While the video might be right or wrong, youtube is huge as far as gaming goes and Nintendo being anal about it is not helping them.
that's what they get for throwing away free advertising. Seriously game companies should be way less anal about youtube
He has a point. Why does Nintendo hate internet communities in a time when every one of their contemporaries has realized how much leg work they put in?
Haven't watched the video, but what does it mean lack of YouTube support..? There's a YouTube app and the browser is even better than that. Am I missing something obvious..? /
Yeah, this.The Wii U is not a compelling product. All the Youtube videos in the world aren't going to change that. It's NOT marketing. It's that it's not appealing to the mass market at all.
I think there's a glaring flaw in this argument. The 3DS.
If Nintendo's Youtube stance was to blame, the 3DS wouldn't have sold 40m.
For sure, but YouTube is becoming an increasingly important avenue for exposure, and turning your back on it is extremely short-sighted, and will only become increasingly damaging.
It must be youtube. It couldn't be that a Nintendo console has never cost more than $250 until now, and the tablet anchor making the price close to next gen while being crammed with barely-better-than-last-gen tech.
LOL Game theory.
No one should pay him money. Not even McDonald's.So basically Nintendo should pay money to PewDiePie?
It'll be a college course one day
So Game Theory recently published a video that ties Nintendo's lack of YouTube support with why the Wii U isn't selling, based on the idea of Flappy Bird's success, which took off only when PewDiePie made a video about it.
It's an interesting idea, and while I'm Nintendo's backward policy undoubtedly is part of the issue, I personally don't think it's the main issue. The Wii U sold poorly from basically the start, predating Nintendo's YouTube stance. And while their YT stance certainly hasn't helped (relaxing those policies certainly wouldn't hurt their chances of regaining momentum) it doesn't change the fact that the Wii U appeared to be an undesirable product to the masses from the start.
But if anything, I think the video is further argument that Nintendo really needs to rethink some of its policies--and well, almost everything in terms of what their next move should be.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyXcr6sDRtw
Nintendo is preventing people from showcasing their products to the greater masses.
And the BS that the branding for the WiiU screwed them over has to rethink their conclusion. The iPhone has a bunch of different models but even a person who doesn't buy the phones know that their are different generations and different models within each generation.
To be fair, $250 is worth a lot less than it used to be. At some point you have to go up.
The main problem is that Nintendo is taking all the ad revenue via YouTube's content ID system. Whilst other companies let YouTubers keep their ad revenue, Nintendo will constantly content ID you and claim all advertising revenue. I know a few YouTubers who gave been content ID'd for having a sound effect from Nintendo game (eg. Mario's coin sound effect was her text message noise in a non gaming related video) and all of their ad money went straight to Nintendo. You can dispute over unfair content ID cases (like my example), but the money that the video made until the issue gets disputed still all goes to whichever company claims it (aka Nintendo). There's a 30 day response to disputes so companies can (and consistently do) wait until the last day to wring most of the ad money from videos. It's really fucked up and when you know that a company always does it I'd imagine people would try to avoid their games, especially if they really care about their ad revenue.No they aren't. I just typed in a few Nintendo games with "Let's Play" and found these channels
https://www.youtube.com/user/cobanermani456/videos
https://www.youtube.com/user/Geilkind/videos
https://www.youtube.com/user/kwingsletsplays/videos
They're almost entirely devoted to Nintendo walkthroughs, and the channels have a pretty large amount of subscribers. And there are a bunch of others. You can literally type in any Wii U game with "Let's Play" and you'll find a ton of results. The whole anti-Youtube thing from Nintendo has been completely overblown. There are plenty of videos out there for anyone that wants to see them.
I've seen quite a few Nintendo adverts on Youtube videos, I had a NES Remix one just the other day. I really don't see the point of this article at all...
Though didn't Nintendo ease off on their anti-youtube stuff lately?
