Romhacking.net

General Category => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: FAST6191 on September 10, 2015, 09:21:52 pm

Title: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 10, 2015, 09:21:52 pm
Nintendo seem to being going after youtube types again, this time though it involves something a bit closer to what we do around here

Background
For those just joining us then you have not missed an awful lot.
Background
For many years footage of games was something of a "as long as you do not force us to do something then we will not" for just about everybody and all uses. With the rise of ease of video capture and increased popularity of game footage/art based videos, many of which can earn not inconsiderable revenue for their creators, there have been many companies seeking to clarify their positions on various matters. There are various laws that could govern the usage of footage though the big one would be copyright, though if you look at Microsoft's effort ( http://www.xbox.com/en-us/developers/rules ) there is a definite dash of trademark law in there. One key feature of copyright is exemptions, commonly known as fair use or fair dealing. http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ for a more academic discussion, 5 minutes into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbrmaeiZ4RE if you want a more UK focused and light hearted take, the main ones are criticism/review, parody (previously not a thing in Europe but somewhat recently added -- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/02/uk_reforms_enabling_private_copying_parodying_and_general_quotation_of_copyrighted_material_come_into_force/ ), various types of teaching and certain aspects of research. The criticism/review thing would form the backbone of much of it but what gets troubled is the "popular" activity known as let's play where a game gets played and shared basically in full. Many would then argue this is not a review or some other type of fair use as it is presently defined, and may not be a good candidate for a further exemption.
Trademarks have to be enforced (if you allow someone to use your trademark without some kind of agreement then it risks so called genericide -- depending upon where you are aspirin might still be a trademark for acetylsalicylic acid but in many places it is not and anybody can sell said acetylsalicylic acid as aspirin) but copyright kind of does not. If copyright does not then the position of many in the video and game communities would be "it is free advertising, why would you possibly object" which is not an unreasonable line of logic.

Nintendo specifically seems to have opted for the letter of the law approach to copyright and has since been seen to go after many in the video making world, by the way youtube is not especially geared in favour of the so called content creators when it comes to copyright ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xjcuik2t78 being one of many discussing such things).
If you are interested in other companies and their positions/links to their usage guidelines then http://letsplaylist.wikia.com/wiki/%22Let%27s_Play%22-friendly_developers_Wiki is a good jumping off point.

Nintendo's first go around saw them take out many videos, potentially including some non infringing ones, which saw many eyebrows raised.

Round 2 saw Nintendo create a revenue sharing program known as Nintendo Creators Program, one that saw some interesting terms and conditions. http://www.romhacking.net/forum/index.php/topic,16408.0.html
Whether this was due to negative PR from the first or something else is a debate for the ages.

There has been very little said on matters of modding and especially not ROM hacking for many of those, one major exception would be Microsoft's guidelines ( http://www.xbox.com/en-us/developers/rules ) which specifically disallow hacks. Previously we saw reports of various developers claiming videos featuring various ROM hacks and the revenue with them but there was still some debate as to whether it was the hack or just part of a larger movement.

Back to today

Round 3 seems to be happening now and has seen some speedrun stuff happen. http://www.destructoid.com/nintendo-s-cracking-down-on-speedrunning-and-rom-hacking-videos-310152.phtml via http://gbatemp.net/threads/nintendo-closing-rom-hacking-and-speedrunning-channels.397021/#post-5661530

ROM hacking as many around here would know exists in a very grey area of the law but is largely untroubled by legal action -- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/10/tecmo_sues_xbox_game_hackers/ being the only major event I am aware of, and dropped three months later http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/27/tecmo_drops_ninjahacker_suit/
After this we are looking at C&Ds issued to various projects, probably the most notable in recent memory being the Final Fantasy type 0 on the PSP (which is supposed to be ported and translated on some newer consoles), http://www.romhacking.net/forum/index.php?topic=19992.0 and 7th Dragon (possibly, jury is still out on the specifics here).

Thoughts of others reading?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 10, 2015, 11:40:16 pm
Hmm. Well, I didn't read click and read all of the links (there were so many) so I'm just going to assume that I know what's going here.

I think videos of Nintendo games is fine, but if someone is making money off of the videos with ads or something, then Nintendo should throw the book at them. If not, then Nintendo should butt out and stop being dicks.

Videos of ROM hacks? Same as above. If someone is making money using Nintendo's IP then they should be crucified. If they're not, why would they care? It wouldn't be in their favor to prosecute. They would only waste money and lose fans/customers.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Zero Dozer on September 11, 2015, 01:50:11 am
Another big fuck off to Internet by Nintendo, and this time it's to Super Mario fans.

Those retards can't realize how much of a fucking shot at their own feet it is. Why must Nintendo act so Hollywoodian, so draconian?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 11, 2015, 05:20:37 am
Hmm. Well, I didn't read click and read all of the links (there were so many) so I'm just going to assume that I know what's going here.

I think videos of Nintendo games is fine, but if someone is making money off of the videos with ads or something, then Nintendo should throw the book at them. If not, then Nintendo should butt out and stop being dicks.

Videos of ROM hacks? Same as above. If someone is making money using Nintendo's IP then they should be crucified. If they're not, why would they care? It wouldn't be in their favor to prosecute. They would only waste money and lose fans/customers.

Most of that was the background to all this, I just edited the post to clarify that a bit more than I had (between the bold text is the background/history of this all).

On the money thing. If it is not a review or one of the other things copyright law allows you to do then possibly. There is also the perception is reality issue as far as hacks and some of the let's play types -- there are quite a few let's plays where people will play games like idiots, whether by design or because they actually are, and if said videos could lead to some kind of confusion/negative perception among those that might not follow things as closely. On the other hand many have argued it is basically free advertising and as Nintendo itself is not in the business of let's plays (actually I suppose with the revenue share from the creator program I suppose it might be) then what harm might be done financially is back to that perception is reality thing from before.
Others still have argued that for certain games a full play through might be a turn off, or make for a wait until it hits the bargain bucket (or Steam sale in the modern world) mentality; the games most likely to be hit being the relatively linear story games that Nintendo does tend to lean towards.

As a rule I am actually not a fan of let's plays, game streaming or even any of the various types of speedrunning. I much prefer tightly edited content with a purpose and most let's play and streaming types are not naturally funny people. Longplays can be useful if I am determining whether to pick up a game and I do not want to only see the highlights that trailers and shorter form videos might focus upon -- if a game does not handle its downtime well then I might have reservations about picking it up, even if it has great sections in between.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Seihen on September 11, 2015, 09:17:49 am
Others still have argued that for certain games a full play through might be a turn off, or make for a wait until it hits the bargain bucket (or Steam sale in the modern world) mentality; the games most likely to be hit being the relatively linear story games that Nintendo does tend to lean towards.

"The Last of Us" was this right here for me. I really wanted to know what the story was about, and it sounded like a great plot. Alas, the gameplay didn't seem like something I'd be interested in.
So I watched someone else play it on Youtube, and Naughty Dog lost out on a purchase.

So, yeah, I do think this does happen, but not as often as game companies pretend.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KaioShin on September 11, 2015, 10:02:22 am
Another interesting point to that discussion, "what's the "worth" of let's plays as free advertising?": People tend to vastly overestimate this as well. There have been games that were successful, perhaps, solely because of YT and streamers, but they are rare. A lot of the times there is no effect on sales. Here is a recent blog post by an indie dev that raised some controversial discussions: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DanielWest/20150908/253040/Good_isnt_good_enough__releasing_an_indie_game_in_2015.php

His game was streamed by very popular streamer, that video has over 500k views on YT, and that video sold maybe 20 copies of the game.

The streamers and the stream viewers certainly seem to get much more mileage out of them than the devs. Maybe they are right to consider options of restricting or stopping let's plays.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 11, 2015, 01:00:26 pm
"The Last of Us" was this right here for me. I really wanted to know what the story was about, and it sounded like a great plot. Alas, the gameplay didn't seem like something I'd be interested in.
So I watched someone else play it on Youtube, and Naughty Dog lost out on a purchase.

So, yeah, I do think this does happen, but not as often as game companies pretend.

