Login

Metroid II fan remake gets Version 1.1 update

Changes v1.1:

- Fixed gravity suit not being rendered in certain systems.
- Fixed room transition in area 3 entrance.
- Fixed language file detection, the game can be fully translated now.
- Added transport pipe to final area.
- Other minor fixes.

Categories: Portables
Tags: game-boy, metroid

Comments

We're they forced to take this down, or did I miss something?

yes. c&d forced him to take it down but there is always other means to get it

hamr
Sat Aug 20 16 04:05am
Rating: 1

He and the download mirrors received DMCA takedown notices for the original file, which they have complied with.

Relevantly, DMCA takedown notices are not actually C&Ds. They do not bar him from continuing work on the project, and in fact they only apply to the specific file that Nintendo's law firm filled out the DMCA claim against, which is the 1.0 version.

Version 1.1 is technically a different file, so Nintendo's lawyers have to fill out paperwork to get *that* taken down from the current batch of mirrors as well (and as of this moment they have not done so).

nurio
Sat Aug 20 16 02:52am
Rating: 1 (Updated 1 time)

Does the creator know what Cease and Desist means? It doesn't mean "keep working on the game and release updates". He can get into real legal trouble...

Also, the hypocrite. He's talking about how he respects the C&D, but here he is, absolutely not respecting it

hamr
Sat Aug 20 16 03:52am
Rating: 1

"Does the creator know what Cease and Desist means?"

Uh, do you?

"He's talking about how he respects the C&D, but here he is, absolutely not respecting it"

You might want to read that blog entry you are referring to a little closer.

THE FUTURE OF AM2R said:

As you may know already, AM2R received DMCA notices in all the download hosts, and some parts of this blog. So far, no C&D letter was received.

...

What about the future?
I'll continue improving and fixing AM2R privately.

Uh, do you?
Bit of a silly question. Of course I do know what it is. I just mistakenly thought he received a C&D. You should've been able to see that from my post

I'll continue improving and fixing AM2R privately.
Privately does not mean "publish it on the internet through other means other than my own channel"

hamr
Mon Aug 22 16 02:07pm
Rating: 1

"Bit of a silly question."[url]

Considering it was a rhetorical question, bit of a silly answer. Razz

"Privately does not mean "publish it on the internet through other means other than my own channel""

Q: How will updates will be released, if at all?
A: I'm still working on it.

...please visit the forum, and I'll eventually provide a fix.

Considering it was a rhetorical question, bit of a silly answer.
If your rhetoric was wrong, of course I answer the question and correct it. I do know what a C&D is.

And anyway, I'm not sure why you have this 'cheeky' attitude towards me. Yes, I mistakenly thought he received a C&D, but I don't see why you need to be like this about it, especially since I long admitted that (and have no issue with admitting that). You're sort of edging towards trolling at this point

Not sure what the point of your quote is and how that has much bearing about what I said. Your previous quote said he is going to do updates privately, which isn't exactly true, since publishing it on the internet is pretty much the opposite of private. Doesn't really matter if he said otherwise at some other time. What he said that time is just wrong

As for another point you made. Even if the guy is legally allowed to create updates and publish them (though I wonder if that means anyone can just change a tiny insignificant thing to dodge a DMCA takedown), it's clear what the idea behind the DMCA claim is. Nintendo doesn't want this game to exist because it infringes on their copyright and impedes on Metroid II sales. The guy was compliant and acted as if it was out of goodwill to Nintendo, but still working on the game and publishing it elsewhere really goes against that mentality

hamr
Mon Aug 22 16 06:30pm
Rating: 1

"I do know what a C&D is."

No, I got that, and I do understand that your real issue is reading comprehension. I figured it would be more polite to merely imply it than state it outright.

"And anyway, I'm not sure why you have this 'cheeky' attitude towards me. "

Well, first, I have a cheeky attitude toward everyone and about everything, so I am not sure why you are not sure.

More specifically to this case, you adopted a strangely aggressive stance on a subject while simultaneously managing to get literally every detail of the story wrong. That warranted correction (and still warrants it, given that you are still getting key parts wrong).

Since expressing that in plain language sounded harsh, I chose to phrase it in the same way that you did.

(I assumed that when you say things like 'does this guy know what 'Cease and Desist' means?', you were also not speaking in the literal sense and were not actually asking someone to inform you on his grasp of the English language?)

