-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Rainway block Nintendo Enthusiast journalist after calling out misleading Switch marketing
- Thread starter Jonneh
- Start date
The defense force in here...
I go with Nate
You are paying attention
I go with Nate
You are paying attention
Well it's not just the trailer, Rainway for Switch was heavily promoted in general for a product that hadn't even been approved by Nintendo. From footage of Witches 3 to Cuphead being streamed through it. Doesn't seem like a smart idea to be promoting something to a userbase until you're absolutely sure it will happen, because when that thing doesn't happen, you rightfully get some backlash. I mean if they are truly being honest here, they handled it terribly imo.
Because a company is using the switch as false advertisement and the guy politely asked them and their response was to block them...seem pretty suspect if you ask me. Plus they blocked Jonneh and Razorbeamz so it seems like they will block anyone that will challenge them. You don't do that unless you have something to hide.
I'm blocked too lol
Hmmmm.
They shouldn't have blocked him in the first place.
Two Chicken tikka kebab with Naan,
One seek kebab with lots of chili sauce,
One donner kebab,
A portion of chips,
and one spicy pizza.
Does anybody else want anything?
For those who keep complaining about the thread: The issue isn't that it's not coming to Switch. The issue is that they heavily promoted Switch functionality to garner publicity, only to claim that it won't be available on Switch, at least for the time being. It was advertised in bad faith, and rather than just accepting criticism, they are blindly blocking their critics on a public forum.
On-topic: Is it even legal to announce something in this manner as a means to promote your product? Could I, in theory, make an indie game, advertise a Switch release, and then never release it on Switch? (From a legal standpoint)
On-topic: Is it even legal to announce something in this manner as a means to promote your product? Could I, in theory, make an indie game, advertise a Switch release, and then never release it on Switch? (From a legal standpoint)
I kinda hope they're being at least halfway honest and DO bring it out on Switch. It's still an attractive idea. The twitter handle admin isn't necessarily behaving in a mature way but the Dev team might still want this
I you have no idea whatsoever what false advertising means.Because a company is using the switch as false advertisement and the guy politely asked them and their response was to block them...seem pretty suspect if you ask me. Plus they blocked Jonneh and Razorbeamz so it seems like they will block anyone that will challenge them. You don't do that unless you have something to hide.
Hmmmm.
They shouldn't have blocked him in the first place.
Two Chicken tikka kebab with Naan,
One seek kebab with lots of chili sauce,
One donner kebab,
A portion of chips,
and one spicy pizza.
Does anybody else want anything?
They've been pretty clear since the beggining that they were pending Nintendo's approval. They never once said that it was approved. It's not a paid product either. It also works on the Switch fine using the pseudo-browser.
Ubisoft did it, and for something that wasn't an indie game at that.
You could. Nicalis did that quite a bit during the Wii U/3DS era. Yatagarasu for example was originally planned for 3DS, but they moved it to PS4, Xbox One, PC and Vita. This was a game that was funded on Indiegogo that Nicalis picked up much like 90's Arcade Racer that disappeared from a platform they were planning for. Also got a name change to Legend of Raven and I believe 90's Arcade Racer got a name change too but we honestly haven't heard about that one in a very long time.
Basically, don't be Nicalis.
I'm blocked too lol
The fuck? Streisand effect in 3, 2, 1...
Well, if you got them right, they wouldn't be malaphors. They would be benephors. Or just plain phors.
Nintendo Enthusiast is the name of the site the guy works for.
What's misleading about the marketing?
They said a Switch version could be coming pending approval.
The person who got blocked never insinuated that the Switch version wasn't coming at all. So I don't understand the title of this thread.
They said a Switch version could be coming pending approval.
The person who got blocked never insinuated that the Switch version wasn't coming at all. So I don't understand the title of this thread.
"We're so 'super sorry' that we blocked you. Just be glad we're not 'super duper sorry' and swatted you as well."
They put the Switch front and center of their marketing because of the hype surrounding the console. Their commercial literally begins with the Switch and playing Cuphead on it through the app.
You confused rug with rock too? They seem to take spelling errors very seriously.I'm blocked too lol
Eh, isn't Rainway supposed to be playable via browser as well? Perhaps it was predicated on the assumption Nintendo would eventually have a working browser. And I'm sure it'll eventually be made available on the Switch by less-official methods eventually if it picks up.
Are the people complaining because they donated money in the past? Or did they put money behind the app in any way? Or are they upset because they posted about it running on Switch on a message board?
Are the people complaining because they donated money in the past? Or did they put money behind the app in any way? Or are they upset because they posted about it running on Switch on a message board?
I do not understand much about laws, but advertising a commercial product on a platform that you can only access by hacking does not sound especially legal.
Do they have that paneer appetizer with the spinach sauce? I'll take one if they do.Because a company is using the switch as false advertisement and the guy politely asked them and their response was to block them...seem pretty suspect if you ask me. Plus they blocked Jonneh and Razorbeamz so it seems like they will block anyone that will challenge them. You don't do that unless you have something to hide.
Hmmmm.
They shouldn't have blocked him in the first place.
Two Chicken tikka kebab with Naan,
One seek kebab with lots of chili sauce,
One donner kebab,
A portion of chips,
and one spicy pizza.
