People have been using Dreams to create anything and everything in their wildest imagination. The PS4 game is all about bringing your ideas to life, and for some people, that means working with already-existing franchises.
Stories like this remind me of why I don't own any Nintendo consoles at the moment. It's not about "protecting their IP" as claimed, it's about Nintendo basically being whiny because they hate to see their anything on another platform. At least if you're going to force stop custom projects using your property, provide a reason other than "Because we can/said so." From the article, and the email the person received, that's all Nintendo was saying, because they can and nothing you can do about it. Had there been financial gain, then Nintendo would have a point and no one would argue against financial gain. But it's basically showing off talents. And to all those who claim Nintendo being in the right; it's about destroying creative freedom using a name they (the customer) like without making any money. While you're at it Nintendo, how about disbanding all the Mario hacks, the Zelda mods to make the games more fun, and the custom Donkey Kong levels.
Destroying creative freedom? Why not be creative and come up with original ideas instead of using established IPs? Using existing characters is the opposite of creative.
Not necessarily. Most creative projects start with modding a game, or fan made add-ons. A lot of people got the position at a major gaming company by modding/adding to an already established game. Imagine how different Sonic Mania would be had Nintendo owned Sonic 100%? Would the game even exist? That game started from modding certain levels; and over time added some custom levels; and now it's rated one of the better Sonic games to date. Now the creator has a permanent position in the gaming industry because he took what he's passionate about (Sonic CD from the previous gen) and proved he knew what he was doing.
A lot of Hollywood is adapted from IP they didn’t create. Oscars even have an adapted screenplay category. Todd Macfarlane didn’t create Spider-Man but he drew a nice cover. I can draw a pretty good TMNT if I do say so myself. Don’t sue me Eastman/Laird! How many people here have written consent for the avatars they use? Gotta pick your battles is all. Dreams ain’t Napster.
Yes, Hollywood adapts written stories into visual storytelling. They get permission from the authors or use literature that is now public domain. I was commenting on "destroying creative freedom", I didn't say it is immoral or wrong to use existing material. Nintendo is known for sending cease and desist, yet people still continue to think they'll get away with it.
There are loads of original ideas. Alot of people use existing IP to learn the game and have a foundation put in place to replicate. It a good starting block.
Drawing a character for personal use is one thing, creating a model that can be used in another game played by potentially millions of people is something different. Do I agree with Nintendo? Not necessarily. They have to protect their IPs, I can understand that. They don't allow people to make games with their characters, it's what they've always done. Is a character model the same as making a game? No, and that's where I disagree with Nintendo. I don't think creating a model of a known character is creative. It may show talent, but it doesn't show creativity. I think creativity has to do with original ideas. You can show level design talent by using existing assets to create custom levels. If you are doing your own artwork, making original set pieces, adding new gameplay elements, that's creativity.
I think you are using a terrible example there @Tetsujin I tell you what, you might be right and Nintendo might be over protective on their IP's but maybe if SEGA cared a little bit about what belong to them they would continue to be the giant they once were
Destroying creative freedom might be a bit much but up until this point, it hasn't been a problem for anyone else but obviously didn't take long for the most aggressive IP defending company in the gaming industry to kick up a fuss. I also love how "go Nintendo" twist the headline to fit their narrative. This should read "Nintendo throws a tantrum once again" not making it look like Sony is the villain here.
By that logic, Nintendo is the least creative company in the history of gaming.
Tetsujin This is not modding a game..this is having creative tools and you have to go out of your way to create something like Mario.
Nintendo said take my IPs off that 💩 we ain't cool like that!
You can still do something creative using existing characters. That's the whole basis of fanart
Developers have a right to protect how their IPs are used, period. Should we pass on Final Famtasy VII Remake because Square shut down projects regarding Chrono Trigger?
And companies do have a right to protect what they own, no one is saying they can't. All we're asking is explain why fans can't make digital art out of their favorite characters. At times these companies go after fans because the fans put in more time and effort towards something than the actual devs/publishers, and the companies don't like how someone with half the resources can do a better job.
