[HN Gopher] Valve's latest Steam Deck trailer briefly plugs a Ni...
___________________________________________________________________
Valve's latest Steam Deck trailer briefly plugs a Nintendo Switch
emulator
Author : angry_cactus
Score : 96 points
Date : 2022-10-08 18:58 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.gamedeveloper.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.gamedeveloper.com)
| IceWreck wrote:
| While Valve shouldn't have done this, Yuzu (and emulation) is
| completely legal. Nintendo cant do anything unless they want to
| go hard against emulation itself which brings us to the same are
| APIs copyrightable debate.
| Madmallard wrote:
| Emulation has been deemed legal? Since when? You're not paying
| for the system or the games and playing them freely?
| monocasa wrote:
| Since Sony vs. Bleem. Bleem even won a protective order
| against Sony's public statements.
| ElCheapo wrote:
| what has emulation got to do with not paying for the games?
| Madmallard wrote:
| Oh right. Legal distinction
| matsemann wrote:
| Why would Valve advertise you could emulate if not for
| pirating games?
| some-human wrote:
| To play the wide range of homebrew switch software
| created by the vast homebrew community the switch has, of
| course.
|
| https://switchbrew.org/wiki/Homebrew_Applications
| matsemann wrote:
| Yeah, no one _really_ believes that.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| In the same way that nobody torrents linux isos? Just
| because it's less popular than other uses doesn't mean it
| doesn't happen.
| matsemann wrote:
| No, in the way that advertising that your product can
| play a few homebrew games when it already can play
| thousands of Steam games makes no sense. It's obviously
| to hint at playing Nintendo titles.
| cauefcr wrote:
| Why does that matter? It's like torrents and Linux
| distributions, perfectly legal, it's not the software
| developers intent that makes the file sharing be legal or
| not, it's the users usage of such software.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Just like no one believes stores selling "decorative
| glass vases" that look like bongs. But it doesn't matter,
| because it's still legal itself.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| So you don't have to travel with both your Switch and
| your Steamdeck. So you can play games at higher
| resolution and fps than the Switch. So people can make
| playthough and tips/tricks videos of Switch games without
| needing to buy a capture card. So you can use game mods
| without jailbreaking your switch.
| atomicnumber3 wrote:
| It's also worth noting that afaik dumping carts you own
| and playing them on an emulator is fine too. As long as
| you don't redistribute them.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| 1. Then you don't have to carry a steam deck _and_ a
| switch.
|
| 2. This way you can buy physical copies of games, keeping
| full control and the ability to resell them, while also
| carrying your current game library on an SD card.
|
| Edit: I forgot modding! That's a huge use of emulation.
| amelius wrote:
| At least since Wine.
|
| https://www.winehq.org/
| extragood wrote:
| Emulation of a device is totally legal.
|
| For instance, I run qemu all the time to emulate various
| android devices.
|
| I suspect that you're thinking specifically of game emulation
| though.
|
| Running software on an emulated device is fine legally as
| long as it doesn't violate copyright law.
|
| For instance, you can legally backup software that you own in
| the US [1] - that extends to games as well - and because
| emulators themselves are legal (although you may also need to
| backup the device's BIOS), you can have a completely
| legitimate archive of copyrighted games to run via an
| emulator.
|
| That said, it's unlikely that most people archive software
| themselves, and it is _not_ legal to distribute backups in
| the US, even if both parties have legitimately acquired
| copies of the source material.
|
| [1] https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html
| Fargren wrote:
| Emulation is legal. Freely sharing roms of copyrighted
| content isn't. You can dump a cartridge you own and emulate
| it on a device you own.
| Madmallard wrote:
| It's weird because the system costs money too
| stoplying1 wrote:
| Wait, why should Valve not have done this? I know Nintendo
| likes to bully smaller folks but it's not like Valve is small
| or that they rely on keeping good terms with Nintendo, right?
|
| Edit: I guess I didn't realize Portal was on Switch.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Because it ruins their relationship with Nintendo.
| daniel-cussen wrote:
| hyperhopper wrote:
| Ah yes, everybody should just bow down to bullies that
| abuse the legal system.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Whether something is "morally correct" does not make it
| prudent to do, unfortunately.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| Sometimes when you have a sensitive relationship, it can
| be helpful to support the thing that makes the other
| company uncomfortable without openly advertising it.
