Major Changes In Youtube Involving Let's Players

[irok]

Corporations need to stop , stop trying to take money out of everywhere , its not to be found and for a lot of lets players im sure it will simply mean less or no videos at all, these people as much as they may love what they do will simply not be able to afford the time taken to do it anymore and the games are simply not going to get free advertising. Its not like people are either going to buy the game or watch the lets plays and if any company slaps on a I don't want you to make videos of our stuff at all sticker I'm personally going to assume the worst, I think I vaguely remember a time when game companies made games and if they were good games people would buy them rather then trying to make money via games and sucking out all that doesn't have to be there and monetizing every possible aspect without a thought to the consumers who it pays to keep in the dark, but I may be wrong and maybe that's always the case.

 

[Mid Boss]

To be honest I don't really care one way or the other. I think it's incredibly greedy for a Let's Player to expect to see revenue from his videos. Gaming is a hobby, recording yourself play games is a hobby. I don't expect people to pay me to waste my time or watch me play a game in a very mediocre fashion. If you do then you're far too entitled and don't really care about the content you're presenting.

Any real LP'ers would continue to make videos even without the promise of advertising revenue because it's done for love of the medium not for lining their pockets. Anyone who says differently has an alternate agenda.

The companies in question have every right to halt that revenue or take it themselves. You're doing nothing but voice your opinions/reactions to a game that they conceived and developed. They own it, they own the rights to it and the world doesn't owe you shit.

That's right! Let's stop paying Football, basketball, hockey, etc etc players. Sports are a hobby. It's incredibly greedy for those people to expect compensation for it too! Any real players will keep playing even when the money stops.

 

[Mr.PlanetEater]

If it's only for the monetized ones then by all means go for it, I view using let's plays as a means of making money to override any Copyright protection let's players can lay claim to. It'd be like Dreamworks streaming a Pixar movie under the guise of fair use and then making money off of the stream. Now if this is going to go for all let's plays then that's a bum deal because some people actually do focus on the game, and give solid critiques without asking for money in return.

 

[irok]

SNIP

But the LP's are making money out of someone elses property. I'm pretty sure ost EULA's state that a game can't be used for personal profit. Shouldn't the LP's pay some royalties to the owner of the game? As we all know, when you purchase a disk/digital copy of a game you're purchasing the license to play it. Same with a film or album.

The game doesn't become your property. Similar to the pre-owned game market. Publishers introduced online passes to ensure they were being paid for people using their games. While I never liked it I most certainly didn't disagree with it. Why should anyone get to use an online service that they haven't paid to help maintain?

EDIT: Try yet another perspective. Dave has worked his arse off. Dave finished some project that'll make his own and Jane's life easier increasing both of their productivity. Jane takese credit then gets a pay rise.

Dave's life has been made easier which is nice but no pay rise. Jane is reaping the financial reward from Dave's work. Why didn't Dave get a raise? Jane has done nothing to earn it other than use Dave's idea.

Incase people can't wrap their head around this....
Dave = Game's Publishers
Jane = LP's
Idea = Game

Dave's pay rise comes in the form of increased sales because in a thousand views maybe 10 people will be convinced to buy into Dave's idea. Jane spends many hours a week editing and recording to get a thousand viewers, the payoff of which while it may be something Jane enjoys doing will still end up being much less then the cost of the game, even if it was an indie game Jane would require a lot more viewers to compete with the cost of buying the game in the first place and the only way to attract more viewers is to spend more time producing more content which as we've already said at a mere thousand viewers isn't going to pay for itself.

If it was about who worked the hardest for no financial reward look no further then how indie games treat this differently then companies, worried that somewhere somehow they are losing money , companies prohibit videos lest people find out that their game is horrid and soulless, indie companies know that videos increase sales as they have a game worth buying as it wasn't designed by accountants and they have nothing to hide, no bottom line to sell or quotas to meet, simply free advertising or at the most philanthropic free happiness and goodwill.

