YouTuber Angry Joe Says He's Done Reviewing Nintendo Games
- Thread starter NoShoes
- Start date
Recommended Videos
OoT: The first minutes of his video make no sense to me. I mean, I can't believe Angry Joe bought all that crap and uploaded the video without knowing about Nintendo policies. It's just that, he is an experienced Youtuber! And the Nintendo policies didn't come up just yesterday with nobody noticing them! I agree that they suck harder than an industrial grade vacuum cleaner; but I don't believe Angry Joe is that careless.
PS captcha: am I happy? ...
PS captcha: am I happy? ...
Because they (Nintendo of Japan) are the HQ and have the full control over the whole brand of Nintendo and all their IP / Trademark / Copyright. NoA can try to persuade them but if NoJ says "No" you get No. You're still beholden to the Parent Company even if you're in a whole different country, because they call the shots 100%.tf2godz said:
What's terrible is that Nintendo is incredibly bad with marketing and PR. Years after the WiiU was released people still thought it was an expensive peripheral to go with their Wii.
That they are harming more PR and Marketing that most companies would pay for is ridiculous. They need to seriously evaluate their PR and Marketing departments as I'm guessing they've got some really under qualified or out of touch employees there. Those are usually the departments you throw your troublesome nephew in if the organization is OK with nepotism (and Nintendo is).
Look, if you love something, you need to acknowledge its flaws and encourage its improving those areas. Giving a blanket pass to all their mistakes only exacerbates the issue. Nintendo screwed up this generation. We need to make sure they don't screw up next generation.
Imagine a European Microsoft office trying to tell the American Microsoft branch what to do if the American Microsoft branch doesn't think it's the right action.
However, this is extremely heartening that the American Nintendo branch understands how ridiculous this is.
That they are harming more PR and Marketing that most companies would pay for is ridiculous. They need to seriously evaluate their PR and Marketing departments as I'm guessing they've got some really under qualified or out of touch employees there. Those are usually the departments you throw your troublesome nephew in if the organization is OK with nepotism (and Nintendo is).
Look, if you love something, you need to acknowledge its flaws and encourage its improving those areas. Giving a blanket pass to all their mistakes only exacerbates the issue. Nintendo screwed up this generation. We need to make sure they don't screw up next generation.
Nintendo is a 100 year company from Japan. The Japan branch is THE branch.Qitz said:
Imagine a European Microsoft office trying to tell the American Microsoft branch what to do if the American Microsoft branch doesn't think it's the right action.
However, this is extremely heartening that the American Nintendo branch understands how ridiculous this is.
Care to back that up? The internet loves nothing if not hating big publishers, so if more of them had draconian polices like this I think a kerfuffle would have occurred. Also you are leaving out indie and middle of the road (single A?) devs that make up a fair portion of quality game output, almost none of whom are stupid enough to try and pull this shit. You think Devolver is trying to squeeze people? The Darkest Dungeon guys? Or for that matter, I don't think Jim is working under any network, and I seriously doubt he has to fight tooth and nail for those clips he uses in Jimquistion.xaszatm said:
What I said was that he wasn't working under publisher influence. I know what Polaris is. Can you provide any evidence that his 20% is going to publishers, not the Polaris legal/operating budget?
WWE pulls this off at least once an episode, doesn't make them any less moronic.
I didn't call you anything. I was saying Nintendo can manipulate their audience because they have an audience uniquely ready and willing to be manipulated, not because they have some kind of PR mastery.
Well it isn't worth much then, is it?
I made a general statement "Nintendo has fanboys" I don't know how you warped that into "you are a fanboy" but it wasn't my intention.
It's fun reading people defending Nintendo on this. Imagine if EA where to do this. Good lord the amount of out cry there would be. It wouldn't stop for a decade. Hell people are still mad about WestWood even though no Game developer have ever been able to produce the same games over and over without making it bad.
But I guess it's because it's Nintendo it's fine and they are allowed to do whatever they want.
But I guess it's because it's Nintendo it's fine and they are allowed to do whatever they want.
I think that those publishers are still worse than Nintendo, as their greed is targeted directly towards their audience (the gamers). I'm not sure, but I think there are more people who play games than people who make videos about games. Towards which group does the greedier focus their greedy deeds?RavenTail said:
I agree that that lot are greedier than Nintendo, they grab at every penny they can and have terrible practices as a result generating worse games. Nintendo tends to treat the people who play it's games with some respect and make some decent products (even if they are a bit... repetitive) so I'm not too upset about them.CaitSeith said:
On the other hand as someone who exists by making videos about games Joe is the group being directly targeted by this and their greed is a source of misery to him shutting down his content (or stopping him from doing so). So he is perfectly reasonable in his rage at them, and him calling out and boycotting for better practices and treatment of his demographic is exactly what he should do.