I have Dreams, and have played these levels. The quality is nothing like what Nintendo produces, not even close. At this point, you are talking out your ass. The best and most creative content in Dreams that rivals what real devs do, has always been original projects. And Nintendo, Square, and anyone should have control over how their characters are used. There is an image upheld by their IPs, and if everyone started doing whatever they wanted with them then it could hurt that image. It is like that for ANY dev on ANY platform. At this point, it just looks like you are trying to put a negative spin on Nintendo just because it is Nintendo.
@ Shiken The fact you're now using personal attacks ("talking out of your ass, and hating on nintendo just to hate") I will no longer debate this with you. And yes I owned Dreams back when it was Early Access for $29.99 USD.
"talking out your ass" isn't a personal attack, lol. Jesus, what is the world coming to?
And, you're expected to defend your IP rights if you want to keep them. I forget the details, but IP holders kinda have to be jerks about it. This was bound to happen unfortunately...
@Tetsujin Probably you can make digital art, you can't make games though
That's fine except Dreams allows no monetary gain exchange. I remember Nintendo is venomous about fan games even when nothing is gained from it, but this is even less of that and they still hate it. At least Sega sees potential instead of monetary loss on everything.
Tetsujin because Sony is turning a profit from people using established IPs. I said this was going to happen a long time ago and Nintendo wont be the last company to do this.
Sadly I had a feeling this would happen sooner. Nintendo won't be the only ones making strikes. It's a shame but I totally saw this coming
So basically Nintendo doesn’t have a right to protect their IP’s? Absolutely ridiculous. People wanna be creative yet don’t want to create their own IP. The hypocrisy...
There is plenty of other projects/art that recreate Nintendo's properties through game engines like UE4 that don't get shut down unless the intent is to release a full game for everyone ect, the issue is more likely it being through a direct competitors games.
are you serious? Nintendo owns these characters, would be no different if someone used anything else that didn't belong to them.
Maybe Media Molecule should ask Nintendo to remove Mario Maker.
Why? Because of LBP? Considering that Nintendo literally invented the platforming genre with Donkey Kong then could they ask MM to remove LBP?
Technically that honor goes to Space Panic, which released a year or so prior to Donkey Kong. It didn't have jumping, but is considered the first platformer. Donkey Kong most certainly is the game that pushed the platformer to be incredibly popular though, and is a better game than Space Panic by a wide margin. If you define the platformer by being able to jump, then AFAIK, DK was the first platformer game to allow that.
rainslacker Considered by very few people as it doesn't have a jump mechanic wich is essential to define a game as being a platformer alongside running and climbing. Donkey Kong was the 1st game to have all these 3 mechanics wich is why it is widely considered to be the 1st platformer so my comment stands.
Not gonna lie this took longer than I expected I knew nintendo was gonna rear their ugly head at some point.
Nintendo is only the first. I know nobody likes other people making money with their IP's. You said is for free, But Media Molecule is selling the platform, and giving a space for people to infringe copyright... (Even The Pirate Bay claims that they can't respond for what their users do... That claim won't stand in any court of law ) It's "For Free" can't be a valid argument: go ahead and make your own God of War game, or a 1st person shooter and call it Halo, and give it for free: let's see how long it takes Microsoft or Sony to go against you.
While I do think Nintendo is a bit heavy handed, I wouldn't expect anything less from any console maker, or publisher with something like this. It's not like Mario or Zelda are abandoned unused franchises. They are cornerstones of Nintendo's marketing of their systems, and a huge draw for gamers. Beyond the need to protect their trademarks or lose them, these creations are going to be seen by anyone in the industry as potentially harmful to their sales, and even if they aren't at that point yet, if Nintendo were to not put their foot down now, it opens the doors for creations that would push the envelope even more. If the roles were reversed, then you can bet that Nintendo would be taking down Sony IP's as well, and it'd be Sony requesting it. Chances are, that very few publishers are going to allow it.
There should not be something like a copyright. Even if Nintendo would make financial losses due to this usage of their IP, this was still better than restricting the creations of our imaginations.
I agree wholehearedly. Copyrighting is wrong plain and simple. If there was no monetary involvement who knows what our creativity would rise to instead of putting out the same old shit to chase popularity and success from the masses. Ive never copyrighted and never will.
