this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024

175 points (97.3% liked)

PC Gaming

8581 readers

648 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca

UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca

KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com

175

Portal 64 dev says “don’t be mad at Valve” for the project’s shutdown (www.pcgamesn.com)

submitted 10 months ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 43 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 49 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Duh, people are pissed at corporate greed that’s is at the core of all cease and desist orders on fan projects. Be it from Nintendo, MS, Sony or Valve and they aren’t stopping.

Indie devs need to stop wasting their time and efforts on fan projects that will never be played by the public because of these corporations shutting them down.

Instead of wasting 300+ hours making a fan project with nothing to show but the knowledge and potential lawsuit you’ve gained, how about putting all those hours into a personal project that is inspired by the games you want to copy instead.

You could make the next Portal, Team Fortress 2 or Hit and run. Just name it something different and stop making 1 to 1 reproductions of corporate property.

[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 43 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Making Portal for the N64 will give you much more exposure and media attention than making just another indie game statistically likely to fail and never get any attention. The guy made a name for himself with this project. Now when he creates an original game, it will get a lot more attention for being made by the Portal 64 developer and have a much better chance to succeed.

[–] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Right. Cause we see countless games being advertised as “from the one person that made the hit and run remake”. Or “from the developer of that cancelled Mario project”.

No, the project becomes known for the controversy of being shut down and people forget about it.

We need more indie games and publishing your own indie game is worth way more than popping out another fan wank that’s likely to get you a lawsuit.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 17 points 10 months ago (2 children)

You won't see a game advertised as "from that developer who made that thing", rather the dev's employers will see that through their job application.

There's a long history of modders being hired for things. CounterStrike was a mod to Half Life; Valve hired the modders to help make Source. Desert Combat was a mod to BattleField 1942; DICE hired the modders to help make BF2. Any coding project that someone participates in can be used to get a job.

Making indie games is only half the battle. Indie games often don't have the polish that comes from experienced coders - indie games tend to succeed on their ideas, in spite of a lack of technical expertise.

[–] conorab@lemmy.conorab.com 6 points 10 months ago

Back 4 Blood is got a lot of traction initially by saying it was a spiritual successor and made by the same people as Left 4 Dead (1). Of course, nobody plays it anymore because it turned out to be a meh game, but boy did people check it out!

[–] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 4 points 10 months ago

CD Projekt RED also hired some mod developers.

[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Right. Cause we see countless games being advertised as “from the one person that made the hit and run remake”. Or “from the developer of that cancelled Mario project”.

Maybe not countless, but those absolutely exist. Retro City Rampage? That was originally "Grand Theftendo", a GTA 3 demake for the NES. Some of the AM2R (Metroid 2 remake shut down by Nintendo) developers are currently developing a Metroidvania after a very successful Kickstarter. Guess what the headlines about it focused on? Yup, the fact that they made AM2R.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

It’s also a very good bullet point when interviewing to work for a game studio. Which is something that won’t be in headlines.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Actually we don't really need more indie games. The amount of games released is increasing 14000 games released in 2023 2000 more then 2022. Most of them are not good.

[–] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Those indie games are still better and more creative than the last 3 dozen of Ubisofts soulless open world clones.

I would take a gamble on an indie game over any fucking corporate live service scam.

[+] fishos@lemmy.world -6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

If that name was "Gimmicky", that's all I took from it honestly. Using an N64 to learn to program games is one thing, but this obsession with making full fledged games on dead consoles is just bizarre. You're catering to a very specific niche. Plenty of people see "on N64" and immediately pass by it because we have no ability or reason to play that. Most of us would have to emulate it on another device anyways, entirely defeating the purpose.

Oh, and quick questio(don't cheat): what is the dev(s) name(s)? Cus I sure as hell haven't noticed that part at all in any of the convos. Just "that guy who made".

[–] conorab@lemmy.conorab.com 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Making a game on the N64 today shows you can work within the limitations of much less powerful hardware. From a hiring perspective, it means you can say “I ported Portal to the N64” which says a lot more about your skill set than “ I made a 3D FPS with these neat twists”. It stands out.

I don’t know the name of the devs, but I would certainty pay more attention to their next project if I knew that it was made by the same people, which you can include in the description of your next game.

