Nintendo Creators Program Still Falls Short For Youtubers

Unfortunately, the Nintendo Creators Program falls very much short of fair. It puts Nintendo in control of a participant’s content, leaves the content creator jumping through hoops and sees their pay harshly diminished.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Big_Game_Hunters1356d ago (Edited 1356d ago )

-make a living off of other peoples work
-complain that they want a cut

Before i get heat for this comment understand this
I'm not one of those people who think being a youtuber isn't a "real" job. we pay for entertainment, entertainment is a demand and demand must be met with supply. Youtubers are part of that supply, they spend time to deliver that supply and must be compensated for the time they spend. We essentially pay the people who pay them with our views, we are the product being sold by the youtubers to the people who put the adds up, basic economics.

My problem with lets players asking for more money. You are leeching off someone else work. Movies, games, TV shows all need to pay copyright if they want to use someone else's work. How much do you think it cost Disney to have bowser in wreck it ralph for even a minute? and here you are wanting 80 or 90% of what is basically the foundation of your content.

lets be honest here. There are only a handful of Lets play channels that have a backbone past the games they play. Those are usually the ones with the most subs and the ones that(no surprise) don't or hardly complain about this stuff. A good example is Two best Friends. I watch the channel for them, even if they weren't playing games i would still watch the channel, matter of fact their best videos are usually the non lets play ones.

I don't have a problem with LP making money, i have a problem with how entitled they think they are. Whether its a good business move by Nintendo or not is a whole different topic.

wonderfulmonkeyman1356d ago (Edited 1356d ago )

Well said.
While Nintendo does have some improvements to make on this [priority #1 being that ridiculously small list of games covered by the program; anything that's published by Nintendo should be in that list by default, IMO], there is certainly a lot of entitlement going around regarding how much Youtubers think they're owed by these companies for their "free advertisement".

While I've got you here, I want your opinion personally, Hunters; how much do you think all that "free advertisement" actually helps the games sell, compared to TV spots, internet ads, and word-of-mouth on forums?

Because as far as I've seen, there are a lot of games that have been covered by relatively well-known Let's Players, that aren't really seeing much of an increase in sales.
It makes me question just how effective all that "free advertisement" actually is, for a lot of games.

Granted, there are exceptions, especially when we're talking about games that are played on the most popular of the Youtube channels like Pewdiepie, but on the whole, from what I've seen, there's way more games out there that have seen air time by these youtubers that aren't seeing that air time translating into large sales increases...

Big_Game_Hunters1356d ago (Edited 1356d ago )

i agree that they need to expand the games they will allow.
As for everyone saying that these LP are doing Nintendo a favor by giving them "free advertisement". I think anyone who truly believes that is delusional to think that anyone who isn't pew or smosh games can make a significant difference in a games sales. The channel i mentioned has 400k+ subs and their GOTY 2013 was W101. we all know how those sales are looking.

Honestly it amazes me that people think videos caterd to people who would rather watch people play games than play games themselves is good advertisement.

SilentNegotiator1356d ago

Nintendo is demanding money from Fair Use videos and you're claiming that the Let's Players are entitled?

Nevers0ft1356d ago (Edited 1356d ago )

I'm pretty much on the fence with Nintendo's stance on this. Whilst I can see why they'd want to take a cut of the revenue from LPs of their games. I'm not sure they should do it at the expensive of pissing off a large, vocal community. The net result could well be considerably less Nintendo game LPs on Youtube, and less publicity as a result.

I'm also curious as to where the line is drawn (if it is at all) - a simple play-through of a game is far different to the commentary-heavy "funny" channels, which are as much about the presenters as they are the games (GameGrumps etc). If all you've done is play the game then Nintendo deserves much of the credit, but many of these channels go far beyond a simple Let's Play.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1356d ago
SilentNegotiator1356d ago (Edited 1356d ago )

Simple; don't Let's Play Nintendo games. They clearly don't want the free advertisement, so leave them to their own awful marketing that they've had this gen.

Let's Plays are Fair Use anyway ( https://iplsrutgers.wordpre... ). Make a few comments about the game (critiques) and tell Nintendo to piss off.

SpiralTear1356d ago

The problem is that Youtubers are saying "we love Nintendo. It's free advertising! We love making videos about Nintendo because we love Nintendo!" If that was the case, they'd just make the videos for no money.

I think Nintendo is still backwards on this and they need a better offer to Let's Players and Youtube content creators, no question, but I'm not fan of Youtubers pulling that "it's free advertising/we support Nintendo" excuse out as if they're making Nintendo videos purely out of love for Nintendo. Because they sure as hell aren't.

SilentNegotiator1356d ago (Edited 1356d ago )

Why would that be the expectation? You'd have to be a fanboy/dork to advertise something for free. You can do something for money and still have a passion for it. They don't need an excuse to make fair use videos anyway.

SpiralTear1356d ago

Of course. Fair use is fair use, and Nintendo needs to figure that out pronto. But if content creators want to produce and run their channels like businesses (like MANY channels do these days), they need to act accordingly.

I have no issue with them getting a good cut of the money from their videos. I DO have issue with them trying to coerce viewers to think that they're doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They're not. Channels are businesses, and as the game industry has taught us, businesses are never run out of the goodness of their owners' hearts.

lemoncake1356d ago

I like Nintendo but they do the most stupid of things sometimes.

Kevlar0091356d ago

The issue I see is while you need to outwardly acknowledge you are using Nintendo content and take a reduced profit from it, Nintendo gets to use your content anytime with no limitations on them, they can say they made it where you need to jump through hoops.

I don't think that's lawful or at the least honest, they're in turn doing what they're trying to stop. If Nintendo is paying you 60% for the video, you should own 60% of that video. And by having majority ownership of the value you should have the final say in how your content is used. Simply giving them 60% is not mutually beneficial when they can use you has a pawn of sorts.

I stand by their decision to take 30-40% of the ad revenue, but am against their egregious decision to claim the content as their own. Nintendo should visibly show credit at the permission of the creators of the video, since Nintendo did not create the 100% of the content shown. Nintendo could just use snippets like the music industry uses samples, but to claim all of the content as theirs doesn't seem right.