YouTuber Angry Joe Says He's Done Reviewing Nintendo Games

[Johnny Novgorod]

Of all the nonsense the company is on about lately, I think Nintendo's stupid YouTube policies takes Peach's proverbial cake.

 

[xaszatm]

My question is "Why is Joe feels like the only one getting this?
Gamegrumps plays more Nintendo games than him and they're fine, PBG mostly plays Nintendo games with his latest Pokemon OR&AS series still ongoing and is not covered in the Creators Program.

I feel like Joe is always the odd one out, with his previous Content ID strike, like the Street Fighter one before this.

Honestly? It's because he isn't playing by their rules. Nintendo either will work with people directly (see: game explain, polaris, Smosh, etc) or has a Nintendo's creators program for people who don't have the clout or desire to deal with Nintendo directly. This is kind of what most other people do with game companies. Heck, I think Polaris, which Joe I believe Joe is apart of, has Let's Players who do Nintendo content and they get along fine with Nintendo. Joe, however, seems to want to play by his own rule and gets mad when people tell him he can't.

 

[xaszatm]

In fact, if I remember right, the Youtube Partners EULA prohibits the use of LPs. The only reason more of them haven't been taken down is because Youtube is simply to huge to scour on a daily or even weekly basis.

That cant be right, or the likes of PewDiePie and DarkSydePhil would have been shut down the moment they gained notoriety.

OT: I'll say what I said in other forums: as much as I like Joe, he's honestly just a drop in the bucket here. Yes, 2 million subscribers sounds like a lot, but when you look at how many views any Nintendo video will get, from people who are more than willing to comply to Nintendo's wants, he honestly doesn't matter here.

Considering that WiiU sales apparently havent surpassed 10m (most recent figure i can find dates to 31/12/2014) thats a potential 20% increase in buyers that wont be seeing anything Nintendo puts out.

Even if we were to assume that even only a quarter of Joes 2m subscribers dont already have a WiiU, theyre certainly not going to be getting one based on what Joe says now.

Except we are trying to correlate potential customers with actual customers, which is kind of putting the cart before the horse. Besides, Nintendo does do videos with people who don't associate themselves with Nintendo usually. Miyamoto did that stint where they visited non-gaming channels (and Smosh) to play Nintendo games and talk. This really didn't affect sales in any positive or negative way. So to say that Nintendo just lost 2 million customers is rather...well, foolish.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

I know this last video he made was a test, but he should have made a quick review (something that would only take a spare weekend, if Joe even has one, to make) to see what Nintendo would have done to it. They've especially been out for Joe for a while, when I haven't heard much about some other LPers. *crosses fingers so they don't touch Brainscratch or Hellfire Comms* It's one thing to take down raw footage, but another to attack a critical response.

They might have the right to do this, but no other game company has went this Content ID match happy. Sure, some have pulled low profile copyright claims for things like getting their own videos higher on the search results, or the rogue developer, who can't take criticism, have gone after Jim Fuckin' Sterling, son and TotalBiscuit. Almost the entire non-Nintendo side of the industry accepts, or even embraces, what is going on with Youtube.

I think Chuggaconroy even vocalized against the Nintendo MCN program, guys like him, who mostly or only do Nintendo stuff and don't want to be coerced into a subpar deal compared to other MCNs, will have to move on from Nintendo. I can't wait for the chance to register a game on the new Club Nintendo (whenever it starts) and fill in where ever I can that I either already bought the game I'm watching an LP of and watching guys enjoy their games makes me want to try them, too. I might even boycott any content creator that is a part of their shitty program.

It's not the money issue I'm worried about, necessarily. It's the big list of forbidden and restricted content they have in the program's terms. I don't want their control freak, money grubbing ways spreading to other companies. If they show signs the program is successful, it might cause an avalanche of shit, a shitalanche. Just fuck off and let the internet do its own thing, Nintendo. You won't look like a raving jackass if you let this go, or drastically improve many things in your MCN program.

