Support NeoGAF

[Petrae]

How long until publishers claim Lets plays are equal to piracy?

Probably not too long.

It's unfortunate, too. With game reviews becoming less and less trustworthy for use in potential buying decisions, removing gameplay videos means that consumers will have to rely more on rentals or word of mouth to try and figure out what's worth their 60 bones.

And with digital slowly eating away at physical media for games, the era of the game rental will eventually go away, too. Then it will be even more of a crap shoot for consumers.

Publishers continue to expand and use their power, and everyone else loses something in the exchange.

 

[Orayn]

Probably not too long.

It's unfortunate, too. With game reviews becoming less and less trustworthy for use in potential buying decisions, removing gameplay videos means that consumers will have to rely more on rentals or word of mouth to try and figure out what's worth their 60 bones.

And with digital slowly eating away at physical media for games, the era of the game rental will eventually go away, too. Then it will be even more of a crap shoot for consumers.

Publishers continue to expand and use their power, and everyone else loses something in the exchange.

Who's removing gameplay videos? This is about the monetization of derivative works, and though many publishers may be taking a pretty hardline position, it's hardly a concerted effort to stamp out freedom of speech with respect to video games. Microsoft and Sony's newest consoles both have built-in broadcasting and recording features, for Chrissakes.

 

[Petrae]

Who's removing gameplay videos?

Gameplay videos potentially will be curtailed with the new policies.

 

[Orayn]

Gameplay videos potentially will be curtailed with the new policies.

See my edit. MONETIZING gameplay videos may be curtailed, which does indeed affect certain YouTubers who make videos their livelihood, but nothing has changed when it comes to just uploading.

This also doesn't sound like it affects people who aren't associated with any partner network. Rather, it brings certain partnered people down to that level.

 

[Alvarez]

These publishers are so stupid. I had no interest in Ryse until I watched about 15 minutes of it on a stream. Now I want it. That's all I'm gonna say.

 

[crooked spin]

Gameplay videos potentially will be curtailed with the new policies.

Potentially? Curtailed? Well goddamn! Definitely time to announce that the sky is falling! RIP youtube RIP viddygames.

 

[Orayn]

These publishers are so stupid. I had no interest in Ryse until I watched about 15 minutes of it on a stream. Now I want it. That's all I'm gonna say.

Congrats, that has nothing to do with the potential changes happening at YouTube.

 

[SlasherJPC]

If they allow videos but just not monatized, people will still see lps, walkthroughs ,etc. Everyone won't stop, only people simple doing this for cash.

 

[Orayn]

If they allow videos but just not monatized, people will still see lps, walkthroughs ,etc. Everyone won't stop, only people simple doing this for cash.

I agree with you, though I wouldn't characterize everyone who makes videos for a living as "simple." They do plenty of real work and it's fine that they would want to profit from it. If I had more talent and influence, I'd want to do the same.

 

[SlasherJPC]

I agree with you, though I wouldn't characterize everyone who makes videos for a living as "simple." They do plenty of real work and it's fine that they would want to profit from it. If I had more talent and influence, I'd want to do the same.

I didn't mean it that way. I put alot of time into my content. I been at this since 2006 and only getting better and better. Over 700 videos. I feel the pain... but I don't make a living income from it all. So I can continue doing my videos regardless.

 

[Cynar]

Congrats, that has nothing to do with the potential changes happening at YouTube.

In the broad picture it definitely does.

 

[Goby]

Just setup offshore pirate streaming sites.

Undergroundlps.org

hardcorepwediepieing.net

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

If they allow videos but just not monatized, people will still see lps, walkthroughs ,etc. Everyone won't stop, only people simple doing this for cash.

Which is why I don't understand the rage. It's like two seperate threads moving in different directions. Just like people make huge FAQs for no money, these videos will still happen. Or OTs on this very board. Those still happen and take a shit ton of time. Why? For the internet points.

 

[Meaning Of Karma]

A lot of people in this thread have a weird idea of what LPs are.

Almost all of the successful, monetized videos that LP channels put out are essentially rifftrax, not just straight rips/walkthroughs.

 

[jacksepticeye]

A lot of people in this thread have a weird idea of what LP's are.

Almost all of the successful, monetized videos that LP channels put out are essentially Rifftrax, not just straight rips/walkthroughs.