For me though they overplayed their hand quite seriously on the second hand games thing (the law allows it, therefore you do not get to complain that your magic fairy wish of no second hand sales to add to your numbers did not come true) so I am not inclined to take their word for much these days.

On let's plays and increased/decreased sales. I have no numbers beyond a few anecdotal things. I do wish to link up http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/04/14/study-publishers-shouldnt-release-demos-just-trailers/ though at this point.

I am not sure a let's play/longplay would see the "I got mine" mentality arise for me, though I certainly have got things from abridged series, recap books/comics and other summary essays in the past so I can not rule it out in myself and certainly not for others. For games the closest I have got it the last level of a game I was playing was buggy, I watched the end boss in video form and was happy with that. I normally bring that one up in "do you have to finish a game to make the final call?" type discussions but I will go it here as well.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on September 11, 2015, 01:17:37 pm
Nintentei TriHard used Take Down on youtube.

But they're okay guys, their Ability is Rock Head!
Title: .
Post by: Chpexo on September 11, 2015, 03:52:27 pm
.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 11, 2015, 04:39:33 pm
Pretty much a reason to stop using YouTube especially if you need it to make money. I doubt this is the end of these legally shenanigans. Nintendo does have the right to do this but I wonder if it will pay off in time.

Not sure what context I am supposed to read first part in but I will risk a "first they came" comment there -- they still have plenty of new and interesting stuff all the time so I will stick around for that. Others (mainly elsewhere) say "go to somewhere else", which is fine and you might well find somewhere to host your videos but there is a lot to be said for the "organic" views/growth options, along with ad revenue if you care about that sort of thing, that youtube provides.

As for time will tell... have you not seen a dying company that does not get technology before?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 11, 2015, 06:55:19 pm
This can only hurt Nintendo (their own actions) and the fact that they can't see that shows how clueless they are.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: JCE3000GT on September 11, 2015, 08:01:03 pm
Ugh, more Nintendo bullshit.  I am just done with that company and it's "modern" products. 

This can only hurt Nintendo (their own actions) and the fact that they can't see that shows how clueless they are.

^ This.  Agree completely.  Even if I wanted a new Nintendo product I likely would not buy it based on this and other questionable actions by this company in recent memory. 
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 11, 2015, 08:16:23 pm
Am I the only one that doesn't think this is a horrible move by Nintendo?

Mario Maker is going to introduce a whole new group of people to game modding -- so people are going to go online to see videos of custom levels, only to discover that they can do it for free without buying Mario Maker at all.  Makes perfect sense to me to try to take those videos down.

As for this "hurting" them -- I don't think their demographic really is as virtuous as the handful of people here.  The handful of ex-Nintendo fans who refuse to buy their system out of principle is not going to break their business.  Most gamers don't give a shit.


So yeah, it makes perfect sense to me.  Do I think they'll be successful?  Of course not.  History has shown over and over and over again that when one company tries to go up against the mass piracy/emulation internet culture, the company loses.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on September 11, 2015, 10:03:27 pm
Have the Japanese yet entered the word KAIZO into that "whole new group of people"'s vocabulary? ;D
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 11, 2015, 11:31:17 pm
Quote
Am I the only one that doesn't think this is a horrible move by Nintendo?

Yes. You are. LOL

Quote
Mario Maker is going to introduce a whole new group of people to game modding -- so people are going to go online to see videos of custom levels, only to discover that they can do it for free without buying Mario Maker at all.  Makes perfect sense to me to try to take those videos down.

I don't think anyone here thinks Nintendo is going beyond their rights. We just think they're douches. If Nintendo wasn't stupid, they'd realize that this isn't going to stop anyone from hacking their games. It's just going to make more people hate them and the people who do hate them, hate them more. Most of the people who are going to buy Mario Maker probably aren't hackers anyway (since it's such a niche thing), so what business would it steal from them?

Does the current flash in the pan pop/rock star make youtubers take down their videos of them doing a shitty cover of their songs in their bedrooms? No, because that's a dick move with no gain.

Quote
As for this "hurting" them -- I don't think their demographic really is as virtuous as the handful of people here.  The handful of ex-Nintendo fans who refuse to buy their system out of principle is not going to break their business.  Most gamers don't give a shit.

My point is that they gain nothing from this. They piss people off, they waste money on whatever legal fees they might incur and for what? We've already established that hacking is niche so it's not because of a realistic source of competiton. Most gamers don't give a shit, just as most gamers don't hack. So they accomplish nothing with this move. They only waste time, resources and alienate people. Fuck Nintendo.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 11, 2015, 11:41:07 pm
Quote
If Nintendo wasn't stupid, they'd realize that this isn't going to stop anyone from hacking their games.

Yeah, but it will "hide" ROM-hacking from people who don't already know about it, thus preventing increased piracy.

It's like a said before -- with the release of Mario Maker, people are going to flock to the internet to look at custom levels.  When they see stuff that was made without Mario Maker, they'll be like "wtf do I need Mario Maker for?"

This is an attempt to squash that.

Quote
My point is that they gain nothing from this.

They gain in that they potentially prevent new pirates from appearing.

Quote
They piss people off

They piss hackers/pirates off... but why should they give a shit about them?


Quote
We've already established that hacking is niche so it's not because of a realistic source of competiton.

Yes it's niche because most people don't know about it.  But they'll find out about it once MM is released and these kinds of videos are still floating around YouTube.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: M-Tee on September 11, 2015, 11:45:42 pm
I see absolutely nothing wrong with Nintendo taking down anything that uses any significant portion of their intellectual property.

It dilutes and taints their branding, and with Mario Maker out, does provide a competing service.

Everyone in this game knows where they stand, and when you choose to build a house on someone else's land (or for a better comparison for most of this stuff, paint the shutters on someone else's house), there's always the chance that that homeowner or landowner's going to come take it back.

If one doesn't want to play said game, one should develop their own product from the ground up. Otherwise, just roll with the punches.

Also, the coversong in a bedroom analogy is a poor one. A better one would be if all the masters from a record company's history were to have leaked online, and folks were using them extensively to release products ranging from slightly to very different.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 12:19:50 am
Quote
Yeah, but it will "hide" ROM-hacking from people who don't already know about it, thus preventing increased piracy.
Quote
Yes it's niche because most people don't know about it.  But they'll find out about it once MM is released and these kinds of videos are still floating around YouTube.

The 21st century does not allow "hiding".

Quote
When they see stuff that was made without Mario Maker, they'll be like "wtf do I need Mario Maker for?"

Because some buggy editor that is game specific with tight restrictions and an end result that will only work on some homemade program (emulators) and Mario Maker are not the same thing.


Quote
Also, the coversong in a bedroom analogy is a poor one. A better one would be if all the masters from a record company's history were to have leaked online, and folks were using them extensively to release products ranging from slightly to very different.

Your analogy would be better if hackers had access to the source code and used their modifications to make money. Besides, isn't the recording industry dead already? :P

Anyway, my point with that was that someone doing something that no one knows or cares about in these cases is not a threat. To continue with this... If someone downloads a bunch of MP3s (or rips tracks from the CDs they own) and makes a remix of a bunch of old songs and uploads them to youtube it doesn't harm the original artists or the record company (if no money is being made, it is a neutral rather than a negative), so the record companies pursuing legal action would accomplish nothing more than to make themselves look like assholes. Lawyers might get tight pants, but everyone else would just grimace.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Erockbrox on September 12, 2015, 12:24:46 am
I say just hit them harder than ever. Create a rom hacking company which makes badass rom hacks of Nintendos IP's. People will LOVE the new romhacks and support the work. Nintendo will shut down the rom hacking company thus hurting lots of fans and hurting their own image. People then hate Nintendo and Nintendo goes out of business because no one will support them anymore.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 12:28:15 am
Quote
I say just hit them harder than ever. Create a rom hacking company which makes badass rom hacks of Nintendos IP's. People will LOVE the new romhacks and support the work. Nintendo will shut down the rom hacking company thus hunting lots of fans and hurting their own image. People then hate Nintendo and Nintendo goes out of business because no one will support them anymore.

