David Scott Jaffe Responds To Nintendo's Revenue Program And Angry Joe's Rant Video

On Twitter the expressional David Jaffe has shared his thoughts about Nintendo's new revenue program and the recent rant video's that have appeared afterwards - especially Angry Joe's video.

[Thatguy-310]

The thing that irks me is that Angry Joe makes it seem like Nintendo doesn't want there games shared. The main problem here is that they don't want people MAKING money that they don't get using there IP's. If these YouTube individuals didn't make money then there wouldn't be a problem. Every company has a right to do what they want with their IP's whether they shoot themselves in the foot or not. AngryJoe knew what will happen so why rant about it?

[LOL_WUT]

Angry Joe has a point look at how much they made off the Wii, the 3DS and its different iterations, Amiibo, not to mention the $10 "billion" they have in the bank. They're so greedy that on top of all that they still want to go after the ad revenue on user generated YouTube videos that use Nintendo content.

I'm glad he won't be making anymore Nintendo related videos and frankly I don't get how anyone can support and defend a company that does such things. Had this been EA everyone would let them have it but since its Nintendo its ok... ;)

[freshslicepizza]

angry joe is mostly a pc gamer so i'm not sure what impact if any he has on making youtube videos on nintendo games. nintendo is also a family friendly company so i doubt nintendo really wants him to do angry videos about their games in the first place.

[xHeavYx]

According to Joe, not only did Nintendo want revenue, they also wanted to own the video as their own, which is what upset him.
A lot of people think that being a YouTube gamer means that you only get to play videogames and that's it, but they do a lot more. And let's be honest, Nintendo doesn't need the extra pennies compared to what they could make with the extra publicity (I said it before, Minecraft became a $2.5 billion game thanks mostly to YouTube and mouth to mouth advertising)
Nintendo is stuck in the past, which is why the Wii U is doing how it's doing, and they'll keep going down as long as they act like this.

[DragonKnight]

"so i doubt nintendo really wants him to do angry videos about their games in the first place."

Wow. You don't watch very many of Angry Joe's videos do you?

Take a look at how "angry" he is with, say, Skyrim. His name is Angry Joe because he doesn't hold the punches in reviewing games that are bad, not because he's always angry.

Also, really wish people would stop thinking that people like Cliffy B or Jaffe's opinion matter. Just because they love the sound of their own voice (or in this case the font of their own type) doesn't mean their opinion is important.

[Wingsfan24]

Dragon Knight -

They can share whatever opinion they want to share. You can't pick and choose whose opinions matter, everyone's opinions matter. It just depends on who you want to listen to. That's a really arrogant comment you just made.

As for Nintendo's greed/revenue issue. All they need to do is make an open world pokemon game on the Wii U using Amiibos and viola, their econmic issues are over. Nintendo makes some incredibly stupid business decisions nowadays.

[DragonKnight]

@PockyKing: Learn what arrogance is before you use the word. It isn't arrogant to say that their opinion doesn't matter because I'm not raising my opinion up to be any higher.

Their opinion doesn't matter. They are talking heads. They are also obsolete talking heads. They both have things in common. They both are responsible for critically and financially successful games. They then left game development for awhile, fat in the pocket. While gone they continued to act as though they were relevant when all they were were people who used to make games and then pretty much just stopped. Now, Jaffe has been slightly more active in development than Cliffy, but they have the same arrogant personality.

Jaffe's opinion on youtube is completely irrelevant. He doesn't make youtube videos and doesn't have a stake in this fight.

Also, and this is for everyone that does this, it's voila, not viola. Viola is an instrument.

@Chucky2003: Lame argument. People donate to Joe because they like his work. If his work sucked, they wouldn't donate. Joe decided to use that money to put it back into his channels on youtube and twitch to provide better content for his subscribers. That's called work. He's getting paid to work, he's receiving donations to work. And paying Nintendo a fee? B.S. to that.

[Chucky2003]

Angry Joe should be the last person complaining about this,I get it ,it sucks what Nintendo is doing,but Angry Joe is making money out of this,hell...his WII U was "donated" by fan,everything he has now there ,his new PC,new TV and among many other things were taken with the money people gave him O_o,so instead of complaining he should pay the fee to post Nintendo videos.I feel for someone who just want to put some videos with him playing a Nintendo just for fun,without making money ,but not for "Angry Joe"

[OtakuDJK1NG-Rory]

BUT did Angry Joe buy the Wii U. No he was donated a Wii U. So he can't about something he spend money on.

[aCasualGamer]

David Jaffe: "It's so dumb what they're doing but it's within their rights"

Angry Joe: "It's within their legal rights but it's so dumb"

David Jaffe: "Angry Joe's arrogant."

David Jaffe basically agrees with Angry Joe that it's dumb, and they both agree that it's within their rights... so why call Angry Joe arrogant?

[XBLSkull]

lol, did people keep with nintendo after ocarina of time? nintendo has been irrelevant for over a decade... thing is a good number of fanboys have and will continue to cling onto a dying beast for all of eternity... there is a change coming with nintendo whether they want it or not. goodybe hardware, just a matter of time - and no one has more money to buy them than microsoft.

[morganfell]

"... so why call Angry Joe arrogant?"

Because he is arrogant. If you saw the video, Joe attempts to justify everything he is saying but showing through all he is saying is a sense of entitlement. People can disagree if they like and it has nothing to do with his being correct or not and has no relation to whether you think highly or poorly of Joe. A simple open minded look at the video shows a pretentious individual with a sense of privlege concerning his actions. Haughty would be the word.

For the record I think Nintendo's actions are a mistake. Within their rights but a mistake. I purchased a Wii U less than a year ago and have been wholly disappointed by them. Not by the console itself but by their lack of support and this latest action is one more error.

But if one is honest it is easy to see his entire rant wasn't driven by the actions of Nintendo so much as it was his anger over what he felt he had the right to do. His sense of entitlement was at the bottom of this. That is his arrogance speaking.

Joe has reached a point in his career, in his reasoning where he thinks he is some sort of gift or voice of the people. Joe really believes this when in reality he is just some guy that began his business (and it is a business) with a gimmick and kept at it relentlessly and thus was noticed. In actuality he is no better than IGN or any larger or smaller site. At the end of the day he is just some shmo with an opinion. That is it.

Like all reviewers he fails to maintain any sort of detailed standards when he attacks or praises the works of talented people. Like them he has no editor in chief attemtping to preserve a sense of objectivity and balance. He will alter his view willy nilly from one game to the next. His reviews concern what he likes rather than what the target demographic would think. He claims to speak for people but at the end of the day he only speaks for himself.

The days when publications listed how they review, to what they award points and that for which they remove them are long gone. Those reviews which were an amalgam of more than one reviewers play through and the combined views were tempered by an editor in chief are past us now. It is about sensationalism and Joe offers this in spades.

Sensationalism isn't always intellect based nor is it most often of any value for the purposes which it purports to be - in this case a review. The fact that he may utter a few things here and there with which others agree hardly makes him accurate or his rants a viable review.

[Bimkoblerutso]

Look, at the end of the day (and Joe says as much in his video, for anyone that actually watched it) Nintendo DOES have a legal basis for taking the videos down.

But it's just a dick move, through and through. It's important to note that it's not just popular revenue-generating channels like Joe's that are getting taken down. It's every video with a visual instance of their characters.

99% of the time, these are videos that are created by and for fans to celebrate their games, so taking them down only hurts the community and, ironically, their own popularity.

Basically they create an environment (and this goes beyond their youtube policies, by the way) that cultivates a rather small, elitist, blindly devoted fanbase, and then wonder why they are not pushing the numbers that they aim for. I've been a rabid Nintendo fan all my life and this still seems low to me.

[soul-assassin-]

Week said...bubble for you

[elninels]

When you become CEO of a publicly traded firm we'll see if you go after whatever revenue stream you can. Nintendo has to keep investora happy. How much money has been made off of their products is irrelevant. if anything angry manchild will lose devout NinNintendites.

[garrettbobbyferguson]

He has zero point. What is with you people and thinking it's perfectly okay to make money off of another person's intellectual property.

[MrSwankSinatra]

so they should advertise for free? That's pretty much what you're saying. Nintendo already gets their money from angry joe from systems, games, peripherals, etc. Why do you think Nintendo deserves even more when he was obviously going to be locked into buying Nintendo products (for what seemed the foreseeable future) to offer more Nintendo related content to his fans? Nintendo are the ones who should be clamoring to Angry Joe so that they can get more sales for their floundering system.

