This guy needs to keep to himself and be happy with what he is doing to begin with. Some of us don't have the luxury of being given Oculas Rifts to play with and 'promote'. If he doesn't like the policy just don't make Nintendo game based videos, it's very simple. Nintendo are well withing their right to do this, even if there could be benefits from letting youtube video makers advertise on Nintendo content.

Maybe I should do a youtube channel and specifically link with Nintendo. I could get free consoles to "test" and reviewer copies of games before they are released with no competition.

Doesn't he make over a million dollars a year, and when did he play a Nintendo game that he actually bought rather than emulated? I understand what his point is but I feel that he really isn't the one who should be speaking out about this. I don't agree with Nintendo on this as I feel that it may turn some Youtubers off of playing their games and keeping them from getting as much publicity online compared to other game companies, but it is their copyrighted material and they choose how it is used, whether it benefits them or hinders them when it comes to advertising online.

ypu still don't get it. this isn't about what is right or wrong or legal or illegal. Nintendo is fully within their rights to impose something like this. That doesn't make it a smart thing oto do. When no one is showing or talking about any Nintendo software anymore who do u think that will affect more? Do you think whatever Nintendo stands to gain from people showing their content is more than what they stand to gain from the exposure they will get? 

Well, wasn't him the one that made Flap bird rise with a single video?

Nintendo would profit more from letting him do his thing.

While it is definitely something which supports your claim, when taken in context it isn't a huge deal.

For the following reasons:

-  The total difference in sales for the XB 360 version from the 2013 -> 2014 was 466,193(2014) - 334,446 (2013) = 131,727 and PS3 version 340,240 (2014) -303,766(2013) = 36,474. Which is a total net gain of  168,201 copies or 4% of total sales. 

- The price for a new copy at this point is $20, not $50 - meaning these sold copies are less profitable. 

- This is one isolated case. There are many games that haven't greatly benefited from sales because of PewDiePew's gameplays. Notice that this video had 12 million hits (at the time of the article) and most of his videos only get 3-5 million. Which games this benefit is very unpredictable and almost like winning the lottery. 

- PewDiePie is the most popular let's player, youtuber, and has celebrity level appeal. Certainly he  can affect sales sporadically like any other celebrity. I wouldn't call most let's players celebrities though. 

- Celebrities can play games on non Youtube platforms too and affect sales. Ellen and Oprah sold plenty of Wii's, for example. However, there are many instances where a celebrity's endorsement doesn't affect sales too much. This is true for both these mega-celebrities and gaming centric ones (PewDiePie.) 

So considering how the potential gain in sales and profit is miniscule, and the risks can be high (Intellectual Property damage) it can possibly not be in the interest of a profit-seeking firm to have let's plays (look at the demo argument, often demos hurt sales and damage IP's, so many companies don't take the risk.) The overall opportunity cost could be less than the real-world costs, meaning profit was not maximized. 

And it isn't generated solely because of the guy talking as he needs the content. So he have to pay a share because of the content. Even the guy complaining says Nintendo is in their right so I don't know why this part would be the discussion.

I don't think anyone here have someone making profits based on his hardwork to be able to complain.

If I used that guy video and audio and Just re-recorded with my face would I be in the right to collect 100% of the profit I made? I am artistically making faces while using his dub and ninty raw material.

Pewdiepie already stated that Nintendo has every right to do this he just disagrees that they should. Every publisher has every right to do it but they don't see the sense. 

Surely if this is something people thought was a good idea EA would've done it long ago.

I never watched a video of pewdiepie but if you are somehow into gaming news you know him.
But i rather watch twitch.tv than Letsplays cause Live > all

I read he is coming close to 10 Million a year
2013 it were like 4 Million $ going above 8 in 2014.

Well this dude has a big following...a damn big following
Bigger than anyone - He can push old games into the charts again easily if he wants to.

Now Nintendo is struggling to sell nice numbers on anything that isn't Mario related.
Im pretty sure someone like PewDiePie going ham over something like Bayonetta 2 could actually make this game sell more than those lol-worthy numbers.
Hell if Pewdiepie would promote the new Xenoblade this game has an actual chance to sell GOOD...No 200k Units aren't good and a failure.
Nintendo Followers brag about their great 3rd Party games with high Metascores,how bad games like Destiny/Ubisoft stuff etc on PS/Xbox are and how poor Sony/MS Follower are to miss out on those games but what does it help if nearly no one plays them?Not even the majority of WiiU owners buys them.
And at the end something which is considered bad like Destiny and all the other games sell Millions over Millions while Bayonetta 2 doesn't even reach 500k LOL
Pew could promote the crap out of this game.
Nintendo needs someone who has a connection to a gaming community.They on their own don't seem to be able to advertise their games.
Pew would do it probably instantly if he gets something out of it.Why would someone with "power"(he clearly has some in the gaming community) promote stuff without getting something in return?
At the End only Nintendo and their 3rd Party would win.Im pretty sure Platinum would happy if they could get easy 500k extra sales out of Bayonetta 2.