Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Nintendo's behind the curve. Most other groups do this already, actually, so it's rather stupid of the article writer to make this sound like Nintendo's just trying to be dicks. Worth noting that they're not blocking these videos (as that would be an actual dick move), just forcing the LPers to cough up the money to the folks who made and/or published that game. I don't normally get all protective of company rights but this seems like a fair trade to me, tbh: LPers still get to play the game and entertain, and Nintendo gets to make additional money on the product they made. It's certainly a better compromise than Sega's reaction, and LPs have gotten pretty out of control with regards to this "entitlement" mentality.

Why are you entitled to make money off of someone else's product? You should not be doing LPs for money, you should be doing them to have fun and show off the game to other people. That was the original point of Let's Plays! Not to make buttloads of money, to have fun, to entertain! Work harder to make your own damn content if you want money, whether that is a review or otherwise. Or if you want to be paid simply for playing video games, get a degree and become a game tester. Stop insisting that the world bends over and throws you free money for doing absolutely no hard work of your own.

The fact that some people fund their entire livelihoods on LPs is honestly a bit disgusting when you think about it. Every other form of entertainment you enjoy involves a hell of a lot more work than an LP. Movies require not only monetary investment, but actors, scenes, etc, and everyone works on it for months. Even hand-drawn commission art requires more actual work than an LP. All you need to LP is FRAPS (or a similar product) and a video game. Heck, I could throw one together right now and be done with it in an afternoon, split it into 10+ parts, and monetize each part. Bam, there's money in the bank and no work involved. That's revolting, honestly. What sort of "hard work" did I do to earn that money, exactly?

I'd never monetize a video of me just playing a game and talking over it because that's honestly kind of stupid. I'm already getting entertainment value out of the game I bought, why do I need to be paid to have fun and to give other people some entertainment? All the LPers seem to care about is money any more. It's kind of sad.

Hell, I watch plenty of LPs (TBF for example), but I hate the mentality that people have now, where they insist that they "deserve" the money because they worked so hard for it. What work did you do exactly? There's more work involved in making low-budget porn than your LPs! You did jack squat to "earn" any money. The ad providers (the ones paying you) did more work than you did. And if it came down to having to pay you for your LPs out of my wallet, I wouldn't do it. Hell, I'm pretty sure that's the reason there is so much support for these LPers....you just have to watch ads, so you don't see it as that bad because you're not actually paying for the entertainment at all. What if you had to pay per video you watched, say, a dollar per view. Would you still support them as radically as you do now? I imagine most of you SAY you would....but secretly you'd be ditching your YouTube subscriptions left and right. Keep up the good fight, ye hypocrites.

Summary: I would not expect people to pay me for doing an LP. Nor do I expect to pay anyone else for doing an LP. Get a real job.

Wow, now that's a dick move from Nintendo. Are they even living in 2013? Are they really that blind to not see that let's players playing their game is basicaly free marketing?

First the WiiU being the way it is and now this. I don't see Nintendo lasting at this point, I'm afraid to say.

Well there goes my respect for Nintendo as a company, it's not even the fact they won't allow people to earn money with YouTube videos(I would be okay with that), it's the fact that they take all off the money people would earn for themselves.

It just makes them seem like greedy assholes who will use others people's work and effort for themselves,can't wait for tomorrows jimquistion.

Also I'm getting sick of people saying its better than simply pulling the video entirely, yes it is better you know what's even better? just don't allow people to make money from videos, you can do that without pulling the video.

Nintendo has always been rather fairly adamant that their games are created for children.

This move might not solely be about the advertising revenue that Let's Play videos generated. Instead it might be about trying to lock their adult fan base back under the stairs with a bucket of fish heads, where the parents of potential young Nintendo console owners can't see them.

Because adult Nintendo fans have a bad wrap for being a bit weird, sort of like how XBox owners have a bad wrap for being foul, nasty-mouthed bigots.

Well, all I learned from this thread is that Nintendo are now assholes, Copyright is a magic wand designed to exploit and kill off secondary markets (even those markets that Nintendo doesn't actually have any vested interest in), and that the word "entitlement" has been so misused that it's now broken beyond repair.

EDIT: You know what, fuck it. I'm throwing this out there.

Yes, Nintendo's property is used in Lets Plays. Lets ignore copyright implications for a moment and talk practicality, since this is both a legal grey area, and the law doesn't always work in the best interests of everyone. Sometimes it needs criticism and adjustment.
OK?

So, what do LPs actually do to Nintendo? What does they prove?

Two things: That someone is interested in playing their game, and the player possesses a copy of it. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It's not piracy, because no copies are being made. It's not entitlement either, since the copies are being used as intended: they're being played. (well, legitimate copies, but if the LPer is using a pirated copy, they have bigger ethical problems already and that's another tired ol' chestnut I'm not touching beyond this aside)

I know what you're thinking: "But if I watch someone play the game, I have less incentive to play it because I just got the experience!"

This is a weak argument. Why?
Unlike Music or Film, a game cannot impart the same experience as a public performance because player input is essential; it is LITERALLY the most fundamental requirement for a game to be well, a game.

Simply put, there is a world of difference between playing, say, Super Mario Galaxy, and watching someone play Super Mario Galaxy. And if you're satisfied by just watching, chances are you aren't the kind of person who would have bought the game for yourself in the first place, on account of interest.

Great games make you want to play, not watch.
Also, if a game is designed in such a way that player input is meaningless, it fails at the most fundamental level conceivable as a game. So that accounts for the "lost sales" angle.