When you missed the point of that post, I then made a gentle joke in order to give you an out to laugh the incident off and move on.

However, as you have registered your displeasure with both of the above tacts, I am now going be completely frank and exacting in my use of language.

"Not sure what the point of your quote is and how that has much bearing about what I said."

The point is to provide context for the quote that you are taking out of context. I did not realize this needed to be explicitly highlighted, but both quotes are the same post. Please take my advice and read it more closely (or at all).

"Your previous quote said he is going to do updates privately."

Right, and then he explained what he meant by 'update privately' literally one sentence later, which is that he would work on the updates in private and then release them publicly by whatever means he could come up with.

"Doesn't really matter if he said otherwise at some other time."

It was the same time; he was elaborating. Of course it matters.

"(though I wonder if that means anyone can just change a tiny insignificant thing to dodge a DMCA takedown)"

The short answer is yes.

DMCA takedown notices only apply to the sites that are actually hosting the file and only to the specific file. Congress specifically avoided granting the power to say 'Okay, this notice we issued to Mediafire applies to everyone everywhere (including guys like Megaupload) for every single file this person ever creates (or from other people that resemble this file).'

"Nintendo doesn't want this game to exist"

If that were strictly true, then he *would* have received a C&D (probably during the 8+ years before release where AM2R was known to be development), and the current batch of mirrors would have *also* been DMCAed by now (as of this moment, they are still up).

Trademark law in America requires some degree of evidence that a company is actively defending its trademark. If they do *nothing* to stop imitators, then there is the risk that the trademark will be genericized and made essentially moot.

On the other hand, doing *everything* to stop imitators is both difficult and would incur larger legal fees than the cost of leaving them up in the first place. Nintendo is actually pretty lazy about policing this sort of thing: For instance, there are literally several hundred similar Metroid fan games and ROMhacks online that have *not* been DMCAed.

So we wind up in situations where Nintendo does what they view as basically the bare minimum legally-required of them to impede fan projects so that they can turn around and say to a court 'See, we did something. Our trademark is still vital' before going back to ignoring it.

"The guy was compliant and acted as if"

I am not especially convinced at this point that you even read the blog post in the first place, so your interpretation of his demeanor is not one that inspires much confidence.

Personally, I would paraphrase the sentiment of his post as 'Hey, no hard feelings toward Nintendo. They did what they had to do in taking it down, and I'm going to do what I have to do in keeping it up."

There is no contradiction of great significance there.

Spoiler

I do understand that your real issue is reading comprehension
If you want the person you're conversing with to read your long post, it's probably best to not start with a jab like that

Tue Aug 23 16 02:13pm
(Updated 1 time)

Why would he care if you read his post or not? If anything, he probably *doesn't* want you to read his post because then he won't have to read another vapid reply from you, lol.

You can ignore his post for childish reasons, but it's your loss because you're the only one who has anything to gain from this conversation. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

hamr
Tue Aug 23 16 11:43pm
Rating: 1

"Why would he care if you read his post or not? If anything, he probably *doesn't* want you to read his post"

I mean, ideally I would prefer if they realized I was not trying to hurt their feelings or w/e and that a couple of one-liners gently pointing out one's foibles does not merit the same level of personal offense as their mother being called a prostitute or something. That way I could go back to avoiding expressing my views in ways that I know that they will take wrong.

But yeah, I suppose them not (mis)reading my posts at all accomplishes a similar outcome.

nurio
Wed Aug 24 16 08:09am
(Updated 1 time)

Don't get me wrong, I typically always read all posts, no matter how long. Heck, there's some other user whose long posts I all read. The only reason I stopped reading is because, to me at that time, it seemed like you were only out to get under my skin

As for why Megashock100 even felt the need to intervene and be this condescending to me, I don't think I'll ever understand

"As for why Megashock100 even felt the need to intervene and be this condescending to me, I don't think I'll ever understand"

B1S and I are bros.

We ride together, we die together.

bad bois 4 lyfe

hamr
Tue Aug 23 16 10:22pm
Rating: 1 (Updated 1 time)

It was not intended as a 'jab' nor as an insult (and I apologize if you take it as one). It is simply the most objective phrasing of the situation.