| smegger001 wrote:
| what relationship? Valve is pretty much PC only other
| than some ports of old source engine games. Nintendo is
| first party console and handheld with couple of
| iOS/android apps. their isn't really any relationship to
| be sensitive.
| gs17 wrote:
| Do they have that much of one? I think they've had one
| Switch title (the Portal collection) and Nintendo doesn't
| really have anything on Steam as far as I know.
| PuppyTailWags wrote:
| I would guess its much more subtle than this. Consider
| potentially nintendo refusing to port games that were on
| steam, or demanding more money/control over games that
| have overlap with steam.
| scheeseman486 wrote:
| Punishing publishers for choosing to release on a
| competitors platform they don't like would hurt those
| publishers more than Valve. Nintendo's relationship with
| third parties is already often strained, doing anything
| like you suggest would in particular cause indies, which
| Switch relies on to fill the gaps between Nintendo
| releases, to flee the platform.
| uni_rule wrote:
| Even then the relationship more Valve repo acces and
| licencing > Nvidia's First Party Studio > Nintendo. And
| obviously Nividia has a good relationship with Nintendo
| because of the Tegra X1 powering the switch so it's not a
| situation of Valve communicating with Nintendo as much as
| it's Valve letting Nvidia make ports out of their back
| catalog by occasionally going "I will allow it" whenever
| Nvidia Lightspeed Studios asks politely enough.
| ouid wrote:
| Why would they need one? Just use an emulator
| aeturnum wrote:
| It seems like Valve has re-uploaded without the emulator,
| but I think there's a case to be made that this sets
| expectations for Valve and Nintendo in an important way.
|
| Valve is not selling a walled garden product and if you are
| expecting them to administer the steam deck like one you
| will be disappointed. If that's not for you then you should
| not go into business with Valve - it would be painful for
| both parties.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| What relationship with Nintendo? Nintendo has no games
| listed on Steam, and the only Valve game on any Nintendo
| platform is the recent Portal port.
| devwastaken wrote:
| The more emulation becomes mainstream the more money Nintendo
| will invest to illegalize it. You cannot legally get roms of
| commercial games, even if you own the game. Breaking of DRM
| is automatically copyright infringement according to the
| DMCA.
| wildzzz wrote:
| If there is a way to make a backup of a game you own while
| still preserving whatever DRM exists, it would be legal.
| Like if you had some device that could dump the contents of
| the Switch cartridge without cracking any DRM, then your
| backups would be legal. The hard part is that "cracking
| DRM" could mean anything since it could be construed that
| any sort of electronic signals between your backup device
| and the cart that emulates a retail Switch is bypassing
| DRM. Ripping a CD or making a completely intact copy of
| retail software are probably the only legitimate backups
| you can make without technically breaking the law. Really
| the only "legal" thing you could do with Yuzu is to play
| homebrew. It would be like owning a really fancy bong in a
| country where weed is illegal, surely you could put legal
| tobacco in it but it really works a lot better with weed.
| scheeseman486 wrote:
| This is a very hazy area, made more hazy by the main method
| of getting games off of a Switch being a dev mode
| implemented by the hardware designers at Nintendo/Nvidia
| that is enabled by bridging two pins on the JoyCon
| connector which completely bypasses the DRM. Is using
| hardware features as designed "breaking" DRM? Hard to make
| that argument when they left the door wide open, unlocked
| and trivial to use.
| zerocrates wrote:
| The DMCA's language is something like "circumventing an
| effective technological restriction," but I don't think
| "effective" really gets much juice. Like, despite the
| total brokenness of DVD CSS by now, it's still going to
| be "effective." On the other hand "circumvention" sweeps
| up conduct that just bypasses DRM rather than actually
| breaking it.
|
| Edit: for accuracy, it's "circumvent a technological
| measure that effectively controls access" to a
| copyrighted work.