Also for the whole intellectual property thing and making money off games im going to say this, take everything out of a lets play that didn't come from the game itself, everything that's from the lper and leave the game, being played without commentary , without editing and without any quirky gameplay habits or random creative diversions "what happens if we/I do x", what do you actually have left, hour long videos of the game being played which would be amazingly stale and boring ,that and all the lets plays are the same ,its not the games lp'ers are making money off, no , not really they are a catalyst , a means to an end , the product is in fact personality , I watch yahtzee play obscure games from 30 years ago because I enjoy the analysis and snarky commenting the game changes and it doesn't matter its still the snarky commenting and that's what I was after anyway its if your a gamer a relatable situation in which to plug personality but nothing more and that doesn't belong to anyone but themselves and I think if that's what people are viewing videos for then they have a basic right to monetize themselves and really do these companies need more money , they cant figure out what to do with the money they've got and what would most of them do with random pocket change anwyay.

 

[Headsprouter]

Oh, balls. That's somebody's living destroyed.

Well...PewDiePie won't be affected much, since he mostly plays indie games (albeit the same ones over and over again).

CaptainSparklez, on the other hand just had a huge dump taken on everything besides Minecraft. I expect a sad vlog from him this week.

Either there's going to have to be a "Channel Sparklez" (obvious parody of Channel Awesome) or he'll have to go a new video hosting site.

And TheJWittz might have to shoot down that non-nintendo footage possibility if he wants to stay put. This is so sad, though, especially for the channels that are still growing.

"Merry Christmas"

 

[EHKOS]

This is pretty bad news for NCS and Chugga. The Creatures should be OK due to them being under the Machinima umbrella, but damn that sucks. It's not like they were going to have their own fucking playthroughs made by a company-hired professional. Let 'em make a little cash off it, some of them use it to make a living. And didn't Nintendo say it helped sales? Because honestly it does, if I wasn't allowed to see real in-game footage of Black Flag I would never have bought it.

Agh. It just pisses me off that they're shitting on the little guys again.

 

[Hap2]

Doesn't this set a precedent for companies to have all forms of game footage that isn't a review de-monetized though?

I'm guessing Let's Plays don't fall under the Fair Use/Fair Dealings clause of copyright law, because they aren't necessarily critical, nor are they a parody.

This worries me, because a buddy and I are working on a different kind of video series that isn't necessarily critical either.

 

[Rancid0ffspring]

SNIP

But the LP's are making money out of someone elses property. I'm pretty sure ost EULA's state that a game can't be used for personal profit. Shouldn't the LP's pay some royalties to the owner of the game? As we all know, when you purchase a disk/digital copy of a game you're purchasing the license to play it. Same with a film or album.

The game doesn't become your property. Similar to the pre-owned game market. Publishers introduced online passes to ensure they were being paid for people using their games. While I never liked it I most certainly didn't disagree with it. Why should anyone get to use an online service that they haven't paid to help maintain?

EDIT: Try yet another perspective. Dave has worked his arse off. Dave finished some project that'll make his own and Jane's life easier increasing both of their productivity. Jane takese credit then gets a pay rise.

Dave's life has been made easier which is nice but no pay rise. Jane is reaping the financial reward from Dave's work. Why didn't Dave get a raise? Jane has done nothing to earn it other than use Dave's idea.

Incase people can't wrap their head around this....
Dave = Game's Publishers
Jane = LP's
Idea = Game

Do you realize EULAs are basically worthless?Better yet enough with the "poor publishers" card because quite frankly they already make millions yet want even more,it's called greed and I don't care what analogy you use to excuse it.

While we're on the subject games are someone's property considering you freaking bought it,so stop saying it's only a license because that is a load of bullcrap.Lastly most publishers don't make the games the developers under them do,for example EA did'nt make Mass Effect,Dragon Age,Dead Space,or any of their other big titles but they sure do like to take credit for it.

Using your logic should the devs get all of the money while EA gets nothing?

Chill out mate it's a discussion.

The publisher would have fronted significant amounts of money to ensure those games did get made. So of course they get a cut if not all of the money. They're the parent company that's investing all the money. Forgive me if I'm a tad lacking on knowledge of business models but the Publisher does what? Nothing? Or do they pay the dev's employee's wages for X amount of months/years? Pay for marketing/advertisement? Distribution?