:)
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 12:38:56 am
The 21st century does not allow "hiding".

Well... maybe not completely hide.  But they can certainly make it harder for someone to stumble across it.


I'm not sure whether I should laugh at the "spitefully run a business into the ground just to piss off nintendo fans" idea just at how ridiculous it is... or if you were being sort of serious.


Regardless, ideals are nice but don't always come into play in business.  Particularly in a field as competitive as video games.  "Free games for everyone" / "Free video posting for everyone" -- these are nice concepts, but they don't help with Nintendo's bottom line.  The idea that it's free promotion for them is absurd -- that's the same argument people were making about music piracy back in the Napster days -- and we all know it was BS.

Nintendo taking steps to secure their IP by whatever means -- even if it ends up pissing off some pirates who are already stealing from them -- I'm sorry, but I just don't see what the problem is.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Kallisto on September 12, 2015, 12:49:16 am
This is slightly off topic, but my only problem with Japanese video game companies really is their outdated way of thinking when attacking translators when deep down the official company will never release a game in english for years or forever. Heck, they purposely forget their IPs for many reasons.
 
I can't tell if a company's japanese pride is hurt when someone outside the company outclasses them or something else is going on. The only company I can think of that didn't show their ass is Falcom.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: chillyfeez on September 12, 2015, 01:35:52 am
Quote
I'm not sure whether I should laugh at the "spitefully run a business into the ground just to piss off nintendo fans" idea just at how ridiculous it is... or if you were being sort of serious.
I can't answer to the original intent, but when I read that, my initial understanding was that it was a direct reference to what Napster did. I don't think it's realistic, but mostly because the precedent of Napster is one most people would not want to follow. We're not all as badass as that guy who started Napster (Justin Timberlake, I think, right?  ;) )
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 01:49:41 am
Quote
"Free games for everyone" / "Free video posting for everyone" -- these are nice concepts, but they don't help with Nintendo's bottom line.  The idea that it's free promotion for them is absurd -- that's the same argument people were making about music piracy back in the Napster days -- and we all know it was BS.

Okay, let's shift gears away from the hacking videos.... A free video of someone playing a game is not the same thing as downloading a copy of the game without paying for it. You press play, but you are not playing the game in the video yourself. Nor is a free video of someone playing a game a replacement for the gaming experience. Therefore, a youtube video of someone playing a game is free promotion. If it hurts sales it will only be because people had a chance to see how much a game sucks before buying it. That is only fair. In my opinion that is much better than someone being tricked into buying something that is crap and regretting it later. People don't make enough money these days to just throw it around like that. I can't tell you how many times I bought an album and beforehand, I heard the band saying "This is our best album yet", only to be horribly disappointed with my purchase. A few years ago I made a rule for myself: Never buy an album that I have not already heard. When a new album comes out that I'm interested in, I download it and if it's worth buying I buy it, if it sucks I delete it and think about how lucky I am that I didn't waste my money on it. I'm not going to pretend that my specific example here is "right" but that is how I protect myself from being duped into promoting garbage. Taking down videos of stuff like speedruns would make it almost impossible to see how a game ACTUALLY plays and if it is worth buying. That sucks. And let's not kid ourselves by saying that game reviews are trustworthy.

Quote
Nintendo taking steps to secure their IP by whatever means -- even if it ends up pissing off some pirates who are already stealing from them -- I'm sorry, but I just don't see what the problem is.

The problem is that it is unnecessary and if you refer to my paragraph above, it is a blow to consumers.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KaioShin on September 12, 2015, 03:35:06 am
And let's not kid ourselves by saying that game reviews are trustworthy.
Reviews are perfectly fine if one is an intelligent human being that can read and understand that different people have different point of views. The only reviews that are untrustworthy are exclusive reviews that come out while everyone else is still embargoed.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: obscurumlux01 on September 12, 2015, 06:53:35 am
The thing that gets me about this the most is wierd.  Nintendo has been caught red-handed with stealing open-sourced code and using it in their 'Virtual Console' setup without attribution or GPL-exemption consent.  They don't care about the rights of anyone else yet they want to pull this garbage.

Speedruns already have dedicated communities online, but sharing them via YouTube was always admittedly easier.

I find it amusing that all this comes around the time that Nintendo wants to put out their lame-ass 'Super Mario Maker' and the entire internet does a *yawn* and says 'Hey Nintendo we did that over 10 years ago and welcome to 2005'.  Super Mario Bros X is just one example and there are so many others that have been around.

Some of the earliest rom hacks ever made were done on Mario games.  I guess if Nintendo wants to continue pulling this crap (and ignoring the people on etsy who are directly selling Mario and Zelda stuff for profit because reasons) then we'll see how it goes.

Avoid any first-party Nintendo stuff on YouTube and move to alternative venues.  Done.

September 12, 2015, 07:02:05 am - (Auto Merged - Double Posts are not allowed before 7 days.)
*snip*

Another idiot clueless indie dev that doesn't know how to business whines about it on GamaSutra and is linked by clueless people like you as some kind of 'proof' on the matter.
No, that isn't proof.  That game didn't sell because you could read the first few sentences and look at the screenshot and know exactly why people passed it up.
2D action platformer with a cutesy aesthetic.  Go on Steam and you are drowning in them.  There's nothing about that game to differentiate it among the crowd so it got lost in the shuffle.  Imagine that.  Then idiot clueless indie dev whines about 'omg why maybe it is the bad consumers not knowing how to throw money at me OMG WHY' over and over.

It had nothing to do with YouTube and everything to do with the simple fact that the press came to the same conclusion I did and avoided that junk like the plague.  Make something original or GTFO; indie or not you better make it worth the time I take to spit at it or you will be thrown aside faster than you can go WTF.  The market is SATURATED with '2D action platformers'.  Like it hasn't been this saturated with platformers since the initial saturation back in the 8-bit and 16-bit eras.  But aside from all the 'mascot game' knockoffs there were a few forgotten gems (like Ristar) that did something new for the time and had an awesome aesthetic.

EDIT:  On the whole 'but it is piracy' argument.  YOU CANNOT PIRATE A GAME THAT IS NO LONGER SOLD AT RETAIL IN THE ORIGINAL FORMAT.  And no, Virtual Console doesn't count.  Virtual Console is just emulation.  Same crap but overpriced crap.  Also Virtual Console uses plagiarized open-source GPL code AND makes money off of it to boot.  There's no reason to support that kind of trash.  Piracy involves withholding income in favor of a free alternative.  If the product is not available for sale then there is no income being withheld.  That would be copyright infringement because garbage copyright laws are garbage.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 10:33:25 am
Quote
YOU CANNOT PIRATE A GAME THAT IS NO LONGER SOLD AT RETAIL IN THE ORIGINAL FORMAT.

Are you making up your own definitions for words again?

You certainly can.  It's called Intellectual Property Rights.  It doesn't matter whether or not Nintendo is actively selling something -- if they own the rights to it, you can't legally obtain it through means they don't approve of.

(Of course, I'm oversimplifying here)
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: chillyfeez on September 12, 2015, 10:46:01 am
Yeah, that's like saying taking something out of my house without my permission isn't stealing because I wasn't trying to sell it...
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 10:56:10 am
I can't tell you how many times I bought an album and beforehand, I heard the band saying "This is our best album yet", only to be horribly disappointed with my purchase. A few years ago I made a rule for myself: Never buy an album that I have not already heard. When a new album comes out that I'm interested in, I download it and if it's worth buying I buy it, if it sucks I delete it and think about how lucky I am that I didn't waste my money on it. I'm not going to pretend that my specific example here is "right" but that is how I protect myself from being duped into promoting garbage.

This is a potential problem with any purchase, isn't it?  I mean if you're saying that reviews can't be trusted....

How can I know whether or not <insert food product or restaurant here> will be any good until I buy it for myself and find out?
Or <insert movie here>?
Or <insert soap here>?
Or <insert anything you purchase here>?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Isao Kronos on September 12, 2015, 10:57:01 am
you wouldn't download a dog, who wants a malware dog that barks in russian
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 12, 2015, 11:00:47 am
Do you have evidence of them using GPL code and not releasing changes for their emulators (they do have a page for code/changes http://www.nintendo.co.jp/support/oss/index.html# )? Various companies have used emulators over the years but licenses do seem to be respected. Likewise various people have analysed the VC emulators, mainly with an eye to getting them more compatible or hacking in some features more commonly seen in conventional emulators, and I have not seen anything of that.

