Honestly, a bit surprised by this. It wasn’t even on Steam. Hopefully switching to an open source SDK will get this back up.

  • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    “Hey, don’t use code for our dead game console we stopped manufacturing 22 years ago and don’t support anymore!”

    Who gives a fuck, Nintendo?

  • WalrusByte@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s a shame, but their request doesn’t seem unreasonable. No one likes dealing with Nintendo’s lawyers. I hope switching SDKs works out!

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        If there’s anything I’ve learned from my interactions with my local (city) government, it’s that staff lawyers are lazy fucks who won’t lift a finger to do what’s clearly the right thing without somebody else that has power whipping them along.

  • Zoolander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I think people are missing the fact that most fanmade content that Valve has historically been ok with is all original material. Black Mesa, Portal Stories, and others all used the Valve IP but were all original content. This port actually uses Valve-created content so, regardless of Nintendo’s involvement (although it makes the demand for this action stronger), they legally have to enforce it or risk losing the legal protections for that property.

    Nintendo just gave them a convenient way to stop it before they needed to do it anyways.

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I don’t think thats how it works for copyright. You have to defend your trademarks to keep them but for copyright, you can decide who can use it rather arbitralily.

      Especially allowing a release of an old game on platform you don’t support which would not really compete with you.

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s not about whether it competes. It’s about whether a “reasonable person” could confuse it for being an authorized product of the IP owner. In this case, people could confuse it with both a licensed Nintendo product (since it runs on original hardware) and it could be confused with an official Valve release (since the content is an exact (as possible) recreation of the levels and assets from the original game.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          So you are clearly talking about trademark. A game design can’t be trademarked. Only the name. Yes, if the name could be confused, that could be an issue. Maybe the cover art to some extent, if it is trademarked.

          But if the game origin can be confused, so what? No law against that.

  • Quokka@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    10 months ago

    It sucks but I also wouldn’t want to get involved with Nintendos lawyers so I can’t blame Steam.

  • BroBot9000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    10 months ago

    Stop with the fan projects already.

    These companies don’t give a shit and will just squash any project that they can’t milk for funding.

    Best case scenario you never release your work in fear of getting sued and nobody gets to play your game.

    Make new projects inspired by these games and actually build your own fanbase instead of being at the behest of greedy corporations.

    • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      You know, you chose a bad post to get edgy.

      Valve is actually one of the companies that treats fan projects very well, sometimes they’ll even let you sell your project on Steam (see Black Mesa remake).

      • vexikron@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Yeah… what this likely means is one or both of two things, for this Portal Demake and the Source 2 TF2 thing mentioned by another below:

        1: Valve is still quite protective of their IP and may be working on their own new releases of some kind in these IP franchises.

        and/or

        2: Valve is still quite protective of these IPs and may have identified something like serious misconduct regarding something about these particular projects, or the people working on them… or they just are not looking to be even good quality games, and Valve does not want their actual games to be associated with or confused with games they expect to be of low quality.

        I realize option 2 there is a bitter pill for many to swallow, but we are talking about a gaming company that is fairly well known for taking actually good mod ideas and at least attempting to hire or in some capacity work with the devs to create what often turned out to be successful games.

        They are notorious for high standards in their own IPs. You’ve got Black Mesa and I think theres one HL2 mod that focuses on you as Commander Shepard from Opposing Force that were both actually greenlit to be sold, for money, as games on Steam, as well as a large number of successful HL2 mods that were not cancelled and are distributed for free by Steam, including Entropy Zero 1/2 and MINERVA.

        Its actually pretty uncommon for Valve to DMCA Cease and Desist over mods… theres probably more at play here than just Valve are big meanie heads.

        • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          It’s explained in the article, actually. ;)

          The project was using Nintendo proprietary libraries, and Valve’s already shown on previous occasion that they don’t really want to go to court with sue-happy Nintendo.

          • vexikron@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Dear fucking god yeah then Valve was definitely trying to save these idiots from themselves, thats nearly certain to get them fucked.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            The project was using Nintendo proprietary libraries, and Valve’s already shown on previous occasion that they don’t really want to go to court with sue-happy Nintendo.

            Why would Valve be sued by Nintendo, considering that they aren’t involved with that fan project at all?

