Nintendo To Begin YouTube Affiliate Program, Will Split Revenue with Youtubers
142 replies, posted
Shooting yourself in the foot Nitendo? This is a perfect example how nitendo doesn't really understand modern gaming.
Other companies don't take action(tolerating) or even giving them permission WITHOUT charging. Like Paradox does.
If it's in Google's TOS that game publishers need to give explicit permission before someone can monetize their videos, and Nintendo is only willing to give this permission if they get part of the money earned, it's a fine practice.
Personally I don't agree with it because of the free advertising-argument and the can of worms of "Who owns your video?", but if Google says this is perfectly fine, then I can't argue with that. Neither can the people who put videos on YT, since they pretty much signed or acknowledged this rule when they uploaded this video.
Couldn't this open up all sorts of flood gates? Hey you showed X on screen, better give the manufacturer some of the dosh.
Like, who determines who much presence a product needs to have in the video for it to be relevant for this kinda monetization? There was a twitch stream going for a while which had a split screen of 1/4 game cam, 2/4 cams in the house and 1/4 info table with the people mostly talking about daily business over the game footage that took a backseat.
Who draws the line there? Corporations alone? Can't see a happy picture down that road.
This legal grey area of Internet remixes is becoming a bigger beast every day.
I hope you guys realize that none of the other big name publishers/developers allow monetization. This is a better alternative compared to what everyone else is doing.
[url]http://cramgaming.com/youtube-getting-tough-video-game-monetization-12989/[/url]
[QUOTE]For those interested, here’s a list of some publishers and their stances on video game monetization.
* Activision - Does not allow derivative works per their terms. See 3. License.
* Bungie - Specifically says not to create derivative works from their software in their terms. Probably why Halo is a pain.
* Capcom - OK if you aren’t making any money. See this FAQ post on their forums.
* Codemasters - Does not grant permission to monetize videos. Posting videos is accepted.
* GungHo Online - These guys do stuff like Ragnarok Online. Videos OK, monetization not OK.
* Microsoft - Videos are completely fine as long as you are not paid. They say part of this includes Halo in their rules, so Bungie may or may not still get on your case. Check out the rules here.
* Natsume - These guys are famous for Harvest Moon among others. From an email they allow videos without monetization.
* Naughty Dog - The Last of Us, Uncharted, Jak and Daxter… great games, but they don’t want you to use ANY of their footage (said via email).
* Nintendo - Encourages videos (especially Let’s Plays), but may decide to monetize your video. The exact wording is on Go Nintendo.
* NIS America - Famous for stuff like Danganrompa and Disgaea. Encourages videos, monetization not allowed.
* Rockstar / Take-Two Interactive - Encourages videos unless they are just straight cutscene footage (Let’s Plays with cutscenes OK). Pretty sure they don’t want things monetized. See the full rules here.
* Sega - Does not give any license for YouTube footage .
* SNK - They do not give license for derivative works.
* Square Enix - Does not grant individual permission to use their works, but DOES grant permission to larger entities. .
* TecmoKoei - Famous for stuff like Dead or Alive and Ninja Gaiden. Specifically in the words of the email, “TecmoKoei does allow people to make video reviews and other similar works, but we do not typically allow monetization.”
* TellTale Games - The Walking Dead, Wolf Among Us, Sam and Max… these guys have some really good stuff. Let’s Plays are definitely allowed, monetization is not. See this permission post on their forums.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=darkzero226;44924338]I hope you guys realize that none of the other big name publishers/developers allow monetization. This is a better alternative compared to what everyone else is doing.[/QUOTE]
nintendo is a easier target to hit though.
The big company that everyone loves and fuels kids nostalgia doing something restrictive is sensational journalism gold
If I were an LPer, I wouldn't mind the split in revenue from my Nintendo game videos. If it is a way to help curb or avoid copyright flags then I am for it, especially if's a real "license to monetize". I agree that it is not the best solution or best way to start, but it is something. Better than what other companies have done in the past (Ex: Sega).
[QUOTE=Wii60;44924371]nintendo is a easier target to hit though.
The big company that fueled kids nostalgia doing something restrictive is sensational journalism gold[/QUOTE]
People were angry at Sega whenever they took down anything with Shining Force 3.
People were angry at Microsoft when they said people couldn't make money of their videos.
The others I didn't even know about, and they don't seem to really enforce it as far as I can tell.
Nintendo also went absolutely insane with copyright strikes as well.
One video, protected by fair use, was taken down because it had the audacity to have a single jump sound in it's Super Mario World review.
Gone are the times when a person posted a video on youtube because "look at what I did, its awesome". Now its all about "look at what I did, now give me money for it"...
[QUOTE=Durrsly;44924398]People were angry at Sega whenever they took down anything with Shining Force 3.
People were angry at Microsoft when they said people couldn't make money of their videos.
The others I didn't even know about, and they don't seem to really enforce it as far as I can tell.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but that's just people getting angry at headlines. Microsoft, for example, has never allowed you to monetize content, they just started explicitly stating that. Red vs. Blue, for example, was lucky enough to receive express permission from Microsoft to start monetizing their content.
