/fg/ - Fangames

>(such as silent longplays)
> No voice commentary allowed in videos of version 0.3 or later. Subtitles are OK.
Weird.

>>8744
You know, it's annoying to see how a teen le epix guy xd tries to attention whore because he's a yutubber!1!11!! :3:3:3
If I was a dev I wouldn't allow that too.

Question: Why should we want to respect their wishes?

>>8754

Well, they made the game, at least if you want to play you should agree.
Would you like to wake up in the morning and find someone shitting up on you? Probably not, as these devs don't want those things in the list happening, too.

>>8754

Remember what happened when people ripped off Yume Nisshi? Zenmaigahara password-protected the download.

And it's very possible to get a copyright strike and lose your good standing on YouTube. Doujin circles have taken down videos of their Touhou remixes from YouTube. So it won't be that far of a stretch if Yume Nikki fan game authors ended up sending DMCA claims against unwanted videos too.

>>8758
excuse to isolate "white western pigs"

>>8758
I doubt the author of LCDDem will do anything, at all…. *;__;*

I don't get it, can independent creators really request videos of their games are taken down for infringement like that? They don't profit off of them, and neither do the people who post videos.

I haven't even heard of some of these games. Lemegeton, Muyuu, Page 13? And why would the sickmind developer care about videos of PRE-remake since that version's pretty much scrapped then anyways?

>>8763
I don't know either. Especially since these are all just copycats of YN in the first place. I get that they worked hard but do they honestly have a right to get so cocky?

Wow /fg/ keeps getting dumber and dumber. It's not up to you or the creators what people do with their projects, especially when they offer it for free.

Requesting for youtube videos to not be made or posted is up to the authors of the games, and if youtubers don't want to follow that request it's their prerogative and a report is still something the fangame creators can use to remove it. Banning posts related to gameplay videos on the board makes no sense.

>Would you like to wake up in the morning and find someone shitting up on you?
>implying hugbox

Creative people get told their shit sucks all the time. It's not your game, and the creators should learn to deal with negative criticism some time in their life.

>>8763
>>8764
can't tell if joking or
>>8765
just stupid

>>8765


>Would you like to wake up in the morning and find someone shitting up on you?
>implying hugbox

What? You got it totally wrong. I was saying that if you don't want someone to do something and they do it anyway it's pretty annoying. I bet you don't want to wake up covered in shit, right? Well, those devs don't want videos (THAT is the analogy I was trying to express).
Who the fuck cares what criticism they get for it.
Whether or not they go full autistic after that is their problem, but, for the love of god, if they ask for something just don't contradict them, is not that hard.

Don't get me wrong I stil think Zenmaigahara is a nazi, but all the shit would've not happened if some cunts didn't try to rip off his SO PRECIOUS source and start all the WESUTERUN PIGGU DORAMA.

Chesir is this your fault again?

>>8768

I'm sorry.

What the fuck is the problem? Are they that fucking afraid of a little criticism or what is the problem with someone commenting in a video of their game?

>>8770

In my personal opinion, I dislike let's plays and those videos with some dude trying to be cool or a youtuber or whatever the fucking trend is where they play "edgy games" (or any game at all).
If I was a dev I wouldn't allow those videos too, or at least I would allow the silent/subtitled ones but no more than that.

I want to believe this is the way, since…
>No Let's Play videos, whether they have voice or subtitle commentary. Other gameplay videos (such as silent longplays) are OK.

For the others I don't know and I don't care. Even without videos they can be criticized thanks to threads in forums or sending messages to the developer, so they really can't escape from that at all (Plus, if you can't stand reviews and criticism, why on the fucking earth you made a game?)

>>8763

I've only heard of one instance, where Wild Games Studio took down TotalBiscuit's scathing (monetized) video review of one of their games, resulting in a copyright strike (though the takedown was later retracted). Bigger game companies like Sega, Square Enix, and Atlus have gotten rid of game videos too.

Meanwhile, the doujin scene has been more and more proactive with their copyrights. It's evolved from harsh multilingual Online Fanarts Protection warning banners into massive DMCA notices. Doujin circles get their reposted stuff delisted from Google all the time.

And some Japanese game developers don't like spoilers posted online. Some devs, like kouri, the author of Ib, don't allow monetization. A few other indie game authors (RPG Maker users and others) don't allow gameplay videos at all.

So posting gameplay videos that the authors don't like could mean big trouble. I don't want the rift between Western fans and Japanese fans to get bigger because of this.

