That Voice in Your Head
- Sep 4, 2010
No it doesn't. You have better legal and moral stances on you side. Stop using the untrue one in your arsenal. You can do better than this.bug_of_war said:YUP.Laggyteabag said:Quick question, though: Does this policy apply to review content too?
Except he didn't drop $900 on Nintendo gear, his fans did. And even if he DID drop that money himself, Nintendo is under no obligations to cater to him. If he wants to do a Let's Play, he needs to follow the same rules as anyone else. We can argue of how effective Nintendo's "strategy" is (I have problems with the creator's program myself) but let's not pretend that Nintendo doesn't have a right to do this.While I don't agree with Angry Joe a lot, in this instance he has a right to be pissed. After dropping $900 on Nintendo gear, they're still dogging him for more money. Yet pretty much every other AAA developer/publisher leave him be, so why would he NOT be angry?Aiddon said:Joe thinking way too highly of himself. Furthermore, he never reviewed any Nintendo games. Period. He just put up lazy LP's. That is it. And let's not get into the fact that his fans donated money to him so he could buy a damn Wii U in the first place. Criminy, there is nothing more pathetic than watching a grown man throw a hissy fit.
At least he has the decency to let his fans know, "Nintendo fucked me, I'm not covering their shit any more".
Furthermore, I'd appreciate it if people who don't do Let's Plays don't pretend to know how to do Let's Plays. You really think that Nintendo is the only company that does it? Every company does it. You want to know why we don't have any complaints? Because these companies cut deals with the handlers of these Let's Players. Same as Nintendo. It's just that Nintendo does it per a Let's Player basis while most other companies just deal with the handlers instead. And this isn't the creators program, this is how an MSRP works.
1. It wasn't a review of Mario Party 10 that got the monetization thing. It was a Let's Play.So after 40/50/60+ hours of playing a game, capturing the footage, writing the review, filming the review, sifting through footage, editing the footage and then uploading the final video, Nintendo deserves money for it? 40% of his revenue? And even if he did opt in, the game that he used to see if Nintendo were actually serious isn't even on the list of approved games that Nintendo will allow people to upload.Chaos James said:While I don't agree with Nintendo's business decisions concerning Youtube, and feel it would serve them better to let content creators make videos freely, I'm aware that they have a program in place to facilitate those who DO wish to make content. I'm quite sure that Angry Joe knows this as well, and uploaded the video anyways. To have it taken down was expected.
2. I head the exact same excuses for bootleggers in the 90's. Now, are Let's Players the same as bootleggers? Of course not, so stop using their excuses.
Do you get how copyright works? How derivative nature works? You do know that, in the music industry, you are not allowed to do your own cover of a song and sell it without paying a fee first? Or that the biggest reasons why MST3K is so hard to get is because, despite their commentary (not unlike a Let's Play), the movie itself is still considered its own work. Or why Rifftrax is bought separately from the movie. The "it's hard work" excuse doesn't cut it here.So by that logic people who make furniture should then pay the person who sold them the wood again? Or a musician should pay the maker of their instrument every time they make a song? Or if a parent posts a video of their kids playing a sport, should the NBL, NBA, NRL, AFL, FIFA etc. then demand that they be compensated for you showing the sport? Or should Logitech/Canon/Sony be paid every time someone films something using their cameras and uploads it to youtube?Scrythe said:This is the kind of arrogance I can't stand with YouTube "content creators" and their bizarre entitlement that they, and only they, deserve 100% of the money they make recording someone else's IP. I mean, their entire fucking job would not exist if it wasn't for the games, and now that companies are saying "You know, I would also like a slice of the pie I just baked", everyone's acting like they're all evil greedy overlords who don't want people to spread the fun these games provide for people.
And Angry Joe is King of Arrogance Mountain.
Lets plays, joke videos, guides, reviews etc. are all free advertisement that the creators have to actually put effort into uploading. Yes, they're using the game to make content, but they already paid for the game and are now using their own time to upload a video that generally will make people go out and buy the game. Video games are fun to watch, but they're more fun to play, and when someone shows you 30 minutes of a game and that footage gets you interested, you'll probably end up buying the game and playing it for yourself because in the end that is the fun part.