 

[xaszatm]

I know this last video he made was a test, but he should have made a quick review (something that would only take a spare weekend, if Joe even has one, to make) to see what Nintendo would have done to it. They've especially been out for Joe for a while, when I haven't heard much about some other LPers. *crosses fingers so they don't touch Brainscratch or Hellfire Comms* It's one thing to take down raw footage, but another to attack a critical response.

They might have the right to do this, but no other game company has went this Content ID match happy. Sure, some have pulled low profile copyright claims for things like getting their own videos higher on the search results, or the rogue developer, who can't take criticism, have gone after Jim Fuckin' Sterling, son and TotalBiscuit. Almost the entire non-Nintendo side of the industry accepts, or even embraces, what is going on with Youtube.

I think Chuggaconroy even vocalized against the Nintendo MCN program, guys like him, who mostly or only do Nintendo stuff and don't want to be coerced into a subpar deal compared to other MCNs, will have to move on from Nintendo. I can't wait for the chance to register a game on the new Club Nintendo (whenever it starts) and fill in where ever I can that I either already bought the game I'm watching an LP of and watching guys enjoy their games makes me want to try them, too. I might even boycott any content creator that is a part of their shitty program.

It's not the money issue I'm worried about, necessarily. It's the big list of forbidden and restricted content they have in the program's terms. I don't want their control freak, money grubbing ways spreading to other companies. If they show signs the program is successful, it might cause an avalanche of shit, a shitalanche. Just fuck off and let the internet do its own thing, Nintendo. You won't look like a raving jackass if you let this go, or drastically improve many things in your MCN program.

When did Nintendo attack a critical response? They monetize Joe's video of Mario Party 10. Joe took down the video himself then posted a rant. Twice.

 

[senordesol]

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.

You can argue that people watch them for the person on camera, and that the book is merely a prop for their content creation. But when you take the book away, they have absolutely nothing to offer by way of content.

A "let's read" is different from a book review. In a review you aren't literally showing every page to the camera and reading it out loud for everyone, just like in a game review you aren't showing an entire playthrough. But in a LP, that is EXACTLY what some people do sometimes without a face cam or any post commentary.

That happens all the time, though. Ever take a literature course? You're required to go through the entire book point-by-point. Sure the school has to pay for the book(s), but the authors don't get a dime of tuition revenue devoted to the reading of their work. So long as the original copy of the book was paid for, they've no say.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

Knowing how much ad space actually costs, even in local media, you have to just /facepalm at Nintendo.

For how many people who watch a let's play exclusively for a game, how many others will actually buy or at the very least follow that company or product because they want to experience the thing themselves?

 

[gigastar]

OT: I'll say what I said in other forums: as much as I like Joe, he's honestly just a drop in the bucket here. Yes, 2 million subscribers sounds like a lot, but when you look at how many views any Nintendo video will get, from people who are more than willing to comply to Nintendo's wants, he honestly doesn't matter here.

Considering that WiiU sales apparently havent surpassed 10m (most recent figure i can find dates to 31/12/2014) thats a potential 20% increase in buyers that wont be seeing anything Nintendo puts out.

Even if we were to assume that even only a quarter of Joes 2m subscribers dont already have a WiiU, theyre certainly not going to be getting one based on what Joe says now.

Except we are trying to correlate potential customers with actual customers, which is kind of putting the cart before the horse.

Unfortunately, in the absence of up to date statistics on everyone everywhere, i have to interpret things and come up with assumptions based on a theoretical maximum, and a realistic minimum.

So to say that Nintendo just lost 2 million customers is rather...well, foolish.

Except thats not what i said. I said thats about 2 million people, whom apparently put some value in what Joe has to say, who wont be making thier decision to buy Nintendo based on what Joe says.

 

[gigastar]

That happens all the time, though. Ever take a literature course? You're required to go through the entire book point-by-point. Sure the school has to pay for the book(s), but the authors don't get a dime of tuition revenue devoted to the reading of their work. So long as the original copy of the book was paid for, they've no say.

But that is covered by fair use as an educational thing. And even then, most schools only examine classical works.

 

[senordesol]

That happens all the time, though. Ever take a literature course? You're required to go through the entire book point-by-point. Sure the school has to pay for the book(s), but the authors don't get a dime of tuition revenue devoted to the reading of their work. So long as the original copy of the book was paid for, they've no say.