I do not know how you so spectacularly misread KaioShin's comment. That is some good going there. You might well be right about over saturation not helping this game, however the comment was more that in spite of let's play popularity it still did not perform.

As for original then the continued popularity of the annual games would seem to say otherwise. Original can be nice, good is better though.

you wouldn't download a dog
Please
http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/downloads.html#dog

Actually it is probably going to require more hard drive space than I have right now. Let me delete some stuff and then I will download a dog.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Isao Kronos on September 12, 2015, 11:01:51 am
a college dog? really? oh boy a dog that makes questionable decisions and parties all the time
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: MarkGrass on September 12, 2015, 02:23:29 pm
Censorship much, Nintendo?

Pretty dumb move to alienate the very same people who likely gave inspiration for Mario Maker, especially when the company has been in dire straits for years.

Nintendo's nostalgia machine will eventually break down completely. The very same people they depend upon to buy the same recycled ideas year after year aren't going to be around to support them forever, and the facts are everywhere to support this notion. This blatant action to shit on the fanbase is a prime example of how desperate they really are.

Even if they managed to completely scrub the entire internet of ROM hacks, nothing would be enough to save this complete flop of a video game console. The writing is on the wall.

Mario Maker most definitely looks like a lot of fun, but doesn't allow for custom AI, custom textures, custom music and so on. The right people who are interested enough will find their way.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 02:49:51 pm
Nintendo's nostalgia machine will eventually break down completely. The very same people they depend upon to buy the same recycled ideas year after year aren't going to be around to support them forever, and the facts are everywhere to support this notion.

I agree with this.  Nintendo has been riding the exact same handful of franchises for 30+ years.  It's almost embarrassing.  There's only so many times you can repackage Mario or Zelda before it gets tired... and I think most people have hit that point.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 03:31:31 pm
Quote
This is a potential problem with any purchase, isn't it?  I mean if you're saying that reviews can't be trusted....

How can I know whether or not <insert food product or restaurant here> will be any good until I buy it for myself and find out?
Or <insert movie here>?
Or <insert soap here>?
Or <insert anything you purchase here>?

But I'm not expected to enjoy soap, food products, movies or restaurants for 50+ hours and in the majority of cases said things are cheaper than video games. At least with a car you are allowed to look under the hood, take it for a test drive, etc... That's how you protect yourself from a bad investment. Taking down certain types of videos on youtube takes away some of that protection and for no benefit that I can see.

I don't see a perfect solution for movies though. At the same time, most movies are cheap and disposable so taking a loss in this case is not such a big deal. A lot of music is cheap too, but with that specific case and me specifically it's partly a matter of principal. I don't want to waste my money but just as important is the fact that I don't think people should be paid to make shitty music. A person also listens to an album or song way more than they would a movie so I'm not sure they compare too well anyway.

Quote
Nintendo's nostalgia machine will eventually break down completely. The very same people they depend upon to buy the same recycled ideas year after year aren't going to be around to support them forever, and the facts are everywhere to support this notion. This blatant action to shit on the fanbase is a prime example of how desperate they really are.

I totally agree with this. Nintendo has become "the sad old hat".
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 04:00:23 pm
Some games have trial versions.

You can also rent games -- or at least you could... is that still a thing these days?

I don't know.  You can rationalize your actions all day if you want.  But at the end of the day you're violating IP laws.  Whether or not you feel you're justified to do so means little outside of dealing with your own personal conscious.


Don't get me wrong.  I pirate shit all the time.  I don't have a problem with it.  The only real difference between us is I don't feel the need to rationalize it.  I don't like fooling myself.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Daria on September 12, 2015, 04:43:29 pm
My point is that they gain nothing from this.

They gain exposure. You take down the popular speed runs so when potential viewers search for "new Mario levels" they pull up a ton of Mario Maker videos instead of ROM Hacks.

With that said - total dick move Nintendo.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: MarkGrass on September 12, 2015, 04:53:39 pm
Don't get me wrong.  I pirate shit all the time.  I don't have a problem with it.  The only real difference between us is I don't feel the need to rationalize it.  I don't like fooling myself.

Yup, I feel the same.

Gemini and myself recently chatted briefly about how discovering emulation changed our lives, way back when. In one instant, one may gain access to video games that they couldn't have previously enjoyed. Whether it be poverty and the inability to purchase, outdated or out of print systems and consoles, regional hindrance and anything else unforeseen, ROM sets can really open doors for many people, creatively speaking.

That feel for me were several of the NES Mega Man games that I had only dreamed about as a child. I would later go on to purchase the entire collection, but before that, I hacked video games as means of a creative outlet in order to stay busy so that I could ditch drug and alcohol abuse. I probably couldn't have accomplished that if it weren't for piracy.

That said, I wouldn't just start downloading movies, music and games for the sake of having them for my pleasure. There's a very fine line between honest intentions and just flat-out stealing.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 05:33:54 pm
Quote
Some games have trial versions.

You can also rent games -- or at least you could... is that still a thing these days?

I don't know.  You can rationalize your actions all day if you want.  But at the end of the day you're violating IP laws.  Whether or not you feel you're justified to do so means little outside of dealing with your own personal conscious.


Don't get me wrong.  I pirate shit all the time.  I don't have a problem with it.  The only real difference between us is I don't feel the need to rationalize it.  I don't like fooling myself.

I don't have a problem with being a pirate. I'm not in denial about it. I'm not denying that there may be some technical reasons why speedrun videos might violate IP laws either. But I'm saying I don't give a shit about that and I think that taking down these videos does more harm than good because the videos themselves do more good than harm.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 06:31:34 pm
taking down these videos does more harm than good because the videos themselves do more good than harm.

The videos do more good... for who.... Nintendo?  How do they at all benefit from them?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 06:56:48 pm
Quote
The videos do more good... for who.... Nintendo?  How do they at all benefit from them?

I KNOW I can't be the only person in the world who's watched a video on youtube and said to myself "This game looks way more fun than I thought it would be". That's good for business. And to go back to something I said earlier, no review could give you a realistic sense of what a game actually plays like because they are all only about a few minutes long and only graze and generalize each aspect of the game. Actually watching someone play a game is a totally different experience and will give you a more realistic impression of what a game plays like. Anyone can make a game look good or bad with a few clips and deceiving words if that is their desire.

And for games that I already have, I can't tell you how many times I watched a speedrun and dug out a game that I hadn't played in a long time because a video showed me how to make the most annoying parts (that prevented me from replaying as often) much easier. I just don't see how these videos are a realistic threat. Maybe some of the hack videos could be a negligible threat to Mario Maker but not enough of a threat that Nintendo should go after these videos. They're just being childish and playing right into the "giant corporate assholes" stereotype that people love to hate.

And before it comes back again, for me the real issue is not whether Nintendo has a right to do this because they obviously do. "Is it worth the effort?" is the better question. Honestly, I wouldn't even care if it weren't for the fact that I like some of these videos and a number of them have either given me a greater appreciation for a game I already had or showed that a game that I didn't have was actually worth my money and attention. Nintendo is stepping on my balls...
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 08:09:54 pm
I KNOW I can't be the only person in the world who's watched a video on youtube and said to myself "This game looks way more fun than I thought it would be". That's good for business.

Wait... are we talking about removing videos of the actual game?  Or removing videos of hacks?  This whole thread I was under the impression we were talking about the latter.

Quote
And before it comes back again, for me the real issue is not whether Nintendo has a right to do this because they obviously do. "Is it worth the effort?" is the better question.

