Nintendo Is Being Sued Over Bricking Switch 2 Consoles (In Brazil)

It's not even bricking. It's just shutting down online access if the Switch 2 senses something hinky going on.
Exactly, continue playing your physical games on it. On wait is pretty much everything a "key" card that needs to download the game?

FU you don't get to play it. Sounds pretty bricked to me.
 
Personally, I think that flagging up a warning first, followed by a three or six month ban for a repeat offence after that is far more preferable to outright bricking the console.

One thing that does concern me is the possibility that might happen due to a bug or glitch, say, a legitimate purchased cart being misdetected by Nintendo's servers and bricking the console in the process. I've heard that apparently once it happens then it cannot be reversed.

Another example here might be someone who buys a second hand Switch 2 game on cart in a box that looks exactly like the real thing but is actually a fake. I could feasily see this happening with the third-party game key cards. If that resulted in a person's Switch 2 getting bricked then would it really be their fault? How could they possibly know the game was a fake unless they tried in their Switch 2 first...?

Now I do not mod my consoles or handhelds and have no interest in using something like MIG or whatever it is called. I purchase my Switch games new on cart from Amazon because I can afford them. On that basis, my Switch 2 should be 100% safe., but, who knows if that really is the case. Time will tell, I guess.
 
Last edited:
vZcOkd6_d.webp

gotcha-bitch.gif
 
I get the concern, but we haven't yet heard of a user being banned yet for unknowingly using a cart that got ripped. Plenty of people are still renting games from Gamefly or borrowing games from libraries so if this was a real issue, we'd know about it.

The bigger concern would be buying used hardware because pirates are trading their banned consoles in and exchanging them at stores.
Yes as far as we know this hasn't been a thing yet, but I made the point of saying the 'idea' that they can is what makes me uneasy, and it could be from a completely innocent act on your part. Whether it be software or hardware, it gives me pause to purchase anything used Switch-related. Which benefits Nintendo obviously, because they'd rather you buy new from them.
 
Lmao, love how the game key card thing is the one that broke that camel back. Nintendo pushed all the limits of how greed they can be this gen. It's time to learn how much Brazilian government love to fuck with people in there.
 
The amount of misinformation, heresay, and plain made up shit around switch 2 is wild and still keeps popping up. In reality some cheap fucks in Brazil tried pirating switch games and got detected and banned from using online. boo fucking hoo

I heard if you stand in front of a mirror and whisper mig flash cart 3 times a Nintendo ninja will appear behind you and brick your switch and then murder your dog.
 
I saw this coming. Imagine buying the console second hand from someone or a place like GameStop and bringing it home and it's bricked.
Imagine buying an used console without testing it first. And GameStop would never sell a bricked console.

That said, companies being able to brick their devices is some despicable shit. No banning system is flawless, so imagine having your device bricked over nothing.
Being able to make your device worse in any way is already pretty bad (*cof cof* Apple)
 
It's not even bricking. It's just shutting down online access if the Switch 2 senses something hinky going on.
True, people don't use "bricking" properly. Though it is effectively useless if there is no account on the system before its banned, you can never set it up to be used even offline with physical games.
 
True, people don't use "bricking" properly. Though it is effectively useless if there is no account on the system before its banned, you can never set it up to be used even offline with physical games.
You sure about that??
 
And considering how Nintendo is now banning MiG users even for just using their own backups (no detection of dupe games), it's complete BS.
Justin Timberlake Eye Roll GIF by Agent M Loves Gifs

The market for the Mig are people who want to pirate games. Switch carts weigh .12 ounces, are barely larger than postage stamps, and take less than 10 seconds to swap in and out of the console.

Even if we try to humor the people who claim they're using it for innocent reasons like trying to prevent somehow losing their original carts, it's use of unauthorized software which none of the console makers would willingly allow.
 
Which part? From what I read from a user that had their system banned, they removed the account from it and now the system can't be used because an account can't be created without online access.
The account part. If you can't create a "local" account then the console is indeed a brick if you factor reset it.
 
The account part. If you can't create a "local" account then the console is indeed a brick if you factor reset it.
Effectively but I don't think technically. The issue isn't internal, Nintendo could (in theory) remove the system from the ban list and it would work with no fix needed on the actual hardware.
 
Justin Timberlake Eye Roll GIF by Agent M Loves Gifs

The market for the Mig are people who want to pirate games. Switch carts weigh .12 ounces, are barely larger than postage stamps, and take less than 10 seconds to swap in and out of the console.

Even if we try to humor the people who claim they're using it for innocent reasons like trying to prevent somehow losing their original carts, it's use of unauthorized software which none of the console makers would willingly allow.
Usage of MiG can absolutely be for personal backups. Especially when traveling having an option to use your own backups is a good one.

Banning consoles because someone is doing backups is BS. Hell, banning consoles is BS period, they should ban users instead.
 
I'm against piracy but the ability to brick a console is a load of turd. It shouldn't be permitted anywhere. Denial of access to services I'm fine with but bricking is way over the line.
 
A bricked console is no different than a broken one, if it's within the year of warranty or whatever is set by the country, it should be replaced for free.

And furthermore, intentionally breaking someone's product should be met with extreme prejudice. No different than destruction of property/vandalism IMO.
 
They can according to their TOS, sure. But they haven't actually bricked anyone's system. Yet the thread title is "...Sued Over Bricking Switch 2 Consoles". And so naturally some people in here are assuming this is about the bricking of consoles. But if your system was banned by Nintendo, you can still buy games, pop them in, and play them. That is not bricked.
Let's not conflate the two. As far as I am aware, MS and Sony also say in their TOS that they can brick your console. It's a stupid clause, sure (maybe it is for cases where the console is stolen?), but none of them have actually ever purposely bricked a console.
Which is concerning and it shouldn't be allowed
 
Top Bottom