By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Non-Pewdiepie youtubers about the Nintendo Youtube program

Areym on 02 February 2015
Mr Khan said:
outlawauron said:

I find this coming from you very odd. What about people doing news, reviews, and commentary with their time isn't content to you? 

News, yes. Reviews, yes. Let's Plays, no. I find the argument that the point of watching the let's plays is the commenters personality to be specious at best. To head off the counterexample, nobody would give a damn about John Madden if he were not commenting for the NFL, that's what brings the eyeballs. Minecraft, Metroid, or Medal of Honor is what brings the eyeballs, not Angry Joe, however much folks may feel otherwise.

With news and reviews, you're making an original contribution. With let's plays, you're presenting the work itself with some sort of thin veil that's supposed to make it "okay" to try to make money off of playing videogames.

As Lafiel may have mentioned earlier, if Nintendo is doing the same thing to news or reviews, then that is wrong.

I don't watch angry Joe or game grumpy for the games they play or review, I watch them because I enjoy their delivery and opinions/commentary. Those youtubers earned their subs. I doubt people would watch their favorite show being commented by a guy they can't stand or hate on TV. 



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

Around the Network
Mythmaker1 on 02 February 2015
Mr Khan said:

The issue is the money. These folks are doing what they enjoy and have a chance to share it with others, we're all in agreement up to that point (for instance, i would oppose any game maker deleting a let's-play due to a DMCA takedown notice), but fair use is the part where you don't make money off of the thing in question. I'm all for fanart, fan fiction, fan commentary.

What you're equivocating is like somebody rebroadcasting themselves watching an NFL game and armchair-commenting, then deciding that they're going to make a living off of that. Legally specious and certainly not correct.


That's not actually how fair use works.



I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.

Areym on 02 February 2015
The Fury said:
It's weird that gaming is seemingly different to any other entertainment medium on youtube, why is it okay for people to make money of someone elses work when it comes to games but nothing else? Because they put effort in to play and upload it?

I wonder if there would be as big of an issue if I started reading well known novels on youtube, word for word, literally from the book, with adverts and then not given a single penny to the writer.

Jim Sterling said they are PewDiePie's subscribers but they are not his games.

He bought the game, technically it is his game ( I assume pdp buys all his games)



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 02 February 2015
Areym said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Well, it is their IP and they do have every right to do so but while granted that they aren't embracing "youtube," at least it is a step in the right direction cause from 0%, its now 60% so 40% more to go

At the expense of the youtuber's integrity. If what Jim and boogie are saying is true and I trust them both, the control of the youtuber's content (the Nintendo content only) is a load of bullshit. Give me liberty or givee death. If it was any other company, there would be riots. This is not a step in the direction, not in the least. Nintendo, who suffers the most from bad or lack of marketing and exposure, is essentially shooting themselves in the foot.

You do realize that the people this is targeting aren't reviewers but rather "Lets Players" who show off the entire game without the consent of Nintendo or really anyone. Yes, if its a review/journalism, it shouldn't be allowed but I highly doubt they get affected by this that much anyway...

And it is certainly a step in the right direction cause they are now open to let people have a portion of the adrev rather than none... That doesn't mean that people should sign up for it if they don't like it but it with without a doubt a step in the right direction because they are open to the idea of letting people make money off of their games.

And I highly doubt that youtube/lets players affects the sales of AAA titles that aren't multiplayer/esports centric to a significant degree.



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

megafenix on 02 February 2015

well, nintendo is just protecting thier copyright content, much like other companies like sony or capcom, if one makes profit out of the intelectual property of someone else then that company has the right to claim a part of the cake, just that 30-40% could be scary to anyone so if nintendo doesnt want to discourgae the youtubers they should take about 15-25% of the money

this reminds me of what the angry joe went through with capcom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_hOomLtuuQ



Around the Network
Frogger on 02 February 2015
OttoniBastos said:

Judging by WiiU sales,i think they really need someone like PewDiePie to promote the WiiU for the legion of 14yo full hormonal girls who watch his videos.


Of course they don't. Contrary to popular belief, any, if at all, benefit Nintendo stands to gain from not monetizing is insignificant. They still get most of the free ads, because Nintendo videos aren't disappearing, and they even make coin off of it. Their bark is worse then their bite.



BraveNewWorld on 02 February 2015

Hope and pray that this fails. Because if it's successful it will kill the let's play community on Youtube.



"On my business card I am a corporate president. In my mind I am a game developer. But in my heart I am a gamer." - Satoru Iwata

The_Sony_Girl1 on 02 February 2015
Areym said:
The Fury said:
It's weird that gaming is seemingly different to any other entertainment medium on youtube, why is it okay for people to make money of someone elses work when it comes to games but nothing else? Because they put effort in to play and upload it?

I wonder if there would be as big of an issue if I started reading well known novels on youtube, word for word, literally from the book, with adverts and then not given a single penny to the writer.

Jim Sterling said they are PewDiePie's subscribers but they are not his games.

He bought the game, technically it is his game ( I assume pdp buys all his games)

Not even close! He played Corpse Party with an emulator! As long as his PC is strong enough, he's just gonna emulate it! People keep saying "Oh he bought the game!" when most of the time, he's playing an emulator, which is illegal if I remember right.



Bet with Xander XT: 

I can beat more games on his 3DS than he can on my PSVita in a month. Loser has to buy the winner a game on his/her handheld Guess who won? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=193531

Me!

RCTjunkie on 02 February 2015

On one hand, I don't think it's right for youtubers to make money by using Nintendo's intellectual property to bash Nintendo. That's just cruel.

On the other hand, Youtubers are such an important aspect of way that word-of-mouth advertising is made and undermining their importance in the presence and future is very dangerous.

So like everyone else is saying, Nintendo's in the right legally, but they'll have to live with the consequences which will be more than likely negative



WHO IS JESUS REALLY?

KLXVER on 02 February 2015

Get N touch or get out!