But in typical Nintendo fashion, they just don't get it.

[hkgamer]

no one is telling him to "advertise"
angryjoes points are from his point only. he was ranting about if he tells a friend should he get any money? no, but if he joins an affiliate program like amazon and he tells a friend then he will get some money.
youtubers are not advertising in a tradtional sense. unless publishers pay them like ms or what wb did with mordor.

nobody told him to buy nintendo products, and nobody told him to try and "advertise" nintendo games. nintendo just seems to like doing things the traditional way where they can track data more sufficiently through normal advertising routes.

[Baka-akaB]

Still let's best honest here . When those companies hire advertising firms , it cost them a lot .

Youtubbers were a win win situation for them , one wich provided tons of free advertising and hype , at no cost for the game companies .

What changed is that they see so much revenu there that they want a share of the pie .

Which could be fair , but then pony up the cost of video advertising and producing content too . They didnt ask for it , but they are happy reaping benefits from it .

Those people dont get payed for just displayed a game , they usually provide a service , and entertainement , comedy content etc

[Thatguy-310]

This shouldn't be about advertising to begin with. If I'm enjoying a game and want to share it with the world so they can see how good it is I shouldn't be getting paid to begin with because I'm going out of MY way to do the work without anyone telling me.

[Baka-akaB]

I didnt say it was about advertising ... but if you're complaining about gains , when you complicitely profits from free advertising , there it is .

notice how Nintendo isnt just outright stopping all of those videos altogether , but is instead scrambling for ownership and money over a digital phenomenon they dont understand or refuse to understand

[Outthink_The_Room]

@Baka-akaB

I see people all the time talking about "free advertising".

That is incorrect. Advertising puts your product in a positive light 100% of the time, because that's what they are paying for.

You're not going to see some ad firm talk about Splatoon like, "Do you rely on voice chatting with your teamates in competitive multiplayer? Well if you do, Splatoon doesn't have it, so enjoy the silence..."

No....the ad that'll be posted will only show Splatoon in a positive way. YouTubers have the ability to paint the same product in a harshly negative light. So is that "free advertising" when it's literally a play through of some dude ranting about how he hates the game and all the stuff that needs to be fixed?

Which then leads to copyright strikes against NEGATIVE videos. And when that happens, everyone says the industry is rigged because you're only allowing positivity and not giving both sides of the story.

It's a tricky situation because alot of the YouTubers are "Angry Gamer" "Cynical Gamer" "Snarky Gamer"..etc. Personalities where ranting about small stuff is expected. That kind of person isn't always going to be "free advertising". Alot of the time, they can potentially put off people if they are nitpicking and constantly ranting.

[rainslacker]

@Outthink

Thank You. Youtube "personalities" are more sensational than they are promotional. Why would any company want their product shown in this light? I'm surprised more companies aren't doing what Nintendo is given how negative some of these people are.

Then with lets-plays, people say it's "free advertising" to basically show off the entire game to others. I could never, in my life, understand that, particularly since the ones I could stomach for more than a few minutes still make the experience so boring and more about themselves than they do about the games.

Very few I've seen can manage to give an objective review that is more about the game than themselves. Yahtzee can do this, but he uses his own content in the form of flash animations. Angry Joe isn't bad about it, but he goes too much into the negative aspects at times and tends to get off track, but overall he's OK.

My only problem with what Nintendo is doing is that they are doing it from a perspective of, "we want a cut". that is just wrong. But I also think that youtube personalities need to be a little less loose with the fair use laws, and actually abide by what they mean.

In the mean time, this is a Youtube policy. If the company doesn't want you using their content without strings attached, and Google agrees to honor Nintendo's wishes, then it's OK to lodge distaste, but to vilify a company over it like they are committing a grave injustice upon the consumer is taking it a step too far.

[3-4-5]

Angry Joe Misleads people, and those of you not smart enough to see it for what it is, end up getting tricked by people like him.

He excites you....riles you up......to get your money.

When he shouts....people click.....when people click....he gets more ad money.

He takes a 1/10 issue and blows it out of proportion to make it seem like a 10/10 issue.

He then misleads and slanders Nintendo by outright lying in some cases.

* Yes Nintendo can handle this better, but it's not as bad as Angry Joe makes it sound.

* You people need to smarten up and realize when you'be been "had".

Your gullible and easily tricked and the media and people like Angry Joe do it to you guys every single day.

And every time....somebody always takes the bait.

You realize he makes it sound worse in order to make money right?

* He lost making money on Nintendo, so he's going to counter that by making a big deal of nothing and complaining while not offering content, and making money off of it.

* You've just allowed Angry Joe to make money off of Nintendo and advertisers without offering YOU the listener/observer/subscriber anything in return.

congrats. He just "got you".

[iamnsuperman]

You have not really written about how Angry Joe got us. Angry Joe is right on the money about this situation. Nintendo is going against the grain while other publishers are fostering it. With how YouTube has exploded and how entertainment and gaming have come together in an online form it is backward to go against that. Nintendo may have a right to do what it does but it doesn't make any sense and shows a lack of awareness when it comes to the industry. Let's plays are a big part of gaming now. Companies can't ignore that fact. Getting friendly with them is a good thing. Nintendo needs to modernise and there is no excuse to not. It highlights an out of touch nature Nintendo has

[LOL_WUT]

What about Nintendo? There being a drought on the Wii U yet they delay Zelda their biggest ip yet since Smash which released last year, no voice chat in Splatoon and their obsession on making Amiibos rather than on GAMES and now this...

Seems to me the only one that needs to wake up is you. Glad to see Angry Joe showing Nintendo's ugly side and giving it the exposure it needs. ;)

[MonsterChef]

I don't watch any of angry joes videos, but I do watch several YouTubers and I've been convinced to buy games because of their commentary.. You say they contribute nothing but their commentary is what they contribute and I'm fine with them making money for playing a game and being talkative. If it's so easy you do it.. This is coming from someone that's 25 with a lot less time to play games. He's right on the money about Nintendo

[HammadTheBeast]

"* Yes Nintendo can handle this better, but it's not as bad as Angry Joe makes it sound. "

That's literally the only concrete point in your whole post.

Of course he wants to make money, that's his job. "Angry Joe" is a persona, just like Pewdiepie isn't actually a 7 year old in a 25 year old's body, he's putting on a character for his videos.

He brings up a good point, why is Nintendo the only one who gets pissy about this stuff?

[ChickeyCantor]

"He takes a 1/10 issue and blows it out of proportion to make it seem like a 10/10 issue. "

His video was taken down, which probably took some time to make. And no content means no income.

I don't see how that's a 1/10 > 10/10.

[firelogic]

You're completely missing the point. Nintendo is legally in the right. They CAN issue take-down notices. They CAN demand a cut of streamer's profits. The main question is SHOULD they? And the answer is a resounding NO. I don't know how much you know about youtubers/streamers in general but they hold an immense amount of influence over the public. There's a reason why companies pay good money to youtubers to talk about their products. They see a huge increase in sales as a result.

Nintendo would increase their brand awareness a lot more by allowing influential streamers to show off their games than they would by taking a cut of their profits. The point is other companies don't have their heads shoved so far up their asses to piss off youtubers.

And yes it is free advertising for Nintendo. A guy with 2 million followers plays Mario Party and shows how much fun it is, you don't think he's going to influence hundreds of people to go out and buy it? Of course he will. They follow him because they like him and respect his opinion.

Sony and MS get it. They BUILT-IN streaming functions into their consoles that anyone, no matter how untech-savvy they are, can stream and advertise games on their consoles.

Get out of the dark ages Nintendo. It's like there are no forward thinkers in the company. yeah you make an immediate profit by taking a cut but in the long run, it's not worth it. It's literally chump change to them. I guess when your employees are locked in dark rooms trying to figure out a thousand ways to milk the first party roster of characters that were created DECADES ago kind of stunts creative thinking.

What do you expect from a company that goes like this?

