The VG Resource

(05-22-2013, 01:49 AM)Kriven Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-22-2013, 01:39 AM)Zero Kirby Wrote: [ -> ]Athletes get injured. All the time. Sometimes very seriously, sometimes even killed. They need very good insurance. They have contracts. They get traded. And the toll of playing sports is a hard one on the body after a very long time. And this is something that cannot realistically be prevented without simply not playing sports.

Lets Players can stop playing video games, take a few breaks, and get a daily dose of exercise and eating right to stop potential injuries and unhealthiness from playing games. They are not in contracts with anyone. They are rarely (if ever) seriously injured or killed without warning during a game and the game being the cause of death.

This is why paying athletes millions of dollars makes more sense than paying Lets Players millions of dollars. They are putting themselves at risk of serious injury in every game. Lets Players are not.

Okay.

But that still doesn't change anything. Let's Players are still spending hundreds of hours playing games and making videos, they are making less than minimum wage. Athletes are spending hundreds of hours training and playing sports, they are making millions. I never said LPers should make millions or that athletes should not make millions. I said that, by the same internal logic which is comparing the amount of effort being put into a way of life translating into money, that LPer's hours turning into less than minimum wage is nothing to complain about.

Emboldened and italicized for emphasis on the part that confuses me most in your post

So you agree with them not making very much money is perfectly okay?

(Minimum wage is also what employers are legally required to pay their not-underage employees and it changes like, all the time and is subjective by state/country. Just sayin', it's not the best measurement of money in a conversation like this.)

(Especially since LP'ers are self-employed, rendering the idea of minimum wage kinda useless.)

Yes, Let's Players not making lots of money is okay.

Edit: Let's Players making lots of money would also be okay, IMO, but they don't, so that's moot.

Editing Again: Though I'm really an advocate for split profits. Money should be going to Nintendo so they keep making more stuff, and to the Let's Players so they keep buying more stuff. Ultimately LPers are consumers, and money that goes to them will likely go back to Nintendo sooner than later. I'm also not fond of the intense stranglehold are current copyright situation has put on the economy and the creative industry.

Just some random philosophy here:
Imagine ads do not exist.
I'd pay to see a movie.
I'd pay to watch TV.
I'd pay commission for art (that includes fan-art).
I'd pay to play a videogame.
I'd pay to watch a sport.
But I would not pay to see someone play a game. I'd rather spend that money to pay for the game itself.

I find it odd that people are siding with Nintendo on a site that makes a profit off of ads while the draw in for people is copyrighted material. How is it different? I'm only here because there's models and I wanted to share models that I can rip.

There's people who would look at this site and be disgusted by all of us because we share or are a part of a site that hosts game content.


So you're against people making money off of LP's this guy goes even further and hates anyone that shares content such as Sprites, Models, Textures, Sound Effects.

I would post an argument he got in with someone from this site, but I don't think it's my place to post that.

Let's Plays contain absolutely no content that wasn't created by the user other than his or her voice.
Aside from rips, tSR contains custom work. Even if it's based off of existing, copyrighted characters and such, it's still the hours of the artist that created the original content. Returning to my point made in my previous post, I'd pay to commission sprites, even if it's fan-made, but I won't pay to see someone play a game. I can pay for a game and experience it myself, but it does not produce the custom content available on the main site.
Also, tSR is there to promote creation. Game Making (using the assets for fan-games) and spriting (using the assets to edit or use as reference). Both may eventually lead to the creation of fully custom games and/or sprites. I, for example, have created the game Princess Fantasy Catventure, which is 100% original content, but the sprites and game both weren't the first I made. I have created a great deal of fan-games and fan-made sprites.

Also any person can assume that beating a game is at least 50% of a game and more often than not be correct. It would be nonsensical (and extremely anal) to think you need to explore every pixel.

(05-22-2013, 02:19 AM)Kriven Wrote: [ -> ]I'm also not fond of the intense stranglehold are current copyright situation has put on the economy and the creative industry.

I'm aware of the perceived economic "stranglehold", but what about copyright has hurt the creative industry?

