Nintendo Wants Its Cut

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Wanna know what got me to buy Zone of the Enders Collection last month? SEEING GAMEPLAY FOOTAGE OF ZONE OF THE ENDERS COLLECTION. I had never seen the game before but I looked up a speedrun because it looked interesting and the moment I saw the gameplay I wanted to play it immediately. I have not had that kind of frantic NEED to play a game since Portal.

Rect Pola:
You know, this is kind of a low hanging fruit. Demanding monetary gain? What happened to the Nintendo flushed with Wii/DS/3DS cash? Have they made one too many missteps before WiiU started earning it back?

This is what I sort of suspect as well. A move like this really gives the impression the company is strapped for cash.

SoDaRa:

MoltenSilver:
While I don't have a clue whose in the legal right here, and certainly don't have any copyright law knowledge to hazard a guess much less judge this grey area, Nintendo has indeed done more damage to themselves than anybody with this move for one simple reason: their competitor's products are now superior to theirs in at least that aspect.

If they're trying to make money from this it's going to fail because no one's going to work for free for Nintendo when other companies are satisfied to leave them be, and if this is about defending copyright then (like all other attempts, legally justified or no) the best its going to achieve is killing coverage of their games outside major outlets. And while those major outlets certainly have their place, I know watching someone actually play a game is a lot better at selling it to me than more typical reviews are.

[edit] oh, and of course, legally right or not, financially right or not, it's always a risk to take any action that spurs this much contempt from the customers.

If this was to protect their copyrights, then why didn't they just remove the videos entirely? And what about Let's Plays before they made money? Didn't they make videos about Nintendo games and not get paid for it? And don't the people who work for 4 years on a game have a right to decide who can make a profit on it? I'm not implying they should remove bad reviews, but if people are making a profit by LPing a game they hate, or just make fart jokes at it, do they not have a right to say they don't want that? I mean if you worked 4 years on a horror game and someone completely destroys the atmosphere for people seeing the game for the first time by making random jokes about irrelevant stuff, is it wrong of the developer to say they don't want that video to be making that person a profit?

Nowadays you have to invest alot of time to get anyone to watch your lets plays. You have to spend hours to cut the footage, edit the sound, and ofcourse playing the game in a way that doesnt make you look like a noob.

As said in the article "professional" lets players spend alot of time to bring us these lets plays.

What did letsplays looked like before people got paid for? The sound of the commentary was awfull, the videos themselves had low resolution and the whole thing looked very poor quality.

Its not like the people that will get hit by that just hold a camcorder towards their TV and record the footage in one afternoon and just slap it onto youtube.

You have to give them a bit more credit here, they are actually investing more time then the lets players of old to make sure to have a certain quality.

And yes it is wrong to claim complete ownership. A partnership model would have worked miles better then claiming COMPLETE ownership, totaly ignoring the hard work some of those LPers put into their videos.

Also watching someone play a horror game and actually playing one yourselfe is a huge difference... or did Amnesia became less scary because you watched a lets play beforehand? And even if so.. if you dont want the horror to be ruined for you.. why the hell are you watching a lets play in the first place?

Sonic Doctor:

Irridium:
Imagine what would happen if Microsoft did this when Red vs. Blue was just getting started. No way Halo would have gotten that well known.

Of course, they did actually do this a few years ago. Notice how Halo is no longer the big one in terms of lets-plays and videos, with the title going to Call of Duty.

Bad move, Nintendo. You will not benefit from this in the least.

And officially Microsoft won't do that. I just watched the special live announcement of the new Xbox, Xbox One.

Like Sony, they are going to let people share gaming videos. With Xbox One, with every game, players will have the ability to view and record playbacks just like players have done with the last few Halo games, and then share them with their friends and the world.

Actually, you were always allowed to share Microsoft stuff, but you are not allowed to make money (ie ad revenue) off of it. They want the free advertising, but they want the revenue as well.

Unfortunately most big companies follow this sort if thinking, though calling it thinking is probably inaccurate. It is the resulting action from several small decisions made throughout the company. As cathartic as it is to imagine some high level executive twirling his mustache about how evil he is, that just isn't how it works (unless it's the legal department, they just don't have souls, not their fault though, they check them at the door).