"We need a new game."
"How about a golf game with Mario?"
"How about a soccer game with Mario?"
"How about a tennis game with Mario?"
"How about a racing game with Mario?"
"How about a 2D Mario?"
"How about a 3D Mario?"
"How about a painting game with Mario?"
"How about Kirby but with yarn?"
"How about Yoshi but with yarn?"
"How about a Mario game but with Yoshi?"
"How about Mario toys?"
"How about a bunch of mini games with Mario?"
"How about a golf game with Mario?"
"How about a basketball game with Mario?"
"How about Mario but with paper?"
"How about Mario costumes in every other game?"

Having a good first party roster is great and all but how about making some NEW lovable characters for a change? They're still chugging along with the same roster they've had since the NES days.

[paddy95]

Nintendo have some of the most creative devs in the world, but the management is shit.

The gc was a failure, the wii got lucky and the wii u was set up to fail from the start. Now they don't know what to do because the only success they had from non-handheld consoles in the past 2 decades was by luck. That fad has passed and now they have a console with no third party support and not very many games coming out on it. They are grabbing at any money they can with no long term strategy.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

You say they shouldn't.
My question to you, is WHY?
I imagine you'll fall back on 'free advertisement' as your answer, so let me say this;
There have been Youtube videos of Wii U games for as long as the system has been out, from popular channels like Game Grumps amongst others.
Similarly, there have been negative review videos that have been monetized of Nintendo's games.
Where's the evidence that any of that has increased system sales for the Wii U?
Where's the evidence that the sales of Nintendo's games, on 3DS or Wii U, are directly, positively affected by them?
Hm?

You can't call it free advertisement when it doesn't prove effective at raising sales.
Especially when many of the videos spoil significant amounts of the content of the games, which would make some just watch the lets plays instead of purchasing the game.

So, given that there has not been any appreciable evidence that we can show Nintendo, to prove we're doing them a favor with all this 'free advertisement', let me ask again: why shouldn't Nintendo exercise their legal right?

You could also claim that they're rich and shouldn't need to do this.
How many of you out there would be saying the same if you were in Nintendo's position, though?
Bottom of the three in console sales and ad revenued videos everywhere spoiling your content with no evidence of helping it increase in sales, and you can't save yourself because your own advertisement methods aren't as frequent or widespread.
Unlike Sony and Microsoft, which are both making bank because their own advertisement is so good that no amount of negative reviews or spoiled gameplay through lets plays will dent sales very much.

If you were in that position, I can guarantee that most of you would put business before reputation and exercise your legal right to claim content.

[xander70769]

Monkeyman

Microsoft and Sony have embraced the system because IT WORKS. If you know your games are good, then you want them to get as much exposure as possible, and what better than free exposure through YouTube channels?

Now if your games are crappy, then it's a different story. But there is the confounding issue; Nintendos game are not crappy, for the most part. So why take this path? It makes no sense. It is the product of a company that is out of touch and greedy.

There is a reason why other companies have embraced this relationship, and it's not because they are "too big to fail." Companies don't just suddenly stop caring about marketing because their profits have hit some magic threshold. It's because they have realized it is a win-win for everyone involved. It's free exposure and generated revenue for them. The youtubers get compensation as well, giving them incentive to do it, but the beautiful thing is that unlike any other industry, that compensation comes from OTHER adverts, not from Nintendos own finances. And finally, gamers get to watch these games get played by their favorite personalities. I don't know how many times I've jumped in my car and headed to the game store because I spent 30 minutes on YouTube seeing how fun a certain game seemed. Nintendo is not doing themselves any favors with this practice, aside from being anti-gamer.

[Spotie]

@monkeyman: If it weren't effective, why the hell would Nintendo want to see the revenue?

You can't justify everything Nintendo does. You can try, but succeeding is another matter entirely. And here, you can only fail in the effort.

[Losso-Oso]

wonderfulmonkeyman:

Where is the hard data that proves that traditional advertising directly affects sales?

There really is none now is there. The thought process for advertising in terms of marketing and business, is that advertising creates exposure.

Exposure creates mindshare, it helps inform people of the product, of its availability and of course, it helps create and drive desire for the product.

Traditional advertising has long been on the decline, as the information age grows, people rely more and more on their own research. One of the driving factors of the decline of traditional advertising has been the recognition and awareness of the public that traditional advertising only spreads half truths and misinformation.

The other huge factor from a corporate standpoint is cost.

It is extremely expensive to advertise the traditional way. Remember Destiny's $500 Million budget? If I was a betting man, I would bet that over 60% of that was advertising budget alone, if not more.

Youtube offers now, a more direct albeit uncontrolable way to do all of those things that traditional advertising tries to accomplish, it just does them more effectively and a heck of a lot cheaper than traditional advertising.

Some youtubers like AngryJoe, Pewdipie, TotalBiscuit among many others, can reach often times the same amount of people that traditional marketing firms and TV, online and printed ad campaigns would reach, and often times more, and do so in a much more cost effective manner.

It literally cost this companies nothing but to let those guys stream gameplay, or do LPs and things like that. Heck they have even tried paying off youtubers (not trying to say anything about the people I mentioned above) to do talking head pieces.

Why? Because they can reach they audience, the same amount of people with literally a fraction of the cost.

Youtubers create mindshare, and hype they also bring exposure to the product on almost the same scale and sometimes a much bigger one, than a traditional advertising campaign, and it doesn't cost the corporations tens of millions of dollars.

The thought that youtubers are just making money off the gameplay they are showing, and not the commentary, editing, presentation ect., that they putting into it is just idiotic.

People watch the youtubers because they feel like they get a much clearer picture, and it helps them make a much better decision.

Nintendo's problem with this, is that they are staring to realize that the way that they have run their business, they way they look at hardware and its relationship with software is dying.

Their status as the most innovative company in the industry died with the N64 and more and more people are realizing this. With every passing generation, Nintendo becomes less and less relevant (the wii was the exception that proves the theory).

Nintendo doesn't innovate, they recycle. They recycle old, cheap tech and use it to make the same I.P.s, the same concepts, same ideas, seem "fresh" and "innovative", when in reality they are the same things we have gotten before, just slightly different.

Nintendo is deadly afraid that uncheck content on youtube will accelarate the publics realization of this, and that is why they are reacting the way that they are reacting.

Just my two cents.

[Knushwood Butt]

^

That's more like a Dollar's worth.

[Eddie20101]

Angry joe isn't doing anything good for the gaming industry. He's a self promoting Pr22k. With a lot of self entitled people following him.

He created this whole situation to get hits and get paid. He wants to get paid, Nintendo wants to get paid (It's their IP). I think a 40% take is fair for something they own and allowing 60% to people trying to make money from their IP is generous. Whose being greedy?

As far as paying money for the system and games, that's for personal use. You can't buy a movie or music and broadcast it for money without paying some kind of royalty.

[Rachel_Alucard]

I agree, the music and movie industry has rules in place that prevent this kind of free loading job. Why should video games be excused?

One day youtube and the interest for streaming will plummet and I'm people like Fuming Pablo will have to go out and get a job that gives you actual work experience and a sense of working as a team. Those traits are more valuable in the long run.

[joab777]

@Rachel_Alucard

What is wrong w/ what they do? I guarantee that you are probably jealous b/c some ppl were smart enough to get in early, put in the work, and actually capitalize from it.

I have a friend who does this, and if ya don't call it work, I don't know what you call it. He literally spends every waking hr on this. He has invested so much money into.

Now, how much different is it that anyone in the world is working a job that they enjoy.

Here's the kicker though. I could never do it b/c you are guaranteed nothing, and it takes a LONG time to start seeing a return. Also, video games are a hobby of mine, and the minute I do this, it will be ruined.

So, if they are free loaders, so is Nintendo, b/c they make millions making the games they stream. The future isn't ditch digging, and if you don't punch a clock for someone else, it doesn't mean you aren't working.

[Rachel_Alucard]

@joab

Probably one of the most ignorant comments I've read all week. The ironic part is that I actually do stream on an almost daily basis and get somewhere between 60-150 people watching after 3 months. I don't intend to ever receive payments from ad money even if I hit 1000 viewers. People are free to donate whatever they want, but I would never quit my career to do something freelancey. My problem is if I turn my hobby into a job, I can guarantee you my passion and enjoyment would be wrung dry out of it.

If you can't make money off streaming music/movies why are video games an exception? Streamers took advantage of a loophole and everyone wonders why companies are trying to plug it.

Nintendo has the right to take money from Infuriated José although I agree that they are stuck in the past in how they're handling it. He should be glad they let him have majority of profits barring the other fees I'm unaware about of course.

