Major Changes In Youtube Involving Let's Players

[Emaruse]

http://cramgaming.com/youtube-getting-tough-video-game-monetization-12989/

If I didn't do that right, I apologize, but this is my second time making a topic, and they don't have any quick tools on making urls or quotes And yeah, I have no idea how to do this, and they don't have any area to teach you this either, so I'm winging it. Anywho, the topic at hand.

It seems that Youtube & The Powers That Be aren't very happy with how much money that Let's Players are making on Youtube, so they decided to make a new regiment starting next year that will affect every Let's Player that is not apart of a major company:

Early next year Youtube will be random checking videos regardless of whether the uploader channel is partnered with a network or not. The random check will take between 2 and 48 hours, but it?s not clear how long the process takes if suitable permissions are provided. Networks will be able to categorize channels into groups with either a Managed, or Affiliate status, with the latter most likely being more common. Affiliates will have random videos checked as per the new rules whereas those channels who are Managed might be able to avoid it.

For those who are Managed, they will not experience any changes and will continue to make money like they always have with their respective company. Affiliates, however, like AngryJoe or PewDiePie will have their content altered to not run ads, and therefore, as an added result, they will not gain any money for their videos, due to them having video game content that is not their own.

Personally, I do not know how many Let's Players are affected other than those two, but I know it will be quite a lot more than just them, hell, it might even be Two Best Friends & Team Four Star that will also be affected as well.
====================================================
For those of you wondering about all the studios stance on this matter, here are what some of the major companies guidelines are (If you can't go to the link

* Activision - Does not allow derivative works per their terms. See 3. License.

* Bungie - Specifically says not to create derivative works from their software in their terms. Probably why Halo is a pain.

* Capcom - OK if you aren?t making any money. See this FAQ post on their forums.

* Codemasters - Does not grant permission to monetize videos. Posting videos is accepted.

* GungHo Online - These guys do stuff like Ragnarok Online. Videos OK, monetization not OK.

* Microsoft - Videos are completely fine as long as you are not paid. They say part of this includes Halo in their rules, so Bungie may or may not still get on your case. Check out the rules here.

* Natsume - These guys are famous for Harvest Moon among others. From an email they allow videos without monetization.

* Naughty Dog - The Last of Us, Uncharted, Jak and Daxter? great games, but they don?t want you to use ANY of their footage (said via email).

* Nintendo - Encourages videos (especially Let?s Plays), but may decide to monetize your video. The exact wording is on Go Nintendo.

* NIS America - Famous for stuff like Danganrompa and Disgaea. Encourages videos, monetization not allowed.

* Rockstar / Take-Two Interactive - Encourages videos unless they are just straight cutscene footage (Let?s Plays with cutscenes OK). Pretty sure they don?t want things monetized. See the full rules here.

* Sega - Does not give any license for YouTube footage .

* SNK - They do not give license for derivative works.

* Square Enix - Does not grant individual permission to use their works, but DOES grant permission to larger entities. .

* TecmoKoei - Famous for stuff like Dead or Alive and Ninja Gaiden. Specifically in the words of the email, ?TecmoKoei does allow people to make video reviews and other similar works, but we do not typically allow monetization.?

* TellTale Games - The Walking Dead, Wolf Among Us, Sam and Max? these guys have some really good stuff. Let?s Plays are definitely allowed, monetization is not. See this permission post on their forums.
====================================================================
And now, my opinion: This is straight-up bull pocky. Why would Youtube and the major companies just do this NOW of all times?! It's like they don't want advertisements about their game from non-bias people anymore! And yes, they did gain money out of it, but that's because if they didn't, it would take far much longer to get the games before anyone else, far much longer to make them now that they would have to get decent paying jobs to support these new rules, which would result in fewer and in-between videos of LP's and other stuff, and it would just ruin business! It's just like Jim Sterling said, and hell, he JUST said this last week! The Video Game Industry just wants to suck up every bit of money that can, and if someone else is making their money despite the fact that their money gain makes THEM even more money, they're just gonna take it away and expect them to do exactly as they are now, only for free.