SoDaRa:
I remember a time when people weren't paid to do Let's Plays. They made the videos solely because they wanted to show people a game they may not have heard about. Now, when you tell people they aren't getting paid, they're all butt hurt about it and refuse to play the game, even if they love it. If getting paid is the reason you do video LP's then I don't think you should be doing them in the first place. Also, plenty of people WILL be doing Nintendo games after this. Not because they get paid to do it, but because they love doing it. At least Nintendo isn't being like Sega, and just removing the videos outright without warning and shutting channels down.

If you want a really good discussion on this, I recommend this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYplcqazWCA

SoDaRa:

I'm not going to pretend that I'm not a Nintendo fan, because I am, but I don't have a blind devotion. If they screw up, I will admit they screwed up (I'm looking at you Metroid: Other M). That said, I don't think what they did was this horrible.

I will admit that Nintendo really should have handled this better, but I don't think they're bad people because of it.
Nothing will change about this other than some people won't get paid to show someone else's content. When did Let's Plays become less about showing people a game you really love to other people and more about the cash? And is Nintendo really going to alienate all of its fans because some people aren't getting paid to play their games on Youtube? Is this going to affect the casual market? Are people going to stop buying their games simply because people aren't getting paid to play them? Are the videos going to be gone? No.

Was this handled very well, not really. But by people not getting paid to play the game, more quality LPs will probably be noticed because the person isn't playing it for the money, they're playing it because they like the game. At least Nintendo wasn't like Sega, who outright flagged, and as a result, destroyed several channels just for the mere mention of a game.
If you want more on this topic, I recommend you listen to this podcast. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYplcqazWCA

This thinking of yours is disingenuous. The problem here is that Nintendo just wade in and demanded all the revenue for the videos. This is not all that different from a musician to go to a movie that used their piece and requesting that they get all the movie's revenue in order to allow licensing their music. It is to spit in the face of the people making a great effort to showcase your game. And even worse, if people make a tribute for a music for the musician for nothing and then the musician but-in and demanded to be paid for that. It'd not be much of an issue if Nintendo requested a cut and NOT started making revenue off the people who were already doing it for free.

It is a choice not to place advertising.

I'm saying this as an LPer. I'm making a LP of Supreme Commander on Something Awful because I love the game and I'm not being paid a cent. But if at any moment JoWood or Square Enix (whichever holder would have the right to call it since it's... complicated) demanded that I start placing adverts somehow to pay them off, I'd just stop it altogether. Not because I want the cut, but because this shows spectacular bad faith and disrespect on their part for my work. It takes anything between 8-20 hours of work to produce each update. And it is exhausting. I'd not stand this kind of blatant disrespect and money grab after all that effort. Many of my followers bought the game because of my Let's Play, but if the company doesn't want this kind of exposure without ALSO getting something more out of it, it is their loss.

SoDaRa:
I remember a time when people weren't paid to do Let's Plays. They made the videos solely because they wanted to show people a game they may not have heard about. Now, when you tell people they aren't getting paid, they're all butt hurt about it and refuse to play the game, even if they love it. If getting paid is the reason you do video LP's then I don't think you should be doing them in the first place. Also, plenty of people WILL be doing Nintendo games after this. Not because they get paid to do it, but because they love doing it. At least Nintendo isn't being like Sega, and just removing the videos outright without warning and shutting channels down.

If you want a really good discussion on this, I recommend this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYplcqazWCA

It is going beyond that, because shutting down their content is inside their legal boundaries and usual international copyright laws. Making money with other people work isn't.

I know that it is exactly what LPers are doing now, but as Ghandi said: an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind - starting with whoever took that decision at Nintendo.

Love must be a two-way road. You must remember that Nintendo will also pursue all videos from people that are not youtube partners and have never seen a cent. Those loving fans will now work for free for Nintendo.

This is fine, I'll just start an account over on Blip... oh...

SoDaRa:

MoltenSilver:
While I don't have a clue whose in the legal right here, and certainly don't have any copyright law knowledge to hazard a guess much less judge this grey area, Nintendo has indeed done more damage to themselves than anybody with this move for one simple reason: their competitor's products are now superior to theirs in at least that aspect.

If they're trying to make money from this it's going to fail because no one's going to work for free for Nintendo when other companies are satisfied to leave them be, and if this is about defending copyright then (like all other attempts, legally justified or no) the best its going to achieve is killing coverage of their games outside major outlets. And while those major outlets certainly have their place, I know watching someone actually play a game is a lot better at selling it to me than more typical reviews are.

