Triggerhappytel
Member
Not unless he signs up to their partnership programme and agrees to hand over a significant cut. I think it's 40%, or 30% if the channel is dedicated to Nintendo stuff.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
AngryJoe receives a Nintendo copyright claim. Hope they enjoyed the ad revenue; Done
- Thread starter Khalifa Jayy
- Start date
Not unless he signs up to their partnership programme and agrees to hand over a significant cut. I think it's 40%, or 30% if the channel is dedicated to Nintendo stuff.
You're an idiot.My response:
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Cool. Tell me the name of your channel so I can watch.
levyjl1988
Banned
Angry Joe
Angry Video Game Nerd
The Cynical Brit
The Annoyed Gamer
Gaming really pisses off a lot of people it seems, that or the industry performs too many fuck ups.
Angry Video Game Nerd
The Cynical Brit
The Annoyed Gamer
Gaming really pisses off a lot of people it seems, that or the industry performs too many fuck ups.
Starchasing
Member
Indies do it because they have no money to get any other type of exposure. Its not some random act of kindness.
cheezcake
Member
Honestly that's worse because it just shows how hilariously archaic their policies are. Again it's not like these policies only effect Joe, other youtubers probably don't put out much Nintendo content due to their policies. And if you don't think that level of free exposure to a targeted audience is valuable then I just don't know what to say.
J
Jpop
Unconfirmed Member
Even if he's wrong calling someone and idiot and not saying why they are wrong is a poor mans argument.
TheSlySoul
Member
The later definitely.
Really now gaming is no different than Hollywood. Nintendo is Disney. The only thing is Nintendo could wish they made a "Frozen".
Many would see the performance/reaction elements of a Let's Play as taking away from that analogy. You're right though, in terms of the broader copyright conversation. Some of the rationales I see being used in defense of Let's Plays don't have any legal grounding. Just because someone else claims that their use of someone's work is helping them doesn't mean the creator is bound by that (in legal terms).
Starchasing
Member
Its funny because AngryJoe is moaning about he can't monetize other peoples content as he wishes , so someone is saying that he is going to monetize AngryJoe content as he wishes.
kitchenmotors
Banned
Is this a joke?
I doubt anyone who is a Nintendo fan really cares about AngryJoe and it's not like Nintendo doesn't spend millions in advertising elsewhere.
You're acting like without Angry Joe, Nintendo would cease to get any coverage. It's not like there aren't millions of Angry Joe wannabes also flooding YouTube with their videos right? YouTube might be a great medium for advertising to kids today, but it's not the only one. Plus where AngryJoe and PewdiePie will stop covering them, someone else will pick up the slack. Why? Because Nintendo is bigger than those two are brands. Subscribers are no different than instagram or Twitter followers. And so far, any benefit has been strictly anecdotal or reserved for niche/indie games, much like when a major movie will use some old obscure song that has long been forgotten only to bring it to the public eye again.
I'm not saying he isn't influential but judging by his temper tantrum on Twitter, re-tweeting a "Fuck you Nintendo" image, and taking about how he spent so much on a wii u and controllers you can tell he's upset and needs them more than they need him. Guys like him would hate when their own videos are uploaded without consent and mirrored to try and capitalize on their name.
It's a fucking video of someone playing a videogame..
The developer already got their money from its sale.
Who's revenue it is or not, who has the law on its side or not, it's all kinds of wtfs and completely ass backwards to do what Nintendo is doing here.
I highly doubt this will effect Nintendo's marketing or publicity, people who subscribe to gaming channels are I don't know usually gamers and as gamers I highly doubt the only media outlet they know is Angry Joe. Those 2 million subscribers definitely know about gaming websites such as ign or gamespot or whatever floats your boat that have sections dedicated to Nintendo platforms. The only ones that Nintendo might lose are Joe's "cult" like followers that all YouTube channels have, not singling him out before you guys attack me. Joe definitely knew about what would happen as some of you had pointed out he made a video about their policies, he most likely did it for the publicity I mean he recently starts doing Nintendo videos that most of his subscribers would not even watch, I just don't see it. Not saying Nintendo is right with their policy but it is their policy so they should enforce it and Angry joe shouldn't be mad when he clearly goes out of their policy guidelines.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
That's why some like Angry Joe could theoretically be useful. They get Nintendo stuff to people outside of those who self-identify as "Nintendo fans."
TheSlySoul
Member
Only 10 million rapid fans though.
Not enough to really produce future hardware with as buyers. Which is why mobile games move.
We all know how protective Nintendo is of their IP. None of this is surprising. They are not going to change. I think its time people accept this. None of this is hurting Nintendo a bit. Angry Joe doing videos won't help the Wii U one bit. I know it, Nintendo knows it, this forum knows it. So Nintendo will protect their IP however they want. Outdated or otherwise.
Kandrick
GAF's Ed McMahon
I'm sure his what... 1 video or 2 really helped turn some of his viewers into Nintendo customers that will now spend countless amounts of money on Nintendo products.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Yeah, I saw that tweet as more of a joke along these lines.
BUT, if the youtube user takes content and watches it, records himself watching it, making occasional comments... basically the tweet is much closer to reality than people are readily willing to accept. They aren't so far off from each other (what the tweet proposes and a let's play).