The made up company my 2 made up people work for get all the money because they pay the wages. The 2 minions work for a company. They earn that company money. That's what a job essentially is.

No! Devs and Publishers aren't losing money to LP's. LP's are making money out of the Devs and Publishers work.

Answer me this, why do the LP's have the right to make money of someone elses work?

 

[GoaThief]

That's right! Let's stop paying Football, basketball, hockey, etc etc players. Sports are a hobby. It's incredibly greedy for those people to expect compensation for it too! Any real players will keep playing even when the money stops.

There are professional gamers, e sports and all the rest of it which will continue to operate as usual. This does not affect them. Even if it did perhaps you're not familiar with the likes of Rugby Union where only a decade or so ago it finally became professional. Your analogy is terrible. LPers are not cyberathletes (for want of a better word).

Actually found out how much these LPers are making today, some modestly popular guy on YouTube was taking home £3500 every month for a mil or two views, not to mention the freebies - that's way more than the people who made the game. It's totally out of whack and completely understandable why developers and publishers might be a little cheesed off. If they are greedy, then LPers must be even more so. Kicking up a fuss about having their pay reduced to something line with what they do, tsk.

 

[Drago-Morph]

They're getting paid to advertise your content, and you're not the ones paying them, and you want to shut it down.

Great job, game companies. Bunch of fucking geniuses over here, clearly.

 

[Mid Boss]

That's right! Let's stop paying Football, basketball, hockey, etc etc players. Sports are a hobby. It's incredibly greedy for those people to expect compensation for it too! Any real players will keep playing even when the money stops.

There are professional gamers, e sports and all the rest of it which will continue to operate as usual. This does not affect them. Even if it did perhaps you're not familiar with the likes of Rugby Union where only a decade or so ago it finally became professional. Your analogy is terrible. LPers are not cyberathletes
(for want of a better word).

Actually found out how much these LPers are making today, some moderately popular guy on YouTube was taking home £3500 every month for mil or two views, that's way more than the people who made the game. It's totally out of whack and completely understandable why developers and publishers might be a little cheesed off. If they are greedy, then LPers must be even more so. Kicking up a fuss about having their pay reduced to something line with what they do, tsk.

Ok, let lay this out for you. How many Let's Players have more than a million subscribers? How many have less than a hundred? No, you're not going to throw up some videos and retire. It takes a lot of work produce quality let's play videos. You have to do retakes and editing all of which happen behind the scenes and you have to keep producing videos on a daily basis to keep people's interest. It's a full time job and you have to be something special to stand out from the crowds. For every Let's Player that gets rich there's a thousand no one's ever heard of. So, yes, my analogy holds up.

"Having their pay reduced to something in line with what they do" There's a LOT of fucking people that this needs to happen to. Least of all, Let's Players. The average American CEO makes between 200 to 300 times more than the average worker of his own company and they barely work 20 hours a week. Many professional athletes make more than the president does. Oh, but Let's Players are where we draw the line! LOL Yeah.

 

[shrekfan246]

Answer me this, why do the LP's have the right to make money of someone elses work?

Because they have to put in endless amounts of their own work as well.

Answer the opposite without using the "Well, the publisher produced the game!" card. Why don't LPers have the right to make money off of spending forty hours a week or more producing content to be distributed through Youtube? Why don't they have the right to make money off of something that essentially becomes a job, with a specific schedule and its own quirks and eccentricities and extra costs?

And why the hell are so many people against the idea of something like LPing becoming a job, anyway? Especially on a website like this one, unless it's all just because of bitterness and jealousy because they can't be paid to play games, you'd figure people would be all over alternative forms of income, but no, profiting off of video games is suddenly off-limits because of reasons.

 

[Mid Boss]

And why the hell are so many people against the idea of something like LPing becoming a job, anyway? Especially on a website like this one, unless it's all just because of bitterness and jealousy because they can't be paid to play games, you'd figure people would be all over alternative forms of income, but no, profiting off of video games is suddenly off-limits because of reasons.