[edit] oh, and of course, legally right or not, financially right or not, it's always a risk to take any action that spurs this much contempt from the customers.

If this was to protect their copyrights, then why didn't they just remove the videos entirely? And what about Let's Plays before they made money? Didn't they make videos about Nintendo games and not get paid for it? And don't the people who work for 4 years on a game have a right to decide who can make a profit on it? I'm not implying they should remove bad reviews, but if people are making a profit by LPing a game they hate, or just make fart jokes at it, do they not have a right to say they don't want that? I mean if you worked 4 years on a horror game and someone completely destroys the atmosphere for people seeing the game for the first time by making random jokes about irrelevant stuff, is it wrong of the developer to say they don't want that video to be making that person a profit?

Nintendo is the one who said it was to protect their copyrights and spoilers, but obviously their actions don't bare that out given that, as you said, they didn't take the videos straight down. I also didn't say the only reason a lot of LPers make them is to make money, but a lot of them do it specifically as a profession and a major source of income, just as Nintendo are thinking as a business, so are these people. And thinking as a business leads to why 'right' doesn't matter here: sure the developer should be allowed some exercise of control over that content, sure they invested to create it, but that's not the point I was making: If someone is making LP videos to make money, why would they put their time that they are expecting to make a profit on into LP'ing a Nintendo game and risk having all their revenue seized, when the company right next door (Such as the developer of Thomas Was Alone who out-right said they wont interfere with LP's and owe their success to it) doesn't take such actions?

It's not a matter of what Nintendo is legally entitled to do, it's a matter of the competition now having the bigger incentive for LP's to be made of their games over Nintendo, and that's a huge amount of free advertising lost.

SoDaRa:

If this was to protect their copyrights, then why didn't they just remove the videos entirely? And what about Let's Plays before they made money? Didn't they make videos about Nintendo games and not get paid for it? And don't the people who work for 4 years on a game have a right to decide who can make a profit on it? I'm not implying they should remove bad reviews, but if people are making a profit by LPing a game they hate, or just make fart jokes at it, do they not have a right to say they don't want that? I mean if you worked 4 years on a horror game and someone completely destroys the atmosphere for people seeing the game for the first time by making random jokes about irrelevant stuff, is it wrong of the developer to say they don't want that video to be making that person a profit?

No, they shouldn't have any right to monetize what people say about their games. They can make a public request for people to not be so mean, but once you set a game out in the wild you have to deal with everything people will say about it even if you don't like the angle. A lot of channels are about video reviews and they have clips of them playing the game. So, in Nintendo's eyes they make a game, I profit from the sales, then make a profit from anyone who reviews their game on Yotube? How is that encouraging your fanbase to talk about your games?

Let's make a strained analogy. Comedians make a living out of jokes, and a lot of them take cheap shots or mock popular movies, people or events. There isn't any reason why parody should be restrained with the copyright hammer. You wouldn't tell a comedian "you can do all the stand-up routines you want, but if you mock our movie you won't get a cent". It even goes futher into "if you make a stand-up routine about us, WE get the profit, not you, who thought up all the jokes". However, I don't even think that's the direction Nintendo is going with this. It's just clueless money-grab.

I think it speaks volumes about the possible implosion of the WiiU if Ninty are stealing kids milk money.

And I didn't know you did LPs Mr Shamus. Consider me a convert. Hopefully they are more entertaining than those crazy kids who just scream and act all 'wacky' in their videos for what I am informed are 'the lols'.

jeffers incoming in 3,2,1. but in all seriousness everything that shamus mentioned is exactly what I and most people i think thought when they heard this story last week.

This makes me think of the point when McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I asked myself what was he thinking?

I expected that somehow somewhere, he was approached by a cowled member of the GOP secret dark-god cult who told him And you will announce this woman Sarah Palin to be your running mate. You do not ask questions.

(...and I will announce this woman Sarah Palin to be my running mate. I do not ask questions.)

And this time around, I'm wondering about Nintendo.

I'm asking myself what were they thinking?

238U

PS: There is an adage: If you can't innovate, litigate. Maybe this speaks to the desperation of Big Mario.

Lord_Gremlin:
Who cares. Nintendo will eventually go the way of Sega anyway. They really don't understand how modern industry works. FFS all their consoles are region locked! And you've just noticed they're out of touch?