How does this go against what I said exactly? Popular games receive more views than games that aren't as popular. Destiny was one of, if not the biggest title of 2014.
Are you saying that any Nintendo title would be raking in the cash because people are frothing at the mouth to see them being played over other games?
I don't think so, especially not Mario Party. I don't think Nintendo games hold that kind of sway over the audience these days.
Wat.
You actually think they're afraid of Angry Joe not liking their games, and that is why they're doing this? Are you for real?
Nintendo wants trustworthy companies and people that can do good coverage of their games. They don't have to always be positive about Nintendo-games to be part of that group. Angry Joe is simply not a personality they want to be partners with. Can Angry Joe still make Nintendo-videos? Yes. Can Angry Joe still do reviews of Nintendo-games? Yes (in fact, he can even make money off of them). In fact, all of us can do our own review videos if we like!
kitchenmotors
Banned
Mass_Pincup
Banned
I find it really weird that people here a defending Nintendo. Sure they are in their right but how those that help you or anyone except Nintendo (I'm not even sure that it will help them) if there's less youtube video of their games?
Wat.
You actually think they're afraid of Angry Joe not liking their games, and that is why they're doing this? Are you for real?
Nintendo wants trustworthy companies and people that can do good coverage of their games. They don't have to always be positive about Nintendo-games to be part of that group. Angry Joe is simply not a personality they want to be partners with. Can Angry Joe still make Nintendo-videos? Yes. Can Angry Joe still do reviews of Nintendo-games? Yes (in fact, he can even make money off of them). In fact, all of us can do our own review videos if we like!
And "anti-consumer"? What are you even talking about? You're not a consumer anymore, once you start making money off of it.
Though, I'm not surprised not everyone gets this. Not even Angry Joe seems to understand it:
(By the way, him "buying" a Wii U is a lie, seeing as it was donated to him").
Like ... Joe, you need to monetize when you share your play sessions?
Why? What work did you put in that warrants that?
call_kotaku
Member
You're not explaining why it's a good idea for Nintendo to refuse free stuff that other companies (that sell more games) pay a lot of money for, just arguing how it's not catastrophically damaging.
TheSlySoul
Member
3DS would be screwed without Monster Hunter and Yokai Watch though. Those sold at least 10 million units alone.
Plus it was screwed at the $250 price.
I own a Wii U as well, been disappointing compared to Gamecube, but better than Wii.
Love my 3DS more, better 3rd party.
kitchenmotors
Banned
The issue is that he makes money off of someone else's product. If he did this for free and never expected anything in return, like his donated Wii U, it would be a different story.
He's an entitled Youtuber. Go away with that mess.
The difference is that Disney is maintaining universal mindshare and keeping up with the times. Nintendo is not.
Continue to move mobile and make games you will whine about
I guess the difference being that Nintendo invested millions of dollars into each and every one of their video games so they have much more to lose financially and legally than AngryJoe does. Though, if he does spend millions of dollars and must constantly protect his intellectual property then by all means, this is a completely fair comparison.
Pennywise83
Banned
You said that people watch AJ only because of him, and therefore the amount of views across his videos is the same regardless the game. I just replied that it is not true, and the amount of views vary greatly across videos; the reason is because there are indeed games that are more popular... which devalue a bit the power of AJ as a "personality" and reinforce the point that people are not watching YTers only because of them but also because of the games they are covering. Also, YTers have yet to prove to be long-lasting, audience migrate easily when it has zero cost to follow a channel.
I really don't get this logic, your telling me that people who subscribe to gaming channels don't know what Nintendo is and have never heard of any gaming outlet other than AngryJoe.
Because it's a childish amount of thinking that went into the response.
The case is about the future of streaming and marketing. Many publishers are adapting to this new way of getting recognition.
Besides, AJ's POV is FOR US GAMERS. No reason to defend a company, I will never understand these people.
Companies don't give a fuck about you, save yourself. That's capitalism.
The only reason capitalism doesn't work effectively is because corporate apologizers screw with the way it's supposed to work.
kitchenmotors
Banned
Wow, calm down with the passive aggressiveness.
Beelzebufo
Banned
Or the AVGN started a comedy show, and a lot of people copied it
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
All you need to add is a script, talk about joe and use his videos, why stop their review how all lets play YouTubers review their games.My response:
His reviews don't come out that often so he probably needs those non review videos to make a living.
Ban Puncher
Member
I want to find some gameplay footage of a particular game so I go to YouTube and search the title.
Open video.
Some fucknut starts talking.
Close video.
Open video.
Some fucknut starts talking.
Close video.
ignoring the fact that this makes no sense, I love mobile games
TheSlySoul
Member
This as well.
Disney has made lots of good original content as of late which Nintendo I cannot say does.
Most big name YTers were just going to continue as they were to see if Nintendo was stupid enough to try and make a move on their videos before they stopped covering them all together
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Again that's from Nintendo point of view unless you work at Nintendo or have shares why do you care if he makes money from it?
Does he even think when he posts this stuff? if he has spent this money it's because he thought that he made an equivalent exchange thus making the purchase worthwhile, it's not like someone forced him to give nintendo this money to buy a WiiU.