And as far as profit goes, a lot of gameplay videos on YouTube are now monetized, with the uploaders getting a few cents or so every time they make you watch one of those video ads at the beginning. And it costs nothing to upload and monetize gameplay videos on YouTube. So this could become an issue of concern for YN fangame authors and other people who give away their games for free. I don't understand how so many Western devs could let people on YouTube walk all over them like that.

So yeah. First they went after reposted fan art, then scanned doujinshi, and now the Touhou remixes, and gameplay videos could be next.

Maybe stop being such babbies and accept that criticism is a part of getting better, and if you get alot of shit told to you maybe you are not gods gift to man and a special little snowflake.

I've had plenty of shit told to me about my games, both in videos and otherwise, but I don't cry about it. Also while I'm at it, stop making exact copies of each others games, japanese fg makers. Maybe then I could actually enjoy YN fangames again.

>>8773

Fair enough. I don't care what people think about my work. I'm not going to try to stop anybody who slams it, but I will put significant effort into whatever I make or do.

Japanese devs seem to be more concerned about spoilers than criticism, though. Many Japanese devs who do conditionally allow gameplay videos say stuff like "don't spoil the ending" or something close to that.

>>8774
If that's the case, sure, whatever. It's still stupid since videos generate more players (if your game isn't shit, ofcourse). But some of them just don't wan't commentary. Those would be the big boo-boos I'm talking about.

>>8762
rip ;_;

>(Plus, if you can't stand reviews and criticism, why on the fucking earth you made a game?)
>If you don't like reviews and criticism, why the fuck did you do [anything]?

Wow, I wish people would stop saying this.


Maybe they made a game because they wanted to make a game.

No, that's too ridiculous, what am I saying??? They didn't keep it a total secret, obviously they want a bunch of input! Anything else would be crazy!!!

>>8775
You are owl

>>8771

>I want to believe this is the way, since…
I want to believe this is the why*
I hate this.

>>8778

One thing is to make a game and have criticism (both bad and good) and accept it, ignoring what is not constructive and improving your game with it; other is to have negative criticism which does not help at all (That would be really off-putting for the dev and I'm too against it), and other thing is to cry because some people disliked your game, ignoring the positive comments.

I mean, yeah, sure, you can make a game just because you want to (nobody is stopping you). But if you make a game you must know there will be ALWAYS people who won't like it, and, moreover, people who will crictize it badly, don't you think?
What you should do with those naggers is to see what they criticize and improve it to impale a big stick in their ass. That's all.

Criticism was (technically) made to see what you could improve. If you don't want to see what you should improve, you shouldn't make a game (Or, you could keep going doing the same to show your middle finger to those fuckers, instead of getting nervous about it). The choice is yours.

Again, I don't like when people just rant "I don't like your tiles so ur gaem must be shit". You can tell those to fuck off improving your tiles, or another aspect of your game which you're better at (Music, drawings, story, etc). But, if you're making a game, you have to know you will have to deal with that kind of cancer.

Of course, we can have different opinions, right? I don't want to convince you with this, I'm just explaining my point of view, and what I think devs should do.

>>8781
> (Or, you could keep going doing the same to show your middle finger to those fuckers, instead of getting nervous about it). The choice is yours.
> (Or, you could keep going doing the same to show your middle finger to those fuckers, instead of getting nervous about it). The choice is yours.
> (Or, you could keep going doing the same to show your middle finger to those fuckers, instead of getting nervous about it). The choice is yours.
> (Or, you could keep going doing the same to show your middle finger to those fuckers, instead of getting nervous about it). The choice is yours.

Nice bait. Made me answer seriously in the past post and now I almost try to make another long one. lel so epic.
10/10, /b/rah. Check 'em.

>>8781
By this I mean that I agree with most of what you said, Chesir, but we've got fundamentally different views on the whole thing. The kind that I doubt a couple of posts on a chan would reconcile. So, let's not continue this. I don't want to argue or clog the thread up.
Thank you for sharing, I mean that seriously.

>>8784

oh, well, pardon me for the previous post then. I seriously thought you were trying to "le trell me". It's ok to have different opinions.
Yeah let's not continue hijacking this with pseudo-drama.

It's just that I really don't understand the frame of mind behind these requests. I mean, for instance, "No Let's Play videos. Live streaming is OK." So, why is live streaming okay? Do you, as a creator, really think people should be expected to abide by your own personal preferences in their treatment of your creation? My view has always been, once you send it out into the world, it's out there - there's no holding back, no leading it by a leash. Do you want it to be seen or not? My respect for a creator comes not merely from their ability, but also their choice to let their creation go and be seen.