I don't think they'll go exactly the way of sega. At worst, I think they'll limit their international hardware market to handhelds and primarily develop games that remain in Japan with the exception of games made for their handheld.

CriticalMiss:
I think it speaks volumes about the possible implosion of the WiiU if Ninty are stealing kids milk money.

And I didn't know you did LPs Mr Shamus. Consider me a convert. Hopefully they are more entertaining than those crazy kids who just scream and act all 'wacky' in their videos for what I am informed are 'the lols'.

Well, to tell the truth, they don't actually consider Spoiler Warning LPs. It is more like a deconstruction of games, mostly negative though, with Shamus as the vitriol king, Josh on the helm playing (a man completely deranged... and thus amusing to watch), Rutskarn to supply an endless stream of puns from all ranges of quality (from just cringe-worthy to suicide inducing... as this is the range of Puns that exist) and, currently, Chris from Errant Signal to provide academic viewpoints. They started with Mass Effect because they liked the first game and wanted to make some criticism and analyze the game, mostly pointing out some ridiculous leaps the writers make, including granting Shepard cut-scene knowledge... of cut scenes he wasn't part of. But it also had a lot of good to say about the setting. Unfortunately, they felt compelled to make both sequels as well. The Spoiler Warning of Mass Effect 3 is one of the most acidic works ever committed to the internet. It might actually melt your computer.

That said, they still try to make it about games that they have a lot to say about. They were very positive about Deus Ex: Human Revolution and The Walking Dead. Though they may tarnish your vision of Bioshock if you liked that game.

They're very entertaining in any case.

I was going to LP Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door next. With this happening...I'm having second thoughts.

This sentiment is bizarre, honestly. The entire idea of an LP is to show off a game, whether because you love it to death or because it's god awful and you want to laugh at it. It's been that way since its birth on SA seven years ago. But YouTube has bastardized what is essentially a hobby you do for fun and turned it into something you can make money off of, which in turn has given many people the idea that you *deserve* money to make silly video game videos for fun.

So what if Nintendo puts ads on your videos? You should be doing LPs because you like to do LPs, not because you're trying to get fat stacks of cash off of them. If this news registers as anything other than mild disappointment it seems like a readjustment of your priorities is seriously in order. If you didn't have ads before then you have short ads now on 30-minute long videos, and only if the watcher isn't using adblock. If you had ads before because you can't stand the thought of doing anything without capitalizing on it then you lose that money. Ho hum, I guess you'll have to go back to doing things for fun.

The YouTube LP Celebrity phenomenon is why YT is choked with quantity-over-quality garbage videos of people screaming into their microphones over unedited footage.

E. Nintendo could have just forbidden LPs altogether, like SEGA did. This is worse?

Nintendo does not understand, grasp or like the internet. They also show a real lack of regard for the usefulness of the online space. The Wii-U has online features that are a still a joke compared to the current generation of consoles and the PC space. Hell even the mobile space is moving beyond them rapidly.

I know people hate companies like Microsoft and Sony shoehorning in 'Socail features' but at least they have a (loose) grasp of why people use them. The Miiverse and 'socal' ideas on the Wii-U is just a head scratcher. It makes no sense to me, it's like friend codes again.

There's people defending Nintendo on this and it's flat out stupidity, even if they have the right to do this it makes them look like MASSIVE assholes and the LPers who do this DO put in work to make their LPs and Nintendo gets FREE ADVERTISING out of this! I bought a few Nintendo games because of LPs, and I sure wasn't thinking about any of them till I was watching my favorite LPers/reviewers go over said game.

They sold games because of LPers, and now they're just snatching what they can from LPers. The fans need to stop defending nintendos every move and realize this move here? This is a real bastard move.

i completely agree, and i am also completely surprised at how inept some companies that are supposedly run by smart people can be

also a good protest of this would be to do a lets play of a nintendo game playing itself, just 10 minutes of the character standing in place, because that is what nintendo created. Without the player/commentary/discussion all you have is a single scene

I'm just going to sit around and wait for Jeffers. That'll make this thread infinitely more times interesting.

All in all, though, I do agree with you, Shamus, and once again you've said it better than I could.

