyphs) if Nintendo want to get real vindictive. | Otherwise there doesn't appear to be much of an existing | relationship to be threatened. | ng12 wrote: | Nintendo is notoriously as hostile as they come, especially to | the PC gaming market. Since Valve is all-in on PC I don't see | why they should be the ones to play nice. | bakugo wrote: | Nintendo has no relationship with Valve or really PC gaming as | a whole at all. They are pretty much as hostile as it gets | towards any platform that isn't their own, to the point that a | planned collaboration with Fortnite fell through because they | were simply not willing to allow any of their characters to be | visible on other platforms. | | Valve isn't burning any bridges here because there were no | bridges to begin with. | dewey wrote: | 3 seconds in a trailer for a niche feature are not worth | offending your competitor over. | bakugo wrote: | Nintendo is not a direct competitor. And even if they were, | what exactly does Valve have to lose here? | yissp wrote: | Portal was released on the Switch, so presumably they do | have some sort of relationship. | bakugo wrote: | As someone else already pointed out, this was likely done | through Nvidia, they had already done an ARM port of | Portal for the Shield which is basically the same | hardware as the Switch so they probably just asked Valve | and they said "sure, why not" ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-10-08 23:00 UTC)