When do you think we should start worrying about preserving the games? When they're 30 years old, there are 20 copies in the whole world and the last working PS3 has scary lights blinking every time it gets turned on?

Preservation of art and media matters. Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but it matters, and the best time to start worrying about it is when it has just been released and the media is abundant, accessible and affordable. This is doubly true for video games, since computer technology progresses and becomes obsolete so quickly, and triply true for modern video games, since so much depends on access to servers that can be shut down at any time. Hell, there is already stuff from the PS3 era that has probably been lost forever because servers were shut down before anyone had a chance to preserve anything.

And it really is hilarious (and sad!) when people think that emulation is somehow the cheap option. Do you have any idea how much is costs to build a rig that can actually run a PS3 emulator at full speed? Not only is emulation not the cheap option; it's the most expensive option. Buying a PS3 and a retail copy of P5 would be cheaper than buying a CPU capable of emulating it. In fact, I suspect that buying a brand new PS4 and a retail copy of the game would be cheaper than buying a CPU capable of emulating it (and then there's the price of those expensive Intel mobos and a cooling system to stop the overclocked CPU from frying itself, which adds another couple of hundred $). People talk smack about the cost of PC gaming, and usually they don't have a clue what they're talking about, but when it comes to emulating modern systems, gaming on the PC really is expensive.

No-one in the world is emulating a PS3 game because they don't want to spend money. (And no, PS3 emulation isn't an extra freebie that comes along with having a gaming rig; the kind of CPU you need for emulating it is massive overkill for PC gaming)

Ah, so you're talking about people buying consoles long after they are last gen, and jailbreaking them for piracy. I thought you were trying to say that there were millions of jailbroken PS4's out there. Makes much more sense now. But we can still blame PC gamers for the piracy as a whole. It wasn't the PS3 community that worked to jailbreak the system.  It was the online piracy community, and guess what? Those are largely PC gamers. One out of three PC gamers pirates games. http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-piracy-survey-results-35-percent-of-pc-gamers-pirate/ 

What exactly makes exclusives anti-consumer? 

Now I don't want to get into any of the other arguments, but I will simply say that if one has to buy a (in most instances arguably overpriced) gaming device completely locked down and restriced to a manufacturer's ecosystem, not to mention one where one must pay to play online to play a potentially interesting game (with little ways to check other than often biased reviews), while piracy still wouldn't be considered the "right thing to do" I really wouldn't feel bad for not supporting financially successful companies in effectively ripping me off through anti - consumer practices that don't allow as many people as possible to play and enjoy quality games, not to mention that piracy of these games would decrease without the need for emulation and more people would get to support the developers for their effort.

Did I say you were a pirate? Or did I simply respond to you with the same animosity you attacked me with? Honestly, how do you expect to come to any sort of conflict resolution when your line of questioning starts with what is essentially "Tell the truth: you're just a petty twat, aren't you"? You create these hostile debates by entering then with the intention of fighting, when I know you're perfectly capable of discussing these things in a civilized manner.

Stop pretending I'm attacking you, and stop attacking people who don't agree with you. That's something a fascist would do, and I'm pretty sure you're not a fascist.

Nintendo built their IPs over decades. They established their first party studios from scratch, they always make sure the final product is meeting certain standards, just look at how long it took them to give us Zelda: BoTW. For them to use the strength of their IPs to sell their hardware isn't "anti-consumer". 

Those developers you speak of are grateful someone is taking a risk on their ideas and funding their projects. The concept behind some first party IPs, like Splatoon, wouldn't have caught EA or other third party publishers' attention, because they simply aren't in the business to sell hardware, and for the most part, rehashing whatever popular these days is simply "good enough". If Nintendo was a third party publisher, they would've mostly played it safe and we wouldn't have something like Splatoon or Wii Sports, but the need to sell hardware comes with the obligation of making attractive new IPs. You can't separate the two, look at the Vita and recent Xbox numbers and tell me how they're doing without notable exclusives. It's not unreasonable to say that hardware manufacturers' first party studios play a big role in innovating and diversifying the types of games we play, and that's beneficial to consumers, not harmful.

If you wanna emulate games and skip buying the hardware these games are supposed to sell, that's fine by me, but don't come up with bs excuses like "EXCLUSIVES ARE ANTI CONSUMER", because you come off as an entitled individual with no understanding of how businesses actually works, you're better than that, or you're supposed to be if you are a vgc regular. 

I won't judge you for emulating or even pirating games, but I will judge if you are coming up with stupid justifications for your choices.

Hahaha, what the hell is the "online piracy community"?

People say that Exculive games are anti consumer.

So MS doesn't release their Halo(except for CE)  Forza  Gears  Ori  games on Nintendo / Sony consoles, and Linux  Mac Android OS too.

Is Microsoft anti consumer company ?

It's such a sad state of affairs when consumers are actually starting to argue that copyright laws are not quite strict enough, that we should make more things illegal and restrict people's freedom a bit more.

Emulators are not illegal, and they obviously should not be. It's a tool that can be abused, just like any other tool.
If there's an issue with copyright, handle that problem. Trying to ban the tools that are used is a supendously slippery slope that nobody should want.

Dude! I sent you an invite to the meet up LAST WEEK! Did you not get it? Jesus check your inbox smh

Don't you dare mention Jesus, you dirty ol' pirate.