[Dee_91]

"I agree, the music and movie industry has rules in place that prevent this kind of free loading job. Why should video games be excused?"

Common sense should tell you why its different for video games.But that sense seems to be alluding your thought at the moment.
Video games are dynamic media, music and movies are static media for comparisons sake.I would rather not spend my time explaining to you the differences between videogames and music/motion pictures.But hopefully that explanation will implant a thought you should have, when you ask that question.

[xander70769]

The comparisons between games and music or movies have never made much sense to me in this context. You experience music by simply listening to it. You experience movies by simply watching them. You have to actually play a video game to get the experience.

You can watch someone drive a car for hours but you aren't actually getting the experience of driving it yourself. This is much more similar to games.

If I watch a full movie for free on the Internet, I'm satisfied at the end. I typically won't feel the need to go out and buy the movie, because I've just seen it and experienced it (unless it's really good.) but when I watch a video game online, if it looks like the type of game I would enjoy, watching the video actually motivates me to go and buy the game. It is literally free advertising for their product. Nintendos behavior on this matter is both anti-gamer and anti-business. It is a lose-lose for all parties.

[Rachel_Alucard]

@Dee
@Xander

But that's just it. Could you make the same argument for a story focused game or a visual novel? When people went and watched the entire The Order playthrough before it released do you think the majority of people would still purchase despite seeing the focus point that it was all about?

The point of all this is that getting paid for unofficially showing off the IP owner's material is a loophole and since the rise of it in 2011 the owners have been trying to remove it. Someone's making a profit out of your work and I'd be dammed if anyone with sense wouldn't cracked down on that.

[joab777]

I think you will defend them no matter what. If you want something shared, you don't put up roadblocks.

Ya know why they do? They are capitalizing on their popularity b/c they KNOW ppl will still choose to share and take the hit. He is right. If you criticize anyone else for shady "legal" practices and give Nintendo a pass, you are a hypocrite.

And its funny to hear Jaffe call someone else arrogant, like "how dare a lowly youtuber do what I do all the time. Doesn't he know he isn't really part of OUR industry." Gimme a break. Here's a newsflash. YouTube and Twitch are why the industry pulled out of a nose dive and is now more popular throughout the world than ever before.

And, hey, Nintendo. It's also why you are able to sell some stupid little plastic figure, and watch grown ups literally fistfight over them. For their kids, you ask? No, for themselves. Insane. All of it is so damn backwards.

[soonic7]

I totally agree with you bro, if you think that it is fine for Nintendo to do this, then when EA release the new battlefield with 500$ worth of DLC, you have no right to criticize them, it is the same situation, their game and they can do whatever they want with it, since it is you know, "legal".

[CorndogBurglar]

I vet that point but its dumb. If they let people make vids of their games, it was increase sales....way more than charging people to use their content. So why do it? No other companies do it, that i know of. That's all the proof you need right there.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

Game Grumps and plenty of others have been doing videos of Wii U games for ages.
Nintendo's system sales haven't risen because of them.
Your point is invalid.

[Losso-Oso]

Wonderfulmonkeyman:

That's not how advertising works. Advertising works by creating exposure to a product, and presenting to the population. This creates mindshare and hype, which creates desire for said product.

This is marketing 101, and that is literally what youtubers do.

If you think that there is data out there that shows a direct link between ads and sales, you are sadly mistaken. Marketing is all about exposure.

Exposing a product and hopefully, informing people of its availability. Youtubers take that a step further by actually demoing the product for you, and letting you see how good it is.

Monkeyman, YOUR point is invalid.

[Eddie20101]

Have you ever watched Angry Joe, he rarely has anything good to say about gaming. He is almost always saying how bad something is. Tell me how does that help sell video games? This thing he did with Mario Party 10 was just a cash and grab for him. He did this to earn a lot of money from a perceived problem that mostly only You Tubers have when the moneys went to their head.

I could almost guarantee that he has not helped to sell a single Nintendo console or game, but it's for sure he's made a lot of money by bashing them and using their content.

Honestly he has said he is mostly a PC gamer (elitist). We know how that goes, they are just as bad as any other extremist fanboy.

Gaming is the only medium where people think they are entitled to use content a publisher and developers had worked on and not have to pay anything for it. These people are clearly doing it for the money. twitch, You tubers, GameStop or any company who sells used games. Sure some of this may help a little but I doubt it's as much as they are helping themselves.

I doubt that any one of these people would think that all this was OK if it were an IP they owned.

I like You Tubers (some of them) but at least be honest any service you are providing is mostly for yourself, either to make money or self gratification and their is nothing wrong with that but you need to be fair and logical about it.

[SilentNegotiator]

@Wonderfulmonkeyman

Feel free to explain how you quantified that. What proof do you have that GG did or did not contribute to Wii U sales in any way?

[Revvin]

You're spot on, Angry Joe is just 'angry' because Nintendo want their cut of the money he makes using their IP. Angry Joe is just as commercial as Nintendo, he has an inflated opinion of himself because mindless fans who lap up his bullshit can't see him for what he is - just another YouTuber trying to make money.

[Yetter]

When a Youtuber has 200,000 subscribers and is streaming your game its free advertising. Nintendo should take the free publicity and run with it

[bohemian 23]

At the same time though, if you buy a Chevy, and than go and decide to deliver pizza. Should you have to pay Chevy for use of their vehicle that you already payed for, every time you get a tip? You bought the game, if you can make money from people watching you play it, than I don't think you should have to give them a cut. If not greed, what is their motivation behind this?

[rocketpanda]

Like Nintendo Oyajis, you don't get it. It is not purely for the money. Some of the most hated companies get it: EA, Ubisoft and Activision and some even pay well know personalities for game exposure because they can grab an audience that has would never in the first place contemplate of purchasing the game.

Never cared for Mario party, then saw Joe playing with his buddies having a blast and thought it would be great to play it with my friends too, then Nintendo decided to be Nintendo and now we are here discussing what should never have been an issue.

[Dfooster]

The youtubers are making money essentially for advertising games for these big companies it's a perfect symbiant circle where everyone wins. The consumer the youtubers and the big corporate companies all gain from this relationship.

Once the big companies want it all then there is nothing to be had for anyone and everyone loses out.

[Parhelion69]

Nintendo apologists like you are the ones that allow them to have abusive politics when everybody else is enjoying the free advertising. And wanting that video to be their "own"? That's just stupid.

Minecraft got big because of this, and surely many other games. Publishers know this. And everybody is fine with this.

Mindless nintendo drones will always exist though.

[jdiggitty]

Say, for instance, I'm making a movie. One extended scene is set in an internet cafe and I have an Angry Joe video playing, in it's entirety, in the background. What do you suppose his response to that would be? Probably, "give me money".

[King-u-mad]

All i'm reading here is selective ignorance...

"The main problem here is that they don't want people MAKING money that they don't get..."

This was not thought out when you wrote it. The reason why is...

Advertisement.

Lets break this down further...

Advertisement by definition is a notice or announcement in a public medium promoting a product, service, or event or publicizing a job vacancy.

Generally in the business world you how to push out a lot of money in order to advertise your product/service.

Where as in the case with a lot of youtubers, if they are generating a lot of views and promoting your service/product for you without asking for payment directly from you. It is called free advertisement on the businesses account. Also due to it being free means what ever money is made due to the advertisement of the product from an outsource is 100% profit. Meaning they are making more money then what they would if they payed for advertisement.

The main problem here is that Nintendo is being greedy. Nothing else.

[Perkel]

problem is that AngryJoe is essentially gaming media.

Why IGN can use Nintendo material without their aproval, why they can do reviews without nintendo stamp ?

Because this is exatly the same reason.

Naturally there is also second problem. AngryJoe videos are FREE marketing for Nintendo. His videos directly sell games to people.

Nintendo simply is shitty company to not grasp it.

[JasonKCK]

David Jaffe calling someone else arrogant, lol priceless.

[Visiblemarc]

The problem is that as much as I adore Nintendo, they are looking very much like the century+ old company they are when it comes to social media.

They need to learn to "read the room." The supposed "revenue lost" to streamers is logically an extension of marketing, essentially part of the advertising budget.

That is how it should be seen. There isn't room for debate, the vast majority of people do *not* side with Nintendo on this, that is the only thing that matters.

