Support NeoGAF

[patapuf]

For those saying this is good promotion, promotion for what? It's a Mario hack.

I agree that it's a little sad that fun videos are being clamped down on but give a little thought before you regurgitate the same angry response in all of these threads.

Mario (and other Nintendo stuff) being popular on Youtube and co. keeps people thinking and talking about Mario. This is not an isolated move from Nintendo, they've been messing with video creators for a while now.

Social media promotion is huge, half of steams bestseller list sells because people make fun videos about their games, phenomenon like minecraft lived off of it, valve makes a killing by helping their communities making content for their games.

Nintendo has huge potential on that front (see stuff like twitch plays pokemon) but it seems Nintendo values control more.

That's their right, i just don't think it's smart.

 

[BGBW]

"Playing videogames in an entertaining way" is a job for some people, a job that's turning in to a career. And it's becoming faster and easier than ever before for this to happen. It used to be that you needed a good PC, expensive capture hardware, and the knowledge of how to work half a dozen pieces of software for this stuff to happen. Now you push the "Share" button on your game console and it's just there.

And as a job they need to expect to follow the rules like everyone else. Entertainment around film and music has existed for years, but there they required permission to use the material. Videogames are no different. Heck, just showing a music cover requires permission if you want to show it, separate from permission to play it.

valve makes a killing by helping their communities making content for their games.

Isn't this what Nintendo is doing with their creator's programme and even inviting popular YouTubers to play their games early?

Nintendo is the original Mario Maker. How are they coming up with the concept of making and remaking Mario levels late?

Also the original Wrecking Crew, a Mario game, had a level editor built in.

 

[Starwolf_UK]

Even if this is legal, people part of the partnership still violated the code of conduct, so I think it's fair.

That being said, it's dumb. I don't think it'll do anything for Nintendo but create more animosity with their fans. Also, more than anything it's just pointless for them, and whatever resources are spent on YouTube takedowns would probably be more effective elsewhere.

That is a really good point the article does not touch. Are these people affected partners or not? If not are the videos monetized at all?

 

[RealityCheque]

Not speed runs, just things running on an emulator (anything that requires piracy to work).

So anything that requires a hold-up and robbery on the high seas?

Note: you also don't know how emulators work.

 

[TheSlySoul]

Pretty terrible example since Major Lazer co-produced the Beyonce track and got full songwriting credits (which means they got royalties). Major Lazer likely got rich off this track.

I can give other examples such as Megaman 1 ripping off Journey.
https://youtu.be/KrLThSLBQv8
Budokai 3 stole many of its music tracks and had to be redone on the HD release.
https://youtu.be/efMSn1dXFwQ

Kimba the White Lion vs. The Lion King, I could go on.

You have to remember Nintendo went after Giana Sisters despite everything being original just becuase it played like SMB. They have a history of being overprotective.

 

[test_account]

And as a job they need to expect to follow the rules like everyone else. Entertainment around film and music has existed for years, but there they required permission to use the material. Videogames are no different. Heck, just showing a music cover requires permission if you want to show it, separate from permission to play it.

While true, that doesnt mean that it cant be a stupid thing though. Like this case for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp. While they probably has the right looking at the paper black and white, its still a silly thing to do. Same thing if its true that you cant show off a music cover in a Youtube video or something.

 

[BlazeHedgehog]

And as a job they need to expect to follow the rules like everyone else. Entertainment around film and music has existed for years, but there they required permission to use the material. Videogames are no different. Heck, just showing a music cover requires permission if you want to show it, separate from permission to play it.

The rules are the most antiquated part! That's where the headache is coming from! The rest of the world is changing and Nintendo's digging their heels in to the old ways.

The copyright laws in question here were designed for big TV and film production studios for wide-scale professional broadcasts, where the notion of paying royalties was an understood part of the industry. They're worth millions, I'm worth millions, so money changes hands as part of the licensing process.

I'm going to dig up another tangential comparison here that will probably fly over some heads, but it's like Adobe and Photoshop. Photoshop is a professional tool, and was priced accordingly. But because of that, it was also one of the most pirated pieces of software, because every art student in the world realized how powerful it was, and it became this secret industry standard where probably something like 80% of its userbase didn't actually pay for it.

Adobe saw this powerful professional tool that they had priced for powerful professional people and realized they had a burgeoning market of lower-end users who could not afford the thousands of dollars they were charging for Photoshop. So they released a cut down version of Photoshop, called Photoshop Elements, for $100. That was still too much. People were still more willing to pirate the "real" version of Photoshop.

So now Adobe has moved to a subscription model. $9.99 a month and you get Photoshop. It stays affordable while also still technically costing a minimum of $120 a year -- just in smaller increments. They changed their policy to better fit who was really using their software.

Copyright law is still designed for powerful professionals and it is colliding hard and fast with users that are too small time to deal with it. Youtube won't even give you the time of day on these kinds of matters unless you're speaking through an acredited lawyer.

The "rules" are out of date, and at this point, only the shrewd (like Nintendo) are still sticking to them. This is a battle many Youtube creators already fought a year or two ago, and most other companies got the message and backed off. (re: Sega vs. Shining Force)

Nintendo would rather be Nintendo.

 

[MrHoot]

I think with the release of SMM, there could be a case of that game promoting ROM hacks instead of the other way around. I'll miss Asshole Mario is that gets taken down but I'm not opposed to this move at all.


Nintendo is the original Mario Maker. How are they coming up with the concept of making and remaking Mario levels late?

Oh don't be daft now, I'm talking about the concept of rom hacking/derivative mario levels based on original games, not mario itself.

It's one of the aspects I like less about Nintendo. They desperately want to keep control of their entire image and brands.
Sega1991 put it best: yeah it fits within the rules and nintendo is within it's rights, but the rules are out of date, and nintendo would rather stay antiquated because they're just deathly afraid of losing an inch of control. It's like if music producers went after every single beatmaker/remixer who resampled because they dared use part of their song into a new beat

I have also another issue with this kind of practice from nintendo. Emulation, like it or not, will always be the best effort for the conservation of older games. It has done a TON more than nintendo in regards of keeping the old gens alive to this day. Hell, to this day it's the only way to play certain games that nintendo still refuses to publish on VC or has completely forgotten about. On principle, the attitude of nintendo of banging it's big boots, trying to keep it's toys for itself while on other hand reselling you it's old stuff and telling you what to show and what's theirs for me goes against the mentality we need to adopt for the future of the medium

Like Sega1991 says, it's time to move forward. Just because it's "the law" doesn't mean it shouldn't be reconsidered

 

[patapuf]

And as a job they need to expect to follow the rules like everyone else. Entertainment around film and music has existed for years, but there they required permission to use the material. Videogames are no different. Heck, just showing a music cover requires permission if you want to show it, separate from permission to play it.


Isn't this what Nintendo is doing with their creator's programme and even inviting popular YouTubers to play their games early?

The key difference here is that valve also helps them earn money with what they produce rather than taking a cut of their ad revenue like Nintendo does.

I don't expect Nintendo to go that far, i just don't think trying to control content producers will work out for them.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

Speedurns?!

NINTENDO R TRYING 2 DESTROY SIGLEMIC!

 

[FullmetalPain]

Sad to see that his videos were taken down because Nintendo is making Super Mario Maker 11 years too late. I'm pretty sure Super Mario Maker will bring some creative levels out of the fans.