Nintendo's Legal Team vs. Milton Guasti's legal team. Who would win?
Shit like that and the CDi games are almost certainly why they are stricter about how their IP gets used.
'
If you are talking about those Pokemon parties, the specific issue is that money was being taken for those. If you are talking about them trying to "go after" PM tournaments by pushing for TOs to not sanction those tournaments, then that's at least understandable from the perspective of how having Project M being at venues sponsored in part by Nintendo and where money was being exchange was probably not the best look when Project M was starting to fly a little too close to the sun with including new third party characters.
The Ken Penders thing was brewing over for years without Sega taking any action until they finally caught on to how crazy that situation was.
Ah I see. I think the answer is yes, there's are ways to mobilize fan communities against the type of corporate cudgeling that Nintendo employs. The Harry Potter fanfic community did it back in 2003/2004 and those were mostly teenagers and children. How they went about it was posting the C&D letters sent to them allowing adults in the fandom (some of them lawyers) to find loopholes and craft counter-arguments that the writers were not equipped to make. They also found other avenues to post their works, and repeatedly petitioned J.K. Rowling who had previously been supportive of fanworks but remained mum once WB went to bat against fanworks.
The ESB thing isn't the best example because nobody is going to confuse that for the real thing or say it's the definitive way to consume that media (something that is an extremely dangerous line that T4S fans walk when they say the same thing about DBZA).
This is faulty logic. 'It hasn't happened to Sega yet with Sonic, therefore it will never ever happen to a much much more valuable brand like Mario' is not how cause and effect works.
So, uh, bad luck chuck?
It really, really was not. It was a good amateur game but was patchy as hell and was a design mess on several levels. It would have been crucified as amateurish if released as a commercial product.
This is completely unprovable pure nonsense. You literally will not be able to cite figures to prove it, because they would be impossible to show.
Boiling down Sonic Mania and Wonderboy down as fangames is incredibly misleading, though. While both have their genesis (:V) in the fangames community and were very active in that even when they started working with Sega, the people behind both projects were working professionals who were already in the games industry before they started working with Sega. It'd be like saying "oh, Nintendo hired the Mother 3 fan translator to work on some of their localizations" when they got Tomato to work on stuff, when the more accurate thing is that they got an experience professional who had spent years working at one of the most prominent animation localization studios but had also been a part of the fan translation community.
do you have any evidence to the contrary? Go find me the PC-only fan game that overshadowed a major AAA release backed by a multi-million dollar marketing campaign. Go find me the fanfic that stopped people from buying the next installment in a book series or the fan-film that outgrossed a major studio release. Both my argument that fanworks don't affect sales/brand reputation and the arguments of corporations that fanworks do affect sales brand/reputation are predicated on the notion that fanworks have any effect on a product/IP. From where I am standing, it is clear that they do have an effect, but that the effect is not what corporations like Nintendo argue it is when they say they are "defending their intelluctual property" thereby rendering their argument/reasoning void.
That's not how it works.
While there's no way to actually quantify the impact it had to the point to where I sincerely doubt it had any *actual* impact, I seem to recall SquareEnix sorta implying that they were shoveling some of the blame for Chrono Trigger DS under performing on fans of Crimson Echoes being incredibly dumb about going around and discouraging people to not bother with CTDS for its new content because CE was going to be the more worthy place to get new CT content.
Well, now that we have the meta discussion about attacking Nintendo fans for defending everything, it has devolved into the same thing.
Already had, just read the thread before posting. Didn't take too long either.
Every article that is published, every thread made in this topic, hurts their brand. It looks bad. What if a kids draws a picture of Mario and shares it with his friends? What if he makes an animation? A level in Dreams or LittleBigPlanet? Where is the line? Can we really prove that fan projects hurt an IP? I think we could argue that actually they help the franchise by adding more attention and clout. Every Mario fan project lends hype to Mario. So when Nintendo makes a new Mario, the hype bubble is inflated by these fan projects.
I've heard AM2R called many things but "patchy as hell" and "a design mess" was never one of them. I'd love to hear what makes you think that.
While this is, in part, due to elements from the original game, AM2R's bosses aren't particularly good (either the re-designed bosses or the new ones) and the original areas added to the game are clearly a step beneath the elements that were based on existing areas (as conceptually interesting as the abandoned ship was, it's a whole lot of nothing for something that wants to be the wrecked ship from Super Metroid).
I'm arguing against the original claim that fan projects do affect sales/brand awareness, bro. Nintendo's argument is predicated on nothing, they said one thing and audiences assumed it to be true. What would I even be looking for here? Examples of things not happening? Nintendo or the OP has to defend their side with actual support before I can level a developed counter-argument against it. But I genuinely don't think they have an argument and have been relying on fans' willingness to prostrate themselves to make up for their lack of an argument. Your "god is a green marshmallow" take is a total fallacy because what I'm arguing is that Nintendo's argument is a "god is a green marshmallow" fallacy. The burden of proof is still on Nintendo. Nintendo has nothing to fear but tells us that there is something to fear.
The onus is on those defending law breaking to justify it.
Okay. The original sprite/tile work was clearly of a lower quality than the ripped original Nintendo assets, it was day and night between them, literally looked like patchwork between professional and amateur graphically.