In an age where Nintendo is struggling to remain profitable (despite making amazing games) they really can't afford to be snuffing out their social media presence. It's, plainly, the wrong choice.

Inevitably, someone will make the mega-obvious observation that Nintendo owns the footage. That is insanely aside from the point.

That's like a guy and a girl going on a date, after dinner, the girl picks up the guy's jacket and puts it on. They walk together by the water. Yes...technically it's his. He has the legal right to demand she remove it or charge her a rental fee. Yet...that would be foolish.

By presuming to wear it, she sends the message: "I'm comfortable with you, I like you, I want to be closer to you and I want others to know I like you."

Being slightly cold, is a small price to pay for all that.

Nintendo is currently charging their dates rent on their jackets. Soon they won't be able to get a date. (Which is an insane waste because they make some of the best games, period.)

[DarkOcelet]

Its not that those companies wants no part of it but they actually want part of that revenue those youtubers gain which is pretty stupid and ignorant because they are gaining popularity and will eventually gain money because some of those million viewers will buy the game so its a win/win situation. I cant agree with David here. Nintendo are doing a pretty stupid move blocking tbose videos and potential buyers. They are basically saying no to free marketing.

[Genuine-User]

Should you not agree with Jaffee then?
He says Nintendo is dumb for putting restrictions, but it's their right to be stupid as well.

[Metallox]

This exactly.

There is no necessity for videos like Joe's one.

[Ilovetheps5]

While I see what most people are saying, I've had a few of my friends not buy a game because they watched a playthrough of it on youtube. One of my friends watched a playthrough of The Last of Us online, but now he has no intentions of buying the game himself. He said he already knew the story, so what's the point. That's just one instance of that happening to a few of my friends, and each time that happens, that company loses out on a sale. So to regain the potentially lost sale, they want some of the ad revenue from the youtube video. Am I saying that it's always like that? No. I'm sure there are plenty of people who will watch a video of a game, enjoy it and go buy the game themselves. But, I don't think Nintendo sees it that way. They only see the lost money. I mean, when Xenoblade Chronicles X comes out and some youtuber plays it, I wouldn't want to play the game after I knew the storyline already. Quite a bit of the enjoyment I get from RPGs is the storyline and seeing the interaction between the characters. If I know the story going in, I probably wouldn't last too long, making me not buy the game. That's just another way of seeing this situation.

[Eddie20101]

All he is going to do is bash and rant about the game (hence the name Angry Joe) to make money on YouTube. How's that help Nintendo?

[Big_Game_Hunters]

Sorry but i don't care if someone else can't make more money using Nintendo's property. As a gamer and consumer i would rather have someof that money go to Nintendo so they could produce more and better product.

All of a sudden this is the root of Nintendo's problems though huh??
I know there are plenty of people eager to attack Nintendo any chance they get...but there are plenty of legitimate problems to be focusing on over something as petty as a youtuber's salary.

@ilovethe PS4
another thing people miss, well said. Too many people think videos caterd to people who would rather watch someone play video games than play games themselves is great marketing. Are there really people who will watch more than 5 or 10 minutes of a lets play before decideing whether to buy a game? i know for me trailers and developer released footage is all i need with reviews to highlight technical and other issues the game might have.

[ifistbrowni]

I think its a kid thing.. Young kids cant buy games because they have no money. They hardly have time to play games due to restrictions (parents saying no, parents not buying them the console, parents not buying the game, no "free" tv to play on, school and homework, sports and activities).

My young nephew watches gameplay videos and "lets-play" videos all the time. Instead of watching Disney Channel and going to sleep, he turns on the Youtube app and watches Minecraft, Far Cry, etc.

As an adult, I only need to see a few trailers to convince me to buy a game. When I was a young kid I wasn't able to get video-games until I got an awesome report card, had a Birthday, or it was Christmas. I don't use Youtube because I'm at an age now where I can buy my own games but if I had a platform like Youtube or Twitch when I was a young kid I probably would've used them to watch games since I was limited to about 3 games a year.

To answer your question. Yes, there are kids out there that watch a full "lets-play" playthroughs. I'm not sure if Adults do it. TBH, I would think it'd be sad if an adult did.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

Advertisement is designed to increase sales, right?
Popular channels like Game Grumps have been doing videos of Nintendo games for ages, right?

So, where's the evidence of the supposed sales?
Where's the benefit in allowing videos that spoil in-game content, without showing a raise in Nintendo's sales, to continue?

The fastest way to make Nintendo stop this insanity is to prove to them that Youtubers are making their sales better.
Not by showing them how it helped Minecraft.
By showing them how it recently helped Nintendo.

If that evidence doesn't exist, then Nintendo is within their rights to recoup losses from ineffective videos that make money off of spoiling the content of their games.
They're a business in third place in console sales that needs education in how to properly advertise their own products.
Not a charity, let alone the current gen leader with so much experience in self advertisement that Youtubers barely make a dent in their profit margins, positive or negative, compared to their own advertisement efforts.

[Losso-Oso]

Really? So where is teh evidence that their traditional ad campaings worked? Shouldn't Nintendo be trying to recoup the tens of millions they spent on the ads on TV, and online and have been completely ineffective?

Wouldn't that be a much more fruitful and gainful thing to do?

Research bro, do some.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

@ losso
Redirecting blame to avoid my question doesn't disprove my point.

Everyone's aware that Nintendo sucks at advertising most of the time.(with the exception of their handhelds and Amiibo)
But considering the fact that Youtubers have done basically nothing for Nintendo's sales in quite a while, it would seem that what little Nintendo has done, is still enough to keep them afloat better than if they only had the likes of Angry Joe to rely upon.

The point is that Youtubers have not shown Nintendo that they've been even more effective than Nintendo at making Nintendo's products sell, and the best way to make Nintendo back off is to prove they're the best source Nintendo can hope to find for advertisement.

So instead of posting strawman arguments and suggesting that i do some unspecified research, 'bro', why don't you try showing some definite proof that would make Nintendo back off, or suggesting a plan to make that proof exist if it does not?

It would be time better spent, compared to trying to start a flame war with me.

[RSKnight]

@monkeyman
Have you ever stopped to think that if popular channels like Game Grumps weren't doing videos of Nintendo games, Nintendo sales could be even lower?
I recomend you to get some business and marketing books and educate your self in those areas before posting more comments defending Nintendo's stupidity. It is ovious in all your posts that you have no idea how businesses and marketing/advertising works.

[BartMoons]

Dumb and stupid perhaps but it remains their decission in the end. Free marketing sure but people are earning serious money from used content that is not even theirs. It's a dilemma really and the 40% share isn;t even that weird.

[Snookies12]

They're not earning money from the game though, they're earning money from their personality over top of games. I don't care what games some of my favorite YouTubers play. Anything from a flash game made in ten minutes, to GTA V. I don't want to watch the game per se, I just enjoy their reactions to the games.

[Multiplatguy]

I wonder how popular they would be if it was just a facecam then. No game footage.

@Snookies... That was a horrible comparison. It didn't even make sense. And you missed the point. Everybody claims it's the Youtuber and his personality that they are watching for and not the game. But take away the gameplay footage and just leave audio and those views would shrink.

I am not opposed to them making money but if the company would actually made the game doesn't want you to, I think it's entitled to whine about it. You didn't make squat and you don't really deserve to make a living off of ranting in front of footage of somebody elses work.

[Snookies12]

@Multiplatguy - That's like saying "I wonder how popular a comedian would be if they didn't tell jokes". I stated that it's not about what game they're playing. Just that they're playing something. Why would it ever just be face cam? Even if the YouTuber swore off all major consoles/companies (in the event that they all started doing this). There would always be free games to play. For instance, some of my favorite YouTube Let's Plays have been of those RPG Maker titles.

[Baka-akaB]

Let's ask you in the same vein , who wins money on those videos without any voiceover and content ? People pick and follow various youtubers for a reason . And the content they add on top of displaying the game is part of it . For nintendo to claim that they would own the videos because it feature segment of the games , among other issues is wrong .

[MonsterChef]

His point is legit, a lot of times I see a particular YouTubers to just here the commentary.. Could care less what they play he can be playing euro truck simulator for two hours for all I care it's entertaining to hear some stupid commentary from time to time

[ceed911]

Agreed. This isn't Nintendo missing out on money, this is Nintendo wanting MORE money. It's the equivalent of your friends coming over and watching you play the newest game, is Nintendo entitled to make money off the free advertising you are providing? No, they just see this as a new source of income.