When wise men speak, the masses never listen, it seems. At least not the important big-shot people among the masses anyway.
====================================================================
Now then, a little conversation between us forum posters:

1: What do you think of this sudden change happening next year?

2: Are you worried about your favorite Let's Player's future?

3: Do You Think This should have happened a long time ago, and are proud of Youtube's Decision?

4: Anyone think that Video Game Crash is going to happen due to this being one of the factors?

5: Which Let's Players do you think would be fine with this outcome? Which ones do you think would not be?

6: Freestlye Final Thoughts - Your take on this with a good conclusion?
===================================================================
You may now post.

 

[Snograt]

Totally ignoring your list of questions (I don't have enough opinions!), I will just say that this is natural behaviour of companies trying to protect their IP.

On the other hand, the companies aren't actually losing money, rather they're gaining recognition, so why the crack down? So BillyBobBuggerlugs is making a few quid from people watching him playing a game. So what? Where's the loss?

 

[Roxas1359]

It sounds like pure greed to me.Most LPs help unknown games get recognition and the Let's Players are effectively getting people to buy those games,but if those game devs want less sales because they're greedy then that's on them.

Thank you for being someone that understands what we LPers do. ^.^

OT: Believe me this is gonna shake up everyone really, and it's gonna be worse if you aren't a partner like me. Pretty much now I'm just gonna finish my current LPs on YouTube, and then head off to Game Anyone primarily because what's the point in using a service that seems hellbent on making what you like to do near impossible to do. And I know this isn't just YouTube/Google's fault, it is also the fault of many other companies as well.

 

[Emaruse]

Totally ignoring your list of questions (I don't have enough opinions!), I will just say that this is natural behaviour of companies trying to protect their IP.

On the other hand, the companies aren't actually losing money, rather they're gaining recognition, so why the crack down? So BillyBobBuggerlugs is making a few quid from people watching him playing a game. So what? Where's the loss?

It's fine. If anyone doesn't have that many opinions to fit the questions, just say what you feel, people. I'm just not too happy about this since they're not losing any money out of Let's Players playing their games on Youtube, in fact, they're gaining more attention and they're showcasing their games to the world. I honestly don't know what caused this other than greed, because.... There's no loss to be had for the Video Game Companies on this one!

 

[SeventhSigil]

I bet even money we're going to see these publishers try to have their cake and eat it too. In other words, I think we're going to see particularly popular Let's Players be permitted to 'sign on' with a particular publisher to represent their product line, or the publishers themselves will try organizing their own let's play channels. It can't be ignored that the ad revenue is money, and I would be very surprised if publishers didn't try to find a way to tap into that.

That being said, that means they are entirely missing the point on why such channels have become so popular in the first place.

 

[Genocidicles]

If this stops cunts like Pewdiepie making money from their shitty videos then I'm all for it.

Sucks for the few good ones though.

 

[BrotherRool]

Most LPs help unknown games get recognition and the Let's Players are effectively getting people to buy those games,but if those game devs want less sales because they're greedy then that's on them.

This is the problem though right, I'm sure every indie company who knows anything wants as many people as possible to LP their games.

But none of these guys make indie games. They don't need people to know that Grand Theft Auto 5 exists and they pay an awful lot of money to make sure people know it on their terms, as the marketing department decided would best maximise sales.

I don't think it's easily proven either way whether LPs help or hurt big games. On the purely physical non-marketing side all we have is anecdotal evidence. For every person who said 'that game looks great I'm going to buy it' I could produce someone who said 'Everyone loves it for the story so I figure I might as well just watch an LP'. I don't think we have anyway of telling which side is bigger than the other because people are notoriously unreliable at telling people what does and doesn't want to make them play games (all the boycotts that no-one boycotted)

And it's very important to companies not just that their games are known, but that they're known for the right thing. Magic: The Gathering went as far to actually removed all cards that used the words 'demon' from the game for a long time because they wanted to cultivate a safe family-friendly image. In the same way companies want you to be focusing on very particular aspects of their game, and marketing outside of their control, like LPs disrupts that.


