For the racketeering, the plaintiffs will have to prove that their games were intentionally held indefinitely so Wata could sell other, similar games for the high amounts. I think the only remote way for this to work is if one of them had, for example, Tecmo Bowl, which sold for $144k. And then the next one sold for half that amount. But because Wata held on to their game for so long, the plaintiff couldnt capitalize on the sale of their game because wata wanted to sell their own game first.
Sounds even clearer that nothing is going to happen.