Saying gaming channels dont get the respect they deserve is crazy. The youtube channels with the most subscribers are most of the time gaming channels. Pewdiepie is all the way up on that list.
Given how many try and act like that now, they don't really need respect, they don't understand what it means.
The new Content Autocracy System is just Youtube/Google being absolute elitism. Publishers of many games have stepped forward and auto denying and killing all claims that are not valid. By denying and killing, apologizing to falsely accused people and closing such claim. Other words to say Publishers are NOT doing this, the automatic system is in full Search & Destroy mode. Probably Nintendo, EA and few other Publishers who should die in furthest reaches of the cyber world doings likely. Nintendo is a absolute Copyright Nazi, EA is not any better either.
You are relying on imagery that wasn't yours to begin with, or a story you never wrote. Did you purchase the rights to this professionally generated content? No.
The problem is cheesy scams. What do I mean? Have you noticed how hardly no game developer and publishing company puts out Game Demos anymore? Given age of games today, many are absolute pitiful and not worth the hard earned 60 USD/Equal you pay for that game. But guess what? You cannot get a refund either, or not easy.
Game Reviewers who do this for a living, deserve respect, except the ones who just scream into a mic. But the ones who actually legitimately review a game and point out Cons and Pros in said game are the primary people who I respect. It is they who help keep you from getting scammed. There is but three choices: Gamble your money, Watch reviews on product, Resort to the dark bay. Remove those who dedicate much time to do proper game reviews, what two options is there? No game developer nor publisher makes demos for they don't want people finding out the game was a total flop. They rather you lose money on their poorly developed game they care nothing about.
I suppose that I will also mention that a new video was posted last night by the same guy. This one is about the new "Remove a song" feature that Google has added for YouTubers to get rid of copywritten music.
First Google+ for commenting and now this, If I had a dollar for every dumb thing google has done to youtube I would be the richest person in all of existence
No it isn't. But that is what the people obsessed with money and fame do. Real gaming channels purchase a decent microphone, get good editing software, and spend hours editing and rendering their footage and that is the easier things they have to do.
In some respects, you also just described every other LP'er who graduated from camcorder LPs and learned how to master video resolution. You just slapped an all to broad a description on the LP community as a whole.
And frankly, it's those that went off to make money on it that set the trend on a crash coarse. They rose the wrong brand of attention. And you know what? I'd hazard that even afterwards folks like Pewds would still be a curse on us all by probably landing some commentary role for e-sports in the future.
YouTube/Google's just trying to keep out of the hair of the people with power, which is to say the developers and federal law enforcement. Gaming channels don't mean squat in the grand scheme of things. More-so since they drove the bandwagon into oblivion.
And it's not like the LP community is asking itself anymore about what they can bring to the table that's new. It's all repeating the same mantra of good mic, and careful editing. Then complaining on Reddit that they're not getting any hits, and throwing their stuff out there into the sea of people complaining about hits where no one will give them hits, because they all want the hits for themselves.
You guys crashed LP. Or it's been crashing, if not crashed, long ago.
YouTube/Google's just trying to keep out of the hair of the people with power, which is to say the developers and federal law enforcement. Gaming channels don't mean squat in the grand scheme of things. More-so since they drove the bandwagon into oblivion.
How is it that gaming channels mean nothing? The people that get onto YouTube and post LP's are advertising company products. In fact, many have even begun to give early-released copies of their games to video game commentators for the fact that it'll help their sales rise when they first put their games out there. Even some of these over-rated YouTubers such as Tobuscus are still helping them make a profit.
The only real issue with gaming channels is the fact that a vast majority of them seem to focus mainly on already popular games or on new ones that everyone wants to buy. That's why not every game is able to recieve a fairly equal amount of attention as any other.
I can understand that gaming channels can and do have a negative effect, but in the end, they still play a major role in helping video game developers gain a profit. If they begin to push LPer's out of the picture, companies are going to figure out that they're the only ones left who can advertise their products.
How is it that gaming channels mean nothing? The people that get onto YouTube and post LP's are advertising company products. In fact, many have even begun to give early-released copies of their games to video game commentators for the fact that it'll help their sales rise when they first put their games out there. Even some of these over-rated YouTubers such as Tobuscus are still helping them make a profit.
The only real issue with gaming channels is the fact that a vast majority of them seem to focus mainly on already popular games or on new ones that everyone wants to buy. That's why not every game is able to recieve a fairly equal amount of attention as any other.
I can understand that gaming channels can and do have a negative effect, but in the end, they still play a major role in helping video game developers gain a profit. If they begin to push LPer's out of the picture, companies are going to figure out that they're the only ones left who can advertise their products.