While I'm not a youtube content creator, I can't imagine it's easy making that your primary source of income. You've gotta work for it. You have to buy all the gear, build up/maintain a fan based, produce a consistent stream of content all while hoping that enough people who watch your videos don't have some sort of an ad blocker. So I very much believe that if someone is going to put upwards of 40+ hours of work a week into being a youtube gamer then they deserve 100% of the money.
...Angry Joe can be super arrogant at times though...
I once tried to dabble in Let's Plays. Is it hard work? Oh yes, absolutely. It is hard, tiring work that you have to make LOOK effortless. But you want to know the biggest part of doing Let's Plays? Knowing where you stand with developers/publishers. If you don't have an MRSP, you better take the time and effort to know which developers will be understanding and which developers you stay away from. This applies to so many more companies than just Nintendo. Once you get to MRSP standing, then you can relax but you still need to be able to talk, negotiate, and explain to these people all the goddamn time. What Joe's doing right now is the exact opposite of that and he still wants his cake and eat it.
So the Order 1866 isn't a video game, got it. (I actually enjoyed that game for what it is, btw)Except that video games aren't passive experiences, they're interactive ones. The main appeal of a video game is playing it, not watching it.KoudelkaMorgan said:The "Youtubers" have every right to freedom of press/speech etc. but until the law says otherwise, they have to respect that the people that make the things they are shamelessly piggybacking off of have a say in who gets to make money off their IPs.
To make a rediculous analogy, imagine you wrote a best selling book. Now imagine that there were thousands of people on Youtube doing "let's reads" and holding the pages up to the camera while making jokes/reading it in character etc. and demanding 100% of the ad revenue to go in their pockets.
1. As explained above, Nintendo already acts like every other company, it's just that Angry Joe likes the deals the other companies give Polaris over Nintendo's way, so yeah, it's still Joe's will against Nintendo's apathy.But if Nintendo acted like every other company, they still wouldn't be bending to his will. They're in no way poorly effected by having someone throw up a video of people having fun playing their game. They want money because they can get money, and while AJ no longer showing Nintendo vids will probably have nill effect on Nintendo's current income, him showing their vids would very likely increase their income from people buying it from his recommendation/lets plays.xaszatm said:Really the solution is already being done, both parties will have nothing to do with each other. Angry Joe will review games that don't require him to bend to Nitnendo's will while Nintendo will continue to ignore Angry Joe and not bend to his will. Both have other resources available to them (games for Joe, LP's for Nintendo) and both don't need the other. The only reason why we're even talking about this is because Angry Joe posted a ranting video online sparking controversy where there really is none.
2. And once again, we fall into the trap of assuming that Let's Plays = sales. You want to know something interesting? I, for fun, typed up Mario Party 10 to see what videos popped up? You want to guess how many of them were Let's Plays? You want to guess the viewer counts on them? At the bare minimum, 146k. The highest? 3 million views. That's right, 3 million. For a game that, quite frankly, is doing poorly in reviews, it seems to be doing swimingly for potential viewers. That 3 million guy isn't even a Nintendo Let's Player. How much you want to be that these people didn't really influence the sales chart of this game at all? Because I'd bet pretty high. Let's Players on their own don't sell games, or at the very least, don't contribute meaningfully in AAA sales, so to say that Joe is free advertisement is folly.
Yeah, sure. "worse" I disagree with how we've made those companies the devil to begin with. They're corporations, not people. I know that some republicans like to think otherwise, but a corporate mindset has always been different than a human one. What are you expecting? That Valve, Sega, Sony, and Microsoft actually care for their customers? They care for them inasmuch as they want them to buy their products. The second they feel their money train is threaten, they become just as nasty as any other company.OT:Nintendo is becoming worse than EA, Activision, Ubisoft and more. And the scary thing is people are still under the belief that they're a good company.
Remind me again which company is capable of getting its competition begging on its knees to advertise their exclusive games on their exclusive titles with the words "Smash Ballot"? Which company can dominate the entire internet with minimum effort? I might disagree on Nintendo on a lot of things, but let's not pretend that Nintendo doesn't know how to work the crowd up to a stupefying frenzy whenever it damn well pleases.Travis Fischer said:That's not what it seems like. That's what Nintendo literally is.major_chaos said:Nintendo frequently seems like a company run by old men, behind the times and convinced this whole "inter-nets" thing is a passing fad that needs to be stomped out, not invested in.