From the article it sounded like they were doing reviews, not let's plays. Reviews are inherently and substantially more transformative. They're not merely appending the content as it is played. They're supporting their assessments and reasoning with footage and proof.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Just to be clear, publishers don't like reviewers, either. They're seen as gatekeepers of audiences and people to be managed and bribed, and that means keeping the reviewer market small. They want reviewers to be PR people with a fascade of being impartial, and few enough to count on one hand.

This is also somwthing that's happening, then, because Nintendo sees a pathway to victory. Not only are their games licensed only for their own hardware, but they can claim the reviews are misleading and invalid because the games aren't designed to run on the platforms they're beinf reviewed on.

Like, none of this is Nintendo coming for your emulation catalogue. It's them coming for people trying to generate an income from their games. And all of the big publishers are going to line up behind them on this, because they also hate anyone who's making coin using their creation.

That's capitalism. That's what it means for something to be capital, and to own it. It's what owning the means of production is all about.