Oh it's definitely not worth it.  I think I might have said this before too, but history has shown over and over again that going up against internet pop culture is a fight you are sure to lose.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: MarkGrass on September 12, 2015, 08:22:49 pm
I KNOW I can't be the only person in the world who's watched a video on youtube and said to myself "This game looks way more fun than I thought it would be". That's good for business. And to go back to something I said earlier, no review could give you a realistic sense of what a game actually plays like because they are all only about a few minutes long and only graze and generalize each aspect of the game. Actually watching someone play a game is a totally different experience and will give you a more realistic impression of what a game plays like. Anyone can make a game look good or bad with a few clips and deceiving words if that is their desire.

No, you're definitely not the only person.

On a personal note, I never trust any reviewer or critic, no matter how reputable they may be. These people don't speak for me and my interests... but like you, seeing and hearing a game being sampled on YouTube can definitely change my mind about something, even if it's the most trivial of ROM hacks.

And for games that I already have, I can't tell you how many times I watched a speedrun and dug out a game that I hadn't played in a long time because a video showed me how to make the most annoying parts (that prevented me from replaying as often) much easier. I just don't see how these videos are a realistic threat. Maybe some of the hack videos could be a negligible threat to Mario Maker but not enough of a threat that Nintendo should go after these videos. They're just being childish and playing right into the "giant corporate assholes" stereotype that people love to hate.

I get what you're saying here, and I could note  few examples of this myself, however, I would argue that speed runs are absolutely awful for business. ROM hack or no ROM hack.

Personally, I only watch speed runs when I don't want to actually play the game, but I'm still interested in seeing what it's all about. The only exception to this is when I want to see that new found glitch that everyone is talking about.

And before it comes back again, for me the real issue is not whether Nintendo has a right to do this because they obviously do. "Is it worth the effort?" is the better question. Honestly, I wouldn't even care if it weren't for the fact that I like some of these videos and a number of them have either given me a greater appreciation for a game I already had or showed that a game that I didn't have was actually worth my money and attention. Nintendo is stepping on my balls...

I don't have balls for Nintendo to step upon, but this recent move is rather unsettling.

As I mentioned before, it wouldn't make any difference if they scrub all videos from the internet - it most certainly isn't going to save their current video game console and it will only help to further hurt the brand by outcasting its own fan base.

I stand by my previous statement: This is yet another dumb move by Nintendo. I'm not sure what, if anything, can redeem them at this point.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Kallisto on September 12, 2015, 08:33:27 pm
I suppose when money is no longer a thing on the Earth then maybe this petty stuff will disappear.

Money causes so much problems as much it creates.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 08:37:35 pm
Rip on money all you want.  But without it we wouldn't have video games at all, and we'd all still be bartering with sheep and chickens.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 08:48:55 pm
Quote
I get what you're saying here, and I could note  few examples of this myself, however, I would argue that speed runs are absolutely awful for business. ROM hack or no ROM hack.

Personally, I only watch speed runs when I don't want to actually play the game, but I'm still interested in seeing what it's all about. The only exception to this is when I want to see that new found glitch that everyone is talking about.

Yeah, it does go both ways. For example (though not a current one), I realized that I would never beat Ninja Gaiden II because once I got the feeling that the whole game was about memorizing enemy spawn patterns and having no chance if you didn't, I decided to watch a video of someone doing a deathless speedrun and I will never play it again. It's just not fun (IMO). Though ninja(s) and the soundtrack are badass.

Quote
Wait... are we talking about removing videos of the actual game?  Or removing videos of hacks?  This whole thread I was under the impression we were talking about the latter.

I've been going back and forth because I was under the impression that Nintendo was attacking both. I've been talking more about consumer oriented stuff for the last post or two because I want my posts to be read as more than just me trying to justify less popular forms of piracy. I got the feeling that talking about hacks was leading people to pay more attention to what I was saying rather than the intent and reason behind my words. Some things are just an easy target.

Quote
I suppose when money is no longer a thing on the Earth then maybe this petty stuff will disappear.

Money causes so much problems as much it creates.

We're a LONG way off from that. It will be a long time before "socialism" isn't considered a "bad word".

Quote
Rip on money all you want.  But without it we wouldn't have video games at all, and we'd all still be bartering with sheep and chickens.

Money is dirty. You never know when the dollar bill you hold in your hand has been in some skanky stripper's crack. Ew...
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on September 12, 2015, 08:50:58 pm
I do remember reading years ago one review, I think it was for Super Mario Galaxy 2, where the site admitted Nintendo told the reviewers they were only allowed to talk about certain levels.
That right there makes you kind of question the credibility of the professional review system. Though maybe the companies don't want major spoilers in reviews but still if they can have the ability to censor reviewers who get advance copies of copies, that's that...
(obviously they wouldn't be able to do anything to someone who reviewed a self-purchased retail copy, but then that site would be behind)
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Disch on September 12, 2015, 09:15:55 pm
Money is dirty. You never know when the dollar bill you hold in your hand has been in some skanky stripper's crack. Ew...

Pfft.  It's 2015.  Money is in plastic/virtual form now, not bill form.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 12, 2015, 09:19:18 pm
Quote
I do remember reading years ago one review, I think it was for Super Mario Galaxy 2, where the site admitted Nintendo told the reviewers they were only allowed to talk about certain levels.
That right there makes you kind of question the credibility of the professional review system. Though maybe the companies don't want major spoilers in reviews but still if they can have the ability to censor reviewers who get advance copies of copies, that's that...
(obviously they wouldn't be able to do anything to someone who reviewed a self-purchased retail copy, but then that site would be behind)

I think this is a good example of why "professional" reviews can't be trusted. If you are too honest (or brutal, depending), game companies aren't going to benefit from your reviews and then you'll find yourself reviewing less and less. It's therefore in the interest of the reviewing party to say mostly or only positive things about the games you are reviewing. That's creates and obvious bias.

Non-commercial reviews I believe are not that much more trustworthy because everyone has different tastes and so if you just don't like a game (regardless of quality) it's easy to make it look like crap just because that's what you feel like doing. Outside of a professional setting it would be that much easier for someone to hate on a prefectly good game simply because they didn't like the main character's hair or some other trivial detail that prevented them from giving the game a chance. Some people are just silly like that.

When you watch a video of someone playing a game and playing it well you don't have to worry about any of the above issues. You can just set back and see the game for what it is rather than how someone is trying to paint it.

Quote
Pfft.  It's 2015.  Money is in plastic/virtual form now, not bill form.

Pfft. It's 2015, yet tangible money still exists and is in constant use.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Bregalad on September 13, 2015, 01:15:17 pm
I don't understand. If you want to see how a game plays, you certainly won't be watching a speedrun, because those plays the game as quickly as possible, often by exploiting all kind of glitches. You'll only watch a speedrun if you already know the game very well.

Thus the argument that "speedruns are free publicity for the game" is nonsense.

And personally I'd rather play a game than watch someone play it - the only exception being if I weren't able to successfully get past a point of the game without cheating and/or if the game's control are horrible so I'd rather not play it.

Game reviews are very informative before you are going to buy a game, as long as you pay attention to many reviews and not just one, obviously, and that you keep in mind different people have different tastes.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: thedarkbanshee on September 13, 2015, 01:23:07 pm
Mario maker would not have been a concept if not for rom hackers. Mario maker is based on rom hacking and with the use of new heros that we all know comes directually from a hack called mario cross over. If anything nintendo owes its new found creativity and sucess to rom hackers specifically. Becides the hackers are their biggest fans for making an exysting product better. If that were not true hacks would not exist.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 13, 2015, 01:56:32 pm
I don't understand. If you want to see how a game plays, you certainly won't be watching a speedrun, because those plays the game as quickly as possible, often by exploiting all kind of glitches. You'll only watch a speedrun if you already know the game very well.

Thus the argument that "speedruns are free publicity for the game" is nonsense.

There is that whole "any publicity/anything that keeps you in the public consciousness is good publicity" concept, especially in this world of downloadable games. Likewise there being scope for some kind of mastery, and video evidence thereof, is not a bad thing either -- I find competition quite boring but I can see why some enjoy watching it and this would seem to be a variation on the theme. Not all speedruns would be helpful here but the same token some let's plays do a serviceable job of reviewing the game.

How useful they as a whole is very much up for debate but I am not sure I can dismiss the thing for the reasons you mention.

Mario maker would not have been a concept if not for rom hackers. Mario maker is based on rom hacking and with the use of new heros that we all know comes directually from a hack called mario cross over. If anything nintendo owes its new found creativity and sucess to rom hackers specifically. Becides the hackers are their biggest fans for making an exysting product better. If that were not true hacks would not exist.

That might be pushing it a bit. I have seen level editors in games (or separately) and means of sharing them for decades at this point -- lode runner, one of the earlier attempts at this, was released in 1983. Likewise Nintendo has experimented a bit with this in things like warioware DIY.
Doubtless level editors, ROM hackers and more have been responsible for a lot over the years, some of the more interesting comments to that end came from John Romero when he was playing through Doom with some people at IGN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUU7_BthBWM


On the professional review thing I would be interested to see the specifics of that Mario Galaxy review. I have been asked not to spoil story events past a certain level before (just story events -- I would have been quite free to say the ??th level had bad enemy placement or the story as a whole had problems), and I assume we all saw what went with the Shadows of Mordor thing not so long ago ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjQHfX4WF4U ) as well as the myriad shady things done over the years as far as previews and early info, but not talking about certain levels would be a step beyond anything I have been subject to or seen. That said I have not dealt with Nintendo reviews so who knows.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 13, 2015, 03:44:23 pm
Quote
I don't understand. If you want to see how a game plays, you certainly won't be watching a speedrun, because those plays the game as quickly as possible, often by exploiting all kind of glitches. You'll only watch a speedrun if you already know the game very well.

Thus the argument that "speedruns are free publicity for the game" is nonsense.

And personally I'd rather play a game than watch someone play it - the only exception being if I weren't able to successfully get past a point of the game without cheating and/or if the game's control are horrible so I'd rather not play it.

When I use speedruns to reference how a game plays I don't watch the whole video or anything. I find a video (try to find a glitchless run) and skip ahead 10-15 minutes and watch just for a few minutes. The level of insight that provides cannot be replaced with a review.

The only speedruns I tend to watch all the way through are games that I have already played. Usually it's a game I've beaten many, many times/have worn out and on rare occasions it's because I've decided that a game is no longer worth my time/effort but I'm still curious about how it ends. But in this case it is ALWAYS a game that I have already played and own. Otherwise it's just spoiling all of the fun, right? How exciting would opening your presents on Christmas morning be if you already knew exactly what you were getting? hehe

Quote
Game reviews are very informative before you are going to buy a game, as long as you pay attention to many reviews and not just one, obviously, and that you keep in mind different people have different tastes.

But that seems like a much less efficient method than what I have described above. Would you rather read a spec sheet about something or actually watch someone use it? The second one will usually give you a better idea of what you will be getting. With speedruns you get the advantage of seeing someone who has mastered the game and therefore can gauge it's gameplay even better.

On the other hand (since they've been mentioned here), I don't care for "Let's Play" videos and don't see them as useful (though they obviously would be useful for the devs to assess the learning curve and other aspects). Most I've seen are too long and you have to watch someone else clumsly stumble around a game as they get used to it. Watching someone who knows what they are doing will give you a better sense of what is possible. Like how it would be better to watch a professional tear up a piano rather than gauge how useful the instrument is by watching someone take lessons.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 13, 2015, 05:15:23 pm
If the reviews you are reading do not at least have a section where they attempt to break the game or devise techniques for beating the game... I do not want to say efficiently but combos/techniques that render it easy street then you are reading the wrong reviews.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Bregalad on September 13, 2015, 05:34:09 pm
I find a video (try to find a glitchless run) and skip ahead 10-15 minutes and watch just for a few minutes. The level of insight that provides cannot be replaced with a review.
Then your method for juging games before buying them is probably horrible. You're only watching a very specific part of the game, while a reviewer will summary the whole 50-100 hours experience in a few paragraphs. A review will get you much more insight as watching a random 3 minutes of gameplay, let alone if those are done by a speedrunner that will not play the game "normally".

Personally the only two uses I have of videoes of another person playing a game is
1) as a walkthgough, whenever I'm lost and need to find what to do next, or if I want to see if there is a better technique to beat a boss than the one I was using.
2) f I lost the game or cannot play it any longer, such as old PC games that cannot be easily run on modern machines because of Windows incompatibility problems.
3) If the game's control are so horrible I don't want to play it myself (such as, say, Ghostbusters or Cheetahmen II)
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KaioShin on September 13, 2015, 05:50:08 pm
A well written review will succinctly break down and discuss the mechanics of the whole game in two or three paragraphs. In a video I have to watch half an hour to get an impression on one level of the game, a tiny snapshot. If it's a complex game it won't tell me anything about how good things are balanced overall, how mechanics interact later, etc.

There is nothing I hate more about the current internet trends than that everything needs to be a video. I was playing Arkham Knight and looking for some last collectible objects and I wanted to check a guide so I'm not wasting time stumbling around randomly. It would have been super efficient to have a table, sorted by locations, with a screenshot of the map and of the game screen for each collectible. But no, they released a video walkthrough for it. So I had to randomly skip through a 20 minute video, trying to hit 5 seconds of information that was relevant to me. It's bullshit, it's a massive waste of my time.

Watching a speedrun of a game as a "review" I have to invest a ton of time for information that could be summed up into a few paragraphs, while I'm getting spoiled all over, and getting expectations about how a game has to look when it's played well that I won't be able to fulfill just playing casually. I literally see zero upside to this "review" method whatsoever.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 13, 2015, 06:47:47 pm
*sigh*

A speedrun is a valuable tool for seeing what a game actually plays like once a player knows what they are doing. It alone is not enough to properly judge a game, but I never said it was. It's just something I use to help me make a more informed decision. After I read up on a game (be it a review or just specs), a video of someone actually playing it helps me see if what was said about the game was true and if it appears to be as interesting or uninteresting as it sounds. If you guys don't see the value in that, I'm not going to waste much more of my time trying to convince you. I'm starting to feel like I'm running in circles...

EDIT: I don't see video reviews as much help either. How many times has a movie been made to look awesome by the little 5-10 second snippets you saw, only to be crap?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 13, 2015, 06:51:17 pm
There is nothing I hate more about the current internet trends than that everything needs to be a video.

I have met this a few times now, even in ROM hacking (how I am supposed to edit a hour of me messing around in a hex editor, RAM viewer and other things into a coherent video I have no idea about) but I suppose more than that I can least hope someone one day trips over a dictionary and takes an interest. I hold out no hope that any given random would find a video editor and learn some video editing.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Isao Kronos on September 13, 2015, 08:17:31 pm
so basically this thread boils down to "oldschool japan company is weird and has weird opinions of internet shenangians"


am i right
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Seihen on September 13, 2015, 08:53:18 pm
Mario maker would not have been a concept if not for rom hackers. Mario maker is based on rom hacking and with the use of new heros that we all know comes directually from a hack called mario cross over.

So, there was no such thing as RPG Maker (on PC and pretty much every single console + handheld since SNES), Mario Paint, Wacky Worlds Creativity Studio (Genesis), Fighter Maker (PSX/PS2 and Windows), or any other game making software? Halo never had a map designer?

Sorry, but you're wrong. Level and map designers have been around since the NES days in Excitebike.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 13, 2015, 10:03:31 pm
Quote
so basically this thread boils down to "oldschool japan company is weird and has weird opinions of internet shenangians"


am i right

Nintendo be trippin'
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: MarkGrass on September 13, 2015, 10:41:38 pm
I don't understand. If you want to see how a game plays, you certainly won't be watching a speedrun, because those plays the game as quickly as possible, often by exploiting all kind of glitches.

For me, that's the entire point.

If I truly don't give a crap about it then I definitely don't want to spend hours of my life watching a video of it. Otherwise, I'm stuck with some amateur "reviewer" who makes immature sound effects and other failed attempts at humor, and that's if I'm even lucky enough to find something about it. Or even worse, some asshole who records every their every facial expression and embeds a small view in the a corner.

Also, not every every speed run exploits known glitches.

You'll only watch a speedrun if you already know the game very well.

Thus the argument that "speedruns are free publicity for the game" is nonsense.

Yeah, well, you know, that's just like, uh, your opinion, man. ;P

There's always exceptions.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: obscurumlux01 on September 14, 2015, 05:43:47 pm
There is nothing I hate more about the current internet trends than that everything needs to be a video.

Simple reasons

One is that the majority of people like watching video reviews on YouTube and those get many more views/ad-revenue compared to standard written text reviews

Two is that text reviews can be copied/pasted/plagiarized in whole or in part with little to no effort by anyone.  It has happened before and makes such things far less worthwhile.  By contrast, video reviews/info is much more effort to plagiarize than right click and copy/paste.

Related tangent
Spoiler:
The most notable plagiarist of video gaming content would be Anita Sarkeesian who plagiarized both fan-art (http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/anita-sarkeesian-fanart-plagiarism-theft/) and the playthroughs of several 'Lets Play' people (http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/2013/07/anitas-sources.html) who do playthroughs without commentary like cubex55 (for archival/historical preservation purposes).  But hey, nobody bothers to mention that tidbit in the mainstream media.  Go figure.  I guess getting close to ~$300k isn't enough to pay for someone to properly license content or double-check how fair use requires attribution to count and might not count at all due to the large amount of commercial income she's generated from her videos & resulting PR.

So for most outlets, they go where the money is.  The money is in video.
As a bonus, mobile device internet use has skyrocketed and with it has internet video use.  A lot easier to watch a video than to read text on a tiny mobile screen.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Gamma V on September 15, 2015, 01:01:01 pm
This discussion reminds me of an episode of Game Theory (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyXcr6sDRtw) where MatPat mentions one of Nintendo's past attacks on YouTube videos of their games.  For those not interested in clicking the link, MatPat theorizes that one reason Nintendo is losing the 8th Gen Console War is that Nintendo keeps taking down videos showing their games.  Yeah, they will advertise their games on TV, but not everyone watches TV or the channels where these ads are likely to run.  There's one game I own for which I've never seen an ad on TV: Kirby Squeak Squad.  I learned about this game from the internet, and became more interested when I saw it in action through YouTube Let's Plays.  Tempting as it was to download a ROM of the game, I decided to wait until I could get it legitimately.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: obscurumlux01 on September 15, 2015, 04:25:09 pm
Nintendo is one of very few companies that are not just openly HOSTILE to YouTubers but outright extort them for advertising revenue.
Even when some YouTubers play along they are not permitted to cover any games outside of the (very narrow) scope of games that Nintendo has authorized.

Nintendo doesn't deserve one iota of your respect or money; not anymore.
They have not given a damn about non-casuals since the Wii was released.

Sadly they are the ONLY option (aside from some PC games) for those with young kids getting into gaming.  I'd honestly say just buy retro games & consoles instead (like NES and SNES/Genesis) but that is just how I'd do it.  The whole 'games for kids' genre is pretty terrible compared to retro ones.

You'd probably be better off grabbing a SNES cartridge of Kirby Super Star instead.  Much better investment of your money in a fantastic game.
Besides, you know the DS game is just gonna be a rehash 'hack' of the older stuff anyways.  Original thoughts aren't part of most Nintendo releases (Splatoon being the only new IP in decades).
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on September 15, 2015, 04:36:38 pm
The difference I see with uploading a Let's Play video vs. a movie or music, is that the game requires effort to play, and so the playthrough is content being created (whereas illegally uploading an unedited movie or music does not).
I don't see watching a play video deterring sales much different than someone borrowing a DVD from a friend, watching and deciding they don't want to buy it. (I'd have said Netflix or Redbox, except I'm sure that's still somewhat making money for the copyright owner)
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 15, 2015, 05:02:04 pm
Quote
The difference I see with uploading a Let's Play video vs. a movie or music, is that the game requires effort to play, and so the playthrough is content being created (whereas illegally uploading an unedited movie or music does not).
I don't see watching a play video deterring sales much different than someone borrowing a DVD from a friend, watching and deciding they don't want to buy it. (I'd have said Netflix or Redbox, except I'm sure that's still somewhat making money for the copyright owner)

That's a good way to look at it. I totally agree with this. Conversely, a video of all of the cutscenes strung together would be a different story.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: chillyfeez on September 15, 2015, 05:51:07 pm
That's an interesting spin, KingMike, but has it been tested on the legal battlefield?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 15, 2015, 06:00:40 pm
Quote
That's an interesting spin, KingMike, but has it been tested on the legal battlefield?

It's a good arguement anyway and from my position in this conversation it's perfect since I've made it a point to focus on what makes sense rather than what is legal (because if we only focus on the law we would never be allowed to do anything fun and this site wouldn't exist). :)
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Gemini on September 15, 2015, 06:16:57 pm
So, in a nutshell, if you make money from your let's plays Nintendo wants a slice? Or that would cover any let's play in general? Also what about alternatives such as Twitch?
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on September 15, 2015, 06:24:02 pm
I think the biggest complaints about Nintendo's plan, last I read, is that it would let Nintendo decide what games are allowed to be played and it demanded no games for rival consoles on the same channel.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: SunGodPortal on September 15, 2015, 07:20:49 pm
Quote
So, in a nutshell, if you make money from your let's plays Nintendo wants a slice? Or that would cover any let's play in general? Also what about alternatives such as Twitch?

That's where I feel a little funny about this stuff. I don't think people should make any money off these videos other than Nintendo. The videos themselves I feel do no harm, but making money from them is kind of like stealing (look who's talking, right?). In my opinion Nintendo is the only entity that should make ANY money off of their games besides people who are reselling their own copies of said games *clarification* in the used game market.

Before anyone pieces all of this together, I'll admit that my logic is not always air-tight.

Quote
I think the biggest complaints about Nintendo's plan, last I read, is that it would let Nintendo decide what games are allowed to be played and it demanded no games for rival consoles on the same channel.

If that is the case then that's just nothing but a bunch of BS. It sounds like they are paranoid and petrified by perceived threats to their image and the competition. How weak, Nintendo...
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on September 15, 2015, 08:29:17 pm
So, in a nutshell, if you make money from your let's plays Nintendo wants a slice? Or that would cover any let's play in general? Also what about alternatives such as Twitch?

That happened before. This was more about them going after those doing various types of speedrun and ROM hacks but yeah that was the gist of it.  https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/terms/ has the terms, the most interesting aspect was you could sign over your channel for a slightly more favourable cut though Nintendo would take from everything there (more http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-02-05-nintendo-clarifies-youtube-revenue-share-program-asks-users-to-delete-non-nintendo-videos ). I see such things as a function of more general accounting but had not seen it for something like this in a while.

As for alternatives... there are not really any that operate on the same scale as youtube and the agreement linked above specifically applies to youtube. Twitch were at least a bit less copyright happy, some say things have changed a bit since they got purchased and in the run up to it though.

"Sadly they [Nintendo] are the ONLY option (aside from some PC games) for those with young kids getting into gaming."
What do you seek? Easy controls, some kind of moral guidelines, educational games or something else entirely? Because other than educational games (which are pretty much a PC, maybe handheld, mobile and web affair these days) you can do well enough to fill hours such that it probably goes into "too much" territory on most consoles, perhaps more so if you are willing to sit there and take some of the control work in various driving games and such like. With the possible exception of the lego games not so many aimed more directly at kids manage the halfway amusing for all to play thing like some of the 8-16 bit platformers
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: HaxorKyo on September 19, 2015, 01:55:54 pm
I say just hit them harder than ever. Create a rom hacking company which makes badass rom hacks of Nintendos IP's. People will LOVE the new romhacks and support the work. Nintendo will shut down the rom hacking company thus hurting lots of fans and hurting their own image. People then hate Nintendo and Nintendo goes out of business because no one will support them anymore.

Why do we need to force Nintendo's hand in going out of business? they're well on their way as it is. Sure, they have a major surplus of Wii/DS money but that shit isn't going to last.  They can't even handle Amiibo properly after almost a year. They release the New 3DS and don't even make games for it.  It's insane that people still support them.

I'm not saying this as a fanboy for Sony or Microsoft. quite the contrary actually. I'm saying this as an extremely disappointing, hardcore Nintendo fan from birth. I can't possibly be the only one that's disappointing like this.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Bahamut ZERO on September 19, 2015, 03:12:06 pm
You're not. I grew up coddled up to my sweet, sweet SNES (My mom taught me how to read using FF4, which started my addiction to RPGS), and I've been disappointed since the Wii/DS era.  I enjoyed the N64 (even with some of their design/hardware choices), and I loved the Gamecube (really felt ahead of it's time in ways).


Sure there are some pretty good games for both systems here and there, but this was pretty much the point where Nintendo began dishing out controller gimmicks over gameplay.  I've seen very few games outside of first party titles for the wii that make an actual innovative control scheme that wasn't "flail your arms and do jerking-off motions to win!" I kid you not, I've actually done this in multiple games and began tearing things apart, which admitedly I find hilarious in ways.  Though to be fair, one game actually uses that as a real control mechanic (No More Heroes) which is one of the few non-first party titles I could play for more than 10 minutes.

The DS, on the otherhand, is for the most part pretty enjoyable. Definitely better gaming options compared to the wii (and for the most part, the Sony PSP, it's competition for it's time).  It still felt like it was just a GBA with more screens and buttons, but at least the games generally made better use of its control gimmicks, minus the games that FORCED them with no alternative schemes or basic button controls (like those god-awful Zelda titles and Star Fox).

Now they focus on that AND try to put touch screens into every orrifice they can.  Not to mention they (once again) gave themselves limitations that drove off a fair amount of 3rd party support, starting with the Wii and continuing into the Wii U.

3DS on the other hand, reminds me of a little handheld Gamecube with some of the stuff I've seen. If I could find one for a decent price at a pawn shop I'd have a field day with some of it's library.

But all of that is just my personal opinion, and how I feel about Nintendo these days.
----------------------------------------------------


As far as Let's Plays and Youtube videos go, I'm quite neutral about 'em. I'm not really into watching someone play a game if I'm not sitting in the room with them, but as other people said they are a good way of seeing a game in action outside of a review or gameplay trailer.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on September 20, 2015, 01:37:38 am
Since it was asked before why would Nintendo complain about ROM hacks on youtube yet do nothing to repro makers?

The answer is: probably because it's easier for Nintendo to do. All they need to do is file a complaint to youtube.

There was a time Nightcrawler tried to take down a repro maker making repros of his translation patches. I believe he reported the repro maker to his ISP or US-based website host or whatever. Something like that.
Site went down for like a day or something maybe until the repro maker just found a new host in like the Middle East or Asia, somewhere known to be more tolerant of copyright infringement.

Even though if they're in the US, Nintendo could probably sue the site owner directly, but I'm assuming there's quite of bureaucratic legal work they'd still have to work through to make it all formal and such.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: shadowmanwkp on September 21, 2015, 04:49:28 am
Since it was asked before why would Nintendo complain about ROM hacks on youtube yet do nothing to repro makers?

The answer is: probably because it's easier for Nintendo to do. All they need to do is file a complaint to youtube.

There was a time Nightcrawler tried to take down a repro maker making repros of his translation patches. I believe he reported the repro maker to his ISP or US-based website host or whatever. Something like that.
Site went down for like a day or something maybe until the repro maker just found a new host in like the Middle East or Asia, somewhere known to be more tolerant of copyright infringement.

Even though if they're in the US, Nintendo could probably sue the site owner directly, but I'm assuming there's quite of bureaucratic legal work they'd still have to work through to make it all formal and such.

In my opinion this is also a big fault of youtube.  Content ID matching allows a lot of false positives, and also false negatives (flip or slow down footage). There's barely any human reviewing going on unless you're part of a multi-channel network that has a legal team (polaris, machinima, etc.). Bigger channels can usually make a successful counterclaim, but the smaller fry will almost always get hit by an unfair strike. Nintendo profits from this by simply feeding nearly all their game footage into content ID. Nintendo footage from a channel not associated from them? Bam, instant ad profits to Nintendo withheld, until a counterclaim. Even if you're doing a review or showing sample footage you still can be hit by a penalty or even lose your youtube account. YT is so big nowadays that you can't get around them, so if you want your video to get noticed there aren't that many sites to go to.

Then there's also manual takedowns. If you as a company don't like that one review made by a youtuber, simply file a complaint and YT will remove it instantly. Usually it takes several days before that video shows up after a successful counterclaim. Incidents like those are too many to count, and unless your channel is big enough to make a fuss out of it, you won't see that video ever again. For big channels this is usually positive for them, because the fuss gives them more publicity if they speak out against it, but smaller channels won't be heard.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: tcaud on October 04, 2015, 09:06:05 pm
A lot of people are trying to make money off this stuff. Anytime money is involved corporations will want a cut. Might get them to back off by promising proceeds to charity and whatnot.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: DSwizzy145 on October 08, 2015, 03:51:24 pm
All i see around from most people crying over it is the true pirates/emulation freebies types that get steamed and rowed up over something they can't get free any longer.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: Rodimus Primal on October 14, 2015, 08:39:31 am
I wonder if this pertains to games that will never see the light of day in the US, like BS Zelda or Seiken Dentetsu 3. I just started making videos and intend to put them on Youtube, but for rom hacks I should make sure not to monetize anything for rom hacks...
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KaioShin on October 14, 2015, 09:42:03 am
I wonder if this pertains to games that will never see the light of day in the US, like BS Zelda or Seiken Dentetsu 3. I just started making videos and intend to put them on Youtube, but for rom hacks I should make sure not to monetize anything for rom hacks...

An interesting anecdote from a popular German Twitch channel I'm watching that tries to keep a 24/7 TV-like channel going via Twitch and including some LP content. They are very open about the business side of their channel and they once commented on Nintendo's behaviour on this topic. They said that this policy mostly comes from Nintendo of Japan. The German branch at least rolls their eyes at it themselves. The only thing they can do about it though is just not to enforce the guidelines given by NoJ and leaving German channels with Nintendo material alone. I dunno how NoA handles it, but mostly we can all thank NoJ for this. Reactionary Japanese businessmen who don't understand the internet.

If you play Japan exclusive games, maybe you are more likely to get noticed by NoJ. At the very least, I wouldn't put the game title in Japanese into the description knowing this.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: M-Tee on October 14, 2015, 01:31:39 pm
How many intellectual properties does Nintendo actually own, that this is an issue? Just leave their stuff alone. Refuse to make any videos featuring their first party content, and don't give any views to videos that do.

If it's that big of an issue, cut them out. Make your own stuff. Review and whatever videos of content creators that actually want it. Splatoon is their first successful new IP in how many (decades)? I guarantee that there's some indy and homebrew stuff being made that deserves the youtube coverage more than whatever next-gen Zelda teaser they're running off of now.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: FAST6191 on October 14, 2015, 03:58:52 pm
Between first party, second party and third party that they have some exclusive rights to... they might not be EA or Ubisoft but Nintendo do OK. Likewise they still punch considerably above their weight/financial spending in terms of the public imagination/mind space and though there may be more willing and deserving folks out there you kind of do have to consider your potential audience. I agree that an approach not unlike the one Google took with news sites (for those unaware Google was being pestered by news sites to not index their news in Google's news feed, Google in turn said fair enough and we will drop you if that is what you want before promptly doing as such. Traffic dived for the news sites and they realised the error of their ways) would be a good strategy, however... I would make a herding cats comment but given the business and legal nous of the let's play set that would be an insult to cats.
Title: Re: Nintendo vs Youtube. Round 3. This time it might involve ROM hacks.
Post by: KingMike on October 14, 2015, 05:28:37 pm
How many intellectual properties does Nintendo actually own, that this is an issue? Just leave their stuff alone. Refuse to make any videos featuring their first party content, and don't give any views to videos that do.
Thing is what Nintendo has their hands on is undoubtedly a fair number of the most popular IPs in gaming history: Mario (and other associated franchises like DK and Yoshi), Zelda, Kirby, Pokemon. And still fairly popular F-Zero, Animal Crossing, Fire Emblem.