Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsTOASTER_TEAM'S PROFILE
Toaster_Team
966
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Colors mess up for GIF
When I upload a gif to my game profile, some colors disappear or are messed up (inversed). Why is this? How could I avoid this?
Here it is as imgur vs rmn:
Here it is as imgur vs rmn:
Building_v1.gif
We need to talk about the fan games here after what happened to the Metroid 2 Project
https://gamingreinvented.com/nintendoarticles/top-ten-nintendo-fanworks-cancelled-due-legal-complaints/
This might also interest you, regarding 2d remake of Ocarina of Time:
This might also interest you, regarding 2d remake of Ocarina of Time:
Until in May 2015, the download link was taken offline with a DMCA notice in its place.
But hey, it wasn’t the end of the world. Surprisingly, Nintendo only ever went after the download on Dropbox, not the website or its social media channels. Hence as of today, the game is still in development, plans for a version 2 are ongoing and there’s even talk of a deal with Nintendo to license the IP and make it official.
We need to talk about the fan games here after what happened to the Metroid 2 Project
Regarding reporting, from the website:
So you're saying that law must and business need to adapt to their environment. I mean, that's a truism if I ever read one. Laws do adapt and so do businesses.
Then you mention that Music has done this and that's it. Ok, I understand but I don't think it brings much to the topic of fangames and Nintendo's reaction about it.
As you said:
Regarding the part in bold: how do you support such statements as: people must do x, y is not true and so on? Sorry, I'm just naturally skeptical when people make claims like that out of the blue like that I need dig a bit to see if there's something tangible there. It's as if Nintendo is run by a bunch of idiots who've never considered the idea that not DMCAing their IPs might be a good thing.
Maybe it's more complex than following a whim and maybe there's a pretty strong rationale supporting Nintendo's way of doing things. It baffles me when people drop by and lecture them how they should run their IPs because they want more Metroid fangames. It just doesn't work that way.
but there's a point where business and the law must adapt to changes or get left behind.
So you're saying that law must and business need to adapt to their environment. I mean, that's a truism if I ever read one. Laws do adapt and so do businesses.
Then you mention that Music has done this and that's it. Ok, I understand but I don't think it brings much to the topic of fangames and Nintendo's reaction about it.
As you said:
People need to quit with the ideathat IPs are hanging from a thin line and "one fangame too many!!!" will let their IP roam free in the wilderness susceptible to wild orgies. It's not true. It takes far more than a successful fangame (or five, or twenty) to threaten an IP. What Nintendo did was the smart move in this situation, yes, but it's not always the smartest choice and it's something that is in flux and may get phased out of how companies protect IPs in current wisdom.
Regarding the part in bold: how do you support such statements as: people must do x, y is not true and so on? Sorry, I'm just naturally skeptical when people make claims like that out of the blue like that I need dig a bit to see if there's something tangible there. It's as if Nintendo is run by a bunch of idiots who've never considered the idea that not DMCAing their IPs might be a good thing.
Maybe it's more complex than following a whim and maybe there's a pretty strong rationale supporting Nintendo's way of doing things. It baffles me when people drop by and lecture them how they should run their IPs because they want more Metroid fangames. It just doesn't work that way.
We need to talk about the fan games here after what happened to the Metroid 2 Project
Another thing to consider: do any of us think Nintendo doesn't pay as close attention to the indie scene as we do? There may or may not be Nintendo employees hanging out at RMN, but they know about the major indie fan releases well ahead of time, too, just like the rest of us. Metroid 2 got a lot of public attention. So did Pokemon Uranium, but the difference is, Pokemon Uranium wasn't getting reported in the mainstream news to nearly the degree that Metroid was.
I would be very surprised if employees scanned the net at all. They are probably informed of fangames by other people who report them.
People need to quit with the idea that IPs are hanging from a thin line and "one fangame too many!!!" will let their IP roam free in the wilderness susceptible to wild orgies. It's not true. It takes far more than a successful fangame (or five, or twenty) to threaten an IP. What Nintendo did was the smart move in this situation, yes, but it's not always the smartest choice and it's something that is in flux and may get phased out of how companies protect IPs in current wisdom.
Says who? You?
Here's the bottom line: it doesn't matter how you guys feel about IP and about what should or shouldn't be allowed. People are coming up with those elaborate explanations going in details about why Nintendo should do what they think they should do.
They don't care.
It's their IP and they'll DMCA stuff which uses it without their permission. That's it.
