-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Nintendo and The Pokémon Company put out statement shaming Pokémon Sword & Shield leakers
- Thread starter Serebii
- Start date
If thequote format doesn't work then pleaseforgive me, this site is horrible for mobile
I respect the fact you may not like the game after buying it.
And I respect the fact you can choose to but it pre-owned or even emulate.
But we can't on one hand say we shouldn't call corporations people and then on the other accuse them of "revenge".
If there was apersons or a site that took"the leaks" and the overall reception of these games - hell, there are definitely others - and put a critical lenses on them I believe you could argue that it absolutely contributed to the overall narrative and reception of the game.
Wired effectively blackmailed Sony into an interview about the new Playstation after choosing not to leak, that's what's been forgotten already and that's absolutely incredible to me. I don't know which organisation is in the right or wrong there. But the end result is, the narrative has changed now for the PS5's pre release newscycle.
Well this one obviously does. That is why both Nintendo and the outlet have made a statement on this.
I can't believe that we as a left leaning site obey the boots of big business, we should let this member just keep derailing the thread because they don't really know what they're talking about when it comes to the ramifications of breaching contracts despite themselves signing similar contracts.
I understand contracts and consequences to breaching them, but the actualities seem quite silly.
As I understand it after looking into things for five minutes, this leak resulted in some people knowing about unannounced Pokemon about five days before the release of the game. Did this even actually affect any marketing plans, or anything at all?
As I understand it after looking into things for five minutes, this leak resulted in some people knowing about unannounced Pokemon about five days before the release of the game. Did this even actually affect any marketing plans, or anything at all?
Yeah I mean I doubt the NDA explicitly features a clause giving them a callout if breached. But I also imagine given a choice between suffering whatever actual conferences that were written in the contract, or putting out a press release, that all parties were on board with the new clause.
How exactly is discussing these news a derail? Jesus. Fine, I'll but out. Sorry for having an opinion that's not amicable to multi billion dollar businesses strongarming tiny publications.
OP
OP
Yes. There were still reveals after the leaks happened that would have created positive press. They also wanted people to have surprises.
For one person yes, but more than one person leaked soon after
It really isn't worth the 15 milliseconds of fame. Nobody will remember you for it and at this point the title is in the hands of everyone who was interested. The only thing it accomplished was giving me an idea of what Pokemon I was going to gun for a little early.
It's fine having a different opinion but you are not expressing it in good faith and your dislike for the games I feel is clouding your judgement in how you are approaching this discussion.
Were this statement for the public or for the media only? I cannot find the statement on Nintendo/TPC website nor they announced it thru twitter. I doubt the public will know about this unless they read an article by the media.
Seems like a release sent to media.
Only the publication, the offending reviewer is also unnamed in FNintendo's release on the matter. Curiously there is no review for Sword and Shield on the website either.
Read the statement. They specifically call to the website, albeit they do refer to the reviewer in question as male.
I just the read the OP and english isn't my first language so I just want to clarify, the title kinda implies that they named names.
Gotcha, that's understandable (and I meant no disrespect in that regard, apologies if it came across that way). I can see why one would infer the OP title as misleading, though the OP seemed to have wanted to refer to "leakers" in a broad context since that seemed to have been the motive behind going public.
Abiding to an embargo and choosing to break it for editorial reasons makes sense for certain reasons and under certain conditions (Like the recent Shenmue 3 thing)
But, there's also an implicit trust between the company and publication that you are going to abide by them. I was on a press trip for KH3 when a bunch of gameplay leaks essentially leaked all the coverage that we wanted to cover at the time and it was super frustrating, because we weren't able to report on it, and by the time the article goes up- it's old news. There's a reason for the synergy between PR and Press that's beneficial to both of them. Leaks generally upset the news cycles and embargos that the PRs have set up, and specialist sites have already agreed to. A lot of the time, putting those sites in a bit of a bind.
In my experience, Japanese companies tend to be a lot more protective and issue NDAs, in which case Nintendo have pretty much free legal rein to persecute whatever they want. I've seen some pretty big numbers being threatened when signing an NDA, but that's usually some sort of fine and hardly enforceable. This case looks pretty cut and dry to me, to be honest. Leaking stuff to get a few more clicks, 5 minutes of fame and ruining that trust and relationship just isn't worth it.
A lot of the smalltime leakers fall foul of this, and are not generally well looked-at in the games journalism space. There's a bit of a difference between something like a thoroughly researched Eurogamer Report on something new like a console, for example, and a random "insider" on Twitter regurgitating stuff that's sort of like an open secret in some industry circles. You saw this a lot around when the Switch was getting revealed.
But, there's also an implicit trust between the company and publication that you are going to abide by them. I was on a press trip for KH3 when a bunch of gameplay leaks essentially leaked all the coverage that we wanted to cover at the time and it was super frustrating, because we weren't able to report on it, and by the time the article goes up- it's old news. There's a reason for the synergy between PR and Press that's beneficial to both of them. Leaks generally upset the news cycles and embargos that the PRs have set up, and specialist sites have already agreed to. A lot of the time, putting those sites in a bit of a bind.
In my experience, Japanese companies tend to be a lot more protective and issue NDAs, in which case Nintendo have pretty much free legal rein to persecute whatever they want. I've seen some pretty big numbers being threatened when signing an NDA, but that's usually some sort of fine and hardly enforceable. This case looks pretty cut and dry to me, to be honest. Leaking stuff to get a few more clicks, 5 minutes of fame and ruining that trust and relationship just isn't worth it.
