Hehe.
No, I don't do things at random or without a reason, as you say.
The games ARE unavailable in every sense that I care about. You can't walk into a gamestore and find it on a shelf. Still, it might be possible to find the games second-hand and it might be possible to find a web-site where you can post-order for old games. But who wants to go through all that hassle? I really don't know if you can or can't find these games that I'm after so it probably isn't abandonware. Especially since Nintendo is so determined to close down every site they can find with roms.
Also, games for a Gameboy aren't very fun if you have to pay loads of money and still only have a few. They are really not that good. But it is very nice to own a few hundreds roms to switch between. That makes it worthwhile.
I don't know why I should have to justify this any further. I think that what I have said so far is enough. The games "can't" be found, the price is absurd, a few little GB games aren't that funny, I've bought stuff from them for years, they are greedy and make a fuss about games that should be abandonware, piracy of this kind doesn't hurt them since they mostly work with GBA now,
But I often tell people who don't yet know it about GBA flashlinkers and things hoping that they won't waste a fortune on small games that could be found elsewhere(but I don't care about GBA;or GBC for that matter).
Stupid new Zeldas
-
Robin_Gravel
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Hi Shantzy.
Maybe the emulators are not written when Nintendo launches
his nes but there are illegal copies found in the black market. I saw 300 games in one cartridge made somewhere in asia
from a friend of mine.
The very first nes games I found was around $40. But because
of the pirated copies, Nintendo placed the price higher around $70. I found this information from an old newspaper.
Robin Gravel
Maybe the emulators are not written when Nintendo launches
his nes but there are illegal copies found in the black market. I saw 300 games in one cartridge made somewhere in asia
from a friend of mine.
The very first nes games I found was around $40. But because
of the pirated copies, Nintendo placed the price higher around $70. I found this information from an old newspaper.
Robin Gravel
-
MagickPoultry
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
What I'm taking issue with is you trying to convince people to pirate newer games, like for the Game Boy Advance. Your reasons don't apply to that, especially when you state that piracy doesn't hurt Nintendo "since they mostly work with GBA now." If someone doesn't want to pay the asking price for a GBA game, no one's forcing them to play it. I'm never going to play any. But don't act like they have an automatic right to play it anyway, unless you want to shove over the pillars of society and bring civilization to an end, engulfed in fires and anarchy and terrible blood orgies the likes of which you can't imagine. <shudder>
-
Shan-c
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Hm.. Here we go again..... 
I don't really think that people have a right to pirate games, but sometimes they shouldn't get to moral about it either.
I just gave a friendly tip. Okay so I was a bit reactionate, in the beginning but just give me a chance to develop my arguments.
I think you should buy everything that you believe is worth your money. I bought every QFG game there is and every Gabriel Knight. Mainly because it was really worth the money and also because Sierra has got a history of financial troubles.
I don't really think that it is possible to hurt Nintendo and Nintendo raising prices is not because of pirating. They raise the prices because they can. Since Mario and Zelda are so popular parents will continue to pay more and more as long as their children keep on nagging them. The prices don't get sky high because of a loss of income, it's because of too much income. Nintendo people are not stupid. It's easier to indoctrinate children with commercial Disney and WB characters than letting forward true artists to make original masterpieces.
Still, if you think that life wouldn't be the same without Mario and Pikachu, of course you should pay. However I suspect that it's mostly about brainwashing children and their parents than making truely outstanding games.
There is always a moral infliction when you copy a game but it does matter some what it is you are taking. If you copy and spread the music from a small record industry or a poor musiscian I consider it a bad and greedy thing but if it is Britney Spears....well you get my point. And you Magic Poultry are really blue eyed if you think that we can't survive without absurdely big multi-national companies that not only make s*#tloads of money but also constantly tries to get under our skin with tons of commercials.
Remember, companies only get better if they are a little bit on the same level and has to compete some. That one company can afford to take all the mediaspace is not fair play. So why waste a fortune on Nintendo if you just want to play the games some?
/Shantzy
I don't really think that people have a right to pirate games, but sometimes they shouldn't get to moral about it either.
I just gave a friendly tip. Okay so I was a bit reactionate, in the beginning but just give me a chance to develop my arguments.
I think you should buy everything that you believe is worth your money. I bought every QFG game there is and every Gabriel Knight. Mainly because it was really worth the money and also because Sierra has got a history of financial troubles.