I upvoted your comment but you're wrong. Would or should Coca Cola allow Pepsi to sell Pepsi with a Coca Cola label over it? Or just outright buy Coke wholesale and slap Pepsi labels over it? No. Same thing here in principle. This isn't LBP. I'm not sure if Nintendo censored LBP creations but either way, no matter what users made they were still just playing LBP. It was that restrictive of a game. Even the most creative, brilliant LBP creators made stuff that was, essentially, LBP. The shooters felt like LBP, the platform levels always did, etc. It was just LBP. Dreams is another animal. A user (users) could make an actual Mario or Zelda game...and it would only be on a competitor's console. Not a game that felt kinda like a Mario game but a game so detailed and deep that it could pass as ab actual Mario game. A game so good that users buy Dreams just to play it. That's not just possible but likely to happen soon. Dreams is a game engine as much as it's a game and people are making pieces within dreams that use their IP. That's within their right to stop. I say this as an owner of exactly zero Nintendo products that owns Dreams. So why did I upvote? I like the idea of your post. Yes, ideally it would be seen as a destruction of creative freedom and they wouldn't do it. Ideally. However, this is reality and they have a right to stop it. Their censorship is much more aggressive and wrong on other platforms, IMO. Their censorship on YouTube is pretty horrendous and much less "chill" than stopping a competitor from making games based on their characters.
Y'all are going to have to show me how Nintendo lost a single dollar because of dreams.
Most of these "creators" are just recreating Mario 64 in Dreams. Talented? Yes. Creative? No.
I knew from the moment I seen Mario on dreams this was coming. Really Nintendo?? You know Mario will still sell millions even though it’s on dreams.... right? It’s to the point I’m scared to draw a picture of Mario! Someone from Nintendo will come out of the bushes and take it!! SMH.
Sad but understandable. Honestly, this doesn't come as a surprise considering Nintendo is very overprotective with its IPs. Just look at the dozen of nintendo fan projects that were taken down.
I'd respectfully disagree with it being understandable in Dreams case. Standalone free fan projects could feasibly bite into Nintendo sales if they are full games and often more feature rich or add something people want but Nintendo won't add to the "official" titles. But in the case of Dreams it's a mini game within another game. There's no way enough people are going to buy Dreams to play a Mario based level over buying actual Mario Odyssey on the Switch if they're in the market for a Mario game, not enough to noticeably dent Nintendos profits to the point they have to chase all these people and force takedowns on them, that's a bridge too far for me.
My kids found the Mario stuff pretty quickly played for a few minutes, then moved on. They spent way more time playing southpaw kitchen, that dinosaur trashing the city, smashing up an art gallery with a baseball bat, etc.... I feel bad for the people that spent time and effort making those Mario dreams, but ultimately Dreams doesn't need Mario.
Doesn't matter if people would or would not choose to buy a Nintendo game or not based on this being available. The mere chance it could have an effect on sales, or the brand itself is why these things get struck down all the time. Nintendo isn't even the only company that does it, they just have some rather notable high profile instances of it happening, and probably get more grief for it than they should. But it's their property, so they can do what they want, and trademark law dictates they have to protect their property.
Even when theyre completely fan made and free lol smh. And Mm isnt even using unoriginal titles like mario for promotion too ofc.
I knew something like this would happen sooner or later. And I'm definitely not surprised that Nintendo are one of the first ones to request takedowns. Anyways there's nothing stopping people from making games that play like Nintendo franchises as long as they don't look like them. Expect to see alot of knock offs in the future.
Exactly. You can make a 3D platformer that plays exactly and even feel like Mario as long as you are not using the characters, or the name, or copy a level or something... It has to be different enough.
Bingo!!! And I'm pretty sure plenty of people are doing that in dreams.
I think this will be more a common occurrence than companies allowing it. I get that people want to make what they love, and I respect them for that. But at the same time, I understand how these companies feel about it. Even good guy Phil would probably not allow Master Chief to show up in any meaningful way in Dreams, although he'd say how happy he was that there was a MC fan. If there was something like this elsewhere, Sony wouldn't allow it's characters to be put into games or stuff like this either. Small demos that have limited distribution is about the best one can expect to get away with. While some of these things are like that in Dreams now, Dreams is still considered a game, and a distribution model, so companies are going to treat it as such. @your reply to flutter "Bingo" sounds like a good name for Cabio's pet chartreuse long tongued llama. Cabio....the portly electrician who wants to save that girl who keeps friendzoning him from the evil Rhino, Mowzer.
