5 ms·

Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Conten

Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines. This is mostly, but not only, Zelda Breath of the Wild content, and mostly, but not only, modded game content. It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. Apparently the creator in question (PointCrow) hasn't heard anything back from Nintendo after contacting them about the issue. I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games, potentially increasing sales. The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game.

encryptluks2 3y ago
> It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. If Nintendo has shown to be hostile towards their own userbase, then really the only complaints should be about existing content. If creators keep paying for Nintendo games and content now that they've seen how they act, then the creators bear a substantial amount of blame going forward.
- stefandesu 3y ago
  I guess you have a point, but I personally wouldn't blame creators for sticking with Nintendo games if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. It's like telling Apple developers who complain about Apple's bad developer relations to move to a different platform. I don't blame developers (or users) for these issues because I completely understand not wanting to transition your whole life and career to a different platform that you might enjoy less.
  - manuelmoreale 3y ago
    > if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. Isn’t that just part of the risk you accept by doing that kind of job? Every job has some risks attached to it and this is not unusual behavior for Nintendo.
mjr00 3y ago
> I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. This is pretty specifically a Nintendo thing. Sony, MS, and pretty much every major game studio are fine with people streaming content of their game, even mods. Hell, it usually ends up being the opposite--game studios offer 6 or 7 figure deals to popular streamers to play their game as marketing play. Worked for Apex Legends. Nintendo has always been really, really aggressive about this, to the point where it doesn't make sense. They've aggressively cracked down on fan projects (e.g. AM2R) which is at least arguably justifiable from a copyright/IP perspective. But they've also threatened to take down any speedrun video with a Nintendo game in it. And they had a major row with EVO about whether Smash could even be played at the tournament a few years back; during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter.
- simoncion 3y ago
  > ...during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter. The E-sports scene is kinda awful, to be honest. Historically, Nintendo has been interested in making fun and interesting toys for people to play with. E-sports people are usually VERY SERIOUS about what they do, and often VERY PARTICULAR about how games work, and VERY VOCAL about changes to a game that radically changes how they've become accustomed to playing the game. Catering to money-making E-sports is generally incompatible with making fun and interesting toys... they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences.
  - smcl 3y ago
    > they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences This is incorrect, and I think you're maybe missing some context. What is being referred to here isn't esports players being whiny or particular about changing a game in a way that would hurt casual users. What's happened a few times recently is that Nintendo were very heavy handed in cracking down on things like Smash Brothers e-sports tournaments: https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-world-tour-shut-down-event-tournament https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-... So here they have already made a game that is beloved by both casual players and professional players, and they seem really keen on cracking down on the latter group. They don't need to take any special steps to cater to e-sports players or tournaments, they just needed to not go out of their way to crack down on them.
simoncion 3y ago
> The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. Eh, that _might_ hurt initial sales of the game. Or it might promote sales of the game, given that prominent video game streamers won't be streaming it, so it'll be more difficult to "play" the game by watching someone else play it. I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have (and would have had a good time with) because I watched someone's recorded gameplay video.
- tpxl 3y ago
  > I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage, and have bought games I've watched people play, that I ended up never playing, or playing for only a couple of hours.
  - simoncion 3y ago
    > I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage... Good promotional materials provide lots of gameplay footage, and Nintendo's definitely a company that I'd trust to not misrepresent the nature of their games and toys in the promotional materials. Regardless, I'm quite aware that there are variety of folks out there with a variety of purchasing habits. I was responding in large part to the absolutist, histrionic statements made by the OP: > It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger ... I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games[.] [These actions] will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.)
    - stefandesu 3y ago
      > (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.) I concur that 1) we can't say for sure what effect it would have on sales if prominent content creators did not cover the game, and 2) even if there's a negative impact on sales, it could be negligibly small. However, I'm still convinced that having big content creators cover your new game release would not hurt sales, and I'm also convinced that Nintendo has nothing to gain from these actions in terms of money or reputation. Even if it only ever reaches a small minority of people right now, I believe that they are damaging their reputation and lose trust, not only with content creators, but with the players as well. And that's just sad.
bachmeier 3y ago
You're talking about the company that sold Mario Maker to six year olds, then deleted the games they created without warning or explanation. The only thing parents remember about that ** was the crying. That was the end of Nintendo anything in our house.
- pharrington 3y ago
  Can you explain this? Super Mario Maker 1 levels are still up and playable.
  - bachmeier 3y ago
    They deleted most content uploaded by kids. More explanation here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com/nintendo-is-deleting-peoples-mario-maker-stages-without-1753248157 https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com...
    - pharrington 3y ago
      So there literally is an explanation from Nintendo. Did you explain to your kids that their levels are still on their Wii U storage?
      - bachmeier 3y ago
        I'll exit this conversation, but if you click the link, you'll see that the title is "Nintendo Is Deleting People's Mario Maker Stages Without Telling Them Why". The summary paragraph says, "Ultimately, the lack of communication is what’s frustrating. If Nintendo wants to have strict policies, that’s fine, but let creators know what they’re dealing with, so they can work around it. Not everyone has a million Twitter followers they can easily share a level with, so it’s unfortunate that some well-made stages may be permanently gone simply because they got lost in the noise." If you have a beef with the article, you'll have to contact the author.
        3y ago
KennyBlanken 3y ago
> Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines Would everyone please stop pretending like a company's "content guidelines" can enforce any restrictions on fair use purposes? Making a cosplay costume of a character is fair use. Making a video of you playing a game is fair use. Fan art about a video game is fair use. 'Content guidelines' pretend to "give" you rights you already have, and then threaten to take them away if you do thinks they don't like.

