Will they ever make roms legal?

I'm not talking about the latest generation, and not the last generation either. Games for the NES, and SNES become harder and harder to find. You also need to find a working system. So what do you do when you want to play these old school games legally?

Well you either got to go across the country hoping to find it cheap or hope to find it on e-bay. Otherwise your pretty much screwed.
True you can download some games through Nintendo, but it doesn't have that classic feeling unless if your playing it on a NES/SNES... and you can only choose from a small list.

So come on Nintendo, allow some of these roms to be legal, you to Sega, and other old time companies.

Roms are legal, they use roms to make virtual console games and some game collections.

I know what you mean though, and I don't think so. They'll keep rereleasing them so you'll be obliged to purchase.

I'll assume that you mean emulations.

In this case, I'll answer your question with another question. Will they ever let me walk into a supermarket, and just take a 2 liter of soda?

I wish that they would. Most of my old NES/SNES games no longer work, and most of the games are rare nowadays.

Nope. Why should they? Legalizing 3rd-party copies of old games weakens the case for copying of current games being illegal. What's more, the big companies gain nothing from doing so, and potentially lose future profits from re-releasing old titles.

Changing the law would only hurt video game producers (even if only in very small ways) and would provide them with absolutely no benefit, so why on earth would they do so?

there not legal???? *grabs ammo,gun and makes a bunker* curse you goldedronn....you made me a fugitive telling me about that rom...and curse this person in real life that told me to download emulators...
and curse coolrom for making me a romm addict....and curse you for telling my they are illegal...

In this case, I'll answer your question with another question. Will they ever let me walk into a supermarket, and just take a 2 liter of soda?

Both situations aren't comparable.

I believe that eventually internet piracy will be legal, however there will be a levy on all devices with a digital storage capacity. Companies know that they can't stop piracy and its not cost effective to go after violators (especially with the maximum judgement in a case regarding personal use piracy being dropped to $5000 in Canada), so they'll seek to do the next best thing (tax the devices we use for piracy.) The Canadian musical industry already sought this remedy years ago, other industries will follow suit.

Is it the best solution, definitely not, but I think it'll happen.

NOt all roms should be legal. Just really old games that no one cares about anymore.

But what about the games that people do care about??

I don't think I'd play games I really don't care about

Originally Posted by The Iron Giant

I'll assume that you mean emulations.

In this case, I'll answer your question with another question. Will they ever let me walk into a supermarket, and just take a 2 liter of soda?

YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A 2 LITER OF SODA

Originally Posted by Pietro

Both situations aren't comparable.

I fail to see how they can't be comparible in any way. Stealing a 2 liter of soda means that whoever produced it aren't getting that profit.

Obtaining a game through emulators and such means that whoever produced the game aren't getting a profit for their work either.

Originally Posted by The Iron Giant

I fail to see how they can't be comparible in any way. Stealing a 2 liter of soda means that whoever produced it aren't getting that profit.

Obtaining a game through emulators and such means that whoever produced the game aren't getting a profit for their work either.

Originally Posted by 8bit

YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A 2 LITER OF SODA

You know what he means.

Anyways, no. While an original copy may be hard to find, Nintendo still sells many of their older games on virtual console and whatnot, and Microsoft sells older games (I know Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie is one of them) through Xbox Live. It isn't like they've completely disappeared off of stores, they just have digital copies available for download.

Originally Posted by pj777

You know what he means.

Yes, I did, which is why I pointed out the fault in his tired and oft-referenced argument with a tired and oft-referenced response.

I don't think anyone disputes that there is a difference between theft and digital piracy.

Whether the difference is in any way meaningful, however, is another matter.

Originally Posted by 8bit

I might be dense tonight, but I don't get it. Explain?

Stealing means taking the product and using it, and the company makes no money, piracy means reselling and redistributing said product for the pirate's profit, while the company still makes no money.

Originally Posted by nikohesus

Stealing means taking the product and using it, and the company makes no money, piracy means reselling and redistributing said product for the pirate's profit, while the company still makes no money.

Would this not damage the company if, say, the game has just been released?

The OP may be talking about games that aren't able to deliver profit to their creators anymore, but even so, I'd say it should be illegal for someone to copy and distribute other people's works for their own profit. Assuming that the work is still protected by copyright.

My first point does seem to fit in a situation when a game has just been released. I guess the difference is that a 2 liter bottle of soda will always bring profit to the company, while a game may only have a certain window in which it delivers profit. My relation still works within that window. Correct?

EDIT: Also, from 8Bit's image, I am getting that while theft removes a game developer's product without giving pay in return, damaging the developer, piracy instead produces it's own copy, still leaving the copies on the shelves intact, leaving the potential for profit to the developer the same. The problem I see with that, though, is that if everyone is allowed to use ripped games, then less people would want to spend money on a game they could experience for free. Assuming that this piracy would exist for a certain game's entire lifespan, (from release to current day) it would ultimately hurt the developer.

Originally Posted by The Iron Giant

Would this not damage the company if, say, the game has just been released?

No, because it does not cost the company to have their product pirated, as it does not deprive the company of anything. It only 'hurts' the company in so far that it 'hurts' the company if you choose not to purchase their product, so piracy might be considered equivalent to neither buying nor stealing a 2 liter of soda.

The OP may be talking about games that aren't able to deliver profit to their creators anymore, but even so, I'd say it should be illegal for someone to copy and distribute other people's works for their own profit. Assuming that the work is still protected by copyright.

Online piracy is not generally done for profit. When it is, for profit pirates are undercut by freedom activists who distribute the information free of cost.

The problem I see with that, though, is that if everyone is allowed to use ripped games, then less people would want to spend money on a game they could experience for free. Assuming that this piracy would exist for a certain game's entire lifespan, (from release to current day) it would ultimately hurt the developer.

This has been shown to be false experimentally. People pirate for a variety of reasons, though most people pirate because they can not afford to purchase the information in question. Of the people who pirate despite being able to afford the product, and who do not go on to purchase the product after pirating, their impacted is negated by the advertising generated by piracy. Ultimately, you end up with a much larger user-base, but an equivalent number of sales to what you could expect without piracy.

Originally Posted by 8bit

This has been shown to be false experimentally. People pirate for a variety of reasons, though most people pirate because they can not afford to purchase the information in question. Of the people who pirate despite being able to afford the product, and who do not go on to purchase the product after pirating, their impacted is negated by the advertising generated by piracy. Ultimately, you end up with a much larger user-base, but an equivalent number of sales to what you could expect without piracy.

If that is factually true, then my opinion has slanted. Would it not make sense to give the game developers themselves the choice whether or not to make their products legally able to be pirated or not? That is, if what you said has been proven. Or does the very nature of piracy being illegal somehow enable it to ultimately benefit developers, as you say (in the form of a larger consumer base, with a solid profit)?

I think it's reasonable that some companies would feel like piracy would detract attention from their own sales. Sort of like having competition that is using their own products, you know? Others, however might see it as some sort of investment, (as your description made it sound like).