There's serious misconceptions of the whole youtube thing in general

SO many posts of people thinking it's guys playing videogames all day in their underwear and getting paid for it

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

Which is why I don't understand the rage. It's like two seperate threads moving in different directions. Just like people make huge FAQs for no money, these videos will still happen. Or OTs on this very board. Those still happen and take a shit ton of time. Why? For the internet points.

The people who are making money are able to because they're popular. They're popular because they make compelling content. If they no longer have the time to make videos because they can't make money from it, the amount of high quality content drops considerably.

See how that works?

 

[Apollo]

Devs are losing money when a high profile you tuber bashes their game and they can't moneyhat the person.

 

[Dead Man]

Devs are losing money when a high profile you tuber bashes their game and they can't moneyhat the person.

Heh

 

[Baby Milo]

Demos are considered bad for business now (DICE conference), word of mouth is bad now (embargoes), free exposure is bad now (this topic)
How backwards and lost can these companies get.

.

damn the way this industry treats consumers is terrible

 

[entremet]

Clueless.

All of the them.

 

[SlasherJPC]

The people who are making money are able to because they're popular. They're popular because they make compelling content. If they no longer have the time to make videos because they can't make money from it, the amount of high quality content drops considerably.

See how that works?

They are also popular sometimes due to timing, luck,fads or help from bigger youtubers. No offense to JackSepticEye but he is a perfect example. He got a shout out from pewdiepie and his views/subs went soaring. YT is oversaturated so its hard find content that is quality with so much content out there. Sometimes all it takes that one thing. I've seen plenty of quality channels that have criminaly low subs.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

The people who are making money are able to because they're popular. They're popular because they make compelling content. If they no longer have the time to make videos because they can't make money from it, the amount of high quality content drops considerably.

See how that works?

Yet, FAQs and other labor of loves continue. Your description of 'considerable' has no definition at this point in time. Nor do we know how profitable the popular guys are. So, some of the argument for keeping monetization is based on emotion, not fact. What if 90% of the let's play guys make less than $100 per month? Do we have any real numbers to talk about?

What if the loss of income is not that large?

 

[Uncle Rupee]

Yet, FAQs and other labor of loves continue. Your description of 'considerable' has no definition at this point in time. Nor do we know how profitable the popular guys are. So, some of the argument for keeping monetization is based on emotion, not fact. What if 90% of the let's play guys make less than $100 per month? Do we have any real numbers to talk about?

What if the loss of income is not that large?

It's still income. And if it as low as that, I don't see why publishers shouldn't let them keep it. Some of these channels give the kind of exposure these pubs would normally have to pay large sums of money to get through other means.

 

[Fattony12000]

Can I join in on the fun?

WHOA WHOA WHOA MR MONEY BAGS! $24.19 in just ONE MONTH? You're officially the enemy.

 

[maverick40]

Google won't care about the tiny minority of users who do let's plays all day and earn money off it. They will still get millions of uploads a day regardless.

 

[jaxword]

Can I join in on the fun?

That's more money than I make in a month.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

LOL. Missing the point.

Believe me, I got the point. But there's already plenty of misinformation in threads like these. If you're going to compare videogames to something, at least make it another copyright work. Why is it always f-ing cars?

 

[bjork]

So assuming this becomes a thing, what is the new thing, then? Do the videos for free and hope Sony or whoever likes you enough to make you their official let's play person?

 

[Orayn]

So assuming this becomes a thing, what is the new thing, then? Do the videos for free and hope Sony or whoever likes you enough to make you their official let's play person?

No, it'll just shift the balance of power among partner networks in favor of whichever is most liberal with granting people "Managed" status rather than "Affiliate."

Also it'll drive people who do both streaming and videos towards streaming if it really does hit hard and make monetization difficult.

 

[LightofRohan]

Makes since to get rid of that stuff to me. I've talked too many people that have stated, "I didn't play it, but I watched a walkthrough on youtube so I don't have to". Kind of lame...

 

[DyslexicAlucard]

Makes since to get rid of that stuff to me. I've talked too many people that have stated, "I didn't play it, but I watched a walkthrough on youtube so I don't have to". Kind of lame...

But it won't prevent that; it will only prevent people from making money from doing that.

