The emulator that lets you play NES games in 3D has left early access on Steam
-
The emulator being 3dSen, direct link to Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1147940/3dSen_PC/
I just gave it a download. Tested Mega Man 2, and now I'm playing Super Mario Bros. It's really fucking cool
-
How long till Nintendo files.
As long as with the other NES emulators.
-
The emulator being 3dSen, direct link to Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1147940/3dSen_PC/
They want money for an emulator? that’s bold
-
How long till Nintendo files.
I wonder if Steam would remove it from people's libraries in that instance or just the Storefront
-
They want money for an emulator? that’s bold
Maybe, but it’s not just emulating the rom, I thinks there’s enough value add for their $9 asking price.
-
The emulator being 3dSen, direct link to Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1147940/3dSen_PC/
Bought it a few years ago. Super cool, though I probably only messed around with it a couple hours before forgetting about it.
-
Maybe, but it’s not just emulating the rom, I thinks there’s enough value add for their $9 asking price.
Still, being able to argue they're not for profit is what typically has protected emulators from being sued to oblivion (and with Nintendo, even that's risky)...
-
Still, being able to argue they're not for profit is what typically has protected emulators from being sued to oblivion (and with Nintendo, even that's risky)...
Yeah, the archival argument won’t fly here.
-
Still, being able to argue they're not for profit is what typically has protected emulators from being sued to oblivion (and with Nintendo, even that's risky)...
Has being non-profit been a legal defense used somewhere before? At least in the US the case law is based on commercial, profit-driven emulators being explicitly ruled as legal when Sony tried suing them. I see this said constantly and I think it's genuinely just the result of propaganda from Nintendo or something.
-
How long till Nintendo files.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'm not sure they can in this instance. The reason they could sue the Switch emulator team was because they were using a proprietary encryption key.
I don't think the NES had that, and as long as you own the game, emulation is legal.
Also, this might be considered transformative use since the devs have to create the 3D profile by hand.
-
I'm not sure they can in this instance. The reason they could sue the Switch emulator team was because they were using a proprietary encryption key.
I don't think the NES had that, and as long as you own the game, emulation is legal.
Also, this might be considered transformative use since the devs have to create the 3D profile by hand.
Nintendo was able to sue palworld using a patent that didn't exist before palworlds release. It's not right, but they can do whatever they want regardless of what the law says.
-
Nintendo was able to sue palworld using a patent that didn't exist before palworlds release. It's not right, but they can do whatever they want regardless of what the law says.
That's not the lawsuit that's being discussed. It's the Yuzu Switch emulator lawsuit.
-
That's not the lawsuit that's being discussed. It's the Yuzu Switch emulator lawsuit.
yeah, i know. Point is that Nintendo can do whatever they want with the flimsyest excuse.
-
I'm not sure they can in this instance. The reason they could sue the Switch emulator team was because they were using a proprietary encryption key.
I don't think the NES had that, and as long as you own the game, emulation is legal.
Also, this might be considered transformative use since the devs have to create the 3D profile by hand.
as long as you own the game, emulation is legal.
People say this, but I believe it is mostly technically untrue. It'd be a relatively easy argument to say that a downloaded ROM that isn't exactly the digital copy YOU purchased with a license would be seen as not legal.
However some people talk about literally ripping the game off the physical device themselves, hence copying their own copy of it. Now you are in grey territory of making copies of copyrighted materials, and in the case of more modern games like the last decade, they almost assuredly have language that specifies you don't actually own the code and all that.
All I'm saying is be careful and probably refrain from repeating the fallacy that owning a game makes emulation of it legal, because that implies having the ROM is legal and that's doubtful.
-
as long as you own the game, emulation is legal.
People say this, but I believe it is mostly technically untrue. It'd be a relatively easy argument to say that a downloaded ROM that isn't exactly the digital copy YOU purchased with a license would be seen as not legal.
However some people talk about literally ripping the game off the physical device themselves, hence copying their own copy of it. Now you are in grey territory of making copies of copyrighted materials, and in the case of more modern games like the last decade, they almost assuredly have language that specifies you don't actually own the code and all that.
All I'm saying is be careful and probably refrain from repeating the fallacy that owning a game makes emulation of it legal, because that implies having the ROM is legal and that's doubtful.
Copying your own game and materials for backup purposes is no grey area, and neither is development or use of emulators, and panicky, uninformed spewing of gut feelings are how public knowledge of your actual rights gets muddled into people with zero knowledge waxing poetic about how they THINK it works because they like games and think that makes their ramblings valuable.
-
Nintendo was able to sue palworld using a patent that didn't exist before palworlds release. It's not right, but they can do whatever they want regardless of what the law says.
They were able to do that because Palworld is made by Japanese devs, and they used specifically Japanese patent law. Doesn't apply here.
-
The emulator being 3dSen, direct link to Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1147940/3dSen_PC/
wrote last edited by [email protected]It also works with romhacks if the code isn't changed too much. Ducktales 2 co-op works like a charm!
-
Copying your own game and materials for backup purposes is no grey area, and neither is development or use of emulators, and panicky, uninformed spewing of gut feelings are how public knowledge of your actual rights gets muddled into people with zero knowledge waxing poetic about how they THINK it works because they like games and think that makes their ramblings valuable.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201
In the USA, it is illegal to make a backup copy of any of your media when the original contains any form of DRM.
On any media where DRM wasn’t used, you’re okay to create a backup copy.
The law is different everywhere though.
-
as long as you own the game, emulation is legal.
People say this, but I believe it is mostly technically untrue. It'd be a relatively easy argument to say that a downloaded ROM that isn't exactly the digital copy YOU purchased with a license would be seen as not legal.
However some people talk about literally ripping the game off the physical device themselves, hence copying their own copy of it. Now you are in grey territory of making copies of copyrighted materials, and in the case of more modern games like the last decade, they almost assuredly have language that specifies you don't actually own the code and all that.
All I'm saying is be careful and probably refrain from repeating the fallacy that owning a game makes emulation of it legal, because that implies having the ROM is legal and that's doubtful.
The emulation itself is legal, assuming you’re not using any copyrighted code, BIOS, etc. to make work.
The backup copy of your game that you need can be made legally as well, but in the USA, if the source contains a form of DRM, then you cannot legally make a copy.
-
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201
In the USA, it is illegal to make a backup copy of any of your media when the original contains any form of DRM.
On any media where DRM wasn’t used, you’re okay to create a backup copy.
The law is different everywhere though.
wrote last edited by [email protected]After the DMCA passed there was a case of a judge finding it legal to bypass DRM to make backup copies, but illegal to distribute the software used to do so. I have no idea if there was ever further clarification or new law about this. That was like 20 years ago. It was part of a case going after the company who was making the software, but the name slips my mind. I'll try to look it up if anyone cares enough and wants to look for something more than hearsay on a forum.