Snotnarok:
There's people defending Nintendo on this and it's flat out stupidity, even if they have the right to do this it makes them look like MASSIVE assholes and the LPers who do this DO put in work to make their LPs and Nintendo gets FREE ADVERTISING out of this! I bought a few Nintendo games because of LPs, and I sure wasn't thinking about any of them till I was watching my favorite LPers/reviewers go over said game.

They sold games because of LPers, and now they're just snatching what they can from LPers. The fans need to stop defending nintendos every move and realize this move here? This is a real bastard move.

If those LPers are expecting to get money because they're advertising for Nintendo then they should be signing a contract with Nintendo before any videos go up. I can't scream "BUY PEPSI" at random people in the street and then sue Pepsi Co. because I didn't get a check in the mail.

VVVVV
How is Nintendo stopping people from LPing lesser known games? They aren't removing any videos at all.

As I wrote about on my blog on Destructoid, Nintendo is really missing out on a huge opportunity. They're depending on YouTube's Content ID system when they should just be posting clear guidelines about what does and does not constitute infringement. Really, the biggest problem is the lack of communication. Nintendo should be taking a different route and incentivizing Let Players to play lesser known or new IPs. Like Shamus said, we all know what happens in a Mario or Zelda game. However, what about the many Nintendo games that get looked over? Those are the games that need eyes and Nintendo is refusing to let that happen.

-Mod edit: Link removed.

SandroTheMaster:

CriticalMiss:
I think it speaks volumes about the possible implosion of the WiiU if Ninty are stealing kids milk money.

And I didn't know you did LPs Mr Shamus. Consider me a convert. Hopefully they are more entertaining than those crazy kids who just scream and act all 'wacky' in their videos for what I am informed are 'the lols'.

Well, to tell the truth, they don't actually consider Spoiler Warning LPs. It is more like a deconstruction of games, mostly negative though, with Shamus as the vitriol king, Josh on the helm playing (a man completely deranged... and thus amusing to watch), Rutskarn to supply an endless stream of puns from all ranges of quality (from just cringe-worthy to suicide inducing... as this is the range of Puns that exist) and, currently, Chris from Errant Signal to provide academic viewpoints. They started with Mass Effect because they liked the first game and wanted to make some criticism and analyze the game, mostly pointing out some ridiculous leaps the writers make, including granting Shepard cut-scene knowledge... of cut scenes he wasn't part of. But it also had a lot of good to say about the setting. Unfortunately, they felt compelled to make both sequels as well. The Spoiler Warning of Mass Effect 3 is one of the most acidic works ever committed to the internet. It might actually melt your computer.

That said, they still try to make it about games that they have a lot to say about. They were very positive about Deus Ex: Human Revolution and The Walking Dead. Though they may tarnish your vision of Bioshock if you liked that game.

They're very entertaining in any case.

I use the term LP to very broadly cover a video in which a game is played, by a person or persons, with commentary. Some people call their videos walkthroughs or guides or what have you, and I guess scathing criticism is covered too.

I've watched the first episode of the Fallout New Vegas series and it was quite good, although I have to get used to four people talking over the same video. And I kind of like that the commentary is about something rather than the usual LP chat of 'what's that?', 'where do I go?' and 'what do I do? This game is so shit! Oh the [objective] is right here.'. I've already played most of the titles they have covered so I'm watching to see an alternate perspective on it, even if it may make me cry a little :p

And there must be puns. At the dawn of the Universe there were puns. There are always...puns.

It may be a tangent, but in the UK we're having a similar issue only with PPL and music. I'm a part-time fitness instructor who teaches Les Mills classes. One of the USP's of Les Mills is that they use the original music rather than cover versions. Up til now we paid a flat fee to PPL to be allowed to play the music in our classes. PPL have decided they don't get enough money from that so they now want a % cut of every class. This starts at 1 rising to 2 in a year or so. While this doesn't sound a lot, it's 5-10 percent of what I get paid for a class. What this means in real terms is that a gym studio running 40 classes a week will now be paying 160 rising to 340 per month. That's before they have paid rent, utilities, insurance, licence costs or even for someone to actually take a class.