But that is covered by fair use as an educational thing. And even then, most schools only examine classical works.

Schools tend to focus on Classical works, but aren't required to (hell, I got my book picked up by a community college). The reason for it is because classics tend to become classics because they have particular literary value (and are thus worth studying).

Same arguments apply to a degree, however. A Let's Play can be argued as a critique on game design. Whether or not it's a 'good' one is irrelevant so far as the law is concerned. The thing is, if it's being used for review, commentary, or education; it's fair game under fair use -regardless as to whether it's coming from an actual educational institution.

 

[The Bandit]

This really made it to the news? Getting a copyright strike was his own damn fault, he starts sobbing after not following the rules that he knew that was in effect. Either that or I underestimate Joe's PR.

His reaction makes his channel seem like Whining Joe.

hahahaha OMG WHINING JOE HAHAHAHA

Grade A post, friend.

It made the news because it is news. Just because it's "the rules," doesn't mean everyone agrees that it should be the rules, and reporting on this encourages discussion on an issue. ITS ALMOST LIKE THIS IS REAL JOURNALISM OR SOMETHING

 

[RavenTail]

What LPs are clearly trying to be is MST3K....but MST3K actually got the rights to use the films it was riffing, either because they were public domain or because they were so cheap it didn't matter.

Well games, no matter how "cinematic" are not in fact so passive that they are indistinguishable from movies since the whole thing about them is interactivity so that's another bad comparison.

Exactly. As someone who watches LP's and still plays the actual games, it is two completely different experiences. If I wanna play Dark Souls and enjoy the depth, and lore, and atmosphere... I'll just play Dark Souls. I watch SuperBestFriends play Dark Souls because I enjoy their personalities and commentary. I still bought, and still play, Dark Souls either way because I like the game, but I watch the video on youtube for the youtubers.

You could *maybe* make an argument about commentary-less walkthroughs being less than legit. They are, basically, showing off the whole game without any original input of their own. But with Jim Sterling, BestFriends, GameGrumps, whoever... the videos are about them. The games they play are largely secondary.

Also, being totally honest, I don't buy *any* games sight-unseen any more. Rental is basically dead, reviewers and metascores can be hit or miss, and I've been burned too many times by modern games. So, unless I watch a Let's Play, and see it in motion with some honest opinions, I don't buy it. I would be really interested to see some actual numbers on whether or not Let's Plays increase sales or not (I am almost certain they do. I know indie sales skyrocket when a big name plays a game). Because, unless there is verifiable proof that these videos hurt the industry, Nintendo, or any other million or billion-dollar company doesn't have a leg to stand on trying to legally silence them.

All of this.

The games themselves are just platforms for the LPers to display themselves. Markiplier doesn't have 7 million subs because people just want footage of Five Nights At Freddy's. He has 7 million because people like him and what he has to say and his reaction to the games.

Also I'm in the same mindset. I want to see a game being played before I buy it. I want uncut, raw, first hand footage these days in order to make an informed choice.

EA, Ubisoft, Activision are notorious for their greed... yet even they don't try and squeeze out every single cent from videos relating to their product like Nintendo is trying to do.

 

[thehorror2]

Nintendo really doesn't seem to like youtubers getting money for showing off their games, even though that's one of the strongest platforms for getting modern gamers interested in their products. (speaking anecdotally, 4 of the last 5 games I've bought have been spurred by watching people playing them and having a blast on the internet)

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

When did Nintendo attack a critical response? They monetize Joe's video of Mario Party 10. Joe took down the video himself then posted a rant. Twice.

Never. Seriously, they've NEVER tried to take down critical responses or reviews in their entire history. Why? Because they're more professional than that. In fact, that is the ultimate reason I side with Nintendo over Joe: because they're acting like adults. They're pros, they're not going to hold their breath and stamp their feet over nonsense unlike Joe. Maybe if Mr. Vargas had articulated himself better I might sympathize with him, but he had to throw a tantrum and destroy any chance he had at good will. I save my sympathies for the intelligent and logical.