The way I see it, why does a publisher care if someone makes money from it? Unless they're using this as a step towards getting rid of gameplay videos altogether -- which many are scoffing at -- then what's the point?

It's not like someone monetizing a Let's Play -- as opposed to doing it for free -- makes a difference to the publisher. If the LP affects them negatively, it'll do so whether the video uploader is paid to do it or not.

 

[enzo_gt]

So assuming this becomes a thing, what is the new thing, then? Do the videos for free and hope Sony or whoever likes you enough to make you their official let's play person?

Lets Play's take over Vine and Instagram.

 

[Dead Man]

Believe me, I got the point. But there's already plenty of misinformation in threads like these. If you're going to compare videogames to something, at least make it another copyright work. Why is it always f-ing cars?

You must have missed all the non car analogies. And part of the point is that the way video games are protected is more like moves when they should be more like board games. Part of the point is that the way they are protected is not consistent with what they are. They are not movies or fixed experiences, they are games designed to be played. Each play is unique. Protecting them the same way movies are doesn't make sense.

 

[Shogun1337]

Can we please find a new avenue to get everyone to shift to from Youtube? Year by year, it gets worse and worse. If they really crack down on the video game videos I watch, and the video game music I listen to 24/7 a day, I'm done with youtube.

 

[Orayn]

Can we please find a new avenue to get everyone to shift to from Youtube? Year by year, it gets worse and worse. If they really crack down on the video game videos I watch, and the video game music I listen to 24/7 a day, I'm done with youtube.

Music situation is more or less at equilibrium with the exception of a few fussy record labels who don't want their stuff on YouTube.

As for games, it's not really a crackdown on content so much as a more stringent application of the rules that were already in place for a good number of people. It could drive away some big names who make a living on YouTube in the worst case scenario, but it's not like they're going to start hunting down and removing any footage involving gameplay.

That said, it would be nice if there some kind of competitor to YouTube in this area, preferably one who would cut deals with these publishers beforehand so the people making content wouldn't have to worry about it. That takes a lot of resources and influences to manage, however, so it's not surprising that it hasn't happened yet.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

You must have missed all the non car analogies. And part of the point is that the way video games are protected is more like movies when they should be more like board games. Part of the point is that the way they are protected is not consistent with what they are. They are not movies or fixed experiences, they are games designed to be played. Each play is unique. Protecting them the same way movies are doesn't make sense.

I didn't miss the non-car analogies, but I saw one and sought to correct it. If anyone read that post and found themsolves nodding along saying "Yeah, if I film my car I don't have to pay. Why should I for videogames?" then they're misunderstanding the respective regimes under which the intellectual property is protected.

I absolutely agree with the bolded. Particularly, the way that source code for computer programs is protected as a "literary work" seems, to me, completely asinine (but that doesn't really bear on what we're talking about here). However, videogames do (almost always) contain artistic, musical and artistic works. And just by buying the game you don't have the right to do any of these things with those works without a license.

I think the law will catch up in time, but it's often slow. Ultimately, I think we may end up seeing videos like Let's Plays being shoehorned into the existing copyright regime somewhere, maybe as collaborative works or possibly as computer-generated works.

 

[Mael]

Yet, FAQs and other labor of loves continue. Your description of 'considerable' has no definition at this point in time. Nor do we know how profitable the popular guys are. So, some of the argument for keeping monetization is based on emotion, not fact. What if 90% of the let's play guys make less than $100 per month? Do we have any real numbers to talk about?

What if the loss of income is not that large?

When you see the amount of time and effort spent in some FAQS....
It's a pitty they don't get paid handsomely.
Seriously the only thing missing from the official ones usually is the nice art in the books.

 

[Nymerio]

Can we please find a new avenue to get everyone to shift to from Youtube? Year by year, it gets worse and worse. If they really crack down on the video game videos I watch, and the video game music I listen to 24/7 a day, I'm done with youtube.

What makes you think pubs/devs wouldn't lobby other video sharing sites to crack down on that stuff?

 

[Cizard]

It is. Minecraft wouldnt be so popular without Youtube videos. Most indie titles like Terraria and Paper Please got popularity out of Youtube Let's plays because Pewdiepie played it or whoever.
You can make an argument that seeing a game from start to finish is bad and some