The results will be one of the following:

1) Gym picks up the cost. Result - It is now almost too expensive to run a gym that just teaches classes. I know some that have already closed and others are struggling. End result - If gyms close, PPL gets less money.
2) The gym reduces my rate. Result - after 8 years without a pay rise I have to take a 5-10% pay cut to help out those poor staving music moguls. On top of that it's not even tax deductible any more. End result - I will hate them with a vengeance and seriously revisit my no piracy policy.
3) The gym drops PPL classes. Result - Cheers, luckily I still have my day job. End result - PPL gets less money.
4) Les Mills moves to cover versions. Result - Classes become more bland. Oh, and the back catalog of music I have paid for stretching back 10 years is now illegal to play. End result - I will hate them with a vengeance and seriously revisit my no piracy policy. Oh, and PPL gets less money.

Anyway, rant over. Oh and Nintendo, you suck too.

Was going all right in that article till you hit a little snag:
You're telling me I don't exist, and that people like me don't exist. :X

People who decide to watch a lets play rather than buy/play a game. I infact do it quite often, sometimes even for games I already own. So you know, don't say that's not how people act, cause if it's how I act, then there's guaranteed to be many others(even based on others admitting as much in threads and the like), and considering lets plays are so popular it kinda proves exactly that.

Fair enough it's dodgy taking all ad revenue, but saying straight up no one uses lets plays as a substitute for buying/playing a game is simply incorrect.

Let me preface this with "I'm not a Nintendo fan." But, I guess it won't bloody matter because I'm going to be painted in that broad brush where I'm either with you, or not.

Did Ninty go overboard for chump change? Yes. Thousand times yes.

However, is everyone blowing this totally out of proportion? Yes.

One. If you are doing LPs for monetary gain, you are in the wrong field. There are different, better ways of getting revenue. From what I gather, LPs take a shit load of time to produce for minimal gain. If you are making money off this, then yes, I think you can try something else that Nintendo can't claim is theirs.

Duo. If you are doing LPs for fun, then how does this change anything? You still put in the effort, but you do it for the sake of your hobby, not because you want money. Will it leave a bad taste in your mouth? I guess, but then no one is forcing a gun to your head to make LPs of Mario or Zelda.

III. Free advertising. I would really like to see how LPs riffing on a game sell more games than professional marketing does. Like, actual numbers, not anecdotal. I mean, if this is true, then the whole marketing team should be fired.

Why were you looking into this LP for this game? Because you were interested in it initially, in which case the LP wouldn't have mattered. Or, you were interested in the people doing the LPs themselves, in which case it wouldn't have mattered what game they covered, because you're watching for the personalities. They could be commenting on a movie, a TV show, or a phone call.

tl;dr, Nintendo is being douches; everyone believes they're the next Hitler. Some perspective might be nice.

SoDaRa:

Was this handled very well, not really. But by people not getting paid to play the game, more quality LPs will probably be noticed because the person isn't playing it for the money, they're playing it because they like the game. At least Nintendo wasn't like Sega, who outright flagged, and as a result, destroyed several channels just for the mere mention of a game.
If you want more on this topic, I recommend you listen to this podcast. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYplcqazWCA

You know this doesn't just affect LPs don't you? News, reviews, commentary and analysis will also be affected by content matching.

Dooly95:
Let me preface this with "I'm not a Nintendo fan." But, I guess it won't bloody matter because I'm going to be painted in that broad brush where I'm either with you, or not.

Did Ninty go overboard for chump change? Yes. Thousand times yes.

However, is everyone blowing this totally out of proportion? Yes.

One. If you are doing LPs for monetary gain, you are in the wrong field. There are different, better ways of getting revenue. From what I gather, LPs take a shit load of time to produce for minimal gain. If you are making money off this, then yes, I think you can try something else that Nintendo can't claim is theirs.

Duo. If you are doing LPs for fun, then how does this change anything? You still put in the effort, but you do it for the sake of your hobby, not because you want money. Will it leave a bad taste in your mouth? I guess, but then no one is forcing a gun to your head to make LPs of Mario or Zelda.

III. Free advertising. I would really like to see how LPs riffing on a game sell more games than professional marketing does. Like, actual numbers, not anecdotal. I mean, if this is true, then the whole marketing team should be fired.

Why were you looking into this LP for this game? Because you were interested in it initially, in which case the LP wouldn't have mattered. Or, you were interested in the people doing the LPs themselves, in which case it wouldn't have mattered what game they covered, because you're watching for the personalities. They could be commenting on a movie, a TV show, or a phone call.

tl;dr, Nintendo is being douches; everyone believes they're the next Hitler. Some perspective might be nice.

It's not just let's plays. It's also news and reviews. This is a "content matching" problem.