Pretty much this. People think that anyone can do it with a minimum amount of work because they have no idea what goes on behind the scenes. The vast majority of people know that, just because you can throw a football, doesn't mean you should be out there making million because they know it's a lot of hard work and dedication.

But, because you don't see the time and work that goes into making a quality let's play video, people don't make this distinction with let's players. So they just assume these people "got lucky" without ever having to really work which creates bitterness and envy.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

This doesn't really affect me one way or another, since I don't watch Let's Plays. However, I find it interesting if Youtube is really starting to push its luck with this along with the whole Google+ malarkey and charging for specific channels. Ho satisfying it would be to see all the popular youtubers move to other sites like Blip or Vimeo and leave the massive corporate conglomerate wallowing in dust with only cat videos left to itself.

 

[deth2munkies]

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.

Agreed,it's like they use copy-right claims to intentionally be dicks when those companies have little to gain from doing so.

How would you feel if you spent a couple years of your life writing a novel, then some dick on Youtube reads the entire thing verbatim, makes fun of it, then makes money off of it.

Now some people that may have been interested won't buy your book because they know what happens, and they think it (and you) are stupid because some dick on Youtube said it and his opinions must be correct.

That's the logic there. It's not 100% correct, but it's still pretty plausible to me. Sure, some people may see the game and say "Sure, I want to try that," but most people won't, especially for story based games. I watched a LP of the story of Starcraft: Heart of the Swarm because I wanted to know what happened. Didn't buy the game, but don't feel the need to anymore. Same thing with The Last of Us (though I don't have a PS3 so...). No need to buy them.

I and people like me are the reason why game companies are doing this, and I can totally sympathize with them.

EDIT: Just want to add, this goes double for folks like Telltale, where the gameplay isn't the point, it's the story. If you watch an exhaustive LP of The Walking Dead (where they show all routes), there's literally no point to playing the game.

 

[DSK-]

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

# It doesn't surprise me, particularly with the Google+ crap that was forced. I'm all for making things better, and have over the last couple of years bent to changes that YouTube has made, but I abhor the Google+ crap. I don't want to change my channel's name to my Google+ account, because then it would break the names policy and the channel, if changed to something else, wouldn't match the content on there. It's fucking stupid. And I can't comment on videos or people who ask me questions on videos because I refuse to "update" my channel to my Google+ name - and I don't even want a Google+ account in the first damn place


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

# I don't really watch Let's Plays, but I do watch an awful lot of Starcraft 2 VODS and competitive matches & commentaries. I'm also rather partial to Robbaz.


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

# I think this was inevitable, because money makes the world go round, but I don't think it's a particularly brilliant idea. This decision does, however, make more sense than the Google+ implementation, though


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

# I have no idea what the/a "Video Game Crash" is :/


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

# I don't know.


6: Freestlye Final Thoughts - Your take on this with a good conclusion?
===================================================================

# I'm concerned for my own channel, which is basically a massive archive of over 1000 videos from a formerly competitive game that I've been downloading replays from, recording and then processing, before uploading to youtube. Due to the fact that these replays are in the public domain, I believe I and others who record content from replays (like Quake, Starcraft, etc) are somewhat safe (though I won't kid myself).

I'm just concerned that all those videos will get taken down and that all my years' hardwork will have gone down the toilet

tl;dr

I'm not surprised by this news, but it doesn't excatly make me all warm and fuzzy inside either.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

Having never watched a lets play video i find myself completely uncaring on this subject. People were making money from someone elses work and the makers decided to stop them...seems fair enough to me. It's all just another part in trying to force people to pay more money for gaming and since i pay almost nothing to game in the first place it doesn't bother me in the slightest...i'm not stupid enough to be a victim

 

[GoaThief]

Ok, let lay this out for you. How many Let's Players have more than a million subscribers?

I said VIEWS, not subscribers. Big difference.

"So, yes, my analogy holds up."

No, it doesn't at all. There are direct comparisons to sportsmen in the gaming world, and LPers aren't them. It's pretty obvious and until you can think and argue logically then I have little more to say to you.

This mentality of "If he/she makes more than me then they need to suffer" is incredibly toxic and petty.

Lolage!