And from a pure greed perspective, it's almost definitely better for publishers if no LPs are made at all. Because

1. Less indie games get advertised, so less competition
2. If you make a bad game, people have less ways to know it's bad
3. If people make a good game then it's still on a level playing field with the others and they can aggressively market it and make sure to post splashy review quotes everywhere.

EDIT: Maybe this will help indie games get even more publicity, but it's could also kill of most professional LPers so that they can't afford to make many indie LPs either

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

I am surprised this didn't happen sooner. Both the EULA and copyright laws are pretty clear on the fact that using an entire, or parts of a, computer game to make money is considered a copyright infringement unless you have some kind of consent from the holder of the copyright. This is essentially Youtube adapting its' policies to abide by the law (and to avoid lawsuits, no doubt) while still giving LPers a fair chance of keeping up their work as a non-profit venture with the permission of the copyright holders.

I can't say I am very upset by this and I can't really see all the nefarious scheming people seem to read into this. Copyright laws are what they are, even if gamers are notoriously bad at adhering to or respecting them. I mean, you'd get sued to the moon and back if you made a Rifftrax-style voice over to a movie and put it on Youtube, and we all accept that. But having someone do the exact same thing with a computer game and getting a cease and desist and suddenly it is BigDev trying to screw over consumers?

 

[idarkphoenixi]

Heard about this earlier but I didn't make a topic because I didn't believe it was true. Gaming is like 60-70% of YouTubes total traffic, look at the top 10 most subscribed people and how many subs the gaming channel get in total. I really hope everyone moves somewhere else.

Video's made for commentary, criticism, review, parody ect are supposed to be protected and do NOT require direct permission from the copyright holders.

 

[GoaThief]

If it gets rid of the likes of Pewdiepie, then it's long overdue and I'm all for it. They provide nothing insightful, unfunny and don't deserve the often large incomes.

That said, those who do the opposite of the above will be affected too so in all honesty I find these new restrictions difficult to condone. Will be interesting to see where it leads, doesn't really affect me at all as I'd much rather play a game than watch a foul mouthed spotty teen rage their way through it.

 

[TehCookie]

For as many people calling the companies greedy, aren't the LPers just as greedy?

I never watched any channels or follow anyone, and most of the ones I do watch are by people who only did a game or one series. I really don't see this affecting anyone who does it to show off a game they love.

 

[FPLOON]

Well... This sucks...

I mean, sure I have a so-called "partnership" on YouTube, but it's not like my channel has become my job, unlike some LPers on YouTube that I follow on a regular basis... Something tells me most LPers need to either be part of some partnership that gives them the right to do LPs of certain major games from companies that would otherwise stop them from monetizing, let alone posting said content on YouTube or go the route of AVGN and the like, playing the games that are so old, there's not much to copyright from it...

Meanwhile, I keep hearing more positive things from Game Anyone, so if all hell does end up breaking loose in this whole copyright business, then I'll keep the alternatives in mind...

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I don't understand why these companies even care if someone is making money with videos of their games. It's not like they're taking away their profit. It's just corporate douchebaggery.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Welp im not purchasing games from these companies again. Yep I mean it. Cryoatic is my favourite youtuber, courtious, emotive and honest. He inspired me to enjoy lots of videogames i otherwise wouldnt have. Ive purchased games because of him too. I was GOING to buy the last of us because of his videos but now im not. Nor will i purchase walking dead season two.

Its liberating to reach a stage in your life where you dont care enough about the latest games to buy them really. I like roguelikes and some old classics and frankly im fine never buying another non indie game ever again.

 

[TehCookie]

For as many people calling the companies greedy, aren't the LPers just as greedy?

I never watched any channels or follow anyone, and most of the ones I do watch are by people who only did a game or one series. I really don't see this affecting anyone who does it to show off a game they love.

Except the LPers often put in a ton of work making videos and they usually don't make much money to offset the costs.That's why most have other jobs to help them make money.

Do you need someone to pay you to do hobbies?

 

[Roxas1359]

I never watched any channels or follow anyone, and most of the ones I do watch are by people who only did a game or one series. I really don't see this affecting anyone who does it to show off a game they love.