Nintendo might have the right to do this. They certainly have the power to do this. But either way, it's an asinine and foolhardy move.

Aaaaaand /topic

This is a bad move, even if it's their right. And it might be their right. This is shaky ground.

Has totalbiscuit come down on this yet? I want to see if he'll give up his fellatio towards the games industry now that there's a precedent that directly impacts him.

Lawyer105:

Surely, surely, we've realised that they think we're just ambulatory wallets-of-plenty with no purpose in "life" other than absorbing whatever dross they spew forth while simultaneously shovelling mountains of dosh their way.

It's funny, because a lot of them seem to think they're entitled to our money and our patronage. I'm surprised we don't see more rage when we don't buy their products in sufficient numbers. Just as they don't owe us anything, we don't owe them anything. Yet so many of them get pissy when a bad product doesn't sell or gets called bad.

I'm not sure if this applies to Nintendo, but the timing that they've decided to pull this at a time when their new flagship is floundering makes me wonder if this is related to those expectations.

SoDaRa:
Now, when you tell people they aren't getting paid, they're all butt hurt about it and refuse to play the game, even if they love it.

They're just not going to showcase it. There's a difference.

If getting paid is the reason you do video LP's then I don't think you should be doing them in the first place.

If it's the sole reason, perhaps, but that's not the case for everyone. In fact, I seriously doubt anyone has ever gotten into LPs specifically because of profit. It's not exactly easy to get noticed to the point you're worth making money, and I doubt anyone's going to do it for free long enough with enough creative effort to put together something people will notice.

Also, plenty of people WILL be doing Nintendo games after this. Not because they get paid to do it, but because they love doing it.

People who will more than likely get fewer views and be less beneficial to Nintendo as a result.

SoDaRa:
I mean if you worked 4 years on a horror game and someone completely destroys the atmosphere for people seeing the game for the first time by making random jokes about irrelevant stuff, is it wrong of the developer to say they don't want that video to be making that person a profit?

It's not wrong to say you don't want it. It might not be your right, however, to do anything about it.

I think this reasoning is silly, though. If you're going into a comedy LP for your first viewing of a horror game, you're not going in for the atmosphere. You're going in for the laughs.

The ultimate issue, however, remains one of the selective nature of "right." It might be "right" to alienate your fanbase from alegal or technical standpoint, but it's still a wrong move to make from a consumer/pr standpoint.

And don't the people who work for 4 years on a game have a right to decide who can make a profit on it?

Often times the people who work for 4 years on a game have NO say in who can make profit on it. I hope you understand that. However, once released to the public a certain amount of control is lost. Nintendo is even going after videos where Fair Use should be an issue. And that opens up bigger issues about media coverage.

CriticalMiss:
I've watched the first episode of the Fallout New Vegas series and it was quite good, although I have to get used to four people talking over the same video. And I kind of like that the commentary is about something rather than the usual LP chat of 'what's that?', 'where do I go?' and 'what do I do? This game is so shit! Oh the [objective] is right here.'. I've already played most of the titles they have covered so I'm watching to see an alternate perspective on it, even if it may make me cry a little :p

Ha, just wait 'til you get to Alan Wake (Season 8), which has FIVE people talking in it!

New Vegas is probably my favourite season (although the Dead Money part of it was ill-advised and painful...), but really all the seasons are excellent. Walking Dead probably has the best analysis in it (as well as in the comments!), and Fallout 3 probably has the most coherent bile in it.

Not much to say, I suppose. Nintendo has every right to do what it wants with the ad revenue from YouTube. It's just a retarded dick move that'll piss off it's fan, and people who do LP's will just migrate to other content so they don't have to deal with the headache of dealing with copyright faff.

By the way, question... Apparently every time one of your videos are flagged for copyright infringement, whether they get taken down or just stripped of ad revenue, apparently your account gets 'copyright infringement' points or something like that, so you'll eventually lose your ability to make cash of ANY of your videos regardless. So apparently if I'm not wrong, even if you're fine with making your videos just for fun and are happy to give Nintendo the proceeds, you're still getting marked down for putting the content up until eventually YouTube automatically pulls out the BanHammer. Can someone explain to me why people should make videos of these games anymore, even for fun, if their account is going to get banned eventually?

