Nintendo of America not allowing SSBM to be streamed at EVO [Up: Decision Reversed]

image.php


image.php


image.php


image.php


wylTeNC.gif

What makes you think that the assumptions and theories of people with no Nintendo related Avatar are any less biased or driven by an agenda in this topic?

Or did you just want to make a lame gif response instead of participating to the discussion?
 
1) Should everyone who streams Nintendo games on twitch.tv also ensure that they have a specific license to do so?
2) If not, what is the legal distinction between a lone individual streamer and EVO in this situation?

Do people really not see the difference between random one off streams, Smash tourney streams, and the magnitude that is EVO? EVO has way more attendees, concurrent viewers, VOD watchers, and publicity compared to everything else. And just because others have gotten away with it before doesn't suddenly make it right? And how long ago was even Brawl streamed at EVO? The legal world has changed over issues like these in the last couple of years and you can't ignore that.

I can understand getting mad about the ethics of it, but I can't get all that angry at Nintendo when any event of this size, and not even limited to video games, involves paperwork getting done. And I'm sure EVO already had contracts squared away with every other publisher involved from a long time ago.

My biggest surprise is that this got resolved within a day at all, and that's not because of Nintendo's involvement or the uproar.

Hey, hey, I defended Nintendo too, where's my avatar?
 

Sorry for not bashing Nintendo without evidence I guess? I never said they were without blame if you read my posts.
Avatar quoting and "hilarious" gifs are always the best of arguments.

How long did it take for Microsoft to drop their anti-consumers practices? Several weeks. How long did it take for Nintendo to fix this? 3 hours. But I guess I'm a Nintendo fanboy so this isn't true.
 
Seems that the people on the other side of the aisle are just as emotionally invested.

Feel free to quote my avatar to make a point. :)
 
Do people really not see the difference between random one off streams, Smash tourney streams, and the magnitude that is EVO?
I don't see a legal difference, no, and that is what I specifically asked for.

You don't see the kind of chilling effect something like this can have in the grand scheme of things? So EVO got their situation resolved and swiftly, no doubt in large part to the relatively huge amount of press and potential negative PR that built up immediately in the wake of the initial announcement (not just social media, but high-profile sites like IGN, Kotaku, Gametrailers, etc). EVO is fortunately big enough to have that kind of pull and visibility, but what happens from here on out? Is APEX going to have to seek a license if they want to stream next year's event? What about smaller scale locals and regionals that want to broadcast? What if they're denied permission? What if they seek it but Nintendo simply doesn't respond at all, which is apparently what happened at MLG with Brawl, resulting in MLG scrapping their Smash stream for that year? If you're a small-time TO or simply one that Nintendo doesn't respond to, do you forge ahead and risk tangling with legal issues or just concede defeat ahead of time and give up the exposure?

It is absolutely fair to get angry at Nintendo over this. Their actions create a stifling atmosphere that benefits no one.

And I'm sure EVO already had contracts squared away with every other publisher involved from a long time ago.
I'm willing to make a friendly bet of some kind that this isn't the case. TOs like MrWizard, Jebailey, and Keits have GAF accounts. Probably wouldn't be too hard to get one of them to chime in on this.

I mean, just to be clear, I'm more than willing to admit that I have no more certainty of how EVO handles this shit than you do. But I just have a hunch from working at other events that these things aren't laid out as explicitly as you assume they are. Maybe it is for EVO; maybe it isn't.
 
How long did it take for Microsoft to drop their anti-consumers practices? Several weeks. How long did it take for Nintendo to fix this? 3 hours. But I guess I'm a Nintendo fanboy so this isn't true.

Well for one the magnitude of both issues are on a entirely different scale.

Of course it would take less time to fix this one.
 
How long did it take for Microsoft to drop their anti-consumers practices? Several weeks. How long did it take for Nintendo to fix this? 3 hours. But I guess I'm a Nintendo fanboy so this isn't true.

I'd like to think there is a difference between dropping DRM from a next-gen DRM-centered console months before launch and allowing stream of a 12 years old game at an FGC.

Nintendo was asked to drop region-locking as well and they stood their ground.

Sorry guys, Obligatory Image:

south-park-1613-a-scause-for-applause-NC-clip08.jpg
 
Had no clue EVO was going to be streaming Smash Bros. At least with this controversy I know exactly when to tune in this time around.
 
Had no clue EVO was going to be streaming Smash Bros. At least with this controversy I know exactly when to tune in this time around.

maybe it was Nintendo's plan all along!! bastards!



I must aclare that I'm joking, please don't avatarquote me.
 
This type of stuff happens all the time, and I've been on the receiving end of it.

Lawyers or suits in some department have no idea until the last minute that something is going on, they see a thing, they don't check with their superiors, and take action regardless.

Then the higher-ups or someone with more sense is like, "No, you idiots! It's cool. Fuck, lemme straighten this out."
 
How am I defending Nintendo, other than having a Nintendo avatar that is? lol

If it's Nintendo's policy to ask permission to stream, I don't see how it's Nintendo's fault Evo didn't get permission. We don't know what happened, which means we don't know who fucked up. Assuming it has to be Nintendo's fault, at this point, is disingenuous. Either way, the issue is resolved so until we do get word on what happened and who fucked up, there isn't much left to discuss.
.
 