| danhor wrote:
| There's also an exploit in the USB stack of the boot ROM
| involved, so it's not quite "using it as intended". I'd
| argue ntrboot on 3DS is much closer to what you're
| suggesting, using a built-in repair access mechanism
| dependent on long(er) broken crypto.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| I will admit that I am mildly concerned with this myself. I
| dislike that everywhere now there are youtube videos
| showing off how you can make play Switch games, but on
| Deck. We are effectively forcing Nintendo's hands. While it
| was a niche thing, they mostly didn't have to care and now
| they might have to..
|
| Things MAY work out to the benefit of regular users (
| though often they work out to the benefit of those with
| best lawyers ). All I am saying is, if push comes to shove,
| as much as I would like to believe Gabe will actually fight
| this should Nintendo go after them somehow ( and I will
| actually spend money on Steam to fund it if needed ), it
| would have been so much better if it stayed a hobbyist
| thing.
|
| Edit: And for the record. I love my Deck. I love that in
| the sea of closed off crap, Steam made it all this magic
| come together.
| p1necone wrote:
| Emulation hasn't been a niche thing since the 90s,
| emulating older systems has always been wildly popular.
|
| Emulating the Switch specifically is maybe a niche thing
| because the emulators are relatively new, the system is
| still sold and you can easily buy the games.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Yes, but in the 90s there were no esports, gaming wasn't
| a billion dollar industry ( with advertising[1] to
| support that ).
|
| <<Emulation hasn't been a niche thing since the 90s,
| emulating older systems has always been wildly popular.
|
| Compared to today it was popular amongst some
| enthusiasts, who already self-selected from perceived
| social outcasts. Gaming has only recently become more
| mainstream, socially acceptable AND ridiculously
| profitable.
|
| The target is that much bigger. I stand by my 'it used to
| be a niche', because even being interested in computers
| was not a mainstream interest.
|
| [1]https://www.gameskinny.com/ggtms/10-best-video-game-
| commerci...
|
| edit:
|
| Seems I was off with a billion number, but it is still
| nowhere near 2017's 100b global video game industry
| estimate.
|
| [2]https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Video_game_industry
| wudangmonk wrote:
| They can invest in it but they cannot predict the outcome.
| I'd like to see DMCA go up against property rights.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| It is a big gamble. I mean, if any company can pull it
| off now, it is Steam. It has money, position and fairly
| vocal customer base, but are you sure this would be
| enough to stave off a relentless swarm of lobbyists
| descending upon WH?
| Gigachad wrote:
| The DMCA does not exist in all countries. It's perfectly
| legal to break DRM in many places.
| [deleted]
| manojlds wrote:
| Because Valve wouldn't want you to emulate Steam games as
| well (which people do, for online stuff). Valve and Nintendo
| are on the same side of this.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| I'm confused. Please define "emulate Steam games".
| jtvjan wrote:
| There are replacements for steamapi.dll that let you play
| games without needing to have Steam open (e.g.
| "Goldberg"). These are sometimes called 'Steam
| Emulators'.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Given how Proton works, one could even make the argument
| that the SteamDeck's primary function is to emulate steam
| games.
| lights0123 wrote:
| _Pirating_ games. Valve doesn 't care if you play games you
| buy not on their hardware (being their original business),
| while Nintendo doesn't want you playing Switch games on a
| computer even if you bought the game.
| oneoff786 wrote:
| Can you play the same game on two devices from the same
| steam account without hiding offline?
| ThrowawayTestr wrote:
| At the same time? Not that I know of. But then doing so
| would be a violation of the game licence.
| dleslie wrote:
| Steam's presence API only supports one playing device at
| a time. It wouldn't be able to understand multiple active
| playing games on one account.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| So it claims, but many games let you click X on that
| dialog and play other games. I have an old laptop which
| is basically a dedicated Civ 6 machine. I can still play
| any other steam game on my desktop while the laptop has
| Civ open.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Steam doesn't enforce DRM. You can usually go to the game
| files and just click the launcher from the file manager
| and the game will run without steam getting involved.
| Sure its not the most officially supported, but they
| hardly prevent you from doing it.
| ErneX wrote:
| I think it's pretty obvious most people using Switch
| emulators are getting the games on the net for free. So it's
| awkward to show that on promotional material of another
| handheld device.
| redox99 wrote:
| Only because it's _very_ hard to pay for switch ROMs. As
| gaben himself said, "Piracy is almost always a service
| problem and not a pricing problem".