I'm hoping this outrage continues so Sony/Microsoft don't ever consider doing such a thing, for fear of backlash.

[Godmars290]

The thing is, given Nintendo's mainstream market awareness, they don't need "free advertising" from Youtube streamers, who do see money which Nintendo isn't getting. That's where this whole stupid situation comes from.

[Baka-akaB]

Except companies with popular franchises dont stay put without actually spending on marketing and keeping the hype and popularity alive in people's mind .... so nah i disagree ... a venue wich provide them more advertising than those expensive marketing firms , is probably music to their ears .

[Godmars290]

Yes, they aren't just sitting still much less waiting for Youtube celebs to promote their stuff. They do their own advertising.

Thing is if incidents like this keep cropping up where someone with a following gets butthurt over not being able to ride to coattails of a successful or good game, we could start seeing negative press towards that game for wholly wrong reasons.

[SilentNegotiator]

Forget "free advertisement"...Let' s Plays and Reviews are as good as Fair Use. No one REALLY needs permission from Nintendo; Nintendo is just taking advantage of Youtube's cautious claim handling (for their own legal protection) to bully profits out of internet personalities.

https://iplsrutgers.wordpre...

Furthermore, people like Joe really should say "to hell with Nintendo". If Nintendo really thinks that it doesn't need the exposure from Youtubers, they can just have another Gamecube on their hands.
I'm sure Nintendo REALLY wants to be where they are with Wii U after the godly success of the Wii. /s

[Godmars290]

The Wii's success was never "godly". The mainstream market recognized the console, bought it, but not its games while the smaller gaming community largely ignored it.

If anything is "godly" its still the Ps1 and PS2 for honestly expanding the market via both soft and hardware. Which should say something as anything after them, aside from the 3DS and Gameboy, has only struggled in comparison to their success.

[00]

If someone was making money off of your work by simply making videos about it I'm sure more people would get an understanding of where Nintendo is coming from, and there is nothing stopping people from making non monetized videos if they want to play the games because they like them.

Edit: Reviews can be fair game, but these let's players shouldn't be surprised that the creator doesn't want them making money off of their work.

[Big_Game_Hunters]

Except making money off lets plays isn't fair use and the article you link doesn't prove it is. Also lets pretending like youtube popularity is the main source of Nintendo's problems though, so we have another excuse to blow another minor issue out of proportion.

[SilentNegotiator]

Exposure in general *IS* one of Wii U's main problems. There was a long stretch of time that a lot of people thought it was an accessory to the Wii.

[700p]

I hate self entitled youtubers. Cry me a river.

[cutthroatslim]

Exactly

[blackblades]

Yeah its stupid, but it's there decision and right to do that. I say people should stop uploading Nintendo content on you tube ect... and see what happens. It might back fire on nintendo, but then again people might sign it and go along like always. People bs about certain things in the gaming industry but they don't do anything about it and it just going on.

[Hoffmann]

Sometimes I almost believe that Nintendo is as "evil /shitty" as companies like Electronic Arts.

[Ck1x]

For people defending the Angry Joe rant you guys are idiots and don't understand why videogames are still trying to catch up with other forms of media when it comes to property and IP. The music industry has been doing things like this for many many years and the gaming industry is trying to get caught up. Songs get played on the radio or used in a commercial and royalties get paid to the content creators for such usage. Anyone who has a problem with such practices don't understand why this is important to gaming and things going digital only in the near future. These companies are still fighting off pirating of software on the black markets, which is losing these companies money as well!

[Multiplatguy]

I see everybody calling Nintendo greedy but it's not like he is making pocket change from Youtube, he gets enough to live off and live well. He bought an extra Xbox and Playstation so he could give them away. I don't think it's unfair that Nintendo feel entitled to some of that money since it was made off of something they created.

I think taking down videos is wrong, stopping people from earning money off of something you created though.. I don't see anything wrong with that. Last time Capcom did this to Joe, he took down the video so we couldn't see it. His fans couldn't see the video because he wouldn't make money off it.

Not a fan of most Youtubers. There are some great Youtubers who do a great job on videos out of passion and not for the money. Also, Joe got his Wii U for free. Why is he complaining about the $300 he "spent on it" when he didn't?

[Baka-akaB]

That's a one side part of the argument . I dont like most youtubers actually ... but nnetheless , they provide in spade a advertising venue that would cost publishers so much if they wanted to match it with real ad companies and tv channels .

It's a bit too easy to pretend that no addition value and content is added , and that all that matter is the gameplay segment , and demand compensation for providing some show and cntent that isnt part of the game .

Some youtubers make profits i find ludicrous for their work , but some clearly are invested in it , both in the work and the material at use .

So a better and less retrograde compromise should be eventually found

[ThanatosDMC]

He gets a lot of donations per stream. Some weird guy always gives him $50 every time he streams without fail. Also, he has ad revenue on his website.

[Multiplatguy]

So considering he can make his fortune from Steaming and from his website, why is he stressing out about Nintendo when he doesn't even play many Nintendo games and only has the system because somebody gave him one?

Seems like this guy is just really resentful towards anybody who doesn't like him earning money off of other peoples work.

[DarXyde]

It's Nintendo's right at the end of the day. You also have to consider that Angry Joe gets a lot of hits and, in the process of bashing their games, they're likely losing revenue in game sales. A precaution, it seems. People do put good faith in reviews believe it or not.

While I think it's robbing yourself of publicity, consider this:

If you have a channel that can generate ads, odds are, you're making money and getting a ton of hits. And if you're getting hits, you're likely getting subscribes. And if you're getting subscribes, you have a viewership that trusts your opinion. That said, if someone with, say 1,000,000 subscribers says [Nintendo game X] sucks, you're probably going to take that review to heart, tell your friends, deter them, and now you've got a game that may have been a commercial success, but isn't. Reviews can be surprisingly stigmatizing. Asking for less than half of the revenue isn't bad if you're reviewing their product if you ask me. At least assume some responsibility for the potential damage you may cause. And if you praise it, consider it a fee for giving you content. Video needs a product to make a review.

I don't see Nintendo's actions as criminal, but I completely agree with Jaffe: depriving yourself of publicity, but it's totally your call. Just know that (a) less is now known about your game and (b) you're also potentially cutting off great feedback and hype for your game.

[tekksin]

ballz of steel

[MultiConsoleGamer]

All companies will do this eventually, and I don't care what David Jaffe or Angry Joe has to say about anything.

[LOL_WUT]

@MultiConsoleGamer Yeah and all thanks to Nintendo. You know not even EA does this apparently they do the opposite. Yet they're the bad guys ;)

"User-generated videos are a valuable and unique aspect of how gamers share their experiences playing the games they love, and one that EA supports."

http://www.gamespot.com/art...

[sloth3395]

Angry Joe isn't doing it for the joy of being a gamer he is doing it for the money

[MonsterChef]

Just like athletes don't play the game for the love of sport... If you have a personality that would make you money for playing games id love for you to contribute in that regard, face it some people make money a lot easier then some of us ever will

[Rebel_Scum]

David Jaffe gets it. I don't see why there should be a debate on this. Nintendo has a right to protect its IP.

I never understood why anyone would watch Angry Joe.

[Zerrgi]

I watch it , but mostly just his reviews , since he is usually right. But I dont watch his annoying rants, when he is obviously wrong

[hkgamer]

david jaffe is pretty much spot on. i respect his opinions a lot because he says what he thinks.

for the most part, gameplay videos and lets plays on youtube was always a grey area type thing, was no right or wrong. i think it is more in the white area these days. anyway, nintendo outrights says that they dont like it and the only way to do this is by following their policies, youtube has allowed them to do this so people need to accept this as reality. you dont hear me complaining if i take a video camera to a cinema to try and capture footage.

back to the point. nintendo and youtube has allowed this policy, so the only thing youtubers can do if they want to broadcast nintendo videos is to either do it somewhere else instead of youtube or make youtube change its policies, which will never happen.

angryjow knowingly released a mario party video on youtube knowing that the nintendo policy existed, he ranted about this before. he did this deliberately so that he can make another rant video about this amd have the whole internet talking about this subject. he wanted nintendo to do this so he can make money posting a rant video. he got 500k views in a day or so.