Nintendo is still one of my favorite companies for what they do for me, and for Joe they can be a greedy uncaring devil for what they do for him.
I agree with you. I'm not siding with nintendo's choice to go on a witch hunt, people can argue the ethical stance nintendo is taking on the issue but at the end of the day they ARE in the right on this one as far as the books are concerned. I feel like there must be more productive ways to try and change the policies surrounding this than making videos you as a content creator know will be flagged and then being surprised when they are flagged and then complaining about it. it alienates sympathy.mad825 said:
Nintendo America is just a branch, Nintendo Japan is the mother company. Japan calls all the shots and while some companies allow branches to be more autonomic, Nintendo obviously dont.tf2godz said:
No, i mean the guys that own Defy. they more or less own a third of internet entertainment. they arent talked about much because they are more of "shareholders" and less of "owners" type of company. basically they buy you and leave you to your own devices as long as your profitable.xaszatm said:
And yeah, i have no doubt some channels have made a deal with Nitendo and paid the extortion money.
the fact alone that MSRP needs to exist for this shows how utterly broken youtube is.
Also, quite to the contrary - A lot of developers allow monetization of their game videos without any conditions at all [http://letsplaylist.wikia.com/wiki/%22Let%27s_Play%22-friendly_developers_Wiki]. 4 out of 227 companies have said no to monetized lets plays.
like thats an achievement. anyone can be the top of twitter charts. do you remmeber #killallmen? that got to the top.
ive seen people defend Microsoft based on what was said on nintendo website.Zefar said:
they are not. This is illegal in US. WOrth noting that illegal is not equivalent of they cant do it. Steam breaks A LOT of laws in European union, for some of whom they paid huge fines, and continue to break them.NoDamnNames said:
Agreed.Vigormortis said:The mental gymnastics being used to give Nintendo a free pass on this is the most entertaining thing I've seen this week. Please, do carry on.
Captcha - miles to go
Gads, I hope so Captcha. This is comedy gold.
I used to argue with people who'd defend Nintendo til they were blue in the face. Now I realize how pointless it is to do. You always see the same names pop up to defend Nintendo from reasonable criticism for years. Now I just sit back and let them keep going.
While laughing heartily.
I don't get defending a company based on nostalgia.
I'm going for anyone other than Nintendo on this. The more this gets out the better. This move by Nintendo is sick and I hope it costs them big time.
Any move that makes EA look better in some way is retarded. Go fuck yourself Nintendo, if you haven't already.
Any move that makes EA look better in some way is retarded. Go fuck yourself Nintendo, if you haven't already.
Personally, I don't get defending a company at all.AzrealMaximillion said:
The devs and publishers we routinely talk about around here are multimillion and multibillion dollar corporations. They really don't need some random fan on the internet 'defending' them from criticism.
Now, I'm all for countering bad arguments, illogical criticisms, double standards, and misinformation - even when these things are levied towards the more egregious publishers and developers. I prefer everyone operate under the truth and make judgement calls appropriately. But, actively defending these companies?
Find something more productive to do with your time, people. Sheesh.
So because it's the reality we live in we can't complain that bullshit is bullshit? Angry Joe is one of the worst at expressing distaste and he does take things personally, but I believe the dude would get behind anyone else who experienced the same situation. He seems genuine in putting anyone before corporations, and while his video is somewhat personal I don't think that he's demanding the rules change for him. He's pissed because almost every other developer and publisher allow him to do his work, as well as tons of other people, so why does Nintendo think it can be the big dog?xaszatm said:
If you know how long it takes to do all the shit that a youtube content creator has to do, then how can you just sit back and say, "Well, you knew that the company were going to be shitty even though others never/rarely are. You deserve it"? Just cause the world is shit doesn't mean you have to sit down and put up with shit.
Hmmm, well I see where things are going to be honest. The bottom line is that a lot of companies like Nintendo are so entrenched and have their own advertising and fanatic base so heavily set that they don't see much benefit to the coverage by third parties they don't control, and indeed tend to take more of a hit when said coverage is bad than they receive as a boost when it's good.
A lot of these "voices from the dark" are making enough money and have become well known enough as have their platforms that they can now be effectively targeted as well. Someone like "Angry Joe" finds it more in their interest to back down and keep making money from other things than to seriously fight. After all they need platforms like Youtube for the revenues, and what's more had become arrogant enough to be well known under their real names. Now such people are able to be hammered by the corporate establishment due to having made themselves vulnerable.