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          The actually law DEMANDS you defend your IP or you effectively lose it

          • woelkchen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            The actually law DEMANDS you defend your IP or you effectively lose it

            Portal64 builds the ROM locally. A legal copy of Portal for PC is required to extract and convert the assets. Websites distributing the finished ROM are liable for copyright violation against Valve but Valve isn’t liable for anything regarding that fan project by Nintendo.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              You know that’s not how lawyers view projects in development

              • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                You know that’s not his lawyers view projects in development

                You know that Nintendo’s lawyers did not even raise a finger, right?

          • vexikron@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yep.

            After a tiny bit more research, it looks like for the Portal Demake, Valve did not even actually issue a Cease and Desist, they actually just heavily recommended the project be cancelled /out of fear of the devs being fucked by the far, far more absurdly litigious Nintendo/.

            While I think Nintendo’s actually legal argument in that, which would basically be that a whole art style from the lower res and lower poly graphics constitutes essentially their brand … I think this is bullshit and legally dubious, but of course Nintendo has faaaar more money to throw at lawyers than some random indie dev, so theyd likely have their lives ruined one way of another.

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Valve is actually one of the companies that treats fan projects very well

        Well, not this fan project…

          • woelkchen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            No, but one example does not define everything.

            Before the announcement of Counter-Strike 2, a hobbyist team made a prototype of CSGO in Source 2. Then Valve made them stop. Same with TF:Source2 now.

        • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes, but Valve didn’t block it based on their own IP. The focus really should be on the fact that Nintendo is so litigious. This was a fan project of a non-Nintendo IP. Their reputation is preceding them.

        • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sure did. It’s really not that hard to understand why Valve would not let someone remake a game that still hovers at around #50th place in Steam’s most played games globally…

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s a lot harder…

      Not just to design and come up with, but to get people to even try it.

      The smart move is to make something like this, release your own game, then release the fan project which brings visibility to your original game.

      • clayh@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        lol “the smart move is to make 2 games before you release one”

        No shit

        Any other nuggets of wisdom? “The even smarter move is to make 3 games before you release one”?

          • clayh@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Not really, the onion is good satire while your comment is hot garbage that you pretend is satire because you realized how asinine your original comment was.

            The smarter move would have been to release the onion comment first then release your original comment after you had some upvotes.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Along with that, contribute to Free Software games instead of working for free to improve commercial for-profit ones.

  • Gravitywell@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    So because it depends on Nintendo libraries, valve wanted it taken down, but valve doesn’t represent nintendo and the project isn’t by them or on steam, so who’s actually at risk of being sued and why?

    If Nintendo asked the developer to stop using Nintendo stuff I’d get it, but in that case it was never legal to begin with and the developer knew they had no license to use those libraries, so why all of a sudden does the developer not want to continue at the request of valve, are they an employee of valve or something? This is super weird, its not even a nintendo IP

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Pure speculation:

      Nitendo is one of the most notorious copyright litigators in the industry, it would not surprise me if they objected to the use of their libraries and pressured valve to exercise their ownership of the IP to shut it down

      I know nothing about this, so honestly don’t listen to me. But Nitendo is a huge joykill so I’m happy just assuming it’s at least partly their fault

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    How do grown ass adults look at this and think anything other than “damn, that’s pretty cool!”? Literally nobody and no company has any conceivable money to lose over this and couldn’t convince me otherwise. Law should have nothing to do with all this pussyfooting about legality.

    • torvusbogpod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      10 months ago

      Valve removed it because it used official N64 APIs that Nintendo holds as classified information. I think if it had totally been bottom-up crafted from scratch, it would have survived. But Valve does NOT wanna deal with a Nintendo lawyer.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Right, but what the heck is up with Nintendo clinging into ancient obsolete stuff? They’re not stupid right?

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes, Nintendo is stupid. They see capitalism as a zero-sum game, and so any time someone has or keeps their own money, that’s the same as Nintendo losing that money, so they do whatever they’re legally able to do to ruin people financially, going as far as taking 30% of your income for the rest of your life if you do wrong by them.

        • ShustOne@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          No but Nintendo is fiercely protective of all of its IP. We know there’s not really harm being done here but it is within their rights to block this and that is the road they always choose.

      • hikaru755@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Wait but why is Valve involved at all, then? Not like it’s their fault that some people they have nothing to do with are building a game based on those APIs, so shouldn’t Nintendo approach the developers of the port directly instead?

        • mint_tamas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Nintendo sues everyone they encounter in the faintest context of their IP with the power of a thousand suns. See also, the failed launch if Dolphin on Steam. Valve is justifiably cautious here.

        • viking@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Valve holds the copyright to Portal, so Nintendo probably just “encouraged” them to pull some strings.