As far as I'm concerned anybody who infringes on copyrights isn't being creative at all. They're using others' creativity to make their own creative Frankenstein.

Well I see it as though the LPers make money off of themselves and their work.

Anyone can make a LP of Mario, but lot's of people won't watch an entire game from start to finish if the LPer is constantly sucking up snot and the video quality sucks. No, the viewers watch because they like the LPer and the quality of their videos along with some other things.

I've seen many viewers ask a LPer to play a game that they themselves already played. Why? Because they like to see how the LPer plays, reacts and likes the game. Even older games.

LPers are basically the friend who tells all their friends about a game and if it's worth the price or not. The friends could still be reluctant to buy the game so they have to see the gameplay for themselves. So this friend starts playing the game and now all these people are exposed to the game and become potential buyers. The game company wins because someone spread the word that this game is worth the price.

Also, If you liked watching LP's and you saw someone playing a game that you thought looked fun, would you continue watching that series to the end? Or would you stop watching the series because you want to experience the game for yourself? Most people want to experience the game for themselves if they care about the game. Think about it, if you plan to buy something you try to avoid anyone and anything that could potentially give away the ending. But if you don't care about the product, you don't care about the ending and never planned to buy it anyways.

(05-22-2013, 01:54 PM)Sengir Wrote: [ -> ]I'm aware of the perceived economic "stranglehold", but what about copyright has hurt the creative industry?

As far as I'm concerned anybody who infringes on copyrights isn't being creative at all. They're using others' creativity to make their own creative Frankenstein.

You'd think that, and it makes some sense on the surface like that. If I make a comic called "Super Spider-Man" it isn't very creative.

But I'm not really talking about strict trademark infringement here, I'm talking about how terrifying it's getting to create your own material, at least in America. Did you know you can't use the phrase "You're fired" without paying Donald Trump a ridiculous sum of money because he trademarked it as his catchphrase on The Apprentice? If Trump's attorneys catch you using that simple, common phrase, you'll be sued out of your fucking mind.

So when I talk about the copyright stranglehold our laws have created, that's more what I'm talking about. The batshit insane trademark and patent whoring.

(05-22-2013, 03:24 PM)Kriven Wrote: [ -> ]But I'm not really talking about strict trademark infringement here, I'm talking about how terrifying it's getting to create your own material, at least in America.

Then this is the wrong thread for that. This is about people making money off of something they don't own (you don't "own" a game you buy; you bought the right to play it) and thinking somehow they are the victim when the company they stole from takes all future money. LP'ers should be grateful that Nintendo doesn't ask Google how much money each LP'er has made through ads previously and charge them that amount.

Just because nerds on the internet don't like a rule doesn't mean they are above the law (including copyright law). Fortunately the internet is not an oligarchy as much as Reddit or whatever dumb site says. Actions have consequences, and LP'ers have to accept that by not getting official permission to make a Let's Play they are opening themselves up to all sorts of nasty things.

(05-22-2013, 03:39 PM)Sengir Wrote: [ -> ]Then this is the wrong thread for that. This is about people making money off of something they don't own (you don't "own" a game you buy; you bought the right to play it) and thinking somehow they are the victim when the company they stole from takes all future money. LP'ers should be grateful that Nintendo doesn't ask Google how much money each LP'er has made through ads previously and charge them that amount.

Just because nerds on the internet don't like a rule doesn't mean they are above the law (including copyright law). Fortunately the internet is not an oligarchy as much as Reddit or whatever dumb site says. Actions have consequences, and LP'ers have to accept that by not getting official permission to make a Let's Play they are opening themselves up to all sorts of nasty things.

It's all tied in on the same laws, though, which is how I got to it.

I'd have to look over the thread again, because it's been several hours since I was in the line of thought that I was and sleep has come between then and now, but I didn't just pull it out of thin air.

Also - LPers are still currently acting within the law until a court ruling deems otherwise, which has not happened yet. If you want to outlaw LPing, you have to actually sue a LPer. Most companies know it isn't worth the fight (despite knowing that they probably will win) and opt, instead, for YouTube removal.