Stuff like what he does worked years ago because it wasn't as well known, and the legality needed to go after such people was being established one precedent at a time. Not to mention that youtubers have as a group become less of a bohemian group of loose cannons than fairly serious businessmen in their own right, despite the role they play. Both Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn for example have managers (and I believe it's actually the same guy, I'd have to look it up to be sure), I'm not sure about others in particular but the bottom line a lot of Youtubers effectively wind up running their own brand name.
To prevent something like this you sort of need an "Encyclopedia Dramatica" or "Pirates Bay" of geek commentary. Anonymous contributors, or at least those hiding behind masks and a role operating off of sites the location of which might change or not be well known making them impossible to really target except in the long run (damage can be done when one is caught, but it always comes back somewhere else. Granted there wouldn't be much money into it for those doing this kind of stuff, but then again to begin with it was more of a hobby to begin with (especially when it was most effective) rather than a business with people setting out to generate hundreds of thousands or millions of hits monthly so they can get a cut of advertising revenue.
I can't speak for "Angry Joe" but I'd wonder if he has a job for example, or if he's become so well known where his "job" has literally become being "Angry Joe" on the internet. Even if he does, think about how many people doing Youtube videos or "Let's Plays" likely do this for their primary source of income now. That allows companies like Nintendo to dictate terms, demanding a cut or their products not be used (which is quite possible as long as not every company is doing this and they can compensate for the loss of one brand by covering others). It's not like "Angry Joe" retiring over something like this is likely because at the end of the day he's getting $$$ and probably too much of it to want to give it up, his own livelihood, or a portion of it, pretty much means the industry he makes money off of now has him by the short and hairys due to having finally gotten towards the end of the glacier-like legal crawl and precedents that have slowly been overcoming the protections on which such people relied and/or brought the platforms people like this need into line with them.
A lot of these "voices from the dark" are making enough money and have become well known enough as have their platforms that they can now be effectively targeted as well. Someone like "Angry Joe" finds it more in their interest to back down and keep making money from other things than to seriously fight. After all they need platforms like Youtube for the revenues, and what's more had become arrogant enough to be well known under their real names. Now such people are able to be hammered by the corporate establishment due to having made themselves vulnerable.
Stuff like what he does worked years ago because it wasn't as well known, and the legality needed to go after such people was being established one precedent at a time. Not to mention that youtubers have as a group become less of a bohemian group of loose cannons than fairly serious businessmen in their own right, despite the role they play. Both Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn for example have managers (and I believe it's actually the same guy, I'd have to look it up to be sure), I'm not sure about others in particular but the bottom line a lot of Youtubers effectively wind up running their own brand name.
To prevent something like this you sort of need an "Encyclopedia Dramatica" or "Pirates Bay" of geek commentary. Anonymous contributors, or at least those hiding behind masks and a role operating off of sites the location of which might change or not be well known making them impossible to really target except in the long run (damage can be done when one is caught, but it always comes back somewhere else. Granted there wouldn't be much money into it for those doing this kind of stuff, but then again to begin with it was more of a hobby to begin with (especially when it was most effective) rather than a business with people setting out to generate hundreds of thousands or millions of hits monthly so they can get a cut of advertising revenue.
I can't speak for "Angry Joe" but I'd wonder if he has a job for example, or if he's become so well known where his "job" has literally become being "Angry Joe" on the internet. Even if he does, think about how many people doing Youtube videos or "Let's Plays" likely do this for their primary source of income now. That allows companies like Nintendo to dictate terms, demanding a cut or their products not be used (which is quite possible as long as not every company is doing this and they can compensate for the loss of one brand by covering others). It's not like "Angry Joe" retiring over something like this is likely because at the end of the day he's getting $$$ and probably too much of it to want to give it up, his own livelihood, or a portion of it, pretty much means the industry he makes money off of now has him by the short and hairys due to having finally gotten towards the end of the glacier-like legal crawl and precedents that have slowly been overcoming the protections on which such people relied and/or brought the platforms people like this need into line with them.
Nintendo may not NEED them but they really don't gain anything by pushing them away either. If people like Joe really are that insignificant to Nintendo then what do they care if they make money making videos featuring their games? Either they don't need those youtubers so this is wielding a sledgehammer to kill some ants, or they do need them in which case you would want to work with them instead of shaking them down for cash. They have been making money just fine for years, why the sudden hair up their ass about people making game videos?gyrobot said:
Uhh and just how else exactly is he supposed to "fight" back? It's not like he can take legal action since, while a shitty thing to do, Nintendo does have the legal right deny using their content. All Joe can do is either take a hit and surrender part of the video revenue (and/or effectively work for Nintendo) or to boycott the games entirely. He can raise awareness and call Nintendo out for it (which he and others have already done) but that's pretty much all that can be done about it. I suppose they could makes signs and protest outside of NOA or something but I doubt that would be any more effective.Therumancer said:
