Do you agree with them? | |||
| Yes | 61 | 45.86% | |
| Kind off | 13 | 9.77% | |
| No | 37 | 27.82% | |
| Godzilla | 22 | 16.54% | |
| Total: | 133 | ||
KLXVER said:
|
if this was MS or Sony there would be shit storms. this if very similar to the DRM viasco, yeah DRM is a very different thing here, but it was LEGAL for MS to do it. it was anti consumer but still legal, same thing as it is here.
Barkley said:
You can be a fan of a youtuber that has stopped producing content because of nintendo's stupid policy and a nintendo consumer as well. It doesn't matter if there are other people doing nintendo content. Can you imagine telling a pewdiepie fan "Hey I know his entire channel got taken down but all those games are on Mr.Joe69's channel!" The individual playing is almost always a bigger factor than the game they are actually playing for let's play viewers. |
You are talking of a 0.000001% minority
I think that Nintendo policies are dumb and wrong. But I don´t think that they should be concerned because its fans cant see a Nintendo Pewdiepie video, and of course I dont think that we can call that a consumer problem because its not. You buy a console to play games. Not to see Pewdiepie videos.
| OdinHades said: I won't judge If AJ is right or not. But it is really insane how many people are defending Nintendo for being straight out greedy. Seriously, those folks are like Apple fans, their holy Company can do no wrong and don't you even dare to say something negative about them. They have no reason to do this, it only hurts their reputation. It's an anti-Gamer policy, simple as that. |
I'm fine with people supporting Nintendo here, legally I'm 99% sure Nintendo can do what they do and naturally that's what people will point out.
However what I think is alarming is that some individuals go as far as insulting Youtubers and denieing them their livelihoods and career choices. We are on a website entirely based on an entertainment business, so it's really disconcerting to me that people here would harshly reject other (and even related) parts of entertainment like this.
Goodnightmoon said:
You are talking of a 0.000001% minority |
on a nintendo console. on playstation and xbox sharing and viewing others experience is a big part of the gaming experience as a whole. it might not be to you, but A LOT of people enjoy this stuff.
Like I said in the previous thread. Both sides (nintendo and angry joe) look petty, pathetic and greedy.
And to those saying this is anti-consumer, how the fuck is nintendo's youtube policy affecting the consumers? In what way does this affect those who purchase product. Please explain to me. It affect no one but those who make money on youtube and nintendo. If you said anti-youtubers then "yes", but anti-consumers? gtfo
| ihatefatkatz said: Like I said in the previous thread. Both sides (nintendo and angry joe) look petty, pathetic and greedy. And to those saying this is anti-consumer, how the fuck is nintendo's youtube policy affecting the consumers? In what way does this affect those who purchase product. Please explain to me. It affect no one but those who make money on youtube and nintendo. If you said anti-youtubers then "yes", but anti-consumers? gtfo |
100% true
Goodnightmoon said:
You are talking of a 0.000001% minority |
I buy a nintendo console, therefore I am a consumer. I watch let's plays therefore nintendo's policy is causing me (who is a consumer) a problem. A consumer problem doesn't have to be something that's wrong with the actual product you are buying, though If I was a let's player myself it would be a problem with the product. You are severly underestimating the popularity of let's plays.
| ihatefatkatz said: Like I said in the previous thread. Both sides (nintendo and angry joe) look petty, pathetic and greedy. And to those saying this is anti-consumer, how the fuck is nintendo's youtube policy affecting the consumers? In what way does this affect those who purchase product. it affect no one but those who make money on youtube and nintendo. |
How can you not understand that consumers watch let's plays, and it affects the viewers aswell as the content creators.
| ihatefatkatz said: Like I said in the previous thread. Both sides (nintendo and angry joe) look petty, pathetic and greedy. And to those saying this is anti-consumer, how the fuck is nintendo's youtube policy affecting the consumers? In what way does this affect those who purchase product. Please explain to me. It affect no one but those who make money on youtube and nintendo. If you said anti-youtubers then "yes", but anti-consumers? gtfo |
uhm, I can see how it is considered "anti-consumer"
more and more people are trusting Youtubers' opinions and presentations of games over review sites and official PR to make their purchasing choices and Nintendo is making that presentation part pretty much impossible for dedicated ("professional") Youtubers
Instead of ranting at Nintendo for abiding by the law, why not appeal to change the law.
Anger is misdirected.
01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01001001 01111001 01101111 01101100 01100001 01101000 00100001 00100000 01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01000101 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00100001 00100000
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