When you aren't a partner then it affects you even more. The benefit of being in a partnership with a network was that they helped you with YouTube's completely broken copyright report system. Most of the time people will get 3rd Party Content ID Matchers, and about 1/10 of the times will it actually be from the company or publisher that owns the IP and all copyright rights. With how this will be, even those who are partnered who had at least some protection get screwed, and those who aren't partners with a network will have an even harder time now.
Really wish I had started LPing a few years ago now...>.>

No,but making LP vids is hard work with little to no payoff.That's why I think anyone who tries to use copy claims to muscle in on Let's Players aren't going to get much money in the end.

You I like a lot, as you seem to know that it can be hard to make the videos and release them on a schedule. ^.^

 

[Roxas1359]

After watching hundreds of LPs from some of my favorite YouTubers I grew to respect the dedication they put into their vids.One of them explained how he often has to release a few vids a week because of editing and getting the audio right,that's why I think it's kind of dickish for Youtube and any game company that is going to take advantage of this to put the screws on people who help get their games out there.

Believe me, getting the audio just right can be a pain. The worst things that can also happen are that the video can glitch out and you have to see if you can save the footage, and if not then you have to rerecord. I remember the worst thing that happen to me before was I was doing a game that had autosaving as a feature and I had to playthrough the game at the beginning again just to rerecord that part. T^T
Some people do put a lot of hard work into the videos, but then there are those that don't, as I've seen some lazy LPs before. XD
Personally I don't monetize my videos even though I can if I wanted too, as I was hoping to work towards an actual network partnership, but if the benefit of getting better protection is gone then what's the point. I might as well just head straight to Game Anyone only because at least there I wouldn't have to remove some parts of the videos or censor out music so that YouTube's broken automated system doesn't go haywire. (It's especially a problem with Kingdom Hearts videos)

 

[Muspelheim]

"Hey, thanks for all the free advertising of our games! Now, bog off!"

And Google goes right along, as usual. The crippling midlife crisis they are evidently going through can't be helping, either. I do hope some smaller devs with less ivory boardroom idiocy weighing them down take the opportunity to get some extra space, however.
It's not the end of the world, perhaps, but it's a good indication of what we'll see more of in the future.

I really hope an alternative comes along, though... Youtube just won't do for much longer.

 

[TehCookie]

I never watched any channels or follow anyone, and most of the ones I do watch are by people who only did a game or one series. I really don't see this affecting anyone who does it to show off a game they love.

When you aren't a partner then it affects you even more. The benefit of being in a partnership with a network was that they helped you with YouTube's completely broken copyright report system. Most of the time people will get 3rd Party Content ID Matchers, and about 1/10 of the times will it actually be from the company or publisher that owns the IP and all copyright rights. With how this will be, even those who are partnered who had at least some protection get screwed, and those who aren't partners with a network will have an even harder time now.
Really wish I had started LPing a few years ago now...>.>

Will it be checking the non-monetized videos though? From the article it only seems to apply to the monetized videos (but I agree that system is broken as hell).

 

[Roxas1359]

Will it be checking the non-monetized videos though? From the article it only seems to apply to the monetized videos (but I agree that system is broken as hell).

Pretty much yeah, they're implementing this for everyone more or less. The main reason a lot of people would go into the partnerships was the protection that the network you were with would provide, with the money being a bonus since the network takes a cut (ranging from 10%-40% but that's based on the contract agreements) and Google always takes 40% no matter what. So this really just kills the point of getting into a partnership to help you get more protection against the broken system, which YouTube really needs to amend because I've gotten more 3rd Party Content ID matches from random groups than from the actual people who own the IP and copyrights.
Larger networks like Polaris, TGS, Machinima, etc. have some more help, but the problem is now they are forcing the networks to determine whether someone is a Managed Partner or an Affiliate. Being an affiliate pretty much you're paying all this money and getting no benefits like protection from the network, but if you were to get copyright strikes then only you are affected. With Managed Partners if the Managed Partner were to get a strike then not only do they get one, but their Network gets one as well. Combine that with the fact that YouTube has a 3-strike and you're out policy and then you can have the situation in which one person can get 3-strikes and then not only is their YouTube shutdown, but the entire network is too.