encryptluks2 3y ago

> It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. If Nintendo has shown to be hostile towards their own userbase, then really the only complaints should be about existing content. If creators keep paying for Nintendo games and content now that they've seen how they act, then the creators bear a substantial amount of blame going forward.

stefandesu 3y ago
I guess you have a point, but I personally wouldn't blame creators for sticking with Nintendo games if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. It's like telling Apple developers who complain about Apple's bad developer relations to move to a different platform. I don't blame developers (or users) for these issues because I completely understand not wanting to transition your whole life and career to a different platform that you might enjoy less.
- manuelmoreale 3y ago
  > if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. Isn’t that just part of the risk you accept by doing that kind of job? Every job has some risks attached to it and this is not unusual behavior for Nintendo.

mjr00 3y ago

> I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. This is pretty specifically a Nintendo thing. Sony, MS, and pretty much every major game studio are fine with people streaming content of their game, even mods. Hell, it usually ends up being the opposite--game studios offer 6 or 7 figure deals to popular streamers to play their game as marketing play. Worked for Apex Legends. Nintendo has always been really, really aggressive about this, to the point where it doesn't make sense. They've aggressively cracked down on fan projects (e.g. AM2R) which is at least arguably justifiable from a copyright/IP perspective. But they've also threatened to take down any speedrun video with a Nintendo game in it. And they had a major row with EVO about whether Smash could even be played at the tournament a few years back; during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter.

simoncion 3y ago
> ...during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter. The E-sports scene is kinda awful, to be honest. Historically, Nintendo has been interested in making fun and interesting toys for people to play with. E-sports people are usually VERY SERIOUS about what they do, and often VERY PARTICULAR about how games work, and VERY VOCAL about changes to a game that radically changes how they've become accustomed to playing the game. Catering to money-making E-sports is generally incompatible with making fun and interesting toys... they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences.
- smcl 3y ago
  > they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences This is incorrect, and I think you're maybe missing some context. What is being referred to here isn't esports players being whiny or particular about changing a game in a way that would hurt casual users. What's happened a few times recently is that Nintendo were very heavy handed in cracking down on things like Smash Brothers e-sports tournaments: https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-world-tour-shut-down-event-tournament https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-... So here they have already made a game that is beloved by both casual players and professional players, and they seem really keen on cracking down on the latter group. They don't need to take any special steps to cater to e-sports players or tournaments, they just needed to not go out of their way to crack down on them.

simoncion 3y ago

> The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. Eh, that _might_ hurt initial sales of the game. Or it might promote sales of the game, given that prominent video game streamers won't be streaming it, so it'll be more difficult to "play" the game by watching someone else play it. I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have (and would have had a good time with) because I watched someone's recorded gameplay video.

tpxl 3y ago
> I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage, and have bought games I've watched people play, that I ended up never playing, or playing for only a couple of hours.
- simoncion 3y ago
  > I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage... Good promotional materials provide lots of gameplay footage, and Nintendo's definitely a company that I'd trust to not misrepresent the nature of their games and toys in the promotional materials. Regardless, I'm quite aware that there are variety of folks out there with a variety of purchasing habits. I was responding in large part to the absolutist, histrionic statements made by the OP: > It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger ... I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games[.] [These actions] will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.)
  - stefandesu 3y ago
    > (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.) I concur that 1) we can't say for sure what effect it would have on sales if prominent content creators did not cover the game, and 2) even if there's a negative impact on sales, it could be negligibly small. However, I'm still convinced that having big content creators cover your new game release would not hurt sales, and I'm also convinced that Nintendo has nothing to gain from these actions in terms of money or reputation. Even if it only ever reaches a small minority of people right now, I believe that they are damaging their reputation and lose trust, not only with content creators, but with the players as well. And that's just sad.

bachmeier 3y ago

You're talking about the company that sold Mario Maker to six year olds, then deleted the games they created without warning or explanation. The only thing parents remember about that ** was the crying. That was the end of Nintendo anything in our house.

pharrington 3y ago
Can you explain this? Super Mario Maker 1 levels are still up and playable.
- bachmeier 3y ago
  They deleted most content uploaded by kids. More explanation here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com/nintendo-is-deleting-peoples-mario-maker-stages-without-1753248157 https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com...
  - pharrington 3y ago
    So there literally is an explanation from Nintendo. Did you explain to your kids that their levels are still on their Wii U storage?
    - bachmeier 3y ago
      I'll exit this conversation, but if you click the link, you'll see that the title is "Nintendo Is Deleting People's Mario Maker Stages Without Telling Them Why". The summary paragraph says, "Ultimately, the lack of communication is what’s frustrating. If Nintendo wants to have strict policies, that’s fine, but let creators know what they’re dealing with, so they can work around it. Not everyone has a million Twitter followers they can easily share a level with, so it’s unfortunate that some well-made stages may be permanently gone simply because they got lost in the noise." If you have a beef with the article, you'll have to contact the author.
      - 3y ago

KennyBlanken 3y ago

> Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines Would everyone please stop pretending like a company's "content guidelines" can enforce any restrictions on fair use purposes? Making a cosplay costume of a character is fair use. Making a video of you playing a game is fair use. Fan art about a video game is fair use. 'Content guidelines' pretend to "give" you rights you already have, and then threaten to take them away if you do thinks they don't like.