Unpopular Opinion

6408 readers

350 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!

How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.

If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.

Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)

If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].

Rules:

1. NO POLITICS

Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.

2. Be civil.

Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...

Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

5. No trolling.

This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

103

Nintendo’s aggressive legal tactics and pricing strategy ultimately protect the quality and value of their games. (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Nintendo, while aggressively litigious, do so to maintain the value and exclusivity of their IP.

Their games also never go on sale, and all sell really well over time, unlike many releases from other publishers.

The result is that Nintendo are able to release a solid cadence of high quality, first party games free of other forms of aggressive monetisation, maintaining the value of the games as art.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I agree they care about the perceived quality of their product, but don’t think them litigating has anything to do why the product is of the quality it is.

I would guess their litigiousness is a holdover from the 90s with them being afraid of being branded as “generic” because every parent/grandparent called their video games “the Nintendo” and they don’t want to be seen as not being protective of their IP as to allow unlicensed products. Maintaining the perception of quality from their products.

I think you’re conflating correlation and causation. They release good stuff, and don’t want to be associated with anything without their approval / lose legal ground of something of theirs, therefore they’re lawsuit happy.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

I'm no expert, but I think it's also a quirk of how copyright law works in Japan. Apparently if you don't consistently restrict other people from using your stuff, you weaken your case when you DO try to stop it.