|
| If getting switch ROMs were as easy as buying any other
| game on Steam, most people would probably pay, the same way
| most people already pay instead of pirating PC games.
| bakugo wrote:
| >I think it's pretty obvious most people using Switch
| emulators are getting the games on the net for free.
|
| Have people already forgotten what Gabe himself said all
| those years ago? Piracy is a service problem, Nintendo does
| not provide any way to obtain these games legally for
| emulation (and often does not provide any way at all of
| accessing their games from previous platforms), so of
| course people pirate them. I thankfully still have a fully
| working launch year Switch so I can do whatever I want but
| it's not particularly convenient and most people don't have
| this privilege at all.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Tbh Nintendo does make it particularly hard to pay and
| emulate. To legally emulate switch games you have to buy
| and then dump them, but if you hack your switch to dump
| them, you get banned from the estore so you can no longer
| buy them.
|
| Personally I'd be happy to pay money and get access to the
| game ROMs to run on an emulator because I find it more
| convenient to play them in an emulator than to switch a
| bunch of cables to put the switch on my monitor.
| bakugo wrote:
| >but if you hack your switch to dump them, you get banned
| from the estore so you can no longer buy them.
|
| You actually don't, and I have to give credit to nintendo
| for this one, there are only a few ways you can get
| banned (the main one being installing pirated games, the
| switch has telemetry that sends back data about the
| signatures of the games you have installed) but just
| running simple homebrew isn't one of them, you can load
| up custom firmware and run a game dumper without getting
| banned just fine. You can even play online with it active
| (I have done it).
|
| The bigger problem is that only very old models of the
| console can be hacked without having to solder a modchip
| so this is completely inaccessible to most switch owners.
| fit2rule wrote:
| bravetraveler wrote:
| I don't really get the buzz, it's Linux and has flatpak. You want
| to emulate it? Install it
| [deleted]
| knaik94 wrote:
| While this is legal, Nintendo is very vocally anti-emulation.
| Nintendo and Denuvo announced anti-emulation measures for switch
| games in August 2022. There's a big difference between support
| and marketing support. Nintendo doesn't care what other companies
| do internally, but cares a lot about what is shown publicly. I
| remember when Nintendo took down a bunch of youtube videos
| showing how to jailbreak the original switch. Nintendo isn't
| coming to PC anytime soon though, so I can't imagine this having
| any major impact, but it is bad manners. Video and thumbnail
| edited out Yuzu.
| confident_inept wrote:
| Emulation aside, the Steam Deck has been compared to the Switch
| in some capacity or another in almost every single review I have
| ever seen of it. While I wouldn't think it's had any negative
| impact on Switch sales, it's a absolute fact that the Deck can
| emulate a multitude of games at performance parity or _better_
| than the Switch itself. The deck is constantly lauded as an
| emulation powerhouse and the Switch appears frequently in the
| discourse.
|
| Emulation legality aside, Nintendo would certainly be the company
| I would expect to pressure Valve for a case against enabling and
| abetting piracy given their history of legally attacking
| perceived "competition".
| lousken wrote:
| And what's the problem exactly? It's just emulation - if anything
| should cause a stir, it should be nintendo for their anti-
| consumer behaviour
| numpad0 wrote:
| That only worked because Nintendo HQ didn't have good
| visibility of markets outside ground transportation ranges from
| it.
| hyperhopper wrote:
| Exactly. Whats the worst that can happen to valve?
|
| Nintendo: "oh no, how dare you show that your product can do
| something that's perfectly legal and a very common use"
| mgraczyk wrote:
| "Portal 3 will not be available on Switch"
| hyperhopper wrote:
| It's okay it has a 3 in the name, it won't be on steam
| either
| scheeseman486 wrote:
| That sucks for Nintendo more than Valve. Portal 1 & 2
| weren't even a Valve push, Nvidia Lightspeed was the lead.