Yes. A handful of developers. Then they probably pay the commentator off to glaze over the glaring issues.
Whether or not the "free advertising" argument is valid is up to debate in itself, as claims of "x bought y because Z Let's Played it" are considerably anecdotal, as the reverse could be stated as well.
Having indulged in the Metal Gear Solid franchise through Let's Play, I now have no reason to actually purchase MGS1/Twin Snakes, MGS2, 3, 4, and Rising since games like those are nothing more than an interactive movie (more so MGS4), which may hurt Kojima's end-quarter sales of his Metal Gear series.
On analysis of the Let's Playing phenomenon, The average video game title can hit a price tag of sixty dollars. And several hundred for the system alone or the PC platform you want to play it on. It is for a lot of people: an expensive hobby. So who's there to make it totally more free and cost less for people to indulge in the latest pop-culture story told in a digital medium, or wacky multiplayer encounters? Let's Play.
And if PDP and company enjoys several millions of [international] subscribers, then it's more than likely from an income standpoint that developers see those millions as not millions of new customers made, but millions of potential customers LOST because they're now getting to sit down and watch a git play a game for them. They're not not making the money they could make off Pewds sub-base than they would have if they just released old-school previews, demos, and so on. The whole game is already being split wide open for them, and destroying any chance at them being a long-term customer.
The same can also be said for Early Access/Beta Public Access titles. Developers are more than likely just nuking their own game before its released by giving them the full core experience of the game.
There is also the factoring in of such advertising black marks as the wrong Let's Player making the wrong jokes about your game and to totally devalue the art, atmosphere, and message in the game by making terrible jokes all over it. So then it doesn't become about the game, but the person playing it. And then what happens? The game becomes a visual backdrop and backstaged. The commentator makes their seventy five cents off you, and none of it goes to the developer that the video is supposed to be about. This also goes back to the point I made earlier where the money these people make are not going to the person who actually made the video game to compensate for the lost sales potential.
At the most extreme evaluation of Let's Play, they are software pirates plain and simple. Just most publicly accepted.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 had to pay for the royalties to talk smack over terrible movies or to wait for their copyrights to expire. There are rules for this.
Having indulged in the Metal Gear Solid franchise through Let's Play, I now have no reason to actually purchase MGS1/Twin Snakes, MGS2, 3, 4, and Rising since games like those are nothing more than an interactive movie (more so MGS4), which may hurt Kojima's end-quarter sales of his Metal Gear series.
If you're selling a game that only has a storyline to it and nothing else, then yes, I can understand how LPer's could be hurting them. However, there are many people out there who get locked into a series of games and would rather buy the game and experience it for themselves than to watch an LP of it, which means that the company still makes some money.
Yes. A handful of developers. Then they probably pay the commentator off to glaze over the glaring issues.
On analysis of the Let's Playing phenomenon, The average video game title can hit a price tag of sixty dollars. And several hundred for the system alone or the PC platform you want to play it on. It is for a lot of people: an expensive hobby. So who's there to make it totally more free and cost less for people to indulge in the latest pop-culture story told in a digital medium, or wacky multiplayer encounters? Let's Play.
This same logic can be applied to television. You now have the capability of watching every single movie, television show or otherwise without paying the people who made it a cent by simply recording it. Does that mean we should get rid of televisions as well?
There is also the factoring in of such advertising black marks as the wrong Let's Player making the wrong jokes about your game and to totally devalue the art, atmosphere, and message in the game by making terrible jokes all over it. So then it doesn't become about the game, but the person playing it. And then what happens? The game becomes a visual backdrop and backstaged. The commentator makes their seventy five cents off you, and none of it goes to the developer that the video is supposed to be about. This also goes back to the point I made earlier where the money these people make are not going to the person who actually made the video game to compensate for the lost sales potential.
This is the one thing that I can completely agree with, however. It's one of the major reasons that I hate most big YouTubers.
Chucklefish gave Etho a copy of Starbound the day before it came out. I don't think they expected that of him.
And that's only one example of a single game.
If you're selling a game that only has a storyline to it and nothing else, then yes, I can understand how LPer's could be hurting them. However, there are many people out there who get locked into a series of games and would rather buy the game and experience it for themselves than to watch an LP of it, which means that the company still makes some money.
Really, it can apply to puzzle games like Portal or multiplayer games such as Call of Duty by giving the viewer the ability to experience the inanity of the online world without being in it, or going through the game and solving the puzzles for you. In the later, it takes the surprise out for you and the only thing it probably does not hurt are games that have infinite content through the ability of giving the player the tools to build something. But at that point you'd be better off doing "Let's Play Photoshop" or CNC Mill.