Yet somewhere on the net, a few days in the future some dude is going to wake up and go: "Hey I'll spend the next years of my life to work on this fangame" and then there's this outrage by the internets when it gets taken down.
"But it would help their sales!"
"But it's just one fangame!"
"But they haven't made a good Metroid in ages!"
The law doesn't care feelings and other musings when it comes to IP (and neither should it).
We need to talk about the fan games here after what happened to the Metroid 2 Project
Companies should know by now that any attempt to 'remove x thing from the internet' is impossible; I'm not saying they should do nothing, but one of the things they pretty much have to do is ride it out.
But on the other hand, protecting their IP is at the core of their legal action, which is well within their right. Doesn't stop me from thinking they're pitching a tantrum over a free-game that won't rival their new games once they drop.
There's more impact to a law than just its strict implementation. Nintendo taking action is also sending a message about their stance on using their IP without their permission. This has a dissuasive impact. If Nintendo were more lax about their IP protection, there would be most likely be a lot more fangames ripping its IP than there are right now.
As for throwing a tantrum, I think you're seeing this as more an emotional reaction than it really is. I doubt those types of decisions are based on knee-jerk emotional response but rather from bureaucratic legal protocol. If you use the IP without their permission, you get taken down, that's it really. Corporation are not moved by emotion, they're moved by gain/potential of gain.
Prom_Night_2.gif
"On Let's Plays" - Dev expresses plight over how LP's have impacted his game's sales
Interesting comment found on steam:
Pewdiepie, the most subscribed to person on youtube, and a let's player has played I am bread on his channel.
The game itself, according to Steamcharts, has an all time peak of 419 people and 80 people in game.
At the very least 3,2 million people watched the I am Bread video, and there are a mere 1000 reviews on the website. Even if we assume a generous 10% rate of people that write reviews that would mean pewdiepies video translated to less than 0,003% sales. And one has to wonder how many of those few sales weren't just other people that planned on Let's playing the game.
"On Let's Plays" - Dev expresses plight over how LP's have impacted his game's sales
Why shouldn't it be that we have to prove that LP = fewer sales?
I don't know.
Also, how would you propose proving either of those things?
I would imagine that's something that could probably be researched by investigating empirical data.
ahahahaha what?! Dude do you even know what communism means?
It's not about whether a thing is good for the game. The overall community is not there to make gammakers happy. The community is there to look at and respond to games. If you put a game in public- ESPECIALLY for sale- you have lost control over how it is treated, beyond a narrow legal/ToS sense.
Ok, "communism" wasn't the best word but it's the best one I could find to represent what I was thinking about.
Well, the narrow legal aspect of things is sort of the source of the contention here though. I puzzled as to why the legal aspect would be considered narrow though.
I'd say the fact that the big publishers who COULD pursue legal action haven't done so is a big hint that, at least in the larger markets, this is considered business as usual and not actively harmful.
Perhaps. There's also the possibility that we're dealing with a grey area which lakes filing lawsuit difficult and where the cost/result isn't worth it for said corporate entities.
I mean how do you explain that Nintendo (a corporation) has a very strong hold on LPs of their games?
"On Let's Plays" - Dev expresses plight over how LP's have impacted his game's sales
I'm going to have to side with Ratty524 on this one.
Also, at the end of the day, unless we can prove without a doubt that LP = more sales, I think it should be up to the dev to decide his or her own position regarding their own respective games. Heck, even if LP did provide more sales, it should be a decision which is left to the dev anyway as opposed to the communist approach of "We know what's best for your game and we'll decide whether or not we want to broadcast LPs of it".
As a side note, as anyone ever thought that using certain elements in game would make you less likely to get criticism? For example, I can see how critics would be less likely to pan a game about cancer because the theme *is* cancer. I feel like it's sort of a way to get immediate sympathy from potential customers. Of course, it wasn't the intention of TDC but I do think it plays in the reception the game would have.
Also, at the end of the day, unless we can prove without a doubt that LP = more sales, I think it should be up to the dev to decide his or her own position regarding their own respective games. Heck, even if LP did provide more sales, it should be a decision which is left to the dev anyway as opposed to the communist approach of "We know what's best for your game and we'll decide whether or not we want to broadcast LPs of it".
As a side note, as anyone ever thought that using certain elements in game would make you less likely to get criticism? For example, I can see how critics would be less likely to pan a game about cancer because the theme *is* cancer. I feel like it's sort of a way to get immediate sympathy from potential customers. Of course, it wasn't the intention of TDC but I do think it plays in the reception the game would have.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