Queue fanboys defending stupid and completely unnecessary decisions made by multi billion dollar companies. People are creating all sorts of stuff in DREAMS and it's completely HARMLESS. However I will say that if you feel inspired by anything Nintendo then just take those ideas and make something completely original. Cause Ninty are a bunch of a-holes
So would you also suggest people boycott Final Fantasy VII Remake because Square shuts down Chrono Trigger fan games? If you want to attack one publisher, make sure you attack them all.
I think it unnecessary for any publisher, not just but any company to go after people that simply do things out of their love for games, music, art, movies. If SE shut down a few harmless fan games then screw em too.
Nintendo are so tight arse with there ip's. They are one of the worse when it comes to fan creations.
Dreams isn't a fan creation. It sells itself on fan creations, which means that it is indirectly profiting off any content that infringes on 3rd parties IP. This is actually one of the few events Nintendo is justified in protecting their IP.
>It sells itself on fan creations, which means that it is indirectly profiting off any content that infringes on 3rd parties IP. That's a very slippery slope. Replace «It» with Photoshop, Flash, Blender, Maya, Unreal Engine, Unity Engine, even MS Paint, it all fits perfectly. Heck, even pen and pencil fits there. So, does that mean that every copyright holder should close down all pen and pencil factories, along with graphics/music/3D/sound editors, game engines and so on? P. S.: I might agree with you if Dreams was using copyright infriging games in their ads or trailers. But they don't.
@staticall Your analogy doesn't work. Nothing you mentioned is analogous to Dreams so your attempt to compare them falls flat there. My position still stands. Also, every time something has been made that infringes on copyright through an engine like Unity or Unreal the creator is sent a cease and desist. Unity/Epic do not distribute the creations of those who use their engine, so they are not responsible. Like I said, your analogy doesnt work.
@TK-66 You said «Dreams isn't a fan creation. It sells itself on fan creations, which means that it is indirectly profiting off any content that infringes on 3rd parties IP.». That was the main point in your original comment. You're blaming Dreams, not it's creations. Like they advertise themselves as a place where you can play «any content that infringes on 3rd parties IP» and profit from it. They don't. Dreams is a tool and you're blaming it for profitting and it's as wrong as blame other tools (like editors, engines and such). So my analogy works perfectly.
@staticall Some advice. Your formatting for your comment is terrible. I'm having to read over it multiple times to figure out what your response even is. "Dreams is a tool and you're blaming it for profitting and it's as wrong as blame other tools (like editors, engines and such)." If you can't differentiate between a video game and a software development engine then you're being deliberately dishonest with your analogy. Also, photo editors are in no way analogous to the situation. How about you directly address my argument instead of trying to jump away and talk about things that AREN'T VIDEO GAMES?
All they have to do is change the characters and the names and Voilà. I can understand Nintendo's reluctance to allow it but they are so strict on free fan content that's not even using original code. But it is what it is.
When will Nintendo realize stuff like this is free publicity
What a shame. Really sad to see Nintendo do this.
it was only a matter of time. ask me if i care.
Is Nintendo seriously upset about this? Wow.....just wow. You know in a way, I shouldn't be surprised. Nintendo has always been like this. DREAMS is a community driven game where people can make stuff, and they aren't selling it or anything. Is Nintendo going to go after other games like Minecraft now too? Get over it Nintendo.
“ DREAMS is a community driven game where people can make stuff, and they aren't selling it or anything.” Is Dreams itself free? You don’t have to purchase it?
expected copyright to become an issue with dreams in the first year because lot's of people tend to recreate not create.
The dreams creations if you make a Mario tribute etc ur not selling that it's just for fun. Il never buy Nintendo products again they need to grow up
You know now that I think about it, Nintendo should create a game called “Dreams” and let people recreate games or scenes from games like Uncharted, God of Wars, or Spiderman in that game. I doubt Sony would mind that right? It’s just for fun after all.
Do Sony try and take down emulators? Does Sega every take down Sonic creations? No! So why does big N do it to be selfish and greedy?
“ Do Sony try and take down emulators?” Do you remember Bleem? Try and Google it. And let face it, right or wrong, these game are someone else’s intellectual property. Some company are lax about their IPs, and some are not, and Nintendo is not the only ones that is strict about their IPs.
Screw you Nintendo! These fan made creations don't harm you in any way