I'd say that attributing absolute untruths and ad hominems to an individual who holds a different opinion is demonstrably toxic. Please try harder.

And why the hell are so many people against the idea of something like LPing becoming a job, anyway? Especially on a website like this one, unless it's all just because of bitterness and jealousy because they can't be paid to play games, you'd figure people would be all over alternative forms of income, but no, profiting off of video games is suddenly off-limits because of reasons.

Pretty much this. People think that anyone can do it with a minimum amount of work because they have no idea what goes on behind the scenes.

Of course they're entitled to something for the input they give - not many have argued LPers should receive nothing. However there are definite issues with ownership, rights to use material and the like. Copyright is vital and is not an inherently bad thing. When more and more people are going, "nah, I'll just watch a LP instead" as entire games are being recorded and played back to millions then there are definite issues that need to be addressed.

Jealousy is a ridiculous argument and doesn't come into it for the vast majority of people. I like many others don't really care as much as you'd like to think. Speaking of professions, my background is in media and professional audio so I know exactly how much work goes into LPs and overall it's not a huge amount. Sorry, but that's the truth.

 

[deth2munkies]

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.

Agreed,it's like they use copy-right claims to intentionally be dicks when those companies have little to gain from doing so.

How would you feel if you spent a couple years of your life writing a novel, then some dick on Youtube reads the entire thing verbatim, makes fun of it, then makes money off of it.

Now some people that may have been interested won't buy your book because they know what happens, and they think it (and you) are stupid because some dick on Youtube said it and his opinions must be correct.

That's the logic there. It's not 100% correct, but it's still pretty plausible to me. Sure, some people may see the game and say "Sure, I want to try that," but most people won't, especially for story based games. I watched a LP of the story of Starcraft: Heart of the Swarm because I wanted to know what happened. Didn't buy the game, but don't feel the need to anymore. Same thing with The Last of Us (though I don't have a PS3 so...). No need to buy them.

I and people like me are the reason why game companies are doing this, and I can totally sympathize with them.

EDIT: Just want to add, this goes double for folks like Telltale, where the gameplay isn't the point, it's the story. If you watch an exhaustive LP of The Walking Dead (where they show all routes), there's literally no point to playing the game.

Except copy right laws are freaking abused by near everyone including game companies.Also sympathy for multi million dollar companies....... really?This isn't hurting them at all and in fact LPs are essentially free advertising.

Ignoring everything I say and restating your own proposition is no way to have a conversation.

That said, you obviously don't know the people who make these games. It's really easy to say "ZOMG BIG CORPORATIONS GRUBBING MONEY" and forget that there's a lot of good individual people that work there and do their jobs brilliantly. I knew a few people at Gearbox and Timegate because I live in Texas where they run things. They're awesome people. In the immediate future, their bonuses are contingent on how well their games do, in the long term, their jobs are.

So don't fucking tell me that sales don't matter and that the only people affected are faceless corporations, because it only betrays your utter ignorance to the truth.

 

[2xDouble]

Answer me this, why do the LP's have the right to make money of someone else's work?

Why do news casters have the right to make money telling other people's stories?
Why do art galleries have the right to make money displaying other people's paintings and sculptures?
Why do museums have the right to make money displaying other people's discoveries?
Why do libraries have the right to make money renting out other people's books?
Why do television networks have the right to make money showing other people's acting and editing work?
Why do retail stores have the right to make money selling other people's products?
Why do theater houses have the right to make money showing other people's plays or movies?
Why do chefs have the right to make money cooking other people's produce?
Why do restaurants and wait staff have the right to make money serving other people's cooking?
Why do crafters have the right to make money using other people's yarn/stickers/cloth/knives/etc.?
Why do musicians have the right to make money using other people's instruments?
Why do radio stations have the right to make money playing other people's songs?
etc., etc...

...because they're each selling their own quality work, not someone else's. That's what "derivative work" means; they aren't selling the same product. Sadly, some corporations lump "derivative work" together with "plagiarism" and "cheap knock-offs", which is an understandable concern, but hardly applicable.


Captcha: "Worth Overdoing." How appropriate.