Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/16/nintendo-enforces-copyright-on-youtube-lets-plays

Take it with salt, as usual, as the info mainly stems from YouTube users now.

tl,dr: If you want to e.g. Let's Play a Nintendo game, you have to add advertisements at the beginning and the end of the video with their profit going exclusively thus only going to Nintendo, not the person that made the video. Way to show your average YT LP'er the finger.

While I like the fact that they're not just outright blocking it, I think it's a colossal dick move to force Nintendo Ads to play, and that revenue goes to Nintendo.

"Hey buddy, I'm giving your game "free" advertisement. I bought the game, I played the game, I recorded my thoughts while playing the game, my own intellectual property, and I edited it down and made it look enjoyable, and now you're telling me I don't even get my ad revenue?"

seriously Nintendo?!

People still play nintendo?

 Frazzled wrote:
People still play nintendo?

I enjoyed the Wii, but lost custody of it...

(totally worth it)

We have a wii. The Boy has playstation XVI or whatever now and some other system too. The Daughter is gnerally post gaming. It cuts into her intranetz.

I bought a Wii with a friend, we each paid 30 bucks for it. Also got House of the Dead and Smash Bros to go with it. Worth it for that, but I wouldn't have ever paid full price for a Wii. Nintendo hasn't been worth it since the 64, and that was only good due to non-Nintendo made games: Golden Eye, Gauntlet, Perfect Dark, Conkers Bad Fur Day, and the single worthwhile Nintendo game: Smash Bros.

timetowaste85 wrote:I bought a Wii with a friend, we each paid 30 bucks for it. Also got House of the Dead and Smash Bros to go with it. Worth it for that, but I wouldn't have ever paid full price for a Wii. Nintendo hasn't been worth it since the 64, and that was only good due to non-Nintendo made games: Golden Eye, Gauntlet, Perfect Dark, Conkers Bad Fur Day, and the single worthwhile Nintendo game: Smash Bros.

Mario64 was awesome

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I bought a Wii with a friend, we each paid 30 bucks for it. Also got House of the Dead and Smash Bros to go with it. Worth it for that, but I wouldn't have ever paid full price for a Wii. Nintendo hasn't been worth it since the 64, and that was only good due to non-Nintendo made games: Golden Eye, Gauntlet, Perfect Dark, Conkers Bad Fur Day, and the single worthwhile Nintendo game: Smash Bros.

I greatly enjoyed my GameCube, still have that and my N64 in fact

 azazel the cat wrote:

Mario64 was awesome

I still have hand cramps caused by Mario64 marathons... Loved that game. Got all 120 stars, baby!

 Frazzled wrote:
People still play nintendo?

Increasingly not. EA have announced they are stopping all their Wii U Games.

It is beginning to look like a failed format. The 3Di hasn't set the world on fire, either.

While I work for PlayStation, I think it would be a serious blow to the whole games industry if Nintendo dropped out of the emerging generation of consoles (PS4, XBox720).

I'm taking this with a pinch of salt. A story largely sourced from YouTube users and being published on IGN is not what I'd call reliable.

I sincerely hope Nintendo does stay in the market. They've consistently proven that they make excellent games (With the exception of the original NES games there has never been a bad Legend of Zelda game, Metroid is almost entirely brilliant, Mario remains incredibly well polished and designed, Pokemon continues to be a huge amount of fun etc...) and they do make great hardware. I would be very sad to see them go. Partially as it would be the end of an era-Nintendo is the last of the great 80s-90s gaming companies. Sega still makes games but doesn't make hardware, Atari is dead as a doornail, same for NEC...Nintendo is the last surviving legacy from the time.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
People still play nintendo?

Increasingly not. EA have announced they are stopping all their Wii U Games.

It is beginning to look like a failed format. The 3Di hasn't set the world on fire, either.

While I work for PlayStation, I think it would be a serious blow to the whole games industry if Nintendo dropped out of the emerging generation of consoles (PS4, XBox720).

I think part of EA's decision might have been how few micro transactions they could also tack on through the WiiU

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
People still play nintendo?

Increasingly not. EA have announced they are stopping all their Wii U Games.

It is beginning to look like a failed format. The 3Di hasn't set the world on fire, either.

While I work for PlayStation, I think it would be a serious blow to the whole games industry if Nintendo dropped out of the emerging generation of consoles (PS4, XBox720).