I don't really think that it is possible to hurt Nintendo and Nintendo raising prices is not because of pirating. They raise the prices because they can. Since Mario and Zelda are so popular parents will continue to pay more and more as long as their children keep on nagging them. The prices don't get sky high because of a loss of income, it's because of too much income. Nintendo people are not stupid. It's easier to indoctrinate children with commercial Disney and WB characters than letting forward true artists to make original masterpieces.
Still, if you think that life wouldn't be the same without Mario and Pikachu, of course you should pay. However I suspect that it's mostly about brainwashing children and their parents than making truely outstanding games.
There is always a moral infliction when you copy a game but it does matter some what it is you are taking. If you copy and spread the music from a small record industry or a poor musiscian I consider it a bad and greedy thing but if it is Britney Spears....well you get my point. And you Magic Poultry are really blue eyed if you think that we can't survive without absurdely big multi-national companies that not only make s*#tloads of money but also constantly tries to get under our skin with tons of commercials.
Remember, companies only get better if they are a little bit on the same level and has to compete some. That one company can afford to take all the mediaspace is not fair play. So why waste a fortune on Nintendo if you just want to play the games some?
/Shantzy
-
Ed
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
[glow=red,2,300]PIRATE EVERYTHING! DOWN WITH SOCIETY! MWA HA HA!!!![/glow]
Oh wait, never mind.
Oh wait, never mind.
-
MagickPoultry
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
If something isn't worth your money, you don't need it. If you just want to play the games some, rent them. Or simply buy the games that you think are worth your money. Support Nintendo's competitors legitimately. Sure, pirating Nintendo's games might be seem to be a shred more justifiable than pirating some small company's products, but it really isn't. What if everyone decided they wanted to do it? Nintendo would feel that hit. Looking back to the philosophies of Immanuel Kant, you can't universalize pirating Nintendo games, so therefore it is immoral. Unless you think you have some special rights. Therefore, not only do we have the stealing aspect of piracy, but we now have the elevation of some people above others. Are you advocating some kind of caste system in which some "Untouchables" must purchase their video games to enable the higher caste of which you are a member to get its games for free? Nosirree, that doesn't sound good to me. I'm a firm believer in equal rights, as well as the inherent moral worth of man. I will not tolerate such an assault on human dignity.
-
Shantzy
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Ehum.. I don't really understand what you are getting at but I stick to my argument. If some, even a couple of thousands of people do some pirate copies, it is a drop in the ocean if it is Nintendo. Did I ever say that just some people have the right to pirate Nintendo stuff. NOONE has the right to pirate but everyone can if they want to. When I started this discussion I just gave a tip to Robin Gravel and others who like Zelda put feel the prices are to steep.
Theoretically it is possible to shove Nintendo over put practically it is impossible. The lower cast that pay for Nintendo does it with pleasure so why bother. I'm talking about brainwashed children and their parents which seems to be the vast majority of millions of buyers. And again, who cares about what is justifiable in this situation(except you maybe).
Maybe you are the kind of person who can afford everything you point at, of course pirating would seem a very dishonest thing. Well yeah, yeah...
You said you are a believer of equal rights. How about equality in general. If you haven't got the dough, you won't be able to buy anything anyways so why not nibble at the table a bit. That is called leveling out.
Again, it DOES matter from whom you are pirating, stealing from etc. Everyone has got his/her own code of honor and we don't need no help from Immanuel Kant in forming our own opinion.
-
MagickPoultry
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Okay, let's take this a piece at a time.
"NOONE has the right to pirate but everyone can if they want to. " What do you mean? I don't see the point of this. Everyone can murder if they want to, but that doesn't mean it's okay. Again, here you seem to be shirking off morality altogether, suggesting that we can do things when we have no right.
"Theoretically it is possible to shove Nintendo over put practically it is impossible. " You misunderstand me. Of course everyone isn't going to start pirating all at once. The point is that if they all wanted to, they wouldn't be able to by your reasoning, since the reason it's justifiable to you is that it Nintendo won't feel it. Therefore, the people who pirate under that reasoning are placing themselves above the rest of the populace.
"And again, who cares about what is justifiable in this situation(except you maybe)." Reasonable people who feel that they should have good reasons for the things they do. People who have guiding principles. Consider that statement you made. If it were true, can't you see the chaotic results? Actions no longer need to be justified?
"Maybe you are the kind of person who can afford everything you point at, of course pirating would seem a very dishonest thing." No need to get nasty. So the only people who oppose stealing are all rich people who can afford not to steal? Another interpretation I could draw from your statement is that poorer people by nature have lower moral standards. I won't accept that. Morality needs to be independent of wealth and social standing.
