If you're talking about Nintendo games, I think you do. I've never heard those big Nintendo titles being legally sold on PC.

Actually it is perfectly relevant, we need to recognize that the world isn't the USA sometimes.

Also just dropping an original disk into a disk drive circumvents the media duplication issue in some territory's.

What does making a backup copy have to do with using an emulator to pirate Switch games? Yes, you are allowed to make a backup copy. But that doesn't stop the fact that playing Switch games without owning a Switch is piracy.

This isn't about a media duplication issue. You can make ten extra copies of a game. So long as you bought the game, and don't distribute your extra copies to others it isn't piracy.

It was extremely common in the 7th gen era, even more so during the 6th gen on Xbox. Every Halo game for example has it (Except Halo 5).
And it does invalidate your example as you don't need PS+ or Xbox Live to play all console games online.

You are arguing as if my example depends on every console game ever requiring a subscription service to play online. It does not depend on that. It only depends on some games needing an online subscription service to play online.

It's still not piracy even if modders got an alternative Xbox Live or Playstation Plus network online for you to connect your console to, you aren't duplicating software.
Reverse engineering/engineering/modding your own software solutions isn't piracy.

Piracy isn't limited to duplicating software.

Breath of the Wild is a last gen game.
It's development revolved around the Wii U primarily, with all it's hardware limitations and nuances.

By that logic Donkey Kong Barrel Blast, and Super Paper Mario must be GameCube games, since their development revolved primarily around Gamecube, with all it's hardware limitations. Except those clearly are not GameCube games, because you can't find a Gamecube copy of those games.

Just because you think it's irrelevant, doesn't make it irrelevant.

It is irrelevant, but I don't think we are on the same page here. People that try to defend emulators for current gen consoles argue that we need emulators up and running asap in order to preserve games. Of course some people will always make copies of their games on day 1, and of course making those copies can be considered an act of game preservation. So of course in a way game preservation starts on day 1. However, that is not relevant to the argument that emulators need to be up and running asap in order to preserve games.

What would be relevant is whether or not day 1 game preservation requires current gen emulators. If it does not, then their argument falls apart. What would also be relevant is whether or not we should attempt to preserve a game on day 1. If there is not a convincing argument for why we should attempt game preservation on day 1, then their argument also falls apart.

Games from release date aren't always the same games 6 months or 12 months down the track.

Take Overwatch for example, there are a ton more maps, more heroes... And an endless list of balance changes, I.E. Symmetra had the Shield generator ultimate at one point which is no longer present in the game and at one point multiple people could pick the same hero and you could pick any hero from any class as there was no role cue.

For most games updates are just a matter of bug squashing. Even if something does change, for most games the differences between the release date version and the final update are so small as to be virtually unnoticeable. In instances where they are noticeable we are usually talking about extensive DLC, where the base version of the game is still accessible and playable. I'll agree that certain games do indeed need to be preserved on day 1, because of issues such as the example you gave above. However, I don't think there is value in saving every single solitary version of every game ever made.

Those "variants" of the same game need to be preserved, that is why game preservation starts on the day a game is released, heck even before a game is released, often a games unfinished state can be leaked out.

By this argument we should be dangling above the laptop of every game developer "Mission Impossible Style" in the name of preserving games. In that case I'd really like to "preserve" Animal Crossing New Horizons. Won't you join me on a bit of corporate espionage to "save" version 0.9 of New Horizons? A happy side effect of our adventure is that we'll both get to play the game before release day. But that has nothing to do with it. I'm just really, really, concerned about preserving the game!

Also your honor, I didn't break into the Cake Factory to eat free cake! I was sampling the cake to make sure it wasn't poisoned! So I should get a reward, instead of jailtime!

A bit of a false assumption to assume someone emulating the game doesn't own the game or the console it was intended for.
I emulate PS2 games, I own a PS2 and own PS2 games... In-fact I dumped my PS2's BIOS onto my PC and plugged it into my emulator to run my PS2 games straight from disk.

Perhaps you need to explain why emulation is piracy?

Most don't actually own the game or the console it was meant for.

I'm not saying that all emulation is piracy or that emulation in general is piracy.

P.S. Sorry for taking so damned long for this response. I'm bound and determined to get through my backlog this year, and the computer that I normally type responses on isn't good for longwinded replies. Unless I'm actually at my house, and on my new rig, I get enough bugs in long winded replies to making posting them like pulling teeth. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241784&page=1#4

So is the stance on exclusives changing? Back in the day a PS exclusive was on one console and nothing else.

So is this now considered a lost exclusive or we taking the MS stance on exclusives now? Imo it’s smart on their part, get more sales and it’s still off the main competition.