I think part of EA's decision might have been how few micro transactions they could also tack on through the WiiU

Yeah, Nintendo outright refused to sign a deal that would have let EA used the console as a microtransaction machine, if I remember rightly.

Peh, it's EA. No great loss. Nintendo are capable of making great games by themselves.

Never liked nintendo anyway.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

Peh, it's EA. No great loss. Nintendo are capable of making great games by themselves.

EA isn't a great loss? Have a look at the games EA produces and the huge customer base they generate? Nintendo is in dire need of customers. They WiiU sold terribly, the system has not a SINGLE system seller yet...in fact, what was the last "big" game that was released for the WiiU? Super Mario?

Nintendo struggles. They are trailing by a long shot right now...lost in the past if you want. All they released so far was another Mario Brothers, the very same game released for the Wii just in current-gen HD and with new levels. That's it. And now, we get a year of Luigi, you know, the most favorite character Nintendo has...and now that, Nintendo, formerly known for a very friendly relation to their users, slaps the same userbase right in the face? I don't know what's going on at the moment, but Nintendo needs to start getting their stuff right.

The Wii U sold really well at first, but then nose dived due to complete lack of follow up. I'm not saying it would have been the biggest thing ever if they actually had, I'm just saying you can't release a system and then no new games for half a year and expect to do well. I don't know what they were thinking.

Squigsquasher wrote:With the exception of the original NES games there has never been a bad Legend of Zelda game.

You'd better only be talking about Adventures of Link, and even then "bad" is way too strong a term. I'm thinking a more apt description would be "not worth building a religion around, but still far above average".

Ahtman wrote:The Wii U sold really well at first, but then nose dived due to complete lack of follow up. I'm not saying it would have been the biggest thing ever if they actually had, I'm just saying you can't release a system and then no new games for half a year and expect to do well. I don't know what they were thinking.

I know what they were thinking: "Hey, remember the Jaguar? That thing was awesome. Let's do that."

 azazel the cat wrote:

Squigsquasher wrote:With the exception of the original NES games there has never been a bad Legend of Zelda game.

You'd better only be talking about Adventures of Link, and even then "bad" is way too strong a term. I'm thinking a more apt description would be "not worth building a religion around, but still far above average".

No, I played the original LoZ as well, and daaayum, it was bad. Putting aside the technical limitations, we have:

>A "map" that is about as much use as a chocolate teapot (It's just an unmarked grey square).
>A pitifully small amount of health to start with.
>A rubbish attack that becomes completely worthless upon losing health.
>Absolutely no indication where you are supposed to be going.
>Almost no storyline outside of the manual.
>Over-reliance on the manual (basically, if you don't have the manual because you lost it or you're playing it on an emulator, you're screwed. Which is ludicrous).
>No tutorials of any kind.
>Respawning enemies.
>Lack of checkpoints.
>A death counter that basically taunts you for not living up to its ridiculous standards.
>Generally absurdly difficult and poorly designed gameplay, which throws you in at the deep end and gives you absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're meant to do.

I couldn't even find the first dungeon. I love Zelda, but there is no doubt in my eyes that the original game is a total fething mess.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
While I work for PlayStation, I think it would be a serious blow to the whole games industry if Nintendo dropped out of the emerging generation of consoles (PS4, XBox720).

I'm not so sure it would. Nintendo have been far more focused on their handheld machines since the Game Cube flopped. This habit they have seemingly fallen into of 'Release a new console, support it for the bare minimum time and then concentrate on our next handheld unit instead' is the reason I had no interest in the WiiU.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Squigsquasher wrote:With the exception of the original NES games there has never been a bad Legend of Zelda game.

You'd better only be talking about Adventures of Link, and even then "bad" is way too strong a term. I'm thinking a more apt description would be "not worth building a religion around, but still far above average".

No, I played the original LoZ as well, and daaayum, it was bad. Putting aside the technical limitations, we have:

>A "map" that is about as much use as a chocolate teapot (It's just an unmarked grey square).
>A pitifully small amount of health to start with.
>A rubbish attack that becomes completely worthless upon losing health.
>Absolutely no indication where you are supposed to be going.
>Almost no storyline outside of the manual.
>Over-reliance on the manual (basically, if you don't have the manual because you lost it or you're playing it on an emulator, you're screwed. Which is ludicrous).
>No tutorials of any kind.
>Respawning enemies.
>Lack of checkpoints.
>A death counter that basically taunts you for not living up to its ridiculous standards.
>Generally absurdly difficult and poorly designed gameplay, which throws you in at the deep end and gives you absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're meant to do.