If you a read a post where someone says 'I am going to keep working on the project and releasing updates' and then you go on to act like it was implied he was not going to release anymore updates, then you are displaying a fundamental difficulty in understanding the meaning of words.

I suspect you think that is an unkind thing to say and that I should have found a more jovial way to point out your errors, but please recall that that is what I originally did (and what you called 'edging on trolling').

Spoiler

And I'm sorry for being a bit sensitive about this issue. I think it mostly stemmed from me already admitting my mistake and wondering why this is still being discussed.

Let me clarify one thing. I long understand that he doesn't intend to withhold updates, and I did misunderstand the guy at first. Now I don't know how this misunderstanding came to be, but I could've sworn he said things like "I'm going to respect Nintendo's wishes" at the first announcement
In a sense you could say that's an issue with reading comprehension? But as someone who actually earns money through reading things, that's a bit insulting. I think it's more misremembering things (I do have a memory issue) than misreading things

And hm, the friendliness of how you point out mistakes does matter, but that wasn't the problem here. I think the bigger problem was that it kind of seemed like you couldn't let it go after I already admitted my mistake. It could've ended right after I said that I misunderstood it was a C&D

Anyway, I'll go back to reread your other post, now that I feel better about it. ...It might take a while, though. It is pretty long and I am already pressed for time

Wed Aug 24 16 10:41am
(Updated 2 times)

Now I don't know how this misunderstanding came to be, but I could've sworn he said things like "I'm going to respect Nintendo's wishes" at the first announcement.

That was with respect to a DMCA notice, not a C&D. Again, you should probably go back and thoroughly read his blog post instead of continuing these tirades about how your mistake wasn't really a mistake because [insert: excuses] and where you also sort of attempt to actually argue about the subject in spite of having confessed to ignorance of the situation, consequently resulting in more mistakes on your part, thus inviting Harm to correct you, to which you will respond with accusations of 'trolling'.

I think the bigger problem was that it kind of seemed like you couldn't let it go after I already admitted my mistake.

The hell? Even putting aside that you admitted your mistake in an impudent manner, all of your posts invited responses in their content (wording, length). I mean, your first few posts are considerably longer than anything Harm had written at that point. I know you have poor memory and reading comp., but this is just a matter of simple observation. Just scroll up a bit and see for yourself and then tell me: who wouldn't drop the conversation? The guy simply correcting your willful ignorance of the situation or the guy who didn't want to admit his ignorance of the situation and then resorted to crying about hurt feelings?

It could've ended right after I said that I misunderstood it was a C&D

You mean the post in which, after your insincere admission, you disputed what the developer of AM2R wrote? Yes, after that, Harm should have dropped the conversation instead of rectifying your cluelessness. By choosing to correct you he has evidently outed himself as a heartless monster out to make little nurio cry. (Those last two sentences were sarcasm btw.)

Spoiler

hamr
Wed Aug 24 16 07:24pm
(Updated 2 times)

"I think it mostly stemmed from me already admitting my mistake"

Confusing DMCA takedown notices with a C&D is not the only mistake I am addressing.

"I could've sworn he said things like "I'm going to respect Nintendo's wishes" at the first announcement"

That is not the case.

He has only made one announcement since the game launched. That is the one titled 'The Future of AM2R', linked above.

In that post, he makes the following points in order:

-That he did not receive a C&D
-That he is really happy with the project
-That he is going to keep improving the game and releasing updates
-That he does not hold a grudge against Nintendo

'I'm going to respect Nintendo's wishes [that I never work on this again]' is not a reading of his words that is at all consistent with any of what was actually written.

"In a sense you could say that's an issue with reading comprehension?"

What would you prefer that I call an interpretation of a statement that holds that it means the exact opposite of what it says?

"I think it's more misremembering things (I do have a memory issue) than misreading things"

I am not convinced there is a meaningful distinction between misreading a text and reading a text, understanding it, forgetting that understanding in its entirety, and then subsequently thinking that the text says something completely different.

"It might take a while, though. It is pretty long"

You make your earning reading things; I make mine typing large volumes of code. ;-)

Megashock100 said:
(except the bit about Harm being heartless.)

what can I say, their designs are way cuter than the nobodys.

Search

Today's VIP

kimandretheman's avatar
Joined: August 2015
Newbie

Social Services

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!