Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo To Split Ad Revenue With Streaming Gamers
An anonymous reader writes "Over the past several years, as computers and networks have improved to handle heavier loads, it's become popular for people to stream video game footage over sites like YouTube and Twitch. Last year, Nintendo aggressively went after the players doing this for their games, hijacking the ad revenue generated through YouTube. It angered the gaming community, and was actively hostile to the people who were Nintendo's biggest fans. Now, Nintendo has partly walked back their position: they've agreed to share some of the advertising profits with the streamer. It's still hostile to the people actively putting Nintendo game playthroughs out there for others to watch, but it's a step in the right direction."
This is the sort of BS one expects from Sony or MS, but Nintendo never used to attack its own customer base. Sad how the last great player-focused games company has fallen.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I assume we can't just Open Broadcast Software stream NES emulator roms, right?
Is there some specific hardware/software used to interface with television to computer?
I'd like to know because I could see myself streaming some old school games. I'm quite good and still have rapid reflexes. I could probably whip up some color commentary too. I might not stream Nintendo games and go for a console with more pure profit available. I was just wondering the specifics of how you do this.
God spoke to me
Gaming videos and streams are huge right now. Just immense. There are dozens of streamers and youtubers that have better ratings than many television shows. One obvious example is VanossGaming. One guy that makes funny game videos on youtube with seven million subscribers. No one would have expected these videos to be so popular a handful of years ago. The sheer volume of free advertising these people give out is an incredible opportunity.
Really Nintendo should be sponsoring these people, not taking away from them. It just shows how stuck in the past Nintendo is. When that cultural inertia dies down, so will Nintendo. They will be relegated to the same realm as Sega and Neo Geo. Some quaint thing that is looked on with nostalgia and disappointment for their refusal to use their vast opportunities.
The NES, Super NES, and Nintendo 64 consoles generally output a nonstandard 240p (NTSC) or 288p (PAL) composite video signal.* The timing doesn't match the official spec but is well within the tolerance of 1980s CRT SDTVs. Some DVD recorders and some USB video capture devices can handle the nonstandard timing; others can't. GameCube and Wii should work with anything. I don't own a Wii U yet.
* One Super NES game and a handful of N64 games are in 480i.
Nintendo's fans aren't just the ones making the videos. There are also millions and millions of fans watching
Being supportive of the streaming players helps to get more people interested in Nintendo properties. (or whichever game they're playing)
This signature is false.
output of a game being played != a copy of the game.
The NES PPU takes shortcuts that produce characteristic artifacts in the composite signal. Some games, such as Blaster Master, rely on these artifacts to create more apparent colors than are actually there. Some emulators, such as Nestopia, have an NTSC filter that emulates these artifacts; others don't. Not emulating the artifacts makes your game look like it's being played on a PlayChoice or an emulator.
It's not an infringement to run homebrew games like Thwaite in an emulator. Nor is it an infringement to back up your own cartridges using a cart reader like this for the purpose of playing them in an emulator, so long as you do not distribute the dumps. (Assuming US law, 17 USC 117(a)(1).) But by the logic of the ruling in UMG v. MP3.com, it is an infringement to download a commercial game's ROM image through the Internet even if you own an authentic cartridge.
Many games I see are really just movies with some interaction pulled from a 1st person shooter engine. They have something to loose by people seeing the videos because you've already played the game a millions times with a different story and/or look. If I see somebody play it, I don't need to play the game because while it might be good what makes it good isn't really the game mechanics itself; which hardly change...
Nintendo on the other hand, they have the same story, same look, few movies. It's all about the game play experience. Mario has been quite creative with the elements and the well paced and rewarding level designs despite it being just another Mario game with the same basic mechanics of the others. Seeing it isn't giving away anything-- experiencing it is the whole point. Nintendo therefore, should be the least concerned about this.
The challenges of the levels ARE the game with Nintendo. It is like getting good at a sport and wanting to play the sport; not new outfit on the same old opponent who has new story about why we are having a rematch (which is what the other games do.)
I get more new experiences from PLAYING Nintendo so I buy them; just as other people who play ...say tennis, still play tennis even though "everything" is the same. One should expect this from a 100+ year old game card company. Think of all the games of poker and solitaire that continue to be played... Then think that Nintendo's goals may have been to create digital versions of those card games you keep playing - except they can charge you each new poker game you play. Not sure I'm being clear on this, but I think there is a different perspective behind them which is what differentiates them (which will likely fade away if they don't actively maintain it.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
The video creators have to pay for their expenses somehow. Honestly, Nintendo shouldn't be seeing a dime from people streaming game videos.
Nintendo's behaviour is indicative of a company that considers their games so poor that a video play through would suffice for most gamers. Instead of hijacking content creators' revenue, they should focus on making better games. There's a reason Nintendo is in third place in the console wars.
They are the ones who have created the videos and the commentaries so, yes, content creators.
Or do you also believe that someone who takes a picture shouldn't be considered the photographer because the picture has objects that they didn't make in it?
The way it's phrased makes Nintendo out to be some evil corp attacking it's poor defenseless fans. It's the total opposite! If you make money with ad revenue using Nintendo's IP, well that's not allowed for ANYONE, and those that do it have been getting a free ride. You can't make money performing a play that someone else wrote unless you get permission, you can't project a DVD of a movie onto a big screen and make money from people watching it unless you get permission, you can't record yourself reading someone else's book and sell the recording or charging companies to put ads on the broadcast, and you can't show people the full plot and details of a whole video game that you didn't publish without the publisher's permission! Just because doing that on Youtube has become a trendy thing with it's own cute name (Let's Play!) doesn't mean it's not IP infringement. What Nintendo is doing is saying "We respect our fans and are letting them slide, and even letting them get paid real money making clearly infringing derivative works, we just want a 50% cut of the money because we are the ones who made and published this game which is the basis of the over half (generously) of the video's content." Also for the record, in the new Mario Kart, Nintendo DOES also allow people to record and edit highlight videos of their races and post them directly to Youtube through a free app. Acting like they are this anti-social bully is completely against their corporate philosophy of gaming being fun and inclusive for everyone.