[–] baconisaveg@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

I made a 3D FPS

In Unity?

Uh, yes...

So, it took 15 minutes right?

[–] fishos@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, because US game devs are so well known for their small install sizes. Are you serious?

[–] conorab@lemmy.conorab.com 2 points 10 months ago

I’m a little confused about what you mean. Is the implication that nobody (particularly employers) would care about being able to optimise a game because US games are so inefficient as demonstrated by their massive install sizes? That’s my guess but let me know if that’s incorrect. If my interpretation is correct then I don’t think that would make much of a difference. It’s not about needing to hire people who can do optimisation, it’s about the skill that went in to it and standing out from everybody else. If you were capable of learning that, on extremely old hardware with what I would assume requires a lot more manual work to do basic tasks compared to more modern game engines, imagine what they could do with all the extra tools!

[–] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 20 points 10 months ago

Indie devs need to stop wasting their time and efforts on fan projects that will never be played by the public

It's not your time, let them use it how they want. Probably the fun for most is in the development.

[–] Defaced@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

You realize in this case the guy was using proprietary libraries from the N64 without Nintendo's consent in this mod? Valve would be absolutely insane not to dmca that mod. This guy kicked a hornets nest of lawyers by releasing this stuff even if his intentions were to just show the businesses what he can do. He knew what he was doing, he knew what would eventually happen, which is absolutely why he's telling people not to be mad at valve. Valve are just protecting their business in the same way Nintendo is protecting their intellectual property.

[–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I’ll never forgive those Microsoftian bastards for shutting Halo Online down the very next day after it was released.

[–] infinitepcg@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

It's not greed, companies will literally lose their trademarks if they don't defend them

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why not just make a version of the game that is stripped of IP, then "someone" anonymously releases a conversation mod that adds in the copyrighted content?

But it makes even more sense to just do your own copycat version and actually sell it and make money off it.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

A version of the game stripped of Portal IP would still need to be done using Nintendo's libraries, as the whole point of this project is that it worsk on the Nintendo 64.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago

You know what gets me? There are retro projects publishing for things like the Commodore 64 that don't see challenges like this.

It makes retro Nintendo hardware just that much more worthless in my view.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nintendo would technically still be able to come after it, but at that point I doubt they'd care.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah what I don't understand is why Valve are defending Nintendo's IP here. They didn't send a cease and desist because it was Portal, they sent it because it uses Nintendo's libraries.

Makes me wonder if there was some kind of legal settlement after the whole Dolphin emulator on Steam thing.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

They're worried that by doing nothing they're implicitly endorsing the project and they don't want to give permission for their IP to infringe on Nintendo's.

[–] flumph@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

Your whole point is undercut by the existence of Portal: Revolution, Portal: Mel, City of Heroes, etc. There's a way to do fan creations that's supported by the IP holders and ways not to do it.

I don't expect indie devs to be experts at the law but they can hardly be surprised if they go outside the boundaries set by the IP holders and then get a C&D.

[–] Metal_Zealot@lemmy.ml 44 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Even Valve recognizes Nintendo's ruthlessness.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yup. Remember the Dolphin release? Oh wait

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Dolphin came with the console bios pre-installed tho, that what gave them problem

[–] lukini@beehaw.org 3 points 10 months ago

The issue is the decryption keys, not the bios.

[–] kemsat@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I’m gonna guess that the legal team does these things without higher ups hearing of anything until after cease and desists have been made.

[+] TWeaK@lemm.ee -17 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Ehhh I absolutely would blame Valve here. They don't have to endorse the project to turn their eyes and allow it to proceed.

Valve's main obligation here, as I see it (IANAL), is their trademark. With copyright, it's up to the rightsholder whether or not they want to prosecute things. With trademarks, they have an obligation to prosecute things they come across or else they might lose that trademark.

There was no pressure on Valve here, except for that trademark thing. Even then, with what they've said, they weren't looking to protect their trademark. They were just looking to avoid the minimal risk that Nintendo actually sued the developers of Portal 64, and Nintendo might include Valve in such a lawsuit. It's not like Portal 64 was being released on Valve's Steam platform, like the Dolphin emulator was.