Does anybody else want anything?
The question is if they intentionally lied or not...I mean, did they ever have it running on Switch or not? This may actually be more of a Nintendo thing, than a Rainway thing. Is it possible they was developing for it, but just never got approval, and then later on started to realize Nintendo was never going to play ball?
I mean if we are going to call out Rainway, we might as well call out Nintendo for it as well. From the sounds of it they got Microsoft's approval.
I mean if we are going to call out Rainway, we might as well call out Nintendo for it as well. From the sounds of it they got Microsoft's approval.
They either lied or were deluded, it was clear that Nintendo was not going to approve such a thing ever.
Things are advertised all the time that don't come to fruition. Being on a gaming entusiast forum we should know that more than most. Something gets announced one day, and canceled the next. Something gets advertised, but then later cut. Things like that happen all the time in development.
It's 100% free and open source, correct? If Nintendo ever flips the browser switch, it'd be legal. There are people who have tested it on the Switch using the internal browser, we're just waiting for approval or something to change on Nintendos side. It's too far in the grey area and I'd give the devs the benefit of the doubt in this case.
Why is that so clear though? And if so, why is Microsoft willing to play ball while Nintendo isnt?
Because Microsoft seeks to unify the Windows 10 and Xbox One Apps and for them to make streaming a PC game on your Xbox One means that you have a PC anyway.
It is not the same position at all.
Microsoft benefits from the PC market, Nintendo does not.
Rainway goes beyond PC as far as Im aware.
EDIT: you're just talking about PC games being streamed.
So how come Nintendo doesnt want PC games streamed on Nintendo platforms? We know the answer, but does that make it right?
You don't need to hack shit to access the Switch browser, and even if it did it would be 100% legal.
No, that's really what Rainway is. It lets you stream your PC games to other devices like another computer, a mobile device, Xbox, or Switch. Nothing about streaming mobile titles to other systems as far as I'm aware or found on their site. That's their vision of PC gaming, to be able to play them anywhere and being hardware agnostic.
Lol that tweet is not polite at all. He's two words away from calling them Scammy McScamsters. It's disingenuous as fuck (from you and the OP) to act like the guy was trying to engage in actual discourse. He's trying to score internet brownie points.
Some people are just clueless. The truth always comes out.
And maybe we should do something about Capcom and Square Enix for their fake promises too. Especially now with the upcoming PS5 announcement. You know Sony will get them on stage to do what they usually do.
And maybe we should do something about Capcom and Square Enix for their fake promises too. Especially now with the upcoming PS5 announcement. You know Sony will get them on stage to do what they usually do.
Watched this trailer, read the description and I still have no idea what "Rainway" is supposed to be. Plus, why the fuck would you have someone playing while walking in a "real scenario simulation" trailer? Who the hell approved that shit lol.
I don't understand the purpose of your post. Someone makes a thread about something you don't understand and instead of reading all these informed posts, you waste your time letting everyone know you don't understand. Probably in an attempt to diminish the discussion, but that's disingenuous and you're above that, right?
If you genuinely don't understand I'll be glad to PM you some reading materials.
Few things
1) this is coming to Xbox? Cool
2) Sweep under a rock is not a thing
3) "honesty"? It was never used in the initial tweet
1) this is coming to Xbox? Cool
2) Sweep under a rock is not a thing
3) "honesty"? It was never used in the initial tweet
well, it did sound too good to be true. I can't see any of the big 3 support this tbh lol
Sounds like a good ol Mighty No. 9
Sounds like a good ol Mighty No. 9
It's their closed platform, it is irrelevant what we think.
This happens all the time.
I see both sides of the argument here but honestly, I'll give Rainway the benefit of the doubt. I doubt they advertised it fully knowing they would never come out on Switch, in which case, play ball.
Yup, playing on the exclusives for shock value:
"Look! Play Cuphead on the Switch!"
Except that... at 1:50, in the "Coming Soon" screen, there's no Nintendo Switch logo, only every other platform Rainway was planning to get on.
Probably to cover their bases by clarifying that "it wasn't in the plans at that time".
I hearsay that they had a tech demo webapp working that used the web browser trick (exploit that already got patched once), but they stopped it (a bit late after appearing in various PR) because it would (did) potentially sour the negotiations with Nintendo for getting a dev kit for the actual app.
I think that's the "limited version" they are talking about there
Last edited:
It was definitely a cheap move to build 100% of their early buzz off a Switch announcement that was clearly never going to be approved by Nintendo. I mean, it worked - and the service is genuinely good enough that it was probably worth it - but it did leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Somebody who uses awful logic to exact revenge for being blocked on Twitter lol
It's borderline harassment to keep perusing someone who has blocked you. Companies block people on Twitter all the time. Odds are in the case of Rainway they have like 1 person running the account.
There's an argument for discussing if the President of the U.S. should block his constituents (he shouldn't be able to), but you're not forced to listen to anyone you don't want to on Twitter. Encouraging further harassment is wrong.
There's an argument for discussing if the President of the U.S. should block his constituents (he shouldn't be able to), but you're not forced to listen to anyone you don't want to on Twitter. Encouraging further harassment is wrong.