Next, why this is a bad idea for Nintendo.

First, Nintendo loses nothing from of the existence of LPs.
There is no "damage control" angle here, because there is no damage to control.

I can claim this based on two observations:
1) Nintendo does not create Lets Plays. They do not directly participate in the LP market, and cannot lose out on account of competition, arbitrage etc. Simply put: YOU CANNOT LOSE WHEN YOU DO NOT PLAY.

2) We cannot assume that LPs negatively (or positively) impacts game sales.
That is, the effect is nebulous, and not implicitly good or bad for Nintendo, due to matters of quality and appeal. Since those matters can vary GREATLY on a case-by-base basis, we cannot assume it's good or bad.

However, what is unquestionable, is that it is free exposure for the game in question.
(advertisement is a form of deliberate exposure; but I refrain from calling it "free advertisement" because that implies approval, which I've already thrown out above)

An LP is, essentially, the most honest advertisement out there; it shows the player exactly what they are getting into, no bullshit, no selective editing, no collusion of opinion or dealing under the table for a good review + score.

Unless Nintendo is reliant on bait-and-switch tactics or paying off reviewers to secure sales, this logically cannot hurt them. (and if they are, that's rather indefensible behavior anyway)

So why is Nintendo kicking the hornet's nest? I don't know for certain, but I'm guessing they're looking for free revenue. The last two years have been the worst in the company's history. I'm invoking Occam's Razor on this one. Feel free to speculate.

What will happen? Two things:
1) People who earn their living on Lets Plays will stop doing LPs of Nintendo games (at least on Youtube) which results in...
2) ...That free revenue disappearing along with the Lets Plays.

(Those who do it strictly for fun of course, do not care either way.)

Ergo, Nintendo is just pissing people off for no good reason.

As a YouTube LP'er, I played about 4 hours of Lego City Undercover and spent upwards of 12 hours editing and rendering 4 videos out. Now I'm not uploading them until Nintendo goes back on this policy. So fuck you Nintendo, no free advertizing for you.

It's almost sickening how people complain that LP'ers only piggyback off the games that they play, and that's the draw. Or that they don't do any effort. That they're just taking things from someone else and practically stealing money.

It's stupid, dumb, and insulting.

Why, then, would two people who are both LPing the same game get different amounts of views? Why can LP's of terrible games rake in views? Because LP's are not dependent on the game. LP's depend on the reactions of people to that game, and how they can make those reactions entertaining.

I'm glad Nintendo completely misses what LPs have done for many games and have just been basically FREE ADVERTISING, there's quite a few games I would have not bothered with if it wasn't for an LP... Including Mario World & Yoshi's Island for GBA.

This to me feels like Adobe kicking down everyones doors and demanding all profits on all art made because we used photoshop.

They're stupid trying to make it look like they're not the badguys isn't endearing at all, it's just stupid and greedy. "Oh EA is so evil for DLC but Nintendo is super awesome to it's fans!"

Yeah so the countless fangames they shut down to 'maintain their games positive image' and now putting their foot on Youtube LPers isn't twisted?

Guess Game Grumps are going to have to find new employment eh?

CriticKitten:

Why are you entitled to make money off of someone else's product? You should not be doing LPs for money, you should be doing them to have fun and show off the game to other people. That was the original point of Let's Plays! Not to make buttloads of money, to have fun, to entertain! Work harder to make your own damn content if you want money, whether that is a review or otherwise. Or if you want to be paid simply for playing video games, get a degree and become a game tester. Stop insisting that the world bends over and throws you free money for doing absolutely no hard work of your own.

The fact that some people fund their entire livelihoods on LPs is honestly a bit disgusting when you think about it. Every other form of entertainment you enjoy involves a hell of a lot more work than an LP. Movies require not only monetary investment, but actors, scenes, etc, and everyone works on it for months. Even hand-drawn commission art requires more actual work than an LP. All you need to LP is FRAPS (or a similar product) and a video game. Heck, I could throw one together right now and be done with it in an afternoon, split it into 10+ parts, and monetize each part. Bam, there's money in the bank and no work involved. That's revolting, honestly. What sort of "hard work" did I do to earn that money, exactly?

You really don't know how much work can go into the good LPs do you? The ones that actually are paid for what they do that is, and not the people holding their webcam toward their 1995 CRT TV.

The cost of Games, recording equipment (cables, devices Microphones, device for said games, HDD's, PCs, extra monitor depending)/software is pretty high easily $1,500-$5,000 easily, on top of this they also may need to apply for an LLC so they can't have their entire home sued off them and that is also a costly time consuming process. This all comes before payment of course because youtube has to accept you before you'd get paid, and they have standards and most are flat out denied, that's quite the risk involved.

Now they have to do tests before they start LPing, then record their playthroughs, edit the videos, alter audio levels and then format/encode the videos and upload on top of interacting with users on social media to maintain/increase their viewership. They're the actor/entertainer, background crew, writers, equipment maintainers/providers and often artists, but they do no work?

Good luck with that 'afternoons worth of work'.

Morality =/= PR.
Just because something seems like bad PR doesn't make Nintendo the devil.
Here are your limitations on Fair Use:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (this is basically how the person transforms the work)

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (More or less asks if the work is fiction, or non-fiction)

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (This one should be fairly obvious, it's basically how much of the work is used.)