[editline]27th May 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;44924400]Gone are the times when a person posted a video on youtube because "look at what I did, its awesome". Now its all about "look at what I did, now give me money for it"...[/QUOTE]
Yes, I too hate the large volumes of quality content that I get to watch free of charge on Youtube because people are now able to spend a reasonable amount of time making videos, without having to sacrifice every second of their free time doing it. I would love to go back to when Youtube was exclusively cat videos and skateboard wipeout compilations.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;44923852]I still think this is bullshit. Nintendo gets nothing but free publicity from LPs, they really shouldn't be taking anything from these people.[/QUOTE]
THat would only be true if the LPs were nothing but praise but they all say they are reviewing/testing and so on.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;44924428]Yes, I too hate the large volumes of quality content that I get to watch free of charge on Youtube because people are now able to spend a reasonable amount of time making videos, without having to sacrifice every second of their free time doing it. I would love to go back to when Youtube was exclusively cat videos and skateboard wipeout compilations.[/QUOTE]
As if people didn't do it for the money most of the time...
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;44924712]As if people didn't do it for the money most of the time...[/QUOTE]
What's wrong with someone making a living off of working as much as anyone else who has a full time job?
So apparently for some of these companies you're allowed to upload videos to youtube and allowed to have advertisements on them, as long as you don't get any money from the advertisements.
My question is, why the fuck not? What difference does it make to the publisher whether you're getting money from the advertisements or not? They're not getting the money either way (except in the case of this topic). All they're doing is keeping popular lets players from playing their games, which only hurts them. They have nothing to lose from people profiting off their lets plays. So why the fuck are they so anal about it?
And don't say "YOU'RE PROFITING OFF OF OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK". You might argue that companies deserve a cut of monetization money but that's a whole different argument. A company saying that you shouldn't earn money through ads when using their footage when the ads are going to be there either way, and when they're not going to see any of the ad revenue either way, is stupid idealogical bullshit that has no place in a capitalistic system. And yet a whole bunch of companies are basing their policies on it anyways.
Can you think of any actually good reasons for such a policy?
There aren't really good reasons to do this, especially if you're an independent games developer or your game is such a specific genre that LPs actively harm it (Telltale for example).
Legally speaking, though, in accordance with the current copyright law (which should be reformed), it's the best compromise scenario
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;44924026]are you serious right now?
if I sell a shirt with Mario's image on it it's still Nintendo's intellectual property dude
Um....
MAYBE EXCEPT FOR THE GAME BEING PLAYED?![/QUOTE]
There are videos of people driving cars on youtube, should those people pay the car company too?
[QUOTE=Intoxicated Spy;44924861]There are videos of people driving cars on youtube, should those people pay the car company too?[/QUOTE]
That's not a really valid comparison, cars are tools, not pieces of media
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;44924113]And yet again, as I said, if I were to upload an entire movie to Youtube, that would be free advertising as well. That has nothing to do with it.[/QUOTE]
Great argument, comparing an interactive medium with a non interactive one. Really thought deep on that one didn't you?
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;44924791]especially if you're an independent games developer or your game is such a specific genre that LPs actively harm it (Telltale for example).[/QUOTE]
Every time I've browsed through the comment section of a Telltale game there's been tons of people that wanted to see how all the other choices would play out. So it seems to be the same deal as with most interactive formats converted into non-interactive ones.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;44924006]No which is why cover bands do pay royalties even though you said they don't.[/QUOTE]
Except that in many cases, they don't? Not sure where you'll pulling this from.
And as I said, it's not even the same thing because a cover band is playing another band's music directly to profit off of it. People show up to see the cover band because they want to hear the original band's music. The LPer is not profiting off the game directly. People watch the LP because they want their experience. The game is secondary.
Nintendo has already made money on the sale of the game, and will likely make more from interested buyers. The LPer is not in competition with Nintendo (unlike the cover band, who is offering exactly the same service), nor are they using the game or any of its content to aid their competitors. LPs are a separate market of derivative content.
[QUOTE=Fangz;44923751][img]http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b196/Starmenclock/TBNINTENDO_zpsf4eb9082.png[/img]
[/QUOTE]
If those "precious cents" are so few and insignificant, why does TB get to care about them? Since he cares so much about them and rants about Nintendo due to them, then isn't he the sad one, going by his statements?
Besides, this doesn't affect him in the slightest. He seldom talks about Nintendo games anyway.
I usually try to defend TB but he's acting like a goddamn drama queen here.
[QUOTE=Scotty.;44923708]So they want money from people for buying the game in the first place, then want to take a cut of hard work and effort they've put in to videos essentially giving Nintendo free advertisement for their games?
Fuck off.[/QUOTE]
I can understand their reasoning, nintendo games arent particularly creative (in the sense of having the player be creative) their generally story driven.
Its different for games like minecraft where the player is creating the story and world and the game is just the canvas they are using.