SoDaRa:

Robetid:

MisterM2402:
You can't say "everyone knows exactly what happens in a Nintendo game" just because you know the general premise the series is based around. I play for gameplay *and* to "see how they turn out". Just a small gripe, though - the article as a whole was good, agreed with it all :)

You better be careful, nintendo may charge you for using that avatar.

OT: I am generally a Nintendo fan and have been since I first got an NES, but this is the exact thing that can turn away a lifelong fan of their exclusive series. I mean i am one of the few people who bought a Wii-U already, mostly coz it has playbackability and i skipped the Wii. This little stunt of theirs has almost convinced me to do a LP video of me smashing it to hell.

What changed because they did this? Is the fact that you and other people aren't getting PAID to play their games mean that now you can't do them or they aren't good games? If you're buying and playing games just to get some cash, then I don't really get why you even play games. Isn't the point of an LP to show people a game they may never have seen before, or to present it in a new way? And what did the WiiU do in order to deserve being smashed? I'm sorry, but I just find it weird idea to buy a game, and expect to make money from it. I mean its not like you worked 4 years painstakingly adjusting the mechanics for them to be fun.

That isn't the point. Hell I don't even make money doing that, it's principle. People DID spend a lot of time making their videos, they may have spent weeks playing the games and editing the videos. Nintendo should be allowed to step in and snatch that money from them? Didn't Nintendo already get their cut when their game was purchased? I won't support such blantent disrespect towards their fans just for them to be able to collect a few pennies. What they are doing is a step away from stealing in my opinion.

There were two ways Nintendo could have handled this, they could have had conversations with the people that play let's plays and actually used them to make money by giving them games in advance to do let's plays previews with; preivews work, that's why I want Anomaly 2 and Sanctum 2, its you tube that's why I bought War of the Overworld on Early Access it is these reasons that I have buzz for a game or hate it's guts.

Secondly, they could have had conversations with the Lets Players and agreed a reasonable Royalties system for games that they got revenue from, say 1% of revenue from Nintendo Let's Plays go to the company.

Instead they went the Draconian route. Not because they want to be stupid or evil, but because it was the route that was the easiest... think about it, no legal costs for applying for bans, revenue coming in from Advertisements, no need to communicate with human beings, win win all around...

... and the easy route never works in the long term. The short term they will get a few thousand but the moment Nintendo adverts appear on Let's Plays, savvy viewers will tip off the LPers and immediately the LPers will declare that if this course of action is continued then they will have no choice but to STOP PLAYING NINTENDO GAMES and we all know the strength of Let's Plays, Previews and First Impressions can sometimes be more powerful than IGN and Gamespot combined.

CriticalMiss:

I use the term LP to very broadly cover a video in which a game is played, by a person or persons, with commentary. Some people call their videos walkthroughs or guides or what have you, and I guess scathing criticism is covered too.

I've watched the first episode of the Fallout New Vegas series and it was quite good, although I have to get used to four people talking over the same video. And I kind of like that the commentary is about something rather than the usual LP chat of 'what's that?', 'where do I go?' and 'what do I do? This game is so shit! Oh the [objective] is right here.'. I've already played most of the titles they have covered so I'm watching to see an alternate perspective on it, even if it may make me cry a little :p

And there must be puns. At the dawn of the Universe there were puns. There are always...puns.

Lucky you.

In any case, welcome to the Spoiler Warning community. They're about to start Tomb Raider (which for me it means I must advance my schedule and buy it beforehand. I did it with Deus Ex too and wasn't disappointed, heh). Dishonored was pretty positive as well, now that I think about it. At least when it deals with the gameplay.

(Oh, and I'm not kidding about Bioshock. Poor, poor Mumbles, she once loved that game.)

The only reason I paid any attention to TF2 and L4D is because of G-Mod videos. I got into watching the videos people made on YouTube, and it made me interested in the games and what they had to offer. These videos directly led to me purchasing TF2, L4D, L4D2, and Garry's Mod itself. And subsequently, I have spent way too much money on hats, keys, and accessories within TF2. Just like the way Valve has been vocal about piracy being an issue of customer service rather than an issue of theft, I think they should point to their community of G-Modders and be like, "Hey guys, you want some free viral marketing that'll never stop producing new material? Then let people use your games and talk about them."

Other publishers will probably say this in response:

Because:

But Valve will just carry on, making all the moneys, and going to their favorite vacation destination.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here