Update 22/03/24, 10:56 UTC - While GitLab have not responded to my email, the team behind suyu are continuing on. As one of their team posted in Discord, which seems invites are open for again:
So they will be sticking to their own hosted Git now.
Original article below:
Well, that didn't last long did it. After a first release, GitLab have already pulled down the Nintendo Switch emulator suyu, due to a DMCA hit as a result of it being forked from yuzu which Nintendo shut down.
Even though the suyu team were doing it as a non-profit, with no way to donate, it seems this didn't matter because it's based on a project that was already taken down. The GitLab page now just gives a 404 error — it's just gone. The suyu Discord is also no longer accepting invites, probably due to an influx of people wondering what's going on.
A few people managed to grab the notice that was sent to the suyu team like Mr. Sujano on X:
So it looks like this may very well be the end of the road for suyu on GitLab. At least for emulation fans, Ryujinx is still going. Since yuzu was open source though, Nintendo will have plenty of trouble fully erasing it, since even a very quick Google search showed up plenty of it still existing on the web across various places.
I've reached out to GitLab for more info…will update if they reply.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
Quoting: bonkmaykrbut seeing as Yuzu was kind of a big deal and was fairly profitable off donations alone for a community project I don't see why they couldn't afford a court battle.Because a court battle against the likes of Nintendo is really, really expensive.
2 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Mar 25
Quoting: NozoEULAs are still contracts, and not everything said in a EULA can be enforced, and contracts that involve illegal activities are void. Certainly private monopolies are one of them.My understanding of a EULA is that they are not enforceable in anyway. They're not a contract, they're an agreement. Asking you to agree to terms for usage of the software.
If they were contracts and fell under contract law, EITHER side could contest any changes to that contract. This isn't the case for EULAs, as the companies can just randomly update them and in some current cases (like Roku) you can't use the device anymore if you don't accept their new terms. It's pretty much bullshit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgV9VWeCnN4
0 Likes
Quoting: MrowlWhat we need is a world in which Nintendo is no longer relevant to the next generation of kids.Don't worry, Nintendo's already going about that themselves - they've done all they can to drive away their long-time fans who were actually willing to give their failures a chance, in favour of a fickle newer audience that's easier to manipulate into buying DLC and subscriptions, and they've also allowed some games to be co-opted to promote rival products over their own. Give it a few years and Nintendo's efforts to make themselves irrelevant will bear fruit.
Quoting: MrowlWhat we need is for developers to outright rip off Nintendo's style of games, but make them multiplatform.Not quite the same thing (though there is lots of overlap), but we've got a list going on over on the forum (yes, yes, second shameless plug guys, I'm sorry
) covering titles that hit the same general vibe and quality that Nintendo used to be known for. Please contribute if you know of any titles that should be on it! 
Quoting: Purple Library GuyBecause a court battle against the likes of Nintendo is really, really expensive.And if you lose, you'll end up indentured to Nintendo for the rest of your life, like Gary Bowser.
4 Likes, Who?
TheRiddick Mar 26
Unless the government or a major testing legal battle happens and the opposition party doesn't fold under the weight and thus makes it through court fully. Nintendo will continue to pull this wherever they can, they have made it VERY CLEAR to the community that THEY DO NOT tolerate emulation of their games or platforms regardless of legal standings in each country/state!
The heavy weight champion declares victory because nobody challenged him to a fight!
The heavy weight champion declares victory because nobody challenged him to a fight!
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Penglingwe've got a list going on over on the forum (yes, yes, second shameless plug guys, I'm sorry ) covering titles that hit the same general vibe and quality that Nintendo used to be known for. Please contribute if you know of any titles that should be on it!
Yes, I have 2 games, you should definitely add to the list:
The first is Palworld. It bears so much similarity to Pokémon that Nintendo and the Pokémon company were investigating a possible lawsuit.
The general idea is that it's "Pokémon with guns" and it's basically an open world survival game, like Ark and Rust, etc. So quite different from Pokémon, but still features "cute" monsters that you help you fight, etc.
It has already sold 25 million+, mostly on Steam, but it's also on Xbox and coming to more platforms.
It's the first truly objective sign that a Pokémon style game can be a massive success outside of Nintendo hardware in today's era. It also runs okay'ish (about 30fps) on Steam Deck.
The next is also a Pokémon-like, though we've heard very little on its development for the past 3-4 years. It's being developed by Pearl Abyss, the team behind Black Desert Online, so I don't think it's vapourware just yet.
It was one of the most talked about trailers of GamesCom 2021; it's Dokév:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7Xlr_EQysA
This looks absolutely insane, and graphically far more ambitious that any Pokémon game. And again, they're aiming for a multiplatform release.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: MrowlYes, I have 2 games, you should definitely add to the list:Do you mind if I quote you over in the thread (unless you want to hop on over there and post it yourself?), to keep it all together?