I couldn't even find the first dungeon. I love Zelda, but there is no doubt in my eyes that the original game is a total fething mess.

1) IIRC once you got the map item the minimap became useful.

2) 3 is the standard amount of health for a Zelda game.

3) The ranged sword was not rubbish.

4) True, but it was assumed you would have the manual.

5) This was annoying.

6) Once you were past the second labyrinth the manual was pretty much useless.

7) A tutorial might have been nice but it wasn't necessary.

8) Game not for wimps.

9) As above.

10) Yeah, don't die.

11) Yes it was difficult, but not absurd. It actually made you think, unlike many games that have followed it. I kinda like games where I have to puzzle over something.


The only real thing I can criticize that game over was the lack of prompts and in-game story.

Squigsquasher takes great joy in trolling Nintendo fans, if the video game forum is any indication. Just throwing that out there.

I am a die-hard nintendo fan, and I'm really disappointed with the WiiU. Mario was fun, as they all are, but damn there hasn't been jack released that I'm interested in since. If they burn me for the amount that I spent on the WiiU I don't think anything is going to win me back to this company. Microsoft, for all its faults, is still the console maker that hasn't (catastrophically) let me down. If a LoZ or Metroid game, or hell, another decent Mario game comes out the WiiU could win me back but the avalanche of shovelware that is sadly becoming a Nintendo trademark is only adding to my nerd rage.

Taking with salt, since Let's Plays come under Fair Use.

Myself, I'm prepared to wait. I rarely get consoles when they first come out, and I think if given time, the WiiU will have some brilliant games. Bayonetta 2 is set to come out for it, and if the first one was anything to go by, it will be awesome, a Zelda game is a given (every single Nintendo system with the exception of the Virtual Boy, the Game and Watch and the Colour TV Games have had a Zelda game) and as we all know there is no such thing as a bad Zelda game (first 2 and the CD-i games aside), a Super Smash Brothers game is certain (which is always good), I can imagine another Metroid being made for it, and if the touchpad was integrated properly I can see it working very well (have it function as an Aliens-style motion scanner, perhaps?), Pikmin 3 is confirmed (I think)...

So yeah, give the system time and it will grow. I'm planning on getting a WiiU myself-Bayonetta 2 alone was enough to persuade me, if I'm honest.

Also, why all the GameCube hate? It was a nice little system with some great games.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:

Peh, it's EA. No great loss. Nintendo are capable of making great games by themselves.

EA isn't a great loss? Have a look at the games EA produces and the huge customer base they generate? Nintendo is in dire need of customers. They WiiU sold terribly, the system has not a SINGLE system seller yet...in fact, what was the last "big" game that was released for the WiiU? Super Mario?

Nintendo struggles. They are trailing by a long shot right now...lost in the past if you want. All they released so far was another Mario Brothers, the very same game released for the Wii just in current-gen HD and with new levels. That's it. And now, we get a year of Luigi, you know, the most favorite character Nintendo has...and now that, Nintendo, formerly known for a very friendly relation to their users, slaps the same userbase right in the face? I don't know what's going on at the moment, but Nintendo needs to start getting their stuff right.

Actually the WiiU DIDNT sell terribly. Infact, if you compare its sales numbers from its launch to last month, it OUTSOLD the 360 and PS3 in the same time frame from their launches. The reason people keep THINKING its selling poorly is because people (Nintendo included) boasted about how much its going to sell at launch. They over shot their estimate by a huge margin.

Also, the EA thing, yes they wanted to basically have the WiiU be a micro transaction ATM and tried to cut Nintendo out of a profit more or less. So Nintendo, as kindly as possible, told them to frack off.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And personally to be OT for the first time in a week



I dont really blame them for this move. Lets Play takes a game, and plays through the game in question. Sure it has the potential to give free advertisement to the game, but it also has as much a chance to do the opposite, and cause people to say "eh, Ive seen the ending now, dont care to buy it"

Meh. Most "Lets Play" things that I watch are either because I'm stuck on something on that particular game(in which case I've already bought it) or its for a game I wouldn't have bought anyway and I'm just bored.

No sympathy from me. The LPers are trying to make money off of someone else's work.

