Asked by the consumer who has broken records buying the switch 2 with the batshit insane clause: “We can brick your console for any reason and are denying your rights to how and where you can sell your purchased games.”
That’d be the gimpsuit.
Shall I detail the number of times nintendont has overstepped it’s legal rights and trampled on those of developers, consumers, and frequently their own employees?
Nintendo’s lawyers know no boundaries. They frequently get apologists making excuses for them while they force their will on whomever they please. What they need is a solid kick in the teeth and to be told to fuck right off.
Why are they jacking prices up? Why are they inserting assinine clauses in user agreements?
Because people just love the abuse apparently. That’s certainly what the market appears to be saying: “Yes daddy N. punish me harder.”
I believe that summarizes the intent of my original statement sufficiently.
I didn’t think it required that much thought… but apparently I was mistaken.
When all you end up posting comes off as nonsensical ramblings, yeah explanation is needed so people can actually understand you. Otherwise it just looks like nonsensical ramblings.
Agree to disagree, I suppose. The OP could use a colon and perhaps a small edit for clarity. That’s a far cry from nonsensical ramblings. But I cannot speak for your ability to digest a post made quickly - so if that’s how it was received: I imagine the explanation should have been sufficient. Your response suggests otherwise. My point was made, and clarified, which to me is sufficient. If you can’t work though it - that’s unfortunate but acceptable.
The market conditions are nobody kicking Nintendo’s lawyers in the teeth and telling them to piss off… regardless of jurisdiction.
Follow that up with the consumer base clamoring for a gimpsuit shaped like the switch 2 and you get this result.
“Yes corporate daddy, punish me harder”
Edit: it would appear some people are unfamiliar with Nintendo’s rather questionable actions. Or their lawyers are on Lemmy. One of those.
No dude your comment just makes no sense.
I can break it down:
Asked by the consumer who has broken records buying the switch 2 with the batshit insane clause: “We can brick your console for any reason and are denying your rights to how and where you can sell your purchased games.”
That’d be the gimpsuit.
Shall I detail the number of times nintendont has overstepped it’s legal rights and trampled on those of developers, consumers, and frequently their own employees?
Nintendo’s lawyers know no boundaries. They frequently get apologists making excuses for them while they force their will on whomever they please. What they need is a solid kick in the teeth and to be told to fuck right off.
Why are they jacking prices up? Why are they inserting assinine clauses in user agreements?
Because people just love the abuse apparently. That’s certainly what the market appears to be saying: “Yes daddy N. punish me harder.”
I believe that summarizes the intent of my original statement sufficiently.
I didn’t think it required that much thought… but apparently I was mistaken.
When all you end up posting comes off as nonsensical ramblings, yeah explanation is needed so people can actually understand you. Otherwise it just looks like nonsensical ramblings.
Agree to disagree, I suppose. The OP could use a colon and perhaps a small edit for clarity. That’s a far cry from nonsensical ramblings. But I cannot speak for your ability to digest a post made quickly - so if that’s how it was received: I imagine the explanation should have been sufficient. Your response suggests otherwise. My point was made, and clarified, which to me is sufficient. If you can’t work though it - that’s unfortunate but acceptable.
No, the original comment just did not make any sense to begin with.