Until such time that a court actually makes a firm stance on what constitutes what percent of a video game and the legality of LP videos, LPers are not acting outside of the law in monetizing their videos.

exceptthewholetrademarkthingtheyshouldprobablychangethetitlesoftheirvideostonotincludethegametitlesandmakesuretheiconsdonthaveanytrademarkedmaterial

Something important you guys aren't getting at (that TotalBiscuit brought up in his video) is that, regardless of whether you or Nintendo thinks people should be making money off Let's Plays or not, regardless of the legality of either side's actions, there's a MASSIVE problem with Nintendo's METHODS in all of this.

Due to content matching being as inaccurate as it is, there has already been journalistic content that's been flagged, rerouting the income stream of a video that someone made FOR THEIR JOB. Not to entertain, not to build their web personality, but to provide coverage and information on a game that they/their company was given permission BY NINTENDO to use as supplemental information/graphics/whatever. And now those people are robbed of what may well be their primary source of income.

No matter your stance on whether or not LPs should be making money or not, supporting this specific scenario just gives Nintendo even more room to control shit that isn't theirs. Fine, whatever MAYBE LPers shouldn't be making money off of their videos (I argue they should but that's not my point), but that still does not mean that this is okay by any means.


Oh, and people who try to decide for other people what does and doesn't constitute a "real job"? Fuck that noise.

(05-22-2013, 04:42 PM)Tellis Wrote: [ -> ]To Tellis

First of all, your Avatar...Edited Final Fantasy 3 NES sprites right .

Secondly, that's a problem Youtube needs to fix. Nintendo is only taking the only action they possibly can right now. Youtube needs to actually update the system with a whitelist that can be appended to, so that when certain channels are exempt from content ID matching, then it won't apply to that channel, such as the IGN channel or whatever else. They'd clearly have permission to post game trailers of upcoming Nintendo games or what not.

(05-22-2013, 04:05 PM)Kriven Wrote: [ -> ]Also - LPers are still currently acting within the law until a court ruling deems otherwise, which has not happened yet. If you want to outlaw LPing, you have to actually sue a LPer. Most companies know it isn't worth the fight (despite knowing that they probably will win) and opt, instead, for YouTube removal.

Until such time that a court actually makes a firm stance on what constitutes what percent of a video game and the legality of LP videos, LPers are not acting outside of the law in monetizing their videos.

Whoops, I did my homework and it looks like I was right again. Donald Trump couldn't trademark "his" phrase. Whenever a company like Volkswagen tries to trademark "bug" or Facebook tries to trademark "-book", it hardly goes over well. If someone took the proper legal steps in the creation process it wouldn't be "terrifying" to create custom material. When people cut corners, don't want to be bothered by legalities or just plain dislike copyright laws of course they'll be shot down.

And yes, a precedent must be set before LP's are declared to be illegal. Nintendo's generous enough to let the LP'ers make LP's instead of sending an LP'er into financial ruin. I'd be willing to bet Nintendo's PR department figured this a much more acceptable and less aggressive alternative.

Keep in mind that if any LP'er wanted they could sue Nintendo! Would they succeed? Probably not. Would they end up having LP's outlawed? Hopefully.

Also the content-matching is very likely fault with Google's software, not Nintendo. I don't know the specifics, but I find it hard to believe Nintendo is manually flagging every single Let's Play they put ads on. If you have any evidence from a YouTube FAQ or something similar then do share.

(Also, Koh, that's not a FF edit...)

When Nintendo does ID claims on videos do the videos ever get taken down?


NOTE: NES, SNES etc. game footage (whether using God's name as a cuss words in the video or not) does not harm any video game company at all.


NOTE 2: If you choose to do a let's play (LP) I recommend you do the following:


#1: Upload the video


#2: Make Private


#3: About 15 hours after fully uploaded change the video to unlisted


#4: Add the video to a playlist


That way the video is much less likely to get taken down, ID claimed etc.

ZeldaClassicExpert, your advice in invaluable.