And at the end of the day, this is all they took issue with: a Let's Play. He's getting pissy...OVER A LET'S PLAY. Really? Not even a review, a preview, or any content that could be educational or satirical, but just video of him playing a game. Dear. Freaking. BUDDHA is that petty.

 

[RavenTail]

When did Nintendo attack a critical response? They monetize Joe's video of Mario Party 10. Joe took down the video himself then posted a rant. Twice.

Never. Seriously, they've NEVER tried to take down critical responses or reviews in their entire history. Why? Because they're more professional than that. In fact, that is the ultimate reason I side with Nintendo over Joe: because they're acting like adults. They're pros, they're not going to hold their breath and stamp their feet over nonsense unlike Joe. Maybe if Mr. Vargas had articulated himself better I might sympathize with him, but he had to throw a tantrum and destroy any chance he had at good will. I save my sympathies for the intelligent and logical.

And at the end of the day, this is all they took issue with: a Let's Play. He's getting pissy...OVER A LET'S PLAY. Really? Not even a review, a preview, or any content that could be educational or satirical, but just video of him playing a game. Dear. Freaking. BUDDHA is that petty.

Except this is his livelihood. His job depends on putting up videos and earning venue from those videos. You clearly don't respect LPers and that is your opinion. But it doesn't change the fact these people are paying rent and getting food on the table because of these LPs.

 

[Mikeybb]

I've enjoyed some of angry joe's work in the past, but haven't watched him for a long while.

As to this, I can't say I'm surprised nor do I think he'll be the last of the 'lets play' youtube broadcasters to do this.

My initial response to this is that Nintendo are making a bad move, as when I think back to the amount of games I've purchased over the past year, a high percentage of those purchases have been a result of youtube coverage or specifically an entertaining lets play of a game and I'm quite sure my purchasing trend isn't a lone aberrant quirk.
It seems foolish to give up.
That said, how much damage do lets plays of bad games do to sales?
Perhaps, given the inclusion of a 'whitelist' of games, they intend to control that kind of exposure too.
If this is the case, it certainly will backfire also.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

When did Nintendo attack a critical response? They monetize Joe's video of Mario Party 10. Joe took down the video himself then posted a rant. Twice.

They never did. I just wanted to see what they would do, since Angry Joe seems to be one of the top people on their radar. I haven't seen Joe review a Nintendo game in a long time. They probably wouldn't have done anything themselves, but the automated content ID system could have found something to claim in the video. I've heard of people giving reviews or even previews/opinion pieces on upcoming games, only to have their video flagged for an official still image. That's right, a still image that was released to journalists to promote the game.

 

[skyn3t]

What's funny is that Smosh Games just put out an Honest Trailer for Mario Party 10, and I sincerely doubt they are part of Nintendo's program. The videos is still up, I guess Nintendo doesn't have the balls to go up against people like Smosh Inc,

Actually, Nintendo doesn't flag your account/put a CR claim on that video or anything of the tradtional nature.
In fact, the video doesn't even get taken down.
And unless you go into your anyitics and look up the money earned on each video, you wouldn't even notice that Nintendo has put any action forth on your content...why you may ask?
Because Nintendo simply claims 100% of the profits of the video and allows it to stay up, earning them more money.

That's why Smosh doesn't have their video down.
Either because they're too stupid to realize that they're giving Nintendo free money, or they simply don't care (because they know it could attract other people to their other videos).


So in a short answer; listen to the god damn video before giving your 2 cents worth of feedback on something.

 

[gamegod25]

Just another case of a company shooting themselves in the foot. They have the right to deny using their content for videos unless they take a cut but in doing so are alienating the very same people who promote those games. Honestly I fully side with online personalities like Joe in boycotting Nintendo, in his shoes I would do the exact same thing.

 

[marioandsonic]

Let me just state for the record that I love Nintendo, and they've built up a lot of good will with me, so I'm willing to let a lot slide with them. I also feel that they have every right to pull any Youtube video that contains their content.

That said, their recent Youtube policies are a joke. I guess this is because they are a company that's slow to adapt to the changing times, but they really should be working harder to build up good will with Let's Players and other reviewers, since it give them a lot of publicity.

And more marketing would be the best thing for the Wii U right now.