[KryptoniteTail]

Problem is that it is not their right to control someone. video taping themselves doing an activity. This isn't a passive media like film, and people are half the attraction. Comparing it to pirating is ridiculous and this certainly falls under fair use and I hope courts get involved.

[Zerrgi]

It is not their right to control someone. But they do have a right to delete videos of their games , which could damage the sales.

[OzzY-waZZy]

Nintendo has become such a cancer for gaming with all their draconian decisions. Region locking, being anti-youtube, underpowered systems, focusing on little toys.

Microsoft was going down the same path with all their DRM but changed heads and rectified the ship. Hopefully Nintendo does the same before it's too late.

[Doletskaya]

"Most of us in games want our shit streamed and talked about but you gotta respect those companies that want no part of it." Lol. No, you don't.

[Mrveryodd]

The one and only Nintendo I ever bought was a 64, never buying another .
They have the same game line up that they had back then.
Screw you big N , like you screw everyone else .

[Ace Killa 08]

That actually works in their favor....

[deester]

so should every player in the NFL -NBA- OR ANY OTHER activity THAT IS BROADCAST have to pay the maker of the basketball the football the rim and nets everything that involves the sport then they should get a cut right they made it so anything that is generated from it the maker should get some (DO YOU SEE HOW STUPID THAT SOUNDS)ok the makers of musical instruments should get paid for every song that is made with there product.where does it stop.
Nintendo should be sued and ran out of business they are a joke they are not innovating to bring in money they worry about things like this I will never buy a Nintendo product ever and all consumers should do the same and David Scott Jaffe is just flat out wrong

[n1kki6]

At some point he is going to lose his audience if he wants to be transparent enough to make everything is about the money. In reality everything is all about the money. This console war is a great example, Sony was able to convince gamers that it was about the gamers, not money, even though ultimately it was "about the money". Not all of this guys videos need to monetize if he wants to be a voice in gaming. Instead he wants to be a voice in gaming only when he is getting paid, and not by Nintendo, by the ads that are distributed via revenue sharing on youtube, another avenue that nintendo can't control. Jaffe is on point. Nintendo has every right to control their content, regardless of our opinions. Nintendo does not owe this person a living for streaming their games.

[urwifeminder]

Don't really care what this fool thinks voted most punch able face in my gaming world.

[PrinceOfAllSaiyans]

What do you expect from that joke of a company. Nintendo won't be around much longer. They're already starting to make mobile games. The NX will be Nintendo's last console. PlayStation, Xbox, and someone like Amazon or Apple will be the third console.

[Ilovetheps5]

People have been saying that for a long time. Believe it or not, they are still here, and they are even in a better financial situation than one of the other big 3.

[Big_Game_Hunters]

Thats assuming Sony doesn't go completely under in the next 7 years due to how bad the rest of the business is going.

[sashimi]

you so funny...not really keep spouting false information.

[Der_Kommandant]

David Jaffe is right as always

[hongthay]

You buy a game, make YouTube videos about playing from it, and profit from that. I don't see why Nintendo needs to take the money from these people that put work into making these videos.

Do car companies take profit from taxi drivers after the initial car sale, since they make money from using their product? Do landscaping companies have to pay the people who make their tools parts of their profit because they are making money from them?

No, of course not, and neither should game companies. They bought the product, and they can use it to make profit.

[Protagonist]

If Sony did this, I would be mad!

Why do people fail to see, what youtubers are doing is a win-win-situation between (big and small) youtubers and the companies. It is goodwill, as it benefits both parties. We as gamers can relate to youtubers, not to companies like Sony, and I say this as a fan! Let youtubers make a few bucks, honestly if big youtubers shows gameplay/first-reactions/revie ws, then it is a lot cheaper for the companies in the end, because people likes this sort of things more, than a commercial from a company. At least I do.

Luckely this is still the norm though.

[WizzroSupreme]

I suppose that the summary of the dilemma can be that Nintendo is well within its right to retain possession over its IP in the virtual space; it's not an ethical problem, as they are fully entitled to what they made by law and by common sense. It is, however, an issue of the "smart" thing to do as opposed to the "right" thing to do as so many gamers conflate the two so interchangeably.

New media, and particularly social media as YouTube has almost grown into, is the driving force behind the PS4's and even the X1's success ever since the latter's coming to its senses. YouTube and Twitch are the two pillars of the general gaming community and like it or not, it's the platform by which developers reach out to their audiences and whether Nintendo chooses to be a part of it is its business. It will, however, give them a whole lot less business, not more.

It's been established how far the Wii U fell from its predecessors in sales figures and there's no coincidence that it has to do with moving out of YouTube's infancy and into the modern age it refuses to acknowledge out of fear or sheer stubbornness. It's more often that it's consumer perception of a brand than the brand itself that's the 50 million unit difference and Sony's worked outrageously hard to build up a media empire selling its vision to consumers. Cry politics if you will, but selling a brand's the very first step and participation in the social media sphere's the cornerstone to that which Nintendo's stubbornly refused to partake in.

Yes, there's piracy that plagues the entire industry and I have no doubts that people who post 10 hours of straight-up-cutscenes and gameplay for monetization need to be cracked down on.

But LetsPlayers who comment, critique, and oftentimes informally review games are best means of advertisement the company has. LetsPlays sell you on a game and Nintendo's games are, arguably, some of the best of this current-gen as so many reviews will tell you. It's a disservice to their own software for it not to be advertised across as many voices as possible.

Can Nintendo charge more money than anyone else to stream its games? Yes, and they have. Should they? That depends on what they want out of it. Will they forever? That depends on what consumers do in response.

[DualWielding]

Incredible! for the first time ever I agree 100% with everything Jaffe said

[thatamike]

Joe acknowledged towards the end of the video that it was Nintendo's right. But he's right that in this era, it is just plain stupid on Nintendo's part. Nintendo Fans are going to defend no matter what. Joe has a point here.

[deathtok]

Fair use gets thrown around too often here. Once a Youtuber monetizes a video, fair use gets thrown out the window.

Like it or not but it's the same reason you can't legally buy a Blu-ray movie, setup a public forum to playback the movie and charge a fee.

[eldingo]

Fair use applies differently to movies and video games you watch a movie but you play a game the difference here is that playing a game and recording it with commentary is where it gets complicated because it then becomes fair use based on whether it is a transformative work or not and thats where it goes all blurry in the eyes of the law because there is no legal precedent or line in the sand if you will on what is fair use or not in full context on whether a lets play video counting as fair use or not and whether monetizing said video changes this or not.

[theFAYEsorceress]

only nintendo fanboys would attempt to defend such a one-sided argument. bottom line is: free advertising is free advertising. minecraft is worth 1.5 billion thanks to the exact same thing that nintendo is trying to block. whether or not they NEED the advertising isn't the point. joe's right, they have every right to block his content, but they're essentially turning away free money, and in ANY business, that's just a stupid decision.

[deathtok]

Is it stupid though? Reviewing a Nintendo game on YouTube can be done without showing video footage of the game.

[quenomamen]

Yea Jaffe, we not talking bout Nintendo having the legal right to be assholes, that's a given.
we talking about how being assholes makes you look as a company.

[rezzah]

Well if anything we can see what happens to Nintendo after the policies are implemented. Other companies are definitely paying attention silently, the effects of Nintendo will determine how they respond.

[OSIRUSSS]

What ever happened to Hip Hop Gamer?

[mastershredder]

AJ is a man-child.

[PhucSeeker]

I don't think the 60-40 portion of the money made by the video is bad. The bad thing is the video submitted to this program will become Nintendo's property, so if they don't like it they remove it.

Say, one Nin's game video review state that the game sucks then it might not get an approved stamp by Nin and the video go poof.

And after a while, there're only praises for Nin's games, even the sucky ones.

[Ridiick]

After watching the Angry Joe video I must say that Jaffe is wrong, this time Joe hasn't get angry for fun, this time he has provide good arguments about why he is not going to create more nintendo videos.

On the other hand Jaffe should be cleaning his own shit before talk about others, we are waiting a Santa Monica game several year ago, probably more programming and less twitter will help.

[TechnoSphere]

I see some comments that basically are jealous of his job.
get over it.Not his problem that you have a shitty one you don't enjoy.

[PurpHerbison]

If it takes 4+ tweets to get it off your chest your probably shouldn't tweet at all. Go start some smug blog or something.

