Anytime it takes more than 3 weeks to make a new post it's typically because there's much going on and the rest of this spring promises to remain full of family activity. I'm aware that despite passing the 2-year mark this blog has had very limited readership but for future benefit I'll keep writing in a general format rather than focused on my known audience of the time. Part of this is for preservation purposes since I won't usually archive that which I've already recorded for the Internet (at least for now, though someday I could follow the path of other webmasters and compile the fruits of my research into a book); the other part is that I could eventually gain a wider audience and I prefer information I post to not be rendered obsolete except for instances of new discovery.
Emulation on Xbox
What prompted this post is Microsoft's recent crackdown (though I doubt it was unilaterally their doing) on emulation for its post-360 Xbox consoles that use Universal Windows Platform applets. I'll be honest: I did not see this coming even though I probably should've, but in any case I must do the right thing and address this as having rendered moot information I wrote in a previous post. Whether Dreamcast, SNES or PlayStation, as of this month that is no longer doable with any [legitimately-used] Xbox console thus I advise no longer attempting anything of the sort unless you know what you're doing.
This feels like an elephant in the room: how can I, a born-again Christian, endorse a practice known as a vehicle for casual software piracy which is technically theft no matter how you slice it? Let's first get the obvious out of the way: there is no wrong in emulation itself provided no copyrighted code was stolen or misused, as shown by the countless digital re-releases using original ROMs under an emulation layer for authenticity rather than porting (the old method from back in the day contemporary systems were not powerful enough). This discussion will focus solely on acquisition of copyrighted content with neither intent nor offering of due compensation to publishers.
Having been involved in some aspects of the scene for years, notably including an Underground Gamer membership (before that place went belly-up), I know the conscience aspect is something people take time to evaluate rather than flippantly-dismiss like petty thieves would. Even places carrying games and other programs for no-cost download have limits on what they offer (I'd personally avoid sites that don't, if only because that's diving into the darker places of the web) and are more than willing to respect any cease-and-desist from a copyright claimant. Disclaiming that this is from my personal observations: they are generally a well-intentioned preservation community, caring about the saving of historical programs and not building their "online street cred." One in particular, WinWorldPC, carries perhaps the greatest concentration of 20th century Microsoft programs in its archives, yet despite knowing full well of their activities Microsoft itself seems to have adopted a live-and-let-live approach so long as certain lines still under support or consideration (specifically Office 2000 & Windows XP) aren't crossed.
I'm not here to make a case that theft is only wrong if the victim is substantially-harmed or can't tolerate non-substantive harm; that's for our individual consciences, buoyed by the Holy Spirit or otherwise, to carry the weight of. Indirect harm is always a factor as well as the potential for non-substantive harm to escalate if allowed to build on itself. Finally, I should not need to elaborate how something is still wrong regardless of whether temporal or other consequences are suffered.
Instead what this comes down to is purpose(s) served and I'd argue the preservation factor is pertinent to that equation. Sometimes something becomes truly deprecated due to changing business fortunes (abandonware is NOT a standing legal term no matter what anyone claims however it is a practical one in select cases) and there is no alternative to experiencing it; of this I'm in full understanding and implore support of re-publishing because, as stated before, the demand for retro gaming is out there and never going away. There are select instances that the spirit of the law can still be abided even if its letter gets violated; those who produce something of value are due compensation by those who consume it but it's still contingent on them to be there to receive that compensation and/or continue offering that thing of value for purchase lest it becomes abandoned property.
There are other instances in which this is not so clear-cut and to that I can only testify that I strive, to the best of my ability, to legally own license to that which I use. In some cases, such as discs of Windows 95 and beyond, this is a practical matter because even though such vintage software has been abandoned it remains a challenge getting it to work in a vintage system if done via other than original method. For cartridge-based game consoles this obstacle has been overcome with flash carts, however I understand that gets into the realm of being far too easy to abuse (one must be careful not to get caught flat-footed should certain ROMs, such as the 16-bit Disney games, see re-release in this generation).
Ultimately it's still a matter of self-restraint and owning up. I'm willing to submit to good faith and here's a few examples I offer not as guidelines but explanations:
1) Commander Keen: Aliens Ate My Baby Sitter was only ever, with a single key exception, released on retail floppy and is now long-abandoned with copies going for exorbitant prices because, despite all the other Keen games still being re-published to this day, demand for this episode cannot be met due to its loss in the mire of its unique original publishing situation; because I wanted it cost-effectively I obtained a loose copy of The Book of id with the Vintage CD, therefore gaining license to the entire id Software "lost game collection" as well as this commercial episode
2) I own a copy of the retail 1.0 CD-ROM edition of DemonStar by Mountain King Studios which they still sell today in a different format; I consider myself having license to any version of the original DemonStar (I prefer 3.25 which is NOT offered for sale, having been superseded years ago) but not to either Secret Missions standalone add-ons unless I were to purchase them digitally
3) Back when it was still offered in 2014 I purchased the full 3D Realms Anthology which came with rights to play any 20th century Apogee Software game in the catalog whether they were included in the digital front or not, including the Duke Nukem games (because they were still included at the time); I confess to having helped myself to registered Apogee games for years in the past without paying, but at that point my conscience once-and-for-all could finally be cleared
4) As a collector I possess many physical copies of games that are still available digitally today; since my ownership of an original release comes with personal use license I have no qualms downloading a GOG "redistribution" for easier running on my 21st century systems
5) A consideration I admit is trickier to justify, one I generally apply only to arcade and console games, is possession of one port being tantamount to license of other versions (i.e. original PC CD vs. Sega Saturn reproduction disc) provided core content is identical; after all, republication of arcade and console titles is far less common which makes those games much more susceptible to abandonment (and getting lost to history)
People should know the difference between wanting to do the right thing without that option and trying to justify what they know to be wrong. Understanding is a key factor: Nintendo has earned a reputation for ruthlessness in its effective shutting down of what used to be prominent ROM hosting sites because they couldn't tolerate distribution of the NES, SNES and N64 back catalogs regardless of whether there was any intention to re-release certain games or not; other companies such as Sega would of course not stand for theft of their contemporary commercial games but are proving tolerant of people appreciating their gaming legacy regardless of how (notable as piracy was a factor in slumping Dreamcast sales). Yet while there should be no room for sweeping generalizations, whence intellectual property owners assert their rights it's their prerogative to define the terms of use and everyone else's obligation to accept the consequences of choices made in response.
Politics, Religion, Who Owes Who Money
From the beginning it was my intention that this blog focus on my hobby interests; I do not consider my sociopolitical orientation as part of that but have covered it from time to time for the sake of a general audience reach. Because this blog encompasses all my online writing for now I had no alternative, but it occurs to me I should make one. I plan to keep this blog as the domain of my retro gaming and militaria observations while, with the exception of my annual Christian faith message, shifting alternate topics to a Substack or something like that.
My first try at blogging, 10 years ago, was focused strictly on political topics; I was younger and more full of passion at the time (I was even still on "regular" social networking). I understand that hobby interest communities encompass people of all sorts of social circles who, if confronted with messaging they find off-putting, would be focused on that rather than the shared interests that bring us together in the first place. I know this because I've been on both sides of treatment on issues plenty of times and need to remember the Golden Rule is Biblical for a reason.
Stay tuned, and thank you for your time reading...