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. (also obvious)

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Fair Use is generally determined on a case by case basis. You can't just hit one of these things, you have to hit all four of them.
Since LP and video games are relatively new, one could argue that laws need to be updated. There's a question of how personal gameplay experiences can effect these factors.
As it is now however, LPs pass point 1 (somewhat, as point 1 is the transformative part of fair use, some LPers do this moreso than others, like ChipCheezum and General Ironicus), but generally fail at points 2 and 3. Hard. They can arguably fail at point 4 as well.

EDIT: Not to be an ass, but Nintendo probably gets fuck all from the free advertising that is LPs.

CriticKitten:
Nintendo's behind the curve. Most other groups do this already, actually, so it's rather stupid of the article writer to make this sound like Nintendo's just trying to be dicks. Worth noting that they're not blocking these videos (as that would be an actual dick move), just forcing the LPers to cough up the money to the folks who made and/or published that game. I don't normally get all protective of company rights but this seems like a fair trade to me, tbh: LPers still get to play the game and entertain, and Nintendo gets to make additional money on the product they made. It's certainly a better compromise than Sega's reaction, and LPs have gotten pretty out of control with regards to this "entitlement" mentality.

Why are you entitled to make money off of someone else's product? You should not be doing LPs for money, you should be doing them to have fun and show off the game to other people. That was the original point of Let's Plays! Not to make buttloads of money, to have fun, to entertain! Work harder to make your own damn content if you want money, whether that is a review or otherwise. Or if you want to be paid simply for playing video games, get a degree and become a game tester. Stop insisting that the world bends over and throws you free money for doing absolutely no hard work of your own.

The fact that some people fund their entire livelihoods on LPs is honestly a bit disgusting when you think about it. Every other form of entertainment you enjoy involves a hell of a lot more work than an LP. Movies require not only monetary investment, but actors, scenes, etc, and everyone works on it for months. Even hand-drawn commission art requires more actual work than an LP. All you need to LP is FRAPS (or a similar product) and a video game. Heck, I could throw one together right now and be done with it in an afternoon, split it into 10+ parts, and monetize each part. Bam, there's money in the bank and no work involved. That's revolting, honestly. What sort of "hard work" did I do to earn that money, exactly?

I'd never monetize a video of me just playing a game and talking over it because that's honestly kind of stupid. I'm already getting entertainment value out of the game I bought, why do I need to be paid to have fun and to give other people some entertainment? All the LPers seem to care about is money any more. It's kind of sad.

Hell, I watch plenty of LPs (TBF for example), but I hate the mentality that people have now, where they insist that they "deserve" the money because they worked so hard for it. What work did you do exactly? There's more work involved in making low-budget porn than your LPs! You did jack squat to "earn" any money. The ad providers (the ones paying you) did more work than you did. And if it came down to having to pay you for your LPs out of my wallet, I wouldn't do it. Hell, I'm pretty sure that's the reason there is so much support for these LPers....you just have to watch ads, so you don't see it as that bad because you're not actually paying for the entertainment at all. What if you had to pay per video you watched, say, a dollar per view. Would you still support them as radically as you do now? I imagine most of you SAY you would....but secretly you'd be ditching your YouTube subscriptions left and right. Keep up the good fight, ye hypocrites.

Summary: I would not expect people to pay me for doing an LP. Nor do I expect to pay anyone else for doing an LP. Get a real job.

A little bit jelous are we? Well think of this, the job market sucks, finding a job is hard, so you want more people looking for jobs? Insted of sitting at their homes and making Lps for a living? Are you that jelous of other people making money of there personalities? Nintendo is like all companys "evil", becouse they dont see the human element in anything, only money.

Snotnarok:
-snip-

I am aware that SOME people pay that much for their equipment.

I'm also aware that the vast majority do not, and what they do can be easily slotted into an evening. And I know this because I've actually done it before. It's literally an afternoon's worth of work to make a simple functional LP, and the required software/hardware is of minimal-to-no-cost. Especially for PC games.

Besides that, when you compare that miniscule amount of money to the amount of money that the developers spend making the games that you're LPing over, and you'll find that you really have no right whatsoever to whine about investing a measly thousand bucks or so, anyways.

No, you don't deserve to be paid the big bucks for minimal work and minimal investment. If you want a job in video games, invest REAL money and learn to make your own. Or go to school and get a degree in development, then get hired to a studio to do it professionally. Or become a game tester. Those are all valid paths. But adding your voice to someone else's game doesn't make it YOUR product that you can buy and sell at will, it's still their product and they have a right to decide whether or not you should make money on something they made.

hino77:
-snip-

The poor job market is really no excuse at all. Get a degree in a field that people always need (and yes, there are a lot of fields like that) and then start applying. Do some actual work trying to get a job. And if you don't find a job in your field, look to get a job in something else. No, you're not "too good" to work at a less meaningful job to pay the bills while you wait for a better job to open up. You do what work you can until you find something you want. That's how everyone else made their way in the world. But nowadays, we have these 20 and 30 year old people with an absurdly entitled mentality who think they deserve their one specific dream job right out of college, and give up immediately after failing to get it.

I myself went back to college after failing to find a job in my chosen field, and now I'm employed. Why? It's not because I'm "better" than other applicants, I wasn't exactly the top of my class or anything. It's because I put in the legwork to get a job and they didn't.

So why would I be jealous (and yes that is the correct spelling for the word, not the butchered version you used) of people who don't do any hard work of their own, gave up on getting a real job, but expect to be paid to talk over someone else's video game that they spent tons of money on? I actually have a job, and they don't. :P

The fact of the matter is that LPs utilize someone else's creative work as a means of making money. It's within the creator's right to demand that revenue. You're not "entitled" to it simply because you did a voice over of the game.