You can't make money performing a play that someone else wrote unless you get permission!
You can't project a DVD of a movie onto a big screen and make money from people watching it unless you get permission!
You can't record yourself reading someone else's book and sell the recording or charging companies to put ads on the broadcast, without permission!
You can't show people the full plot and details of a whole video game that you didn't publish without the publisher's permission!
Just because doing that on Youtube has become a trendy thing with it's own cute name (Let's Play!) doesn't mean it's not IP infringement. What Nintendo is doing is saying "We respect our fans and are letting them slide, and even letting them get paid real money making clearly infringing derivative works, we just want a 50% cut of the money because we are the ones who made and published this game which is the basis of the over half (generously) of the video's content. You get as much credit for adding your personal touch to the broadcast/recording, as we do for making the whole game, 50/50 which is more than fair." Also for the record, in the new Mario Kart, Nintendo DOES also allow people to record and edit highlight videos of their races and post them directly to Youtube through a free app. Acting like they are this anti-social bully is completely against their corporate philosophy of gaming being fun and inclusive for everyone.
Also, commentary. Most of the time, the game being played is not what draws me in, but the commentary and comedy that the producer adds to it.
Why would one WANT people to be interested in Nintento's properties, if this is how they're going to treat their fans? The proper course of action here is to say, "Fuck you Nintento," and stop giving them one's business.
Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
It's not just the gameplay - its the art that goes into level design, world design, the music, the writing of dialogue, the plot twists, the comedy gags, the easter eggs... That's a lot of work Nintendo put in, that someone else is making money from. Yes, the commentary and personality of the LPer adds to the experience, that's why Nintendo feels like they deserve some of the revenue. But don't tell me you listen to LPs of games you have no interest in, or you listen to LPs with no video footage of the game. The game is the whole point! Otherwise why not just watch some stand-up comedy.
So I've bought a Nintendo game, I find it's retardedly difficult at one point because of shit game design or the sorts, and you're telling me despite having already shelled out for the game itself, I also now have to pay Nintendo (through ad views) to figure out how to get past a certain point too? That no one is allowed to show me?
How much do Nintendo pay you to make such a stupid pro-Nintendo, anti-consumer argument?
None of this has any relevance, Nintendo is selling software.
Following your logic Adobe should claim ownership to anything produced by Photoshop.
---- Sig. gone.
I think you'll find that commercial derivative works, even if unauthorized, are fair use.
The commentary track and the act of actually playing the game is completely original work as the actions taken by the player are not scripted by Nintendo, therefore it's clearly a fair use derivative work as proven by countless legal precedents.
next up, Nike hijacking some freerunners channel ads.
Because you know, if you use Nike shoes all profit belongs to them because they own copyright to the shoe logo. makes perfect sense??
fuck no, no it doesn't. Nintendo should just publish their own playthroughs instead of retroactively trying to hijack shit. what's next, they going to claim rights over late '80s movies that show someone playing smb3?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Why should Nintendo permit people who post spoiler videos for their games on Youtube to profit from it significantly?
Since when has Nintendo given a flying fuck about their hardcore fans? They've built an entire sales ideology based on selling to the general market and pretty much ignoring hardcore gamers.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
like say, a picture of the Mona Lisa, or a picture of Ben Affleck being Batman behind the scenes of the new Superman movie, you aren't allowed to sell that picture without permission.
You do have a point, but you've picked two really awful examples to illustrate it. The Mona Lisa is public domain and you can absolutely take pictures of celebrities and sell them to the media (as long as they're in public).
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
I've noticed that the Let's Play channels I watch pretty much stopped doing Nintendo games altogether. Whether Nintendo liked it or not, these channels can bring exposure to their games.
I've bought about a dozen games after watching short LPs of them on Two Best Friends Play's channel or their subchannel on Machinima.
When this first started, I heard podcasts or interviews with people from shows like Hey Ash Whatcha Playin', TBFP, etc. where they basically said they weren't planning any Nintendo game based shows until the situation was changed.
Except it's not that is it? You're making that argument up as Nintendo has even been hitting people who have just done clips, not the full game.
I wouldn't call 15 minutes a very large chunk, and even then a number of videos shorter than this have also been hit.
This whole thing helps LPers. It takes their hard work out of a legal grey area and says "If you make an LP with a Nintendo game you are guaranteed that the video won't be taken down and you won't be sued. If you get enough views you also will get paid." If you make a Mega Man LP, and Capcom doesn't have a deal like Nintendo's for you to sign up for, then suddenly one day some Capcom guy can just shut down your video or even sue you. That's a big risk, when the alternative is doing an LP with Nintendo that supports and legally protects both you and the publisher of the game.
That would be RPM Racing by Blizzard, the only game that fully used the Super NES's high-resolution mode during gameplay. The sequel, Rock n' Roll Racing, dropped the 480i gimmick in favor of more detailed 240p graphics and licensed hard rock music. Some games used a semi-high-resolution mode (512x240p) inside text boxes, mostly RPGs, because kanji need a lot more pixels than Latin characters.