Look at "games" like beyong two souls, once youve watched a lets play theres not really any reason to play the game yourself
[QUOTE=Manibogi;44924924]Besides, this doesn't affect him in the slightest. He seldom talks about Nintendo games anyway.[/QUOTE]
How dare he care about things that affect other people but not him! He should only care about himself!
And those "precious cents" are chump change to Nintendo but they're extremely valuable to lets players trying to make enough money to justify continuing to spend time and effort on their content.
[editline]27th May 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Richy19;44924945]Look at "games" like beyong two souls, once youve watched a lets play theres not really any reason to play the game yourself[/QUOTE]
let's be honest, with Beyond Two Souls there's not any reason to play the game period.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;44923924]No because when you buy Sony Vegas, its purpose is editing videos. You ARE paying Sony their cut when you buy the software. The price of video games doesn't include Nintendo's cut for making the original product used, or else there would be two different versions, one for Let's Plays and one for normal gamers.[/QUOTE]
Should I give Sony a cut for my Sony Vegas tutorials on my channel?
Edit: what if I had a 3 hour video of me editing a video in the software. Would I have to give a cut to them?
[QUOTE=Richy19;44924945]I can understand their reasoning, nintendo games arent particularly creative (in the sense of having the player be creative) their generally story driven.
Its different for games like minecraft where the player is creating the story and world and the game is just the canvas they are using.
Look at "games" like beyong two souls, once youve watched a lets play theres not really any reason to play the game yourself[/QUOTE]
This is something that needs to be taken into account as I was saying earlier.
Minecraft is (generally) much more of a tool than it is a game by essence, which makes royalty-free monetization more logical.
Whereas, for example, Telltale's games are far less interactive; for instance The Walking Dead is 90% cutscenes and dialogues, with two or three differences separated by player input. Player input which happens once every 5 minutes. In this case it would make sense for Telltale not to grant monetization rights to it.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;44924959]How dare he care about things that affect other people but not him! He should only care about himself![/QUOTE]
Most of the YT "content producers" haven't even touched Nintendo games since last year to begin with, so they should be thankful that they get it back, even if it isn't as good as before.
This kind of shit always happens in the internet. Someone takes something away from someone else, so they start bitching about it. Once they calm down, they get that thing back, albeit in a more limited form, so instead of being thankful that they at least got a portion of that thing back, they start crying because evil companies are stealing their sheckles or whatever the fuck.
When you host your content on YT, you have to abide by their rules. If they allow this and it's not something illegal, then don't complain. There's not really any other options anyway because of a lack of YT alternatives.
[QUOTE=Manibogi;44925113]Most of the YT "content producers" haven't even touched Nintendo games since last year to begin with, so they should be thankful that they get it back, even if it isn't as good as before.
This kind of shit always happens in the internet. Someone takes something away from someone else, so they start bitching about it. Once they calm down, they get that thing back, albeit in a more limited form, so instead of being thankful that they at least got a portion of that thing back, they start crying because evil companies are stealing their sheckles or whatever the fuck.
When you host your content on YT, you have to abide by their rules. If they allow this and it's not something illegal, then don't complain. There's not really any other options anyway because of a lack of YT alternatives.[/QUOTE]
"people shouldn't fight for themselves, they should just be grateful and happy with whatever our glorious corporate overlords allow us to have"
The fact is, there was a time when you could upload lets plays of any game and monetize them, and no company had a problem with it. As long as that's taken away, people are going to complain, especially if they feel like companies aren't really losing anything from it.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;44924922]Except that in many cases, they don't? Not sure where you'll pulling this from.
And as I said, it's not even the same thing because a cover band is playing another band's music directly to profit off of it. People show up to see the cover band because they want to hear the original band's music. The LPer is not profiting off the game directly. People watch the LP because they want their experience. The game is secondary.
Nintendo has already made money on the sale of the game, and will likely make more from interested buyers. The LPer is not in competition with Nintendo (unlike the cover band, who is offering exactly the same service), nor are they using the game or any of its content to aid their competitors. LPs are a separate market of derivative content.[/QUOTE]
Cover bands don't necesarily have to pay the royalties themselves, unless they're doing something like uploading the song to Youtube. But if they're playing it at a venue, the venue owner subtracts money from the ticket revenue to pay the royalties.
God forgive a company wants to get a few cents especially now that they're allowing people to LP nintendo stuff now WITH REVENUE. You guys don't realise that a lot of people that watch LPs dont end up buying the game so its the least they could do.
[QUOTE=Map in a box;44925306]God forgive a company wants to get a few cents especially now that they're allowing people to LP nintendo stuff now WITH REVENUE. [B]You guys don't realise that a lot of people that watch LPs dont end up buying the game so its the least they could do[/B].[/QUOTE]
Minecraft, Amnesia, Happy Wheels, and a bunch of other games exploded because of let's plays.
[QUOTE=Durrsly;44925321]Minecraft, Amnesia, Happy Wheels, and a bunch of other games exploded because of let's plays.[/QUOTE]
Those are indie games though, which by nature have to rely on word-of-mouth advertising
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.