Maybe Copyright seen they are allowed to do it.. that is a quite possible angle.

But one thing is sure PR wise this is bad. Very bad.. this is terrible PR. And Nintendo can't really take that right now. Seriously Nintendo in this time where you have issues selling your WiiU. You want this kind of PR added on it?

I get it that you want some of the money that these LP's make. Then set up a licensing system.. because if you take it all. Well then quite a few people will stop LP-ing Nintendo Games.

There you go..

CriticKitten:

Snotnarok:
-snip-

I am aware that SOME people pay that much for their equipment.

I'm also aware that the vast majority do not, and what they do can be easily slotted into an evening. And I know this because I've actually done it before. It's literally an afternoon's worth of work to make a simple functional LP, and the required software/hardware is of minimal-to-no-cost. Especially for PC games.

Besides that, when you compare that miniscule amount of money to the amount of money that the developers spend making the games that you're LPing over, and you'll find that you really have no right whatsoever to whine about investing a measly thousand bucks or so, anyways.

No, you don't deserve to be paid the big bucks for minimal work and minimal investment. If you want a job in video games, invest REAL money and learn to make your own. Or go to school and get a degree in development, then get hired to a studio to do it professionally. Or become a game tester. Those are all valid paths. But adding your voice to someone else's game doesn't make it YOUR product that you can buy and sell at will, it's still their product and they have a right to decide whether or not you should make money on something they made.

hino77:
-snip-

The poor job market is really no excuse at all. Get a degree in a field that people always need (and yes, there are a lot of fields like that) and then start applying. Do some actual work trying to get a job. And if you don't find a job in your field, look to get a job in something else. No, you're not "too good" to work at a less meaningful job to pay the bills while you wait for a better job to open up. You do what work you can until you find something you want. That's how everyone else made their way in the world. But nowadays, we have these 20 and 30 year old people with an absurdly entitled mentality who think they deserve their one specific dream job right out of college, and give up immediately after failing to get it.

I myself went back to college after failing to find a job in my chosen field, and now I'm employed. Why? It's not because I'm "better" than other applicants, I wasn't exactly the top of my class or anything. It's because I put in the legwork to get a job and they didn't.

So why would I be jealous (and yes that is the correct spelling for the word, not the butchered version you used) of people who don't do any hard work of their own, gave up on getting a real job, but expect to be paid to talk over someone else's video game that they spent tons of money on? I actually have a job, and they don't. :P

The fact of the matter is that LPs utilize someone else's creative work as a means of making money. It's within the creator's right to demand that revenue. You're not "entitled" to it simply because you did a voice over of the game.

Who are you to determine what people do or do not deserve for their work? If people think that service is worth the money provided to them, who are you to judge that to be unfair? It does take money. It does take hard work. It does rely on the LP'er just as much as the game, if not more. I would be more okay if Nintendo asked to take a percentage, because there's more reliance on content in a LP than a review, but it's still dependent on the player to make it successful.

If you're arguing that LP'ers can't take the money Nintendo deserves by slapping over commentary because it's their work, not the work of the player, you have to acknowledge that Nintendo cannot take the money LP'ers deserve for their hard work.

Whether or not you like it, they do have a job. Some people have easier jobs than others. They have found something someone is willing to pay them money for. That's a job: a regular activity performed in exchange for payment. It sucks that you think people shouldn't enjoy their job to the point you deny that these "fun" jobs exist, despite the hard work and talent required to make any real money.

You scream jealousy, demanding that these people go out and find a "real" job, that they're not entitled to money given for the service that they provided, for doing a substantial amount of work to entertain others. You might as well say reviewers don't deserve money, or people who do commentary on the news like Stephen Colbert aren't entitled to what they get. After all, without good news to bounce off of, he could be very boring. His show depends on the news....

What it says to me is that you're throwing a fit that a small group of people have figured out that their personalities are enough to land them a job playing video games for nothing other than the entertainment of others and that you're lashing out by claiming that it's not a "real" job--as if there were such a thing as fake ones--and that they don't deserve the money for the things that they do.

Having a regular job as a LP'er is harder than you think.

CriticKitten:

Snotnarok:
-snip-

I am aware that SOME people pay that much for their equipment.

I'm also aware that the vast majority do not, and what they do can be easily slotted into an evening. And I know this because I've actually done it before. It's literally an afternoon's worth of work to make a simple functional LP, and the required software/hardware is of minimal-to-no-cost. Especially for PC games.

Besides that, when you compare that miniscule amount of money to the amount of money that the developers spend making the games that you're LPing over, and you'll find that you really have no right whatsoever to whine about investing a measly thousand bucks or so, anyways.

No, you don't deserve to be paid the big bucks for minimal work and minimal investment. If you want a job in video games, invest REAL money and learn to make your own. Or go to school and get a degree in development, then get hired to a studio to do it professionally. Or become a game tester. Those are all valid paths. But adding your voice to someone else's game doesn't make it YOUR product that you can buy and sell at will, it's still their product and they have a right to decide whether or not you should make money on something they made.

I'm sorry, you simply don't understand the work that goes into computer work and talking so condescendingly against something you know nothing about is not helping your argument. You say it's easy, I've clearly laid out it is not, even for the average/low spending LPer that is paid they work hard for their money but because you don't understand how it works and think you can spin out a show in an afternoon (which you can't because youtube needs to approve you and you need content before that happens) that they don't deserve to be paid? They provide entertainment to thousands+ and I have said they do plenty of work so where's the counter argument that they don't do a lot of work.