The main problem is that Nintendo is taking all the ad revenue via YouTube's content ID system. Whilst other companies let YouTubers keep their ad revenue, Nintendo will constantly content ID you and claim all advertising revenue. I know a few YouTubers who gave been content ID'd for having a sound effect from Nintendo game (eg. Mario's coin sound effect was her text message noise in a non gaming related video) and all of their ad money went straight to Nintendo. You can dispute over unfair content ID cases (like my example), but the money that the video made until the issue gets disputed still all goes to whichever company claims it (aka Nintendo). There's a 30 day response to disputes so companies can (and consistently do) wait until the last day to wring most of the ad money from videos. It's really fucked up and when you know that a company always does it I'd imagine people would try to avoid their games, especially if they really care about their ad revenue.
I saw a TheBitBlock video yesterday (now removed) of Super Luigi Bros from NES Remix 2 where he altered the music because it was apparently claimed.
The main problem is that Nintendo is taking all the ad revenue via YouTube's content ID system. Whilst other companies let YouTubers keep their ad revenue, Nintendo will constantly content ID you and claim all advertising revenue. I know a few YouTubers who gave been content ID'd for having a sound effect from Nintendo game (eg. Mario's coin sound effect was her text message noise in a non gaming related video) and all of their ad money went straight to Nintendo. You can dispute over unfair content ID cases (like my example), but the money that the video made until the issue gets disputed still all goes to whichever company claims it (aka Nintendo). There's a 30 day response to disputes so companies can (and consistently do) wait until the last day to wring most of the ad money from videos. It's really fucked up and when you know that a company always does it I'd imagine people would try to avoid their games, especially if they really care about their ad revenue.
Luckily there are enough Nintendo fans who don't give a shit about the ad revenue to make videos, but a lot of the bigger ones do (Game Grumps seems to be an exception, since they play whatever the fuck they feel like).
You know, I agree that Content ID claims over something like sound effects is fucked up, and using footage for a review very clearly falls under fair use, but to be honest I don't see the problem with a company insisting on receiving ad royalties from, say, a Let's Play. I think they should probably at least get a cut...nobody has an inalienable right to make a career out of talking over video game footage, so this really shouldn't be an outrage.
The way it works now is they don't get a cut; they get the entire amount , minus whatever % YouTube makes
Plus it doesn't only affect Let's Plays, as it potentially affects any video that makes use of the footage, including reviews
That is one of the dumbest arguments for the failure of the Wii U that I have ever heard
Totally unrelated to the video presented:
I think Flappy Bird is pretty instructive as to how Nintendo has lost their edge. Flappy Bird became popular largely due to word of mouth and the incredibly low barrier to access. People heard about it from a friend, downloaded it during the conversation where they heard about it from their friend, and played it. They used social services to point out they were playing it, and it frustrated them, or they hated it, or they loved it, which further spread word of mouth. The game cost $0.00 and was a small download size, so no trouble to just download it right then and there.
The Wii was popular because people became instant converts. It was easy. The controller was easier than any other controller. The remote metaphor was understood instantly. The pack-in game was of obvious interest to a broad group of people, and the rules of each sport explained themselves obviously. The barriers to using the Wii were far lower than the barriers to using conventional consoles.
Now there are easier options. Even if Nintendo had great software today, their method of delivery puts up barriers. Barriers get in the way of casual or low-investment users checking out their product. People can debate to high heavens whether mobile sucks or whatever, whether Mario is genius and <insert mobile game here> is terrible. But if someone said "What's the absolutely easiest way for me to play a game in the next few minutes", you'd point to their mobile phone. And that can't be underestimated as a market that Nintendo once had and now doesn't and won't.
You know, I agree that Content ID claims over something like sound effects is fucked up, and using footage for a review very clearly falls under fair use, but to be honest I don't see the problem with a company insisting on receiving ad royalties from, say, a Let's Play. I think they should probably at least get a cut...nobody has an inalienable right to make a career out of talking over video game footage, so this really shouldn't be an outrage.
Nintendo did just fine without YouTube before. Don't see why lack of YouTube would hurt them now.
I have learned nothing in this thread. But at least seeing this picture makes me appreciate how great my dreamcast and gamecube are.