      • Demdaru@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I may be overinterpreting this but it almooost seems, if you stretch it a bit, as if valve saved poor guys. Valve said stop, Nintendo’d say pay up.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Why do grown adults keep using IP copyrighted by big companies? Unofficial ports, unofficial remakes, unofficial sequels, etc. get taken down all the time and yet constantly the creators think “no, my project is special. It’ll be spared that fate” and almost every time they’re wrong.

      A Portal-like game without using Portal assets and Valve had no leg to stand on…

      • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        A Portal-like game without using Portal assets and Valve had no leg to stand on…

        This wasn’t taken down because it was based on Portal. It has nothing to do with Portal or Valve, really. It was taken down becuase it uses the official N64 SDK, which is still for some reason considered “confidential.” Valve said to take it down either under duress from Nintendo, or because Valve expected to be under duress from Nintendo and didn’t want to be. If it had used the libdragon API library instead of Nintendo’s official one, then this wouldn’t have happened and Nintendo would have been told to bite rocks.

      • nbafantest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It started out as a fun project by just a normal guy.

        It is literally not possible to make a game like this any other way.

        I would bet the concept goes underground and continues tho.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          He uses Valve IP, therefore Valve was even the position to make any demands in the first place.

          Valve cannot just go through the homebrew community and demand takedowns of random games. They could in this case solely because they own the assets. How is this so hard to understand that I have to repeat myself over and over again?

          • nbafantest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Do you think it’s hard to understand?

            I don’t think you understand that it was started as a fun side project to see if he could actually do it. He wasn’t trying to make the next AAA game

    • dezmd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Why would a grown ass adult put so much effort into an unlicensed dupilcation of copyrighted IP (Valve) and build it on top of a system from a company known for ridiculous enofrcement of IP that had a walled garden of access to their game system IP that is protected by the copyright cabal supported DMCA?

      There’s more sides and nuance to all of this.

      He could’ve made Portal in the style of a 90s console instead of directly declaring it N64 and only had to tend with permission for it as a mod from Valve’s sometimes permissive pov without crazy assed 'Tendo being involved.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Because that’s cool as fuck.

        If he did it your way, that defeats the purpose of the constraints in the exercise.

  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    My bet is that Valve doesn’t like it when you reproduce their games using the same name, since both this and TF2 source 2 got hit, but we also got an original portal mod on steam last week, and Black Mesa is a monetized remake of HL1 that exists on steam.

    Hell there are dozens of mods and expansions available directly on steam with their own store page instead of workshop.

    • dan1101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      If the name is the problem and Valve wants to be cool they could just say that.

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        That’s not the only problem, I think. It’s not an adaptation of their work, it’s a “demake” which means it uses original source files or, at best, exact recreations of that work. The other projects people are comparing this to adapted Valve’s work to make something original. This isn’t original and uses the existing name. It would be very easy for Valve to make the claim that this product could be confused as an official Valve product even if most people who are interested would know the difference or be able to tell.

    • Schrodinger's Dinger @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Valve has stated that they are okay with people making mods using their property, as long as they either openly state that they are not Valve, and do not use Valves IP in their names unless they ask for permission by Valve, which they will give in many cases. They are more strict when it comes to commercial games using their IP, of course. I think in the case of Portal 64 though, it definitely has to do with Nintendo’s ridiculously over the top protection of their copyrights.

    • thoughtorgan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Black Mesa was also limited by valve in some minor ways

      I remember being at PAX East in 2019 before COVID, and they had a booth there. They had big box copies of Black Mesa which I thought was really cool, I wanted to buy one just to have on display. But they said valve actually said they weren’t allowed to sell them. It was only for a promotional purposes at the booth.

  • Walop@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Valve has been quite supportive of fan projects like Black Mesa and Delta Particles and only demanding to remove Half-Life from the name to protect their trademark. But I guess they don’t want to risk involving Nintendo.

  • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    if nintendo has the potential to take legal action against valve for this I dont blame them for doing this. Nintendo has some fucking balls to the walls lawyers that will do anything to protect their IPs. Valve has every reason to be afraid of nintendo

    • bitwolf@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      They also likely have a touchy relationship right now considering the removal of dolphin.

    • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t think Nintendo would have a case against Valve, only against the developers of the demake. It looks more like Valve wants to maintain a good relationship with Nintendo, given Valve has ported Portal to the Switch and may intend to port more of their back catalog.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Some people are also saying valve gave the guy a friendly warning about using the Nintendo sdk rather than sending a cease and desist, and the reporting on it was misleading