Pre-record tests, record while being entertaining, having interesting things to say, always talking, edit video to have proper levels and make sure everything is visible to the viewer (this requires re-watching the episode so it can take just about the same time to edit as it does play, now you have to render and encode the video, upload to youtube, maintain yourself socially by interacting with viewers all this on equipment they have to provide & maintain.

Minimal investment and minimal risk despite all that was previously stated? Spending thousands to get their sound/audio acceptable? Then creating content that youtube has to approve? That's right you don't just get paid you have to be approved and that includes: quality of audio/video and content provided. There are people who do this for a second job you know and have this stuff you mentioned in their resume, Classic Game Room is a fine example of a youtube partner who was a video editor and resumed his reviewing job climbed the ladder to partnership and is full on getting paid for reviewing games. Does he not deserve the money he earns? Writing, getting games, console, maintaining a website and paying staff. No because I'm sure you can give an opinion and work up millions of viewers right?

By your logic, you owe your car company a % of profits because it is their car you used to get to work. Oh you bought it in full already? But it's THEIR product and they have a right to the money you make. Were you using a dell computer at work? Well maybe dell deserves some money from your paycheck despite it being the company computer, YOU are using it for work and are earning money off it aren't you? Yes yes it was paid off but you're making money off it. So how much are you giving them? Nintendo is asking for all profits so I assume you'd be giving around 95%? You want some for taxes and gas I figure.

Bashfluff:
-snip-

Snotnarok:
-snip-

I love it. People want to keep insisting that LPers somehow merit money for slapping their name onto someone else's work, and will resort to any ridiculous argument to make it happen. Even ones that I already dismissed in prior posts. Because those are the only arguments they have.

They have to invest thousands? So do the people who make those games, you know. And they spend many, MANY thousands more than any LPer spends to make their LPs. And the vast majority of an LP relies on the game developer's content to make the video compelling and interesting. Furthermore, I have a friend who does LPs and never spent "thousands" on anything. I myself have done decent LPs and haven't spent much either. The suggestion that all LPers spend countless thousands out of pocket is dishonest at best.

LPers have to spend several hours doing their "jobs"? Oh gods, the horror of playing a video game for hours on end! Sounds like a relaxing weekend to me. Meanwhile, the folks who made the video game they're playing worked far more hours and were paid pretty poorly for that time, too. Likely much worse per hour than the LPer, I'd say (which is a crime too, but that's another issue that doesn't fit this discussion so I'll save it for another thread). Forgive me if I don't feel too sorry for the guy who just added his voice to the video and called it his own work when the guy who actually made all the content is being paid even more poorly for his time.

LPers have to "work hard"? Doing what, exactly? In many cases, once you've set up the audio balancing and video, there's NO extra work involved beyond recording the game and talking over it. And there's no "original" product being made here, this is someone else's hard work being recorded over by another person and the original creator isn't getting a single red cent from the video in question.

There would be zero attraction to LPs at all if the game content itself was removed, so how can you POSSIBLY argue that the LPer in question is contributing "significantly" to the project when the entire video falls apart without the game there? You may notice that Rifftrax, a group whose entire product depends heavily on the product of another person (the movie makers in Hollywood) don't actually sell you a copy of the movie to go with their audio. Why? Because it's blatantly illegal for them to sell someone else's work as their own when they don't have distribution rights for the movie. LPers have been getting away with this same thing for years, and honestly, they shouldn't be. Unless they've made specific signed agreements with the video game company in question....and many of them haven't....they shouldn't be allowed to post videos of the game with their audio slapped over it. Sorry, that's the law. Wave the flag of Fair Use all you like, a poster earlier already pointed out that the legal standing for Fair Use on an LP is shaky at best.

These LPers are honestly rather lucky Nintendo didn't take their videos down on sight, as many other companies have been known to do. But I love how people want to make Nintendo sound like assholes despite them being far more generous than most other mainstream publishers with regards to this sort of thing. Anything to build the anti-Nintendo sentiment, eh, dear hypocrites?

If you want to argue that LPers deserve a portion of pay, alright, I'd be willing to talk about that. I don't think it should be much, because they contribute far less to the product than the game developer does, but that's not for me to decide. It's the company's game and not property of the LPer, so how much an LPer makes (if anything) should be up to the game developer to decide and NOT the LPer. The notion that an LPer does enough work and contributes enough content to an LP to merit the majority of the ad revenue (much less all of it), however, is an absolutely laughable point of view.

There's a reason that I can respect work done by reviewers or critics (Yahtzee, Angry Joe, Jim Sterling, MovieBob, etc) and believe that they deserve to be paid for their work, whereas the majority of LPers I do not feel the same way: the amount of effort required to make a video like any of the folks I just listed is FAR more than any LPer you can name. Go ahead and try to find one. They produce more actual CONTENT for their videos than LPers do in terms of editing and voice work, they invest far more of their time and money into their videos than LPers do in terms of hardware and software, and they're far less entitled and bitchy about how they "deserve" to be paid than LPers typically are. And perhaps most importantly, they're doing their jobs because they enjoy it, rather than because it was the only thing they could manage to do with their lives. If you make a living doing a review show, good for you, because you're actually contributing something of yourself there and providing people with a unique product/service. If you're making a living from LPs, that's honestly sort of disgusting, because your entire revenue stream relies on other people making products for you to show off. I have no problem with people making money from LPs, but I have a serious problem with people making *very* comfortable livings off of them.