Squigsquasher wrote:No, I played the original LoZ as well, and daaayum, it was bad. Putting aside the technical limitations, we have:

>A "map" that is about as much use as a chocolate teapot (It's just an unmarked grey square).
Unless you get the map item, in which case the grey square becomes a map
>A pitifully small amount of health to start with.
Man up, Nancy
>A rubbish attack that becomes completely worthless upon losing health.
Guess you'll need some timing & dexterity, then.
>Absolutely no indication where you are supposed to be going.
Yeah, okay. A fair criticism.
>Almost no storyline outside of the manual.
Welcome to NES.
>Over-reliance on the manual (basically, if you don't have the manual because you lost it or you're playing it on an emulator, you're screwed. Which is ludicrous).
emulator implies that the Internet exists. I'm sure you can find an alternate.
>No tutorials of any kind.
What did you need a tutorial for? Do you remember what the NES controller looked like?
>Respawning enemies.
NES again.
>Lack of checkpoints.
Death used to mean something. You kids today are spoiled.
>A death counter that basically taunts you for not living up to its ridiculous standards.
Did the big mean game hurt your feelings?
>Generally absurdly difficult and poorly designed gameplay, which throws you in at the deep end and gives you absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're meant to do.
Yeah, it's definitely not Kirby's Air Ride

KingCracker wrote:I dont really blame them for this move. Lets Play takes a game, and plays through the game in question. Sure it has the potential to give free advertisement to the game, but it also has as much a chance to do the opposite, and cause people to say "eh, Ive seen the ending now, dont care to buy it"

If the ending of the game is the sole motivator to play it, then that is a hallmark of a terrible game. Video games, more so than most things, are about the journey rather than the destination.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
No sympathy from me. The LPers are trying to make money off of someone else's work.

Those damn rally drivers - they buy some car, then race it and they keep the money they make from racing instead of giving it all to the company that made the car!

Indeed. I rarely actually finish a game of Total War. I just play it cause playing it is fun.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Squigsquasher wrote:No, I played the original LoZ as well, and daaayum, it was bad. Putting aside the technical limitations, we have:

>A "map" that is about as much use as a chocolate teapot (It's just an unmarked grey square).
Unless you get the map item, in which case the grey square becomes a map
You should start with a map to begin with
>A pitifully small amount of health to start with.
Man up, Nancy
Not all of us like dying over and over thanks to a pitiful amount of health
>A rubbish attack that becomes completely worthless upon losing health.
Guess you'll need some timing & dexterity, then.
Yeah, 'cause that's really possible with a crummy D-pad.
>Absolutely no indication where you are supposed to be going.
Yeah, okay. A fair criticism.
>Almost no storyline outside of the manual.
Welcome to NES.
Just because something is typical of its era does not mean it is good. Otherwise we would be singing the praises of bubonic plague and witch hunts from the Middle Ages
>Over-reliance on the manual (basically, if you don't have the manual because you lost it or you're playing it on an emulator, you're screwed. Which is ludicrous).
emulator implies that the Internet exists. I'm sure you can find an alternate.
Over-reliance on the manual is never a good thing. The manual in a game should be a quick point of reference, not an absolute necessity to beating the game
>No tutorials of any kind.
What did you need a tutorial for? Do you remember what the NES controller looked like?
How about giving some kind of help as to how to defeat some of the enemies, like the seemingly-invincible waterbourne rock-chucking thing?
>Respawning enemies.
NES again.
See above. Datedness does not excuse terrible design
>Lack of checkpoints.
Death used to mean something. You kids today are spoiled.
What, spoiled with games that you can actually complete without an Olympian expenditure of effort? Your point comes down to a rose-tinted view of your childhood-if the games of your childhood had been as easy as modern one and modern games were as hard as old NES games, you would be complaining that "All these modern games are way too difficult, back in my day games were simple"
>A death counter that basically taunts you for not living up to its ridiculous standards.
Did the big mean game hurt your feelings?
A game that forever taunts me for my mistakes when making mistakes is incredibly easy to do is not a game that encourages me to play it.
>Generally absurdly difficult and poorly designed gameplay, which throws you in at the deep end and gives you absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're meant to do.
Yeah, it's definitely not Kirby's Air Ride
And that is the problem with it. I can't enjoy the story, the music, the world and so on because the ridiculously tough gameplay is in the way.

The hallmark of a good game is that anyone can get good at it within 5 minutes of starting it, and that you can get maximum enjoyment out of it with minimal expended effort. Games are forms of entertainment. Punishing difficulty is not entertaining. Imagine how much movies would suck if you had to solve quadratic equations to continue watching them every 5 minutes.