A lot of the smalltime leakers fall foul of this, and are not generally well looked-at in the games journalism space. There's a bit of a difference between something like a thoroughly researched Eurogamer Report on something new like a console, for example, and a random "insider" on Twitter regurgitating stuff that's sort of like an open secret in some industry circles. You saw this a lot around when the Switch was getting revealed.
I'm grateful to the leaker, I got to know how much content was cut and still didn't buy the game. Will get used or heavily discounted.
Both parties handled it well. It sucks but a precedent needs to be made. Not only for Nintendo but for everyone in the industry. NDAs are there for a reason. Many industries have it and it's a legal document not worth taking risks over.
You make it sound like you couldn't have found out without the leaker, which is ridiculous.
They make an example of this publication so no one does it again. This one might have been harmless. What if the next one isn't?
this type of response, a hard cut off of a relationship with nintendo, might encourage other sites to be more careful about not breaking embargo.
It's a Nintendo focused site. Blacklisting them pretty much kills the site anyway. There will still be leaks for the next Pokemon game regardless.
There probably will be but they can still make an effort to ensure they don't come from sources within their control
I'm usually a day 1 buyer for Pokemon games, were there more than one leaker pre-launch? I honestly don't know lol. All I remember is pictures of the Dex, a chart of all the cut pokemon and some GIFs were the game runs horribly.
Saying Nintendo naming the company is an "attack" is . . . Unusual, at best.
Like, if I were to sign-up for a service, and an employee there didn't meet the terms of the service, it would be an attack for me to call them out on it? Like I hire a roofing company and the guy that comes out and does it does a piss poor job. Posting a review saying they did a shit job and didn't meet the terms of the contract would be an attack against the company?
That's obviously backwards. It could get pretty twisted it you apply that logic to criminal situations. If someone commits a crime against me and I call them out for it I'm attacking them?
Framing it as big company attacking little company is weird too. If Nintendo wanted to they could easily swallow the smaller company with a lawsuit.
Like, if I were to sign-up for a service, and an employee there didn't meet the terms of the service, it would be an attack for me to call them out on it? Like I hire a roofing company and the guy that comes out and does it does a piss poor job. Posting a review saying they did a shit job and didn't meet the terms of the contract would be an attack against the company?
That's obviously backwards. It could get pretty twisted it you apply that logic to criminal situations. If someone commits a crime against me and I call them out for it I'm attacking them?
Framing it as big company attacking little company is weird too. If Nintendo wanted to they could easily swallow the smaller company with a lawsuit.
Deflated marketing plans would certainly be a tangible negative effect for them.
Inevitably all information about a game will be out there, and there's nothing Nintendomon can do about it.
People who want surprises will always get them, they just need to opt to not look at available information.
I don't consider "ruined surprise" to be much of an actual thing or problem for anyone.
OP
OP
And that's a great idea in theory, but when leaks happened people were sharing them with no care on social media. They were plastered over YT videos etc.
You're not wrong. Pokémon is the biggest media franchise in the world. There will likely be leaks no matter what. That doesn't mean Nintendo shouldn't try to stop them. I'm sure if Nintendo can identify where future leaks come from they'll sever those ties as well. By making this public those leakers now know what they're getting themselves into, and maybe that knowledge will encourage them to think twice (or at least encourage their bosses to think twice about who they're giving the early review code to).
Nintendo and the Pokémon Company could have done a lot worse to this publication than just publicly cutting ties. I'm sure FNintendo is more than happy with the public shaming than they would be with any of the more serious legal and financial ramifications that can come with breaking a contract.
I'd be a lot more sympathetic to Nintendo and GameFreak if the leaks didn't reveal all the shortcomings they had been desperately trying to keep under wraps during developement and show how unfinished the game was. It was thanks to the leaks that I decided to not get the double pack at launch and boy am I glad I didn't.
I mean the thing is that most everything that leaked was covered anyways after the embargo lifted. And also reviews. It's not like the leak was gonna be the only thing that informed you of the problems.
Oh we read exactly what they said.
Reviews were forbidden from going into specifics about the second half of the game which coincidentally is when it completely fell apart.
...I mean, yes? Most reviews don't delve into late game details in depth at all. That's not new. However the leak itself delved more into other aspects of the game rather than just story beats.
Sure but the quality dropping off a cliff 60% of the way through a game and never recovering isn't. I'm thankful the leaks were there to reveal that when no one else was.
Man I hate the word "multi billion dollar businesses" to justify that whatever they do is wrong and Evil!!
NDA is a trust based agreement, of course a public statement about this case is necessary.
You destroyed the trust on your part.
Nintendo or whatever the hell any company, big or little in its foot has this right to publicly state that their trust with another company has been broken.
Businesses are built upon trust and no one wants an untrustworthy partner to work with. Nintendo knows this well. anyone who is working in marketing knows this.
What is been done here is not an evil scheme or Fear tactic by a multi billion dollar business. It's the natural consequence of breaking the trust between two partners. Simply being called out.
The reviewer works at the website. Why wouldn't the site be punished as well? Companies are always responsible for what their employees do while representing them. It's not unusual
Well, at least they didn't out the particular individual, only the company, which is fair in my opinion.
I just hope Nintendo/game freak don't dimiss the value of supporting Portuguese speaking countries even more.
I just hope Nintendo/game freak don't dimiss the value of supporting Portuguese speaking countries even more.