This same logic can be applied to television. You now have the capability of watching every single movie, television show or otherwise without paying the people who made it a cent by simply recording it. Does that mean we should get rid of televisions as well?
The only person you ever pay to watch a TV show is the cable company. Not the studio. The advertising pays for that. And if not on TV: then Hulu or even Netflix pays for it from ad revenues on their site.
Agree 100%. Video created by the person who uploaded it. HE should be the one who benefits from it the most. If someone else owes 25% of the video - give them those 25% - be fare!!! In stead they are stealing the whole video from the creator. YES, I mean what I say: they are STEALING.
But they're not, they didn't create anything inside the video, they're just showing the visual content of someone else's creation. The game creator created what you're seeing, the video uploader did not. What the video uploader generally does is provide some sort of commentary, which is fine, but you still need the permission of the creator of the content before it's profited from.
To say the game developer is 'stealing' is ridiculous, they made the game, they made the visual content and therefore they own the rights to the video. Like it or not, that's the law.
But they're not, they didn't create anything inside the video, they're just showing the visual content of someone else's creation. The game creator created what you're seeing, the video uploader did not. What the video uploader generally does is provide some sort of commentary, which is fine, but you still need the permission of the creator of the content before it's profited from.
To say the game developer is 'stealing' is ridiculous, they made the game, they made the visual content and therefore they own the rights to the video. Like it or not, that's the law.
So answer this question for me, then. If you make a video in which you showcase both a video game made by Nintendo and a game that you've made, does that video belong to Nintendo? Should they be able to claim it, even though half the content doesn't belong to them?
The video itself doesn't belong to the anybody but the person who made it. I don't care if it contains 30 songs with individual copyrights to them. Every person that made those songs still has zero rights to claim ownership of that video. If you put this same logic into reality, that would mean that if you built your own house on government-owned land, that government should be allowed to take your house from you and claim it as their own.
Given how many try and act like that now, they don't really need respect, they don't understand what it means.
The new Content Autocracy System is just Youtube/Google being absolute elitism. Publishers of many games have stepped forward and auto denying and killing all claims that are not valid. By denying and killing, apologizing to falsely accused people and closing such claim. Other words to say Publishers are NOT doing this, the automatic system is in full Search & Destroy mode. Probably Nintendo, EA and few other Publishers who should die in furthest reaches of the cyber world doings likely. Nintendo is a absolute Copyright Nazi, EA is not any better either.
As explained by Machinima who in this case.
The problem is cheesy scams. What do I mean? Have you noticed how hardly no game developer and publishing company puts out Game Demos anymore? Given age of games today, many are absolute pitiful and not worth the hard earned 60 USD/Equal you pay for that game. But guess what? You cannot get a refund either, or not easy.
Game Reviewers who do this for a living, deserve respect, except the ones who just scream into a mic. But the ones who actually legitimately review a game and point out Cons and Pros in said game are the primary people who I respect. It is they who help keep you from getting scammed. There is but three choices: Gamble your money, Watch reviews on product, Resort to the dark bay. Remove those who dedicate much time to do proper game reviews, what two options is there? No game developer nor publisher makes demos for they don't want people finding out the game was a total flop. They rather you lose money on their poorly developed game they care nothing about.
Click them or they will click you
In some respects, you also just described every other LP'er who graduated from camcorder LPs and learned how to master video resolution. You just slapped an all to broad a description on the LP community as a whole.
And frankly, it's those that went off to make money on it that set the trend on a crash coarse. They rose the wrong brand of attention. And you know what? I'd hazard that even afterwards folks like Pewds would still be a curse on us all by probably landing some commentary role for e-sports in the future.
YouTube/Google's just trying to keep out of the hair of the people with power, which is to say the developers and federal law enforcement. Gaming channels don't mean squat in the grand scheme of things. More-so since they drove the bandwagon into oblivion.
And it's not like the LP community is asking itself anymore about what they can bring to the table that's new. It's all repeating the same mantra of good mic, and careful editing. Then complaining on Reddit that they're not getting any hits, and throwing their stuff out there into the sea of people complaining about hits where no one will give them hits, because they all want the hits for themselves.
You guys crashed LP. Or it's been crashing, if not crashed, long ago.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
How is it that gaming channels mean nothing? The people that get onto YouTube and post LP's are advertising company products. In fact, many have even begun to give early-released copies of their games to video game commentators for the fact that it'll help their sales rise when they first put their games out there. Even some of these over-rated YouTubers such as Tobuscus are still helping them make a profit.