I'm loving the new batch of gaf members, objective, smart and ever vigilant for errant gamers who show any empathy for the big N, please keep up the good fight, your selfless toil are appreciated by the silent majority, thank you
 

Like I said in my edit, since we didn't know what happened, saying that we shouldn't just assume what happened is fanboyish? It doesn't help that my hypothetical scenario, according to Triforce's statement in the podcast, ended up being true. Depending on how much you trust Triforce's word and the fact no one, as far as I know, has come out and said he is wrong, we know Nintendo didn't know about the stream, and we know EVO didn't get permission. But I'm a fanboy for even entertaining that notion? That wasn't even my guess, I was literally just stating a situation where Nintendo didn't cause this ruckus out of simple spite. That's unreasonable? Being level-headed shouldn't make someone a fanboy of anything, that honestly pisses me off that he tried to write me off as that simply because I didn't erroneously keep my pitchfork hoisted after the situation was long resolved.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend I don't like Nintendo, I do. You can look through my post history and see that (though my avatar is more about Pokemon than Nintendo, if that makes sense). But if I wanted to get into some console wars bullshit and be called a fanboy left and right I would go back to GameFAQs. Fuck that noise.
 
The day I start defending the actions of a multi-billion dollar entertainment corporation is the day I quit the hobby for good. They're not even getting paid to do that. Disgusting.

That's cool since I'm not doing that.

I like Nintendo that's true, but this doesn't mean I wasn't concerned when this story broke, now that this over I'd like to know what happened exactly before starting to burn Nintendo at the stake for being evil.
 
I think Nintendo's decision was horrible and stupid. But I also think an argument can be had without assuming that one side is trying to push some agenda. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't necessarily mean they are biased toward a corporation.

It's a forum for discussion -- arguments will have two sides. Logic prevails, while accusations often come across as mean and hostile.
 
The day I start defending the actions of a multi-billion dollar entertainment corporation is the day I quit the hobby for good. They're not even getting paid to do that. Disgusting.
I'm not defending the actions of a multi-billion dollar entertainment corporation... we don't even know the "actions" of said corporation. I'm not going to bash or defend anyone until I actually do know those actions.
 
You know what would be funny.

If some people at NoA's legal department didn't get the memo and they shut down the EVO stream WHILE Melee is on.

I can seriously see it happen.
 
nintendo is so hilariously out of touch. maybe as the wii u continues to crash and burn they'll realize they don't have all the answers.

you know what... i always read these types of posts on GAF and dislike them. It is only now that I finally realize how true those statements were all along.

Nintendo... for shame.
 
Would someone in their own room just streaming stuff be considered "public" then? This stuff interests me, so I'm wondering the specifics. I understand how/why it works with other media, but gaming is more of a grey area. I figured that Twitch in general would have all the legal stuff figured out.

Yes, steams and videos on the Internet count as publishing or performing for the public.
 
Just coming in here to say "Only For" is in my avatar because SNES boxes were the most bitchin' things in the world for younger me, nothing further. :P
 
My mistake, he was referring to the actions. I guess we really don't know how they told EVO. Phone? email? fax? message in a bottle? Miiverse?

I can't pass judgement on this until we know exactly how the message was delivered.
 
Sorry for not bashing Nintendo without evidence I guess? I never said they were without blame if you read my posts.
Avatar quoting and "hilarious" gifs are always the best of arguments.

How long did it take for Microsoft to drop their anti-consumers practices? Several weeks. How long did it take for Nintendo to fix this? 3 hours. But I guess I'm a Nintendo fanboy so this isn't true.

False equivalency. Reneging on an arbitrary decision that has no possible negative financial disadvantages versus completely overhauling your console strategy for the next 5-7 years.
 
That's really dumb. It's not even an anime fighting game, it's a fighting game based off an RPG.
When people disparagingly say "anime fighting game," they often mean "airdashers and subsystems out the ass." More or less. Ragging on ArcSys in a roundabout way.
 
Fighting games have to get a certain number of entrants to be put on EVO and even then there are limited slots. SCV would've gotten in before VF, hardly anyone plays VF.

Smash has the 3rd highest number of entrants right below the 2 big Capcom games SF4 and Marvel.

That's what I'm curious about.

When I was a young teen, VF2 was a big thing, second to SNK/Capcom, and Tekken was considered to be entry level and button mashy crap. But VF was in all sorts of tournaments.

Now days when I see people talk about fighting games it's, obviously, an SNK/Capcom situation, but now I see Tekken in tournament brackets. Did it stop being terrible? The last one I played was... 3 maybe? And it was pretty meh.
 
That's what I'm curious about.

When I was a young teen, VF2 was a big thing, second to SNK/Capcom, and Tekken was considered to be entry level and button mashy crap. But VF was in all sorts of tournaments.

Now days when I see people talk about fighting games it's, obviously, an SNK/Capcom situation, but now I see Tekken in tournament brackets. Did it stop being terrible? The last one I played was... 3 maybe? And it was pretty meh.
To my knowledge, Tekken 4 was the only entry in the series that had a fairly bad reputation, for reasons I'm not entirely familiar with. All the other entries seem to have been at least somewhat popular. It's been a staple at EVO since 2003, never having taken more than a 1-year hiatus at a time. Things might not be looking so hot right now though, as TTT2 isn't drawing big numbers at most tournaments despite being a brand new game. It doesn't appear to be drawing new blood in the way the Capcom games have been doing since 2009.

The only time Virtua Fighter seemed to have had something resembling popularity in the States was with VF4. Well-received game, first entry in the series on the mainstream console of choice, pitted against the least popular entry in Tekken, and released at a time when Capcom wasn't putting out anything new.
 
Just coming in here to say "Only For" is in my avatar because SNES boxes were the most bitchin' things in the world for younger me, nothing further. :P

I didn't know we had to justify our avatars...
What a sad world has GAF turned into...
 
They didn't renege: they never agreed to it in the first place.

Renege was the wrong word, meant to say drop the arbitrary decision to forbid Melee from being streamed. Semantics aside, it should be clear there is a huge size disparity between the two 180s.
 
Top Bottom