this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
130 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

31240 readers
327 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] alyaza@beehaw.org 83 points 1 year ago (31 children)

this is clearly not true, Portal literally just got a huge fangame with a Steam release. the issue is entirely that it uses Nintendo stuff and the guy even says as much

[–] ram 27 points 1 year ago (18 children)

This is just a corporate passing of the buck. There’s no reason to believe a third party infringing upon the properties of two parties would give the latter parties any ability or risk of going after one another.

This project was not on steam and as such was not distributed by nor associated with Valve in any way beyond infringement of IP and use of their assets. Let's not give Valve a pass just because they can lazily and baselessly say "um nintendo!" about it.

[–] alyaza@beehaw.org 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (15 children)

Let’s not give Valve a pass just because they can lazily and baselessly say “um nintendo!” about it.

okay but this was not your initial argument--this is an entirely separate issue from it, actually. your argument was "Valve about to become as litigious as Nintendo with IP they’ve let rot." and that is demonstrably false or they wouldn't have let Portal Revolution release. if they were going to be litigious about the Portal IP, why would they DMCA Portal64 but not Revolution?

to me, this is clearly an example of incorrectly getting mad about something and then shifting the goalposts to not have to take the L.

[–] ram 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

to me, this is clearly an example of incorrectly getting mad about something and then shifting the goalposts to not have to take the L.

Or it's hyperbole.

[–] alyaza@beehaw.org 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

you run into the same issue: being hyperbolic here doesn't really work if literally the same week of your hyperbole, something directly countering the hyperbolic point you're making happens. hyperbole isn't non-falsifiable or unimpeachable just because it's hyperbole and intended to be humorous--you can still be hyperbolically wrong, and in this case you are.

[–] ram 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, hyperbole is non-falsefiable. It's a rhetorical device, not a claim unto itself. In this instance it's a rhetorical device being used to communicate the idea that, were this Nintendo, they'd be receiving rightful backlash, but people, like you, online will give a pass due to the sheer fact that it's Valve doing the takedown.

[–] alyaza@beehaw.org 14 points 1 year ago

were this Nintendo, they’d be receiving rightful backlash, but people, like you, online will give a pass due to the sheer fact that it’s Valve doing the takedown.

well... now you're indicating that this kind of isn't hyperbole from you, because you're just straight arguing the underlying (and still incorrect) "hyperbolic" point now, lol

Yes, hyperbole is non-falsefiable. It’s a rhetorical device, not a claim unto itself.

i mean i think this is just obviously ridiculous. if someone said "every person who dislikes Valve is a pedophile who hurts children" or whatever hyperbolically i think it'd be silly to say that's non-falsifiable just because it's hyperbolic. there's still an underlying and incorrect claim being made

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)