[Kenshin_BATT0USAI]

Facts to consider about this:

1. Angry Joe claims that IT IS within their(Nintendo's) legal right to do this, but it is stupid.
2. David claims that IT IS within their(Nintendo's) legal right to do this, but it is stupid. And that Joe is arrogant for thinking the same? (did he even watch the video)
3. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY watches any youtuber for anything BUT the youtuber. They come for the youtuber, not the game.
4. Nintendo is really stupid for doing this. Simply put.

[PurpHerbison]

This is typical Jaffe though. He talks out of his ass more so than not.

[arbitor365]

David Jaffe is flat out wrong, at least in America, because we have laws protecting fair use for the purposes of critique, commentary, satire, parody and education. So reviewers have every right to use gameplay.

And to even evoke fair use is unnecessary. There exist no laws that prohibit the free display and sharing of gameplay footage. For obvious reasons. Sharing gameplay footage does not take away from the sales of games.

So, David Jaffe is full of crap for defending this policy. Does he really think that extending this "copyright gameplay" precedent would be a good thing for the industry? It doesnt make sense on any level.

[deathtok]

I'd suggest reading about Fair Use before throwing the term around. Fair Use doesn't cover monetizing another copyright holder's content.

It's the same reason that Fair Use doesn't let artists sample other songs without legal implications...

[arbitor365]

MST3K and Rifftrax have been using copyrighted content and profiting, because of those laws for 2 decades. Comedians like Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart have used copyrighted material in their shows.

Countless sites use footage of movies and games in reviews. I have gotten flagged for copyright and appealed it under fair use and gotten my monetization back. So yeah, fair use does not just apply to non profits

[phoenixwake]

It's ridiculous when games like The Order, or Telltale Games, which are mostly story/cinematic driven aren't even considered for takedowns. Yet many have argued that a longplay of those types of games practically removes the need to play the game, and yet Youtube videos of these go up on Youtube unchecked.

Watching somebody play Mario Party and actually playing it with a group of friends are two completely different things. Watching someone stream the game can only be beneficial to bringing awareness to the game's really muted release (seriously, I would not have even knew it was out had I not gone to Gamestop that day, I was there to pick up Bloodborne).

Get it together, Nintendo.

[ScamperCamper]

Who gives a crap what Jaffe thinks? Who is he? Does his youtube channel have 1+ million subscribers? Even Metallica had supporters of their mp3 issues. Does that mean Metallica was smart about it?

[PowerNerd101]

So David Jaffe is calling someone else arrogant? Uh-huuhh, pretty sure I have a black kettle around here somewhere...

[Tonykid]

Most of these YouTubers are saying they are making videos for there fans yet complain when they are not making money and telling me to turn off adblock.

Yet all they do really is sit in front of a computer playing video games. don't give me all that bullshit because that there is more to it than that because there isn't. All the successful YouTubers already are successful enough to live off YouTube to buy new games. The less than successful ones are just late in the game.

[Tonykid]

Also why would Nintendo need exposure who doesn't know Mario.

[dennett316]

Any idiot can record themselves playing a game. To get to the position that you can make money off that, you need to build an audience, and that's the hard part.
An unlike-able jerk isn't going to draw in lots of viewers unless he offers something else. A quiet, introverted type isn't going to draw in lots of people either. It's the old cult of personality thing, you need to offer something that people want to see. Gameplay alone just isn't enough, if it was, then non-commentated Long Play videos would be the biggest thing on YouTube, not a guy like PewDiePie.

[dennett316]

I like Joe a lot, but I don't know what he expected when it comes to Nintendo. Their position is clear, and has been for months, you either do it on their terms, or you can't make money off their assets. I think it's a dumb way to approach things, but it's what they want. They don't want it done any other way, so it's absolutely pointless to get this upset when they inevitably do what they told you they would do.

By all means create a video and state why you think they're wrong and want them to evolve, but don't break their terms and expect to get away with it.

Besides, if it WAS truly about spreading the good word about Nintendo's games, and if it's truly only the content of the YouTuber that's the important factor - as many YouTubers and LP'ers claim - then release a video talking about the great game you played, but do so without any game footage in it. That way you get the supposed desired result you were after - spreading the word - and you also get to keep 100% of the ad revenue on your video. If the footage is so unimportant and non-essential, there should be no issue in doing that. Do a Vlog about the game, talk about what's great about it and urge people to buy it and show support. Just do it without game footage. Shouldn't be a problem if the YouTuber's opinion is the main draw, and not the game footage.

[eldingo]

After reading this article and jaffes tweets along with watching the video they were talking about that angry Joe put up it seems to me jaffe is getting mad at Joe over nothing in the video he put up Joe makes it clear he knows Nintendo has the legal right to do what they did to his video but is angry that they are doing it when they don't have to and considers it a dick move that Nintendo is doing this as like past examples they have shown a degree of isolationist behaviors taking stance on an issue and stubbornly refusing to adapt even if it benefits them which is disappointing because they make good fun games however jaffe saying Joe was being arrogant in his rant was i think an unfair assumption as Joe already explained multiple times in the video that he knew Nintendo had the legal right to do so but wanted to rant about how much of dick move it is along with a decent argument for why they should not be doing this because while taking a cut of all videos benefits them short term in money in the long term it is hurting their reputation with YouTube in general and any gamers who believe that what Nintendo is doing right now with its videos on YouTube is while legal an incredibly stupid dick move along with canning any fan made recreations of their games as well like the super Mario n64 remake they recently took down like he says in his video Nintendo has a history of making some very isolationist decisions while im glad jaffe thinks what they are doing is very stupid (because it is make no doubt about that)it makes me wonder why he thinks joe is arrogant still despite him explaining he knows they were in the legal right but was gonna rant anyway cause it was still a dick move and it pissed him off.

[Tex117]

Of all the stories in gaming, this one strikes me as silly and stupid.

"Youtuber gets pissed as he uses copyrighted material and told not to."

Not only that, he does admit he knows the cease letter is coming because he was "testing the water."

Whatever, all for publicity.

[eldingo]

it was an angry rant video that joe made to argue why nintendo should not be doing what it is they are doing regarding nintendo game videos along with the fan recreation of super mario 64 that they also took down as well jaffe had the same opinion as joe in his video yet jaffe called him arrogant and this article shows us this you clearly did not watch the video joe made nor read jaffes tweets why you made that assumption is silly joe did not make this article you are commenting on nor ask for it to be made he only made a video to argue why nintendo is a dick for doing what they are doing and also argue why they should not be doing it at all when they don't have to get your facts straight before you accuse someone of doing something.

[i8urCAKE]

People care that much about this crap ?

[IWentBrokeForGaming]

Maybe this is Nintendos way of making up for past failed endeavors (power glove, virtuaboy, etc.)? I'm sure Nintendo being odd man out for quite some time... Has them finally wanting to play it safer?

[ipach]

nintendo doesn't want the money entirely. they primarily want control. yeah, it's very backwards and stupid and dick-like as Joe says. But, how would we even know what a dick company is like until one becomes one? the price of freedom: dicks. what can we do? make it illegal for companies to be dicks? a society or government that outlaws dick practices is probably just as dick-like as the original dick it was trying to prevent. angryjoe should do a parody spinoff channel for nintendo videos call dickeyjoe.

[LexHazard79]

Its well within Nintendos rights to do what they want with their IPs. If they dont want you using it without you paying so be It. Think of it as franchising, you gotta pay a certain percentage to the brand owner. 40% is alot tho....

[ScamperCamper]

If you're the only one acting like this, then who is reasonable, who is not? Pretty simple answer. There is a thing called fail use, which is obviously dismissed and unchallenged because Nintendo is picking on gamers.

[DillyDilly]

Angry Joe & PewPew Idiot is all like. I dont wanna work at Burger King. Damn you Nintendo

[joel01]

I am not going to take anyone's side but to people who are comparing streaming movies with streaming games , come on guys that's not even the same thing ! Movie is a passive media where as gaming isn't. Otherwise people could have just bought a controller and pressed the buttons while watching the walkthrough and still get the same feeling of accomplishment.

[Mithan]

Nintendo is wrong here.

And no Jeff, I don't have to respect them for it. Its a bad decision, period.

[the_mack_attack3]

Actually agree with Jaffe for once. Pains me to say it!

[joinsideke]

Is there a reason the author decided to refer to him by his First Middle and Last name here?