Does the guy even cover Nintendo stuff? He doesn't. So what's the big issue? It's not as if he made an Income (which is all HE AND Companies care about) through Nintendo stuff.
Look at it this way: You're in good standing in a class, here comes a group project. You do your work right, but the teammates didn't do crap, and then they get the credit for YOUR work when they don't deserve shit. It's similar to this, the guy feels that he has the right to claim the videogames on his videos as "his", and thus feels entitled to get profit off of them, but in reality someone else owns the game and went through handwork... Just to have an idiot make money off their work.
I'm all up for property owners to defend their rights, yes perhaps 40% might be too much for a bunch of people who play videogames and upload them to YouTube for a living, but once again... They're making money off someone else's work.
For those who don't know: Whenever you buy a game, song, video, etc. You don't buy the media itself, but a "permission" to use the media in a way that won't affect the IP owner = No renting, etc. You don't actually own the game, because it's not your property or patented under your name.