Nintendo Wants YouTubers to Pretend Some Games Don’t Exist

I mean you're saying that but Mother 3 never came over, Fatal Frame never came over, and it took so much bullshit just to get Xenoblade, last Story, and that one shitty game over.

NoA at a time might not have been that big of an issue, but recently they have been just as poor. From how they handle the independent scene, to what they do with social media/youtube these days, to how they handled evo a few years ago, to a lot of things. Iwata deserves the lion's share of the blame, as he is the head of the company these days so as someone who would get majority of the credit, he must accept majority of the blame. But, let's talk realistically here it's not just Nintendo of Japan that needs an overhaul, all 3 factions need to work better. It's in a lot of ways a Sony scenario where it wasn't just one fix, but a bunch of fixes that were necessary. Kaz being put in charge just happened to be a big one.

@jg4xchamp: Last Story was awesome and only sold 0.63m Global, Xenoblade was best RPG in past 10 years and sold...0.89m Global. Mother 3 and Fatal Frame would have sold WAY worst. Do you know how much these games cost to make? They spent 6-12 months just testing them. Translating them cost even more money. Im pretty sure they know what the fack they're doing. Every time you buy a Wii U, or 3DS, or anything Nintendo, they are making profit. Nintendo dont play no games, they facking create them.

I'm sorry are you apologizing for them doing less and not taking enough risks when they make hand over fist on some of their other games and can take some of these gambles?

@robert_mueller: Then that's you, but me and millions of others like these personalities. For every game there are hundreds and thousands of videos on Youtube so the only way to pick which once to watch is because of the person who created the video. And I don't need to find games, because of Youtubers games find me. Example: TotalBicuit just released a video on a game called Sunless Sea. I had never heard of the game before, but because of his video I now know about it and I think it looks interesting, so I may pick it up soon. This is the power these guys have and Nintendo is blind for not seeing it.

@Thunderdrone: How is that any different to what Gamespot does? They release gameplay videos like now playing, they do videos where they show games and talk about them and they have ads on this site. They make money from showing games, just like youtubers. Giant Bomb's Gerstmann even tweeted that they won't put any Nintendo videos on their Youtube channel, but you can watch the same videos on their website.

That might be correct, but I am sure that there are also millions like me who watch such videos without having subscribed to the channel. And these occasional viewers also add to the advertisment earnings. The real question would be how big those two groups actually are, but I guess that neither me nor you can answer this at the moment.

But even if you have subscribed to the channel, the question remains whether the producers of these videos benefit from other's IP. From my point of view, they certainly do. I believe you, when you say that the comments of the person who plays the game are the main reason for you to watch the video. But let us compare the situation to books. If I published a commented version of a novel, where each page contains a 50% margin with my own comments, I would still have to pay some kind of fee to the IP owner of the original work. Why should that be any different when it comes to video games?

@robert_mueller: If people can read the original text from your book, then they can get the full experience, which would be a problem. With let's plays you don't get the full experience, to get that you need to play for yourself. Books are also non interactive medium, where everyone will experience the same story and events. In games what happens varies from person to person, even story may sometimes differ from player to player. So I don't really think that books and games that close in this case.

More than once, I heard people say that they are not going to buy a certain game, because they have already watched it completely on Youtube and now there will be no suspense anymore. This is particularly an issue for story-driven games.

So while it is true that you cannot get the *full* experience, the experience you *do* get can be sufficient for part of the audience to not buy the game. And this potential damage has to be compensated in some way.

@robert_mueller: That's the problem of game devs. If their game has nothing else than a story, they have done bad job. To me gameplay is always the most important factor and that experience I can't get from just watching.

Well..I'm sure Youtubbers will indeed pretend some games don't exist- that is they will pretend no Nintendo games exist at all :D

@mikhail: NINTENDO ... they never learn.

I don't see the big deal. Its Nintendo's IP, if other people want to make money off of it then Nintendo should have a say on how they do it.

Basically you are saying that someone who makes games that *you* do not enjoy has no right to protect his IP. That is ridiculous and cheeky.

Take classic click-and-point adventures like Day of the Tentacle for example. Most people will agree that this was a very good and entertaining game when it was released. But if I had watched a video of the complete game, it would not have made any sense to play the game anymore. If I had created such a game, I certainly would not want people to distribute videos revealing the complete game. And as the creator of this IP, I would have every right to hinder others from living on my IP.

Nintendo attempting to dictate what others do? Imagine that!

This.

@robert_mueller: IGN also offers full video walkthroughs for games. You wanna see what happens in Telltales Walking Dead series? Head over to IGN and they'll show you.

If you try to stop people from making videos on your game, it will only hurt yourself, it will be a PR nightmare for you as it is for Nintendo right now. Instead use it to your advantage, some companies are working with Youtubers and using them to market their games, which is fine if properly disclosed. If someone wants to watch your game, instead of playing it, let him. Next time he might want to try himself.

I am pretty sure that IGN does not offer any walkthroughs without the permission of the IP owners.

If an IP owner wants to stop people from making videos on his games, then that is his own legitimate decision. If he finds out that it damages his sales, he will correct his decsion. Shitstorms are overrated, because many of those who participate in such a shitstorm would not have purchased the game anyway.