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| Side note, is anyone using one of these as a daily driver
| computer for development?
|
| The specs look decent enough and the price is cheaper than a
| laptop.
| dewey wrote:
| Cheaper than a laptop? You could get a cheaper laptop with
| better or equal specs if you buy used or get something from a
| previous year. A lot less hassle than trying to get something
| on custom hardware to run with no real upside.
| ThatMedicIsASpy wrote:
| Used T480(s) T490(s) is starting at 400-500EUR
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Is it cheaper than a laptop? For $400 you can get a pretty good
| chromebook that has a full size screen and keyboard.
|
| That said, it would probably work so long as you connected an
| external keyboard.
| TillE wrote:
| There aren't a lot of serious use cases, but if you're a casual
| / indie game developer, it's great as sort of a complete Linux
| dev kit that's also a fun toy.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Not exactly, but I ssh'ed into my mine, because my sausage
| fingers couldn't handle messing around with correcting
| corrupted emudeck profile. It is basically a PC. It ran Kingdom
| Come and CP77 well with heatwave being the only apparent
| notable side effect. I am sure people will soon be posting all
| sorts of weird deck setups:>
| jeroenhd wrote:
| The stock OS comes with some weird stuff preconfigured (no
| encryption, weird partition layout, etc.) so it depends on how
| you use it. For example, you'll need to mount the system
| partition r/w for things like kernel updates and I wouldn't
| dare enable AUR on an OS explicitly designed to be updated
| through a third party update system without having a recovery
| disk handy at all times. This limitation has some impact (i.e.
| installing DisplayLink drivers can be a challenge) but it's
| still Arch but fancy.
|
| Hook it up to a dock and it should work and perform like a
| laptop. With a decent CPU, quick SSD and 16GB of RAM you should
| be able to do certain types of dev work quite comfortably if
| you hook up a display or two, a mouse and a keyboard.
|
| The thing just runs Flatpak so stuff like VS Code and Jetbrains
| products will run perfectly fine.
| jitl wrote:
| Oof, the linked trailer on YouTube shows "This video is private"
| for me.
| priner2 wrote:
| Looks like they reuploaded it, with Yuzu cut out. (around 1:40
| in the video)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRnZrSBK3R4
| RajT88 wrote:
| Oddly enough, the light that Humble Bundles have shone into
| gaming revenue cycles has made me question our copyright system
| as a whole.
|
| Stay with me.
|
| In Europe during the time of Mozart, composers were incentivized
| to be prolific by only getting royalties off the first public
| performance of their works. Now that is not fair today because of
| course we can losslessy reproduce such things infinitely.
|
| However, Humble Bundles (and really, steam sales and other
| similar discounts and give-aways) work because the vast majority
| of the money a game is ever likely to make is early in the
| revenue cycle. Not 20 or 10 or even 5 years later.
|
| We don't know the revenue Nintendo derives from virtual console
| sales, but you can be assured that virtually none of it is making
| it to the creators which is who copyright is designed to protect.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| I'd prefer a system, where the author has to actually and
| actively be trying to make money in a specific market, before
| the copyright can be applied in that specific case (as with
| trademark law, where the owner has to actively protect the
| trademark).
|
| Some nintendo games are currently not available anywhere (from
| nintendo or from original publisher), but if you copy/download
| that rom, you can get fined due to fictional losses for the
| copyright holder. What losses? If you're not selling the game
| anymore, how can you have losses from it? If you're not selling
| that movie in my country, how can you show a loss from me
| downloading it?
| EMIRELADERO wrote:
| > We don't know the revenue Nintendo derives from virtual
| console sales, but you can be assured that virtually none of it
| is making it to the creators which is who copyright is designed
| to protect.
|
| I too have many gripples with copyright but this is simply
| wrong. Copyright is designed to protect the _rightsholder_.
| Whether it is a person or a company is irrelevant. This isn 't
| a conspiracy or cynical-type explanation, this is _by design_
| [deleted]
| ece wrote:
| I'm not an author or artist, but you only need to search for
| tweets about copyright on Twitter to see it benefits the
| rightsholders a bit too much. If the term was shorter, maybe
| it would be different. Of course the reason the term is
| longer is because of rightsholders.
| dleslie wrote:
| Very few humble bundle products are financially successful.
| It's easy to think otherwise because of the standout few.
| zerocrates wrote:
| In terms of moneymaking, copyright's long term is more relevant
| for video games in that it includes the right to make
| derivative works (i.e.: sequels). Certainly there are
| franchises that have lived longer than 20 years.
