http://www.joystiq.com/2013/05/16/ni...s-play-videos/
Although nowhere near as bad as what Sega recently did, this is still going to piss a lot of people off. Do you guys think this is fair?
Printable View
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/05/16/ni...s-play-videos/
Although nowhere near as bad as what Sega recently did, this is still going to piss a lot of people off. Do you guys think this is fair?
fair or not its a dickhead move
good show nintendo ! *stir smy tea*
( sarcasm for the oblivious under us )
As long as they don't take anything down, it's fine. Hopefully it will also protect those videos from being taken down due to other b.s. copyright claims.
Can we have a temporary abstention on Nintendo headlines?
Please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pulstar
It doesn't bother me on seeing Nintendo headlines, why does it bother you ?
This effects everyone that has a lets play of a Nintendo game, its not right and should be posted about. Many (most) people here have a YouTube account and some have gameplay videos (some have only Sega, some have both Nintendo and Sega game videos).
This is a great idea actually.
I don't understand why do that. It's like free advertising for their games: the more videos of their games has, more people will see and talk about it, thus increasing the chances of getting the game.
Hell ,it's not like a tv show or a movie. You don't feel pleasure by watching someone else play a game.
It is free advertising for their games and Nintendo realizes that. That's why videos are not being flagged or taken down. Nintendo is just going to be claiming the money for the advertisements placed on these popular videos. I bet a lot of these videos were already monetized anyway, the only difference is who the money goes to. Who deserves the money more anyway, the company who funded, researched, developed or published the game, or someone who sits at home all day playing video games?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bottino
I think what Sega did with flagging Shining Force videos a while ago was much worse. Glad they apologized.
That's a interesting point of view.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheaterdragon1
Agree, for those cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheaterdragon1
Any negative impact on those doing this stuff purely for fun (ie non-partners -or non-sponsored in general) would be a different matter though.
And for YT partners in particular, that would be something YT/Google would need to negotiate with Nintendo anyway, totally independent of any of the actual channel owners or such.
I can see how greedy Nintendo don't want anyone making a cent off their dollar.
The lets play videos are quite entertaining and I don't see any of them making me actually want to buy or play the featured game afterwards.
This may be what I do from now on besides hooking up a system to play an old game.
I mean what more convenient, playing/paying through a game to get to a certain part you like, or finding the lets play part?
Anything good always gets the boot.
AVGN going to be affected again ?
It looks mostly like their target is "Let's Play" videos which show loads of gameplay footage and in most cases entire games. Most review shows like AVGN are covered by fair use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector
It's dumb really, I can't imagine a single time I watched a "Let's Play" and felt like I didn't want to buy a game now. Specifically because it's usually of games I already own and have beaten. I guess I understand why it's a breach of copyright law but it seems insane to assume "Let's Play" videos are hurting their bottom line in some way.
It's not, it's just a way to leech off revenue from other people's videos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obviously