0 Likes
Quoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: LoftyNintendo make money off of selling hardware and of course a few of their exclusive IP's. You being able to emulate switch on PC won't hurt them one bit, but everyone else doing it with consummate ease en-mass & on a steam deck in higher quality which is just a much better switch like platform would and eventually probably will destroy Nintendo.Maybe, but that's not the customer's problem. Businesses are not entitled to abusive business models simply on the basis that they wouldn't be able to make money on non-abusive business models. That's why we have antitrust laws, child labour laws, product safety laws and on and on. So if the question is "Should businesses have the right to dictate what hardware I use to run software I bought from them?" the answer does not hinge on whether they will lose money from not being able to do it. Nor does it have anything to do with whether they put some kind of encryption on it to enforce their ability to so dictate, even if there's a law with a clause that says it's illegal to circumvent their encryption.
And there is an answer to the question. The answer is "No, businesses should not have that right. If I buy something, I should be able to do anything I want with it that isn't illegal for real reasons unconnected with that business' ability to exploit me." In fact, the whole thing where when you buy software you are claimed to have "licensed" it and have to click on a EULA is bullshit from start to finish. I don't sign a EULA when I buy a TV, even though it probably has software in it.
That's not the same case, it's even worse. In this case, Nintendo restricts platform/hardware you are able to play with games of other companies. It is anti-free-market.
0 Likes
Quoting: LachuDidn't mean to give the impression that I thought all Nintendo was doing was using EULAs; I was just giving that as an example of the kind of thing that shouldn't really be allowed.Quoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: LoftyNintendo make money off of selling hardware and of course a few of their exclusive IP's. You being able to emulate switch on PC won't hurt them one bit, but everyone else doing it with consummate ease en-mass & on a steam deck in higher quality which is just a much better switch like platform would and eventually probably will destroy Nintendo.Maybe, but that's not the customer's problem. Businesses are not entitled to abusive business models simply on the basis that they wouldn't be able to make money on non-abusive business models. That's why we have antitrust laws, child labour laws, product safety laws and on and on. So if the question is "Should businesses have the right to dictate what hardware I use to run software I bought from them?" the answer does not hinge on whether they will lose money from not being able to do it. Nor does it have anything to do with whether they put some kind of encryption on it to enforce their ability to so dictate, even if there's a law with a clause that says it's illegal to circumvent their encryption.
And there is an answer to the question. The answer is "No, businesses should not have that right. If I buy something, I should be able to do anything I want with it that isn't illegal for real reasons unconnected with that business' ability to exploit me." In fact, the whole thing where when you buy software you are claimed to have "licensed" it and have to click on a EULA is bullshit from start to finish. I don't sign a EULA when I buy a TV, even though it probably has software in it.
That's not the same case, it's even worse. In this case, Nintendo restricts platform/hardware you are able to play with games of other companies. It is anti-free-market.
Meanwhile, I don't actually give a damn if things are anti-free-market. (rant about free markets follows)
Spoiler, click me
Not a big fan of either free markets or the things that actually exist that people call free markets even though they aren't and indeed can't possibly be. Markets are social constructs which are formed and maintained by the creation and enforcement of social rules, sometimes formal, sometimes informal. Markets free of such rules cannot exist. So-called "free" markets are markets in which a certain kind of rule is considered less legitimate and reduced as much as possible--specifically, any rule intended to increase the common good as opposed to that of the individual wealthy profiteer. They work as they're supposed to--they let the Zuckerbergs of the world piss on our heads and tell us it's raining.
I do care if things take power away from actual people.
(Side note: The term "free market" as invented by the classical economists meant something entirely different from what free-marketeers mean by it now. They were talking about markets in which rules were applied for the purpose of squeezing out market "rents", making those markets free of rents. So a classical "free market" would be one in which no firm had the power to erect barriers to entry, create a monopoly or cartel, or otherwise evade competition and use that evasion to raise prices.
For modern free-marketeers, the point is almost opposite, to reduce all rules that might restrict what firms do, under the assumption that anything whatsoever they might choose to do must be efficient because markets, and the underlying motivation is precisely to create a situation that both allows and gives an economic justification for extracting rents to create windfall profits at consumer expense)
I do care if things take power away from actual people.
(Side note: The term "free market" as invented by the classical economists meant something entirely different from what free-marketeers mean by it now. They were talking about markets in which rules were applied for the purpose of squeezing out market "rents", making those markets free of rents. So a classical "free market" would be one in which no firm had the power to erect barriers to entry, create a monopoly or cartel, or otherwise evade competition and use that evasion to raise prices.
For modern free-marketeers, the point is almost opposite, to reduce all rules that might restrict what firms do, under the assumption that anything whatsoever they might choose to do must be efficient because markets, and the underlying motivation is precisely to create a situation that both allows and gives an economic justification for extracting rents to create windfall profits at consumer expense)
0 Likes
Quoting: PenglingQuoting: MrowlYes, I have 2 games, you should definitely add to the list:Do you mind if I quote you over in the thread (unless you want to hop on over there and post it yourself?), to keep it all together?
Sorry for the late reply! Yes, of course!
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me