|
| Ports, remasters, official emulation, and subscriptions have
| given a longer "tail" for at least a handful of classics but
| even without that it's "the IP" that would be most jealously
| guarded.
| grayfaced wrote:
| I think it'd be a stretch to say sequels are covered by
| derivative works. Trademark would be the primary protection
| and would function for sequels with no copyright protection
| at all.
| zerocrates wrote:
| Sequels that share or build on characters, plot, and so on
| with their predecessors are definitely derivative works.
| (Let's ignore the literal sharing of assets and bits of
| code that's also common for sequels since that's obviously
| more straightforward, and not strictly necessary.)
|
| Trademark definitely comes into play, and is probably the
| more important form of IP here in practice (and for some
| series may be the only really effective protection). But
| you still couldn't go out and make a game with Master Chief
| or Nathan Drake even if you called it something other than
| Halo or Uncharted.
|
| Trademarks are also interesting and somewhat unique for
| video games: the typical rule is that the title of a book
| or movie, etc. is not eligible for a trademark. You need a
| name that's being used for a series to get a trademark. But
| video games are excluded from this rule and can (and almost
| always do) get trademarks for their titles even when
| they're standalones.
| jimbob45 wrote:
| _We don 't know the revenue Nintendo derives from virtual
| console sales, but you can be assured that virtually none of it
| is making it to the creators which is who copyright is designed
| to protect._
|
| An advocate for the devil would claim that those creators were
| compensated upfront rather than over the lifetime of the
| product. Therefore, the company is rightfully collecting the
| revenue that the creator left to them that they always paid
| for.
| dewey wrote:
| To the people saying "it's completely legal, what can Nintendo
| do" it might be worth considering that not everything is about
| legal / not legal. Companies and people have relationships and
| it's not always about if something is technically allowed, it's
| about how it's being understood by the other party and in this
| case it's pretty clear that Nintendo is not a big fan of
| emulators.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Nintendo also isn't a big fan of people playing Super Smash
| Bros competitively. They're allowed to have their opinions but
| I don't see why anyone needs to respect such silly opinions.
| dewey wrote:
| There's a difference between a random consumer respecting
| their opinions and businesses working in the same industry
| not trying to put them in a weird position.
| jareklupinski wrote:
| makes sense
|
| I've seen a lot of formerly xbox and playstation exclusive
| titles start popping up on Steam... so you wouldn't need an
| emulator for those...
|
| No other way to get Mario on Steam yet though ;)
| scheeseman486 wrote:
| Valve include access to Flathub on the Deck by default, a
| repository that distributes Yuzu. The degree of separation is a
| little larger than outright distributing on Steam, though must
| be said, Valve already distribute Nintendo emulators on the
| store including Wii/Gamecube via RetroArch. Switch is more
| recent, but Nintendo are still selling games that released on
| those platforms.
|
| The only thing I can see this threatening is native JoyCon/Pro
| Controller support on Steam (more specifically use of their
| controller glyphs) if Nintendo want to get real vindictive.
| Otherwise there doesn't appear to be much of an existing
| relationship to be threatened.
| ng12 wrote:
| Nintendo is notoriously as hostile as they come, especially to
| the PC gaming market. Since Valve is all-in on PC I don't see
| why they should be the ones to play nice.
| bakugo wrote:
| Nintendo has no relationship with Valve or really PC gaming as
| a whole at all. They are pretty much as hostile as it gets
| towards any platform that isn't their own, to the point that a
| planned collaboration with Fortnite fell through because they
| were simply not willing to allow any of their characters to be
| visible on other platforms.
|
| Valve isn't burning any bridges here because there were no
| bridges to begin with.
| dewey wrote:
| 3 seconds in a trailer for a niche feature are not worth
| offending your competitor over.
| bakugo wrote:
| Nintendo is not a direct competitor. And even if they were,
| what exactly does Valve have to lose here?
| yissp wrote:
| Portal was released on the Switch, so presumably they do
| have some sort of relationship.
| bakugo wrote:
| As someone else already pointed out, this was likely done
| through Nvidia, they had already done an ARM port of
| Portal for the Shield which is basically the same
| hardware as the Switch so they probably just asked Valve
| and they said "sure, why not"
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-08 23:00 UTC)