I mean I don't want to go out of my way to annoy these people, and I don't post videos anyway, but in my opinion if they really get annoyed about this type of thing it's their own fault because ultimately I don't recognize their right to make these demands in the first place. Is this a cultural difference or am I just a fucking douche?

Criticism is a moot point anyway. Let's Plays are a transformative media running under fair use. It's a different production from the source material, so the original author neither has the privilege or the right to tell anyone to not record footage and not make money off something they've created. If you need more information on this argument you need to get out of this thread and google fair use.

I don't know where the japanese community gets off thinking they have the right to do this. It's like making an album or writing a story and suing people that review it.

The reason Square and Sega etc can get away with it though, is because they're multi-million dollar businesses and can afford to make partnerships with youtube, giving them first say on what can and can't be posted.

>>8779
He is owl

>>8791
No u.

>>8787

Copyright law lets the authors set the rules. I'm not sure why some devs don't allow voice-over or subtitled commentary. Sounds like they edite

>>8788

Let's see… uploaded for profit (uploaded and monetized on YouTube at no cost) and nearly all of the game spoiled. That's most Let's Play videos. IANAL, but that hardly sounds like fair use to me.

Don't post videos and monetize them if the devs say no. It's that simple.

If you're making a YN fangame and you don't want ceｒtain videos (such as monetized videos, Let's Plays or spoilers) posted online, feel free to reply here.

ゆめにっき派生ゲームの作者へ：
プレイ動画の投稿を禁止・制限（マネタイズ禁止・ネタバレ禁止・実況プレイ禁止等）したら、このスレにガイドラインをご返信してください。

>>8787
>>8794

Copyright law lets the authors set the rules. I'm not sure why some devs don't allow voice-over or subtitled commentary. Sounds like they do want videos to be shared, but didn't want those videos to ruin the atmosphere of the game.

I'm actually VERY curious about the differences in copyright law between the US and Japan. Because in the US, you really *can't* set limitations like that; although large corporations have been stomping around on fan works everywhere for a few years now because the vast majority of hosting sites would rather simply comply with a takedown notice over facing a lengthy and expensive court battle, parody and satire are both expressly protected under the law. There seems to be a huge gaping cultural dissonance here, because I've also seen it in the fanart scene (don't repost! only allowed here! only allowed in this *insert specific circumstances here* way!) In my not-so-humble opinion, copyright laws need to be wiped off the books anyway; if you put something out for public consumption you should expect that it's going to become a new tool in the infinite arsenal of tools that anyone from the public can use however they want.

>>8794
Copyright law does NOT let the copyright holders bend the law. All copyright really does is protect people from having their intellectual property stolen and claimed as something else. The creator of the spoon had no say in how a spork was created, and an artist has absolutely no fucking say if someone makes fanart of their original characters used in a different context.

While it's fair for the original authors to ask for non-monetization on videos if they make a valid point for why, they have no say in whether a video can or can't be made, regardless of if it's a let's play or a review or a commentary. You can't make that claim ESPECIALLY if the product you're offering is for free.

tl;dr fuck the devs and fuck your lack of knowledge and stop crying about shit you have no say in.

I shit on copyright every day

>>8799
And because people like you are open like that about it, the Japanese hate us.

>>8800
I shit on japanese every day

>>8794

http://www.kickstarter.com/dmca/moon-power-a-sailor-moon-art-fanzine-submitted-by
http://www.kickstarter.com/dmca/final-fantasy-vii-the-web-series-unofficial-fan-project-submitte

But I digress.

I don't understand why Japanese devs say "no spoilers" or "no commentaries", especially since Niconico users can't make money off of their videos and hence can't make money off of juicy content there. Devs like Atlus and Zenmaigahara really shouldn't try to keep people from posting spoilers or Let's Plays online. These kinds of videos are common, and people who don't like them should avoid gameplay videos and play the games themselves.

I understand when devs don't allow monetization, though, and I think that other devs really need to put their feet down. Maybe not use ContentID to throw video ads like what Nintendo tried to do, but maybe use ContentID to simply track videos (matched third-party content = uploader can't monetize). But if they really want to allow monetization, they should restrict the ads to banners and overlays only–no in-stream ads allowed. People on YouTube really shouldn't be monetizing videos of free games or free mods anyway, for hopefully obvious reasons.

(And I hope the fangame authors here do chime in on this since so many gameplay videos and streams on YouTube and other sites are being monetized now, and chances are they're not going to see a single dime out of those stupid ads.)