But if it wasn't bad enough that you repeated the same stale arguments, you then resort to a CAR analogy....the Godwin's Law of all internet debates. Fine, I'll play your game. Let's fix your car analogy to make it match the scenario here.

A person buys a Ford truck. He proceeds to add a few flashy lights and decals to the truck, then puts it in his driveway and charges people just to look at it. Now it doesn't matter if they didn't want to look at it, have already seen it before, or were just driving through and happened to glance at it, it still counts as a view and he still demands payment every time they pass by (which, I'll note, is exactly like ad revenue from YT: doesn't matter if a user watches the whole video or not, just clicking the link and letting it load the ads counts as a view provided the user didn't have AdBlock, and the LPer makes money from those ads even if the user didn't watch any of their video).

Now suddenly your "poor LPer" seems like kind of an asshat, doesn't he? But that analogy is a hell of a lot closer to the reality of the situation than yours was.

See why I'm tired of seeing these stupid car analogies? It's bad enough that everyone always uses cars, because apparently cars are the only product on the planet Earth that is allowed to be used as a basis of comparison....but it's especially tiring because a physical object like a car has absolutely NOTHING in common with an intangible digital object like an LP. It's akin to the people who compare used cars to used games: it's a dumb comparison because it's nothing like the product you're comparing it to.

Feel free to try again, but this time try to come prepared with a valid point. Or better yet, please don't bother. I'm not going to entertain this nonsense any further. It's a waste of time, and unlike LPers, I actually have things to do with that time. :P

What is more fun is that if Nintendo just removed the videos, they'd look better, but now that they take the revenue from all the videos it makes them worse.

Instead of being a good company that just tries to please your fans by letting them cash in a bit on your work so that they might buy your next game. They decide it's a good idea to piss them all off.

There are LPers out there that are worth listening to, just to hear them talk. GameGrumps for example. I often don't look at the video as there are rarely good things happening on them. Sometimes it has happened when it comes to bugs or glitches and it's fun but not normally.

CriticKitten: If you think some of those bigger LPers have it easy you're wrong. OMFGCata for example does a lot of LPs but even he gets burned out from time to time due to having to work so much on the stuff he does. Unlike your work where you work some or several hours a day. He would work most of his day. More than what you do.
The crappy ones probably don't take much time but the bigger LPs don't have it all easy for them. TB also said that you need to get at least 100 000 views to make any sort of decent money on it. Less than that and it's often a waste.

But it really sounds like you're jealous of someone having a hobby that he can cash in on.

CriticKitten:
[quote="Bashfluff" post="7.408155.17063162"]Snip

There's work involved plenty of it and you're blowing it off as nothing because you don't understand the work involved. Also blowing off the other point of the devs were already paid for the game in question so they already got the money.

I work with computers, I work with tech and you really come off as many clients I've had who don't understand the work involved and believe a website is made with a few clicks of a mouse followed by a automate button again thinking the hardest part is scanning artwork.

Your truck logic makes no sense, no one is being paid because for accidental views, these are views and subscribers, aka they come back to youtube and view their vids/ads and make youtube money. My car logic is the car/game is helping you make money, so by your logic you owe the car company money for the car helping you get to work despite you already having paid it off entirely much like the LPers with these games. But the devs deserve more money? Well the people buying the game because of the LP (Like I have) would probably account for that.

"There would be zero attraction to LPs at all if the game content itself was removed, " so talkshows, Tosh .0, sports commentators? I guess they don't deserve pay for being entertaining and just making commentary over footage that they have no involvement in. After all the football players run and get brain damage while some guy yaks into a mic.

They get paid because they get views and subs/give reason for people to come to youtube and see adverts, are entertaining enough for people to come back.

LPs have benefits to devs anyway, it makes people want to buy the game, I've bought several games off LPs and had I not seen them I'd not have paid the money. So yes the devs do get something out of it, customers, because I know I'm not the only one who's done this.

Either you're trolling or you just have no idea what work goes into these things and your opinion only has so much weight when you don't know the work involved.

This is too funny. I can't comment, or I'd ruin it. I must watch instead.
*munches popcorn*

Snotnarok:

Either you're trolling or you just have no idea what work goes into these things and your opinion only has so much weight when you don't know the work involved.

So far his(her?) arguments have included:

-Self congratulatory remarks
-Marginalization of points based on a purely arbitrary definition of "real work/job"
-A massive strawman about the pay disparity between developers and LPers (even though they work in related but separate markets..)
-TWO moon logic accusations of hypocrisy against a vague someone whom he is projecting ASSUMPTIONS onto (a someone, who, as far as we know, only exists in his head).
-A half assed supporting argument that apparently isn't related to the topic
-Presuming to think for everyone reading at least once.

And my favorite:
-A Parthian Shot that attempts to discredit everyone who participated in the argument. Which is hilarious because I don't think he realizes that he just discredited himself too.
With a promise that he is done with the argument (I can't wait to see if he breaks that promise).

I'd retort, but I'm past trying to reason with the clearly unreasonable.

Snotnarok:
I'm glad Nintendo completely misses what LPs have done for many games

I totally agree, it's not as if nintendo have put up there own lp's and payed for the services of prolific lp'ers to promote games.

Nintendo doesn't really need LP's to promote a Nintendo first party game. They can pay for real advertising, and don't need help getting green lit or kick started and what not. They say mario or luigi and people come running with open wallets.