The only real issue with gaming channels is the fact that a vast majority of them seem to focus mainly on already popular games or on new ones that everyone wants to buy. That's why not every game is able to recieve a fairly equal amount of attention as any other.
I can understand that gaming channels can and do have a negative effect, but in the end, they still play a major role in helping video game developers gain a profit. If they begin to push LPer's out of the picture, companies are going to figure out that they're the only ones left who can advertise their products.
Yes. A handful of developers. Then they probably pay the commentator off to glaze over the glaring issues.
Whether or not the "free advertising" argument is valid is up to debate in itself, as claims of "x bought y because Z Let's Played it" are considerably anecdotal, as the reverse could be stated as well.
Having indulged in the Metal Gear Solid franchise through Let's Play, I now have no reason to actually purchase MGS1/Twin Snakes, MGS2, 3, 4, and Rising since games like those are nothing more than an interactive movie (more so MGS4), which may hurt Kojima's end-quarter sales of his Metal Gear series.
On analysis of the Let's Playing phenomenon, The average video game title can hit a price tag of sixty dollars. And several hundred for the system alone or the PC platform you want to play it on. It is for a lot of people: an expensive hobby. So who's there to make it totally more free and cost less for people to indulge in the latest pop-culture story told in a digital medium, or wacky multiplayer encounters? Let's Play.
And if PDP and company enjoys several millions of [international] subscribers, then it's more than likely from an income standpoint that developers see those millions as not millions of new customers made, but millions of potential customers LOST because they're now getting to sit down and watch a git play a game for them. They're not not making the money they could make off Pewds sub-base than they would have if they just released old-school previews, demos, and so on. The whole game is already being split wide open for them, and destroying any chance at them being a long-term customer.
The same can also be said for Early Access/Beta Public Access titles. Developers are more than likely just nuking their own game before its released by giving them the full core experience of the game.
There is also the factoring in of such advertising black marks as the wrong Let's Player making the wrong jokes about your game and to totally devalue the art, atmosphere, and message in the game by making terrible jokes all over it. So then it doesn't become about the game, but the person playing it. And then what happens? The game becomes a visual backdrop and backstaged. The commentator makes their seventy five cents off you, and none of it goes to the developer that the video is supposed to be about. This also goes back to the point I made earlier where the money these people make are not going to the person who actually made the video game to compensate for the lost sales potential.
At the most extreme evaluation of Let's Play, they are software pirates plain and simple. Just most publicly accepted.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 had to pay for the royalties to talk smack over terrible movies or to wait for their copyrights to expire. There are rules for this.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
Chucklefish gave Etho a copy of Starbound the day before it came out. I don't think they expected that of him.
If you're selling a game that only has a storyline to it and nothing else, then yes, I can understand how LPer's could be hurting them. However, there are many people out there who get locked into a series of games and would rather buy the game and experience it for themselves than to watch an LP of it, which means that the company still makes some money.
This same logic can be applied to television. You now have the capability of watching every single movie, television show or otherwise without paying the people who made it a cent by simply recording it. Does that mean we should get rid of televisions as well?
This is the one thing that I can completely agree with, however. It's one of the major reasons that I hate most big YouTubers.
And that's only one example of a single game.
Really, it can apply to puzzle games like Portal or multiplayer games such as Call of Duty by giving the viewer the ability to experience the inanity of the online world without being in it, or going through the game and solving the puzzles for you. In the later, it takes the surprise out for you and the only thing it probably does not hurt are games that have infinite content through the ability of giving the player the tools to build something. But at that point you'd be better off doing "Let's Play Photoshop" or CNC Mill.
The only person you ever pay to watch a TV show is the cable company. Not the studio. The advertising pays for that. And if not on TV: then Hulu or even Netflix pays for it from ad revenues on their site.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
But they're not, they didn't create anything inside the video, they're just showing the visual content of someone else's creation. The game creator created what you're seeing, the video uploader did not. What the video uploader generally does is provide some sort of commentary, which is fine, but you still need the permission of the creator of the content before it's profited from.
To say the game developer is 'stealing' is ridiculous, they made the game, they made the visual content and therefore they own the rights to the video. Like it or not, that's the law.
So answer this question for me, then. If you make a video in which you showcase both a video game made by Nintendo and a game that you've made, does that video belong to Nintendo? Should they be able to claim it, even though half the content doesn't belong to them?
The video itself doesn't belong to the anybody but the person who made it. I don't care if it contains 30 songs with individual copyrights to them. Every person that made those songs still has zero rights to claim ownership of that video. If you put this same logic into reality, that would mean that if you built your own house on government-owned land, that government should be allowed to take your house from you and claim it as their own.