Valve's lawyers are being excessively conservative and risk averse here. As a result, the community that Valve relies on is suffering harm. That makes these lawyers fucking assholes, in my view. They didn't have to do anything, they weren't prompted to do anything, they did it off their own back to show that they were doing something.

If Nintendo had shut them down, that would be a different thing. However, that would almost certainly only have been a cease and desist letter, sent to the developers, with no involvement with Valve. Valve's lawyers have completely jumped the gun here and done something that actually harms Valve's public image, for no tangible benefit.

Valve should sack these lawyers, they're cunts.

[–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I'm with you on the first part. It makes no sense for Valve to do this. Using LibUltra or not, Nintendo has been relatively lax on people creating new code for the N64. At least to my recollection only in cases where Nintendo felt their IP was directly being threatened did they try and take down fan projects. Even then they heavily rely on the redistribution of Nintendo IP to take things down. Admittedly I have only seen others talking about the Portal 64 project using LibUltra but even so that's Nintendo's fight, not Valve's.

I don't see how Valve could possibly be afraid of getting sued here by Nintendo, it doesn't make sense. Valve did not create it, nor distribute, advertise, or aid in any way. IANAL but I don't see how Valve could possibly be listed as a party to the lawsuit unless Nintendo lawyers agreed with Valve lawyers to go after this guy for IP theft.

TBH I see this more as Valve seeing that with a project this publicly known, if they don't defend their IP here they'll lose any future copyright claims and want to prevent it. They also see an opportunity here, blame Nintendo who won't flinch it at since they get labelled legal bad guys all the time, no real dent to their reputation while saving Valve's internet golden child perception. Valve would never do something like this so it MUST be Nintendo's fault. Based on the comments in this thread and I've seen else where, that seems like a good assumption. Nintendo takes the heat while Valve protects their IP.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

TBH I see this more as Valve seeing that with a project this publicly known, if they don't defend their IP here they'll lose any future copyright claims and want to prevent it.

That would only apply to trademarks. Copyright has no requirement to sue to maintain the rights, but registered trademarks do.

I wonder if there was some sort of settlement between Valve and Nintendo, after Dolphin was removed from the Steam store, which requires them to support Nintendo. Even then, this is separate to the Steam store.

It does give them brownie points with Nintendo though, I guess.

[–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Yup your right, I was wrong. Valve keeps the copyright regardless.

Dolphin situation was different though. https://dolphin-emu.org/blog/2023/07/20/what-happened-to-dolphin-on-steam/

Valve only ever insisted that Nintendo had to give Dolphin permission to distribute since Valve was afraid of a potential DMCA coming from Nintendo if Nintendo thought that the encryption keys were IP illegally being redistributed. Since Nintendo says emulators are illegal everywhere but a courtroom, Dolphin team knew that they'd never get an ok. Valve probably knew that but didn't care enough to help fight that legal battle.

I'm not sure Valve cares about brownie points with Nintendo. The Steam Deck is a direct competitor against the Switch, Valve has done nothing to curtail the use of Switch emulators on Deck, and the work Valve has been doing makes using a switch emulator a better experience.

This whole thing only makes sense if Valve wanted to protect their IP. Involving Nintendo really does sound like blame shifting without having to actually go to court

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

also, it's simply cheaper to say to the guy "hey, could you take down?" than even asking lawyers about the legality of the project

[–] nybble41@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

When it comes to their trademarks Valve can't take a fully hands-off approach without negative consequences. Either they explicitly endorse the use of the Portal name and other branding, in which case they're encouraging and aiding the project and could potentially be caught up in any lawsuit from Nintendo, or they say nothing and allow the trademark to lapse from non-enforcement, or they prohibit the project from using the Portal branding and enforce that prohibition with a lawsuit if needed. Unfortunately for the project, only one of these options retains their trademark and doesn't set them up for a fight with Nintendo.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Sure, and like I say trademark is the one obligation they have. However, there has been no indication that protecting a trademark was the driving factor. The driving factor seems to be entirely that it involves Nintendo.

Furthermore, there would be no fight with Nintendo here. Nintendo have no real grounds to sue Valve, even if Valve ignored it. Rather, it almost plays out as if Valve hope to host Nintendo software on their platform - which doesn't seem likely to ever happen.