And aside from a few prolific lpers, most people are there to watch someone play the game first, listen to the person 2nd.

If your Lets playing just to make money, go play something else. It's not free advertising if someone is giving out money.

Eve Charm:

And aside from a few prolific lpers, most people are there to watch someone play the game first, listen to the person 2nd.

That's not true for me. I am there for the commentary, I like to hear people talk who have nice voices and accents. Of course, you probably have evidence that most people are there for the opposite?

If your Lets playing just to make money, go play something else. It's not free advertising if someone is giving out money.

If Nintendo is not paying for the advertising, then it is free advertising for them.

When the money pot starts to run dry...

WeepingAngels:

Eve Charm:

And aside from a few prolific lpers, most people are there to watch someone play the game first, listen to the person 2nd.

That's not true for me. I am there for the commentary, I like to hear people talk who have nice voices and accents. Of course, you probably have evidence that most people are there for the opposite?

If your Lets playing just to make money, go play something else. It's not free advertising if someone is giving out money.

If Nintendo is not paying for the advertising, then it is free advertising for them.

Someone is getting paid themselves for using a Nintendo product. If anyone should be getting paid for the lets plays, it should be the maker of the product getting shown.

And I'll believe the latter when we get an article about matel taking the advertising fees of people playing barbie horse adventures, and someone caring.

Furthermore the lets player should be glad that nintendo didn't remove the videos because they can still use those videos of them playing the hot new release to get people to look at their other videos where no on cares if they get the ad revenue or not.

Eve Charm:

WeepingAngels:

Eve Charm:

And aside from a few prolific lpers, most people are there to watch someone play the game first, listen to the person 2nd.

That's not true for me. I am there for the commentary, I like to hear people talk who have nice voices and accents. Of course, you probably have evidence that most people are there for the opposite?

If your Lets playing just to make money, go play something else. It's not free advertising if someone is giving out money.

If Nintendo is not paying for the advertising, then it is free advertising for them.

Someone is getting paid themselves for using a Nintendo product. If anyone should be getting paid for the lets plays, it should be the maker of the product getting shown.

And I'll believe the latter when we get an article about matel taking the advertising fees of people playing barbie horse adventures, and someone caring.

So all you really have is your opinion that people watch LP's to watch the game first and commentator second. That's all I have too, I was really hoping there was some evidence to show one thing or the other.

I don't see how SOMEONE getting paid still doesn't give Nintendo free advertising. Anyway, if I watch a video where someone is showing me how to change the water pump in my truck, does Chevy deserve some money?

A huge chunk of reviewers I'm subscribed to review Nintendo games, so I expect to be hearing about this for at least every day for the rest of the month. Highest probabilities on Tamashii Hiroka, Yuriofwind, TheJWittz, Peanubuttergamer, & JonTron. Then again, none of them have stated that the make any revenue from their videos.

I'm okay with this on a per video basis. I mean some of those videos are Lets Plays or Walkthroughs that show the entire game, & I can see Nintendo's claim to that, but the others are reviews, previews, homages, history ofs, speculations, merchandise showcases, fan game/rom hack updates, creepypastas, fan animation, & cosplay parodies, which all seems like Fair Use to me.

Oh so as long as they say it's "free advertising" they can make money off it? So like those streaming sites that make money selling HD streams of stuff is in the right to because hey they are still streaming something for free, and it's advertising, even though they have no permission to do so.

And about the chevy no but say you were reading the manual of the pump and showing all the little pictures and stuff off in the book, I do think the company of the water pump can say " hey your showing off my product, they are only really there to see my product, if your reading it with a funny voice or not, they should be entitled to the ad fees that you received if they choose to do so.

Atmos Duality:

I'd retort, but I'm past trying to reason with the clearly unreasonable.

Well, yes I'm trying to see how far this moon logic goes because this job exsists, LPing isn't exactly a new idea so it's very interesting to watch logic this skewed come out. Already my theory is he has a wheel attached to his side because he walks on an angle.

Eve Charm:

And about the chevy no but say you were reading the manual of the pump and showing all the little pictures and stuff off in the book, I do think the company of the water pump can say " hey your showing off my product, they are only really there to see my product, if your reading it with a funny voice or not, they should be entitled to the ad fees that you received if they choose to do so.

So why can't Chevy say that? Chevy sold that guy the truck and installed in that truck was the water pump and now he is making money off of advertising for a video teaching people how to change the water pump.

Of course, what I am suggesting is ridiculous but it really isn't any different than buying a Nintendo game and teaching people how to play it in a Let's Play. People watching a guy change a water pump still have to change their own water pump and people watching a Let's Play still have to buy and play the game themselves. Watching a game and playing a game are different things.

CriticKitten:
Nintendo's behind the curve. Most other groups do this already, actually, so it's rather stupid of the article writer to make this sound like Nintendo's just trying to be dicks. Worth noting that they're not blocking these videos (as that would be an actual dick move), just forcing the LPers to cough up the money to the folks who made and/or published that game. I don't normally get all protective of company rights but this seems like a fair trade to me, tbh: LPers still get to play the game and entertain, and Nintendo gets to make additional money on the product they made. It's certainly a better compromise than Sega's reaction, and LPs have gotten pretty out of control with regards to this "entitlement" mentality.

LPers often make a livelyhood out of their work. They don't need Nintendo and they don't need Sega. If they don't make money from their videos from streaming a certain brand, they won't make any more videos of that brand. The amount Nintendo will make, hypothetically, from redirecting revenue will be miniscule from the publicity the LPers give to Nintendo. Playing a game and watching someone play a game is not the same thing. I cannot rely on GameSpot, IGN or anyone to make an objective analysis of a game. Developers rarely release demos anymore that are representative of the main aspects of the game and the only way to tell if the game is any good is to watch an LPer play through the game.

The amount of money it costs to market a game > ad revenue from an LP. Nintendo has NO reason to divert the funds. Basically, what they are doing is the equivalent of a chess set maker demanding money because its chess set was video taped being used.

This vid is fairly representative of my views.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yX4io2O4EI

If watching your game makes me want to play it less, that is an issue that you are just going to deal with. If I crack open a book at a book store and it turns out to be written by a deranged lunatic, why would I buy it? If a game looks boring as hell, why would I buy it?

Basically, what they are doing is the equivalent of a chess set maker demanding money because its chess set was video taped being used.

Right, it's like Hoover demanding money from people who are seen on video using a Hoover vacuum.

WeepingAngels:

Eve Charm:

And about the chevy no but say you were reading the manual of the pump and showing all the little pictures and stuff off in the book, I do think the company of the water pump can say " hey your showing off my product, they are only really there to see my product, if your reading it with a funny voice or not, they should be entitled to the ad fees that you received if they choose to do so.

So why can't Chevy say that? Chevy sold that guy the truck and installed in that truck was the water pump and now he is making money off of advertising for a video teaching people how to change the water pump.

Of course, what I am suggesting is ridiculous but it really isn't any different than buying a Nintendo game and teaching people how to play it in a Let's Play. People watching a guy change a water pump still have to change their own water pump and people watching a Let's Play still have to buy and play the game themselves. Watching a game and playing a game are different things.

Actually it isn't ridiculous but it's the whole question here, is the video really about the chevy, then chevy should have the rights to it, is it really about the water pump then why not the water pump, if it's really about the guy whats the point of the chevy or the water pump being the main focus, you don't need either to tell people how to put in a pump ((ala podcast))

And lets play aren't teaching players the game, they are just playing the game start to finish or where ever they decide to stop.

If nintendo can say " make videos of our games and we'll take them down" Why not " your not going to make the money off our games. Real answer is nintendo doesn't need that kind of advertising, They pay plenty for their first party advertising and they do it in a way to not spoil their games so people would buy it rather then just watch it be played.

Eve Charm:

WeepingAngels:

Eve Charm:

And about the chevy no but say you were reading the manual of the pump and showing all the little pictures and stuff off in the book, I do think the company of the water pump can say " hey your showing off my product, they are only really there to see my product, if your reading it with a funny voice or not, they should be entitled to the ad fees that you received if they choose to do so.

So why can't Chevy say that? Chevy sold that guy the truck and installed in that truck was the water pump and now he is making money off of advertising for a video teaching people how to change the water pump.

Of course, what I am suggesting is ridiculous but it really isn't any different than buying a Nintendo game and teaching people how to play it in a Let's Play. People watching a guy change a water pump still have to change their own water pump and people watching a Let's Play still have to buy and play the game themselves. Watching a game and playing a game are different things.

Actually it isn't ridiculous but it's the whole question here, is the video really about the chevy, then chevy should have the rights to it, is it really about the water pump then why not the water pump, if it's really about the guy whats the point of the chevy or the water pump being the main focus, you don't need either to tell people how to put in a pump ((ala podcast))

And lets play aren't teaching players the game, they are just playing the game start to finish or where ever they decide to stop.

If nintendo can say " make videos of our games and we'll take them down" Why not " your not going to make the money off our games. Real answer is nintendo doesn't need that kind of advertising, They pay plenty for their first party advertising and they do it in a way to not spoil their games so people would buy it rather then just watch it be played.

It doesn't matter if it's about the Chevy or the water pump as both were sold by Chevy (the truck was sold with the water pump pre-installed). Also, changing a water pump in a Chevy truck may not be the same as changing the water pump in a Ford car and therefore the video is about a specific Chevy truck. Do you think people should own anything they buy? Should the man making the video also have to pay Snap-On because he used Snap-On tools? See how ridiculous this is getting?

I have checked LP's many times to get help with a game.

Nintendo may not need that kind of advertising (though they could use help with the Wii U in my opinion) but they are getting negative press over this and that is something they don't need.

Well the answer is if your just showing the way to change a chevy pump then chevy if they choose should be entitled to do what they want with it, so should ford, and yes even snap on if your going to put them in it. if your using their products why don't they have a say in it specifically if your making a profit off their stuff. Profit being anything like selling tickets, selling walkthrus or just spamming your own advertisements.

There are reasons why people blur out names of products in videos and why no name brands are shown unless they are advertised because they can get sued for it or lose their profits. Games should be no different. This isn't something new on the table here.

If your stuck in a game you could also check an faq, or you could check something like a paid and approved IGN walkthru or something.

This won't stop let's players. Just lets players that play nintendo games will more be about getting their name out or I don't know, Not doing it for the money? while the money ones just play other games.

Well as it kind of goes there is no such thing as bad press or the only bad press is no press.

I don't know how to embed Blip videos, but there's a half hour debate on it at Blistered Thumbs. Even though one of the guys makes LPs, they're taking Nintendo's side.

http://www.blisteredthumbs.net/2013/05/thumb-wars-ep-37-ninten-donts-of-lps-twitter/

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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
Register for a free account here