"If you haven't got the dough, you won't be able to buy anything anyways so why not nibble at the table a bit. That is called leveling out." Ah, so we should just get rid of money altogether. Video games aren't a necessity, I ought to remind you. They're a luxury.
The ideas of past individuals, such as Immanuel Kant, are good to consider. Especially when they're reasonable. Forming one's own opinion isn't necessarily good if it's not based on reason. You seem to willingly ignore morality in this matter. Not wanting people to get "too moral" about it, and not caring about justification. If you're going to compromise morals arbitrarily in this case, of what value are they the rest of the time?
"NOONE has the right to pirate but everyone can if they want to. " What do you mean? I don't see the point of this. Everyone can murder if they want to, but that doesn't mean it's okay. Again, here you seem to be shirking off morality altogether, suggesting that we can do things when we have no right.
"Theoretically it is possible to shove Nintendo over put practically it is impossible. " You misunderstand me. Of course everyone isn't going to start pirating all at once. The point is that if they all wanted to, they wouldn't be able to by your reasoning, since the reason it's justifiable to you is that it Nintendo won't feel it. Therefore, the people who pirate under that reasoning are placing themselves above the rest of the populace.
"And again, who cares about what is justifiable in this situation(except you maybe)." Reasonable people who feel that they should have good reasons for the things they do. People who have guiding principles. Consider that statement you made. If it were true, can't you see the chaotic results? Actions no longer need to be justified?
"Maybe you are the kind of person who can afford everything you point at, of course pirating would seem a very dishonest thing." No need to get nasty. So the only people who oppose stealing are all rich people who can afford not to steal? Another interpretation I could draw from your statement is that poorer people by nature have lower moral standards. I won't accept that. Morality needs to be independent of wealth and social standing.
"If you haven't got the dough, you won't be able to buy anything anyways so why not nibble at the table a bit. That is called leveling out." Ah, so we should just get rid of money altogether. Video games aren't a necessity, I ought to remind you. They're a luxury.
The ideas of past individuals, such as Immanuel Kant, are good to consider. Especially when they're reasonable. Forming one's own opinion isn't necessarily good if it's not based on reason. You seem to willingly ignore morality in this matter. Not wanting people to get "too moral" about it, and not caring about justification. If you're going to compromise morals arbitrarily in this case, of what value are they the rest of the time?
-
Shantzy
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Okay I just want to end this.
I have no time to use computers nowadays. I won't comment on everything you said but this post will be very very long but...well
Firstly, I think it's a bit blunt to compare pirating with murder. I don't think you can even really compare it with theft because you aren't really taking anything. Just making a duplicate. Of course there is an aspect of loss but it's not like if you would steal a car ('cause that would involve someone losing a car).
I think it is funny that you say that people who pirate put themselves above the populace. And then you imply that people who commit petty theft HAVE lower moral standards.
"Another interpretation I could draw from your statement is that poorer people by nature have lower moral standards"
That's a rather stupid interpretation if you ask me 'cause that wasn't at all what I meant. But yes, I do believe that poorer people do more small theft and piracing etc. Whether if it's true or not doesn't matter but if it where to be true, you would consider these people to be without moral and that is a horrible way of thinking. They have their OWN moral values, as I have mine and you must of course have yours.
"can't you see the chaotic results? Actions no longer need to be justified?" All our actions aren't guided by a moral idea. Some are, and some aren't. Sometimes your conscience says Yes and other times it says no. but when that happens is in different situations for all people.
example: You might like to hunt and eat meat and see no moral complication with it. and I might be a person who won't eat meat and could never draw myself to kill an animal. That's because my moral ideas are different from yours, and they should be.
Another example: A man knows that his neighbour is pregnant and that she will have an abortion. He hates her for that and is really unpleasant and nasty when he passes her by. Eventhough he doesn't really know her.
In my opinion, the man hasn't got the right to be angry with his neighbor since what she is doing doesn't really affect him or anyone else. He may think that she is doing a bad thing and that's okay but he has no right to force his ideas on her or punish her by being nasty. You never have the right to imply your own moral values on others.
to be continued........
I have no time to use computers nowadays. I won't comment on everything you said but this post will be very very long but...well
Firstly, I think it's a bit blunt to compare pirating with murder. I don't think you can even really compare it with theft because you aren't really taking anything. Just making a duplicate. Of course there is an aspect of loss but it's not like if you would steal a car ('cause that would involve someone losing a car).
I think it is funny that you say that people who pirate put themselves above the populace. And then you imply that people who commit petty theft HAVE lower moral standards.
"Another interpretation I could draw from your statement is that poorer people by nature have lower moral standards"
That's a rather stupid interpretation if you ask me 'cause that wasn't at all what I meant. But yes, I do believe that poorer people do more small theft and piracing etc. Whether if it's true or not doesn't matter but if it where to be true, you would consider these people to be without moral and that is a horrible way of thinking. They have their OWN moral values, as I have mine and you must of course have yours.
"can't you see the chaotic results? Actions no longer need to be justified?" All our actions aren't guided by a moral idea. Some are, and some aren't. Sometimes your conscience says Yes and other times it says no. but when that happens is in different situations for all people.
example: You might like to hunt and eat meat and see no moral complication with it. and I might be a person who won't eat meat and could never draw myself to kill an animal. That's because my moral ideas are different from yours, and they should be.
Another example: A man knows that his neighbour is pregnant and that she will have an abortion. He hates her for that and is really unpleasant and nasty when he passes her by. Eventhough he doesn't really know her.
In my opinion, the man hasn't got the right to be angry with his neighbor since what she is doing doesn't really affect him or anyone else. He may think that she is doing a bad thing and that's okay but he has no right to force his ideas on her or punish her by being nasty. You never have the right to imply your own moral values on others.
to be continued........
-
Shantzy
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
"Morality needs to be independent of wealth and social standing." No man, morality has to be a totally individual thing. In Germany 1939, everyone had exactly similar moral ideas. and those who opposed them would sooner or later have to accept that they where not allowed to have certain opinions. Killing off people with another religion and heritage was a good thing in many peoples eyes.
PS. Never listen to political parties that go on about "important" moral,family,social values etc. Just give them the finger and say: F**k you I won't do what you tell me!
"You seem to willingly ignore morality in this matter." No, I simply ignore your morality. Eventhough we might have some common ideas.
"If you're going to compromise morals arbitrarily in this case, of what value are they the rest of the time?"
Hmm. Already answered this partially. Morals have a value when you think they have a value. There are no moral values that exists without people inventing them and believing in them. You might aswell say that nothing is true if noone believe that it is. Maybe everything is just opinions.....but now I'm pushing it.
The only moral idea I strongly would like that everyone had is:
-Thou shalt not kill.
I can question all other morals depending on the situation but not that one.
You can answer my posts if you want to. I'll read it, but it is doubtful if I will be able to answer. Time is not on my hand now.
PS. Never listen to political parties that go on about "important" moral,family,social values etc. Just give them the finger and say: F**k you I won't do what you tell me!
"You seem to willingly ignore morality in this matter." No, I simply ignore your morality. Eventhough we might have some common ideas.
"If you're going to compromise morals arbitrarily in this case, of what value are they the rest of the time?"
Hmm. Already answered this partially. Morals have a value when you think they have a value. There are no moral values that exists without people inventing them and believing in them. You might aswell say that nothing is true if noone believe that it is. Maybe everything is just opinions.....but now I'm pushing it.
The only moral idea I strongly would like that everyone had is:
-Thou shalt not kill.
I can question all other morals depending on the situation but not that one.
You can answer my posts if you want to. I'll read it, but it is doubtful if I will be able to answer. Time is not on my hand now.
-
MagickPoultry
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Sure, everyone has their own ideas about morality, but that doesn't make them all equally valid. They have to be defensible. If you think something is immoral for yourself, it's only reasonable to think it's immoral for other people. Morality is open for debate, which is kind of what we were doing before now when you go and say, basically, "morals are just opinions, so we don't need to follow them." When you say morals only have a value when you think they have a value, you are ignoring morals in certain cases. In other words, being immoral in those cases. I guess that's all I'll say.
-
Jonozon
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
That's deep, it brings a tear to my eye. :'(
But the point is Oracle of Ages, and Oracle of Seasons should have been made for the Game Boy advance, they would have been a lot better games, and more worth your time to pirate
(just kidding)
Jonozon
But the point is Oracle of Ages, and Oracle of Seasons should have been made for the Game Boy advance, they would have been a lot better games, and more worth your time to pirate
(just kidding)Jonozon
-
Robin_Gravel
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Think that two zeldas are the last games for gameboy color.
Robin Gravel
Robin Gravel
-
Nailhead
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
Wow, this thread has been going since June of last year. Amazing. Well, preach on Zelda lovers (or haters).
-
AGI1122
Re: Stupid new Zeldas
I love zelda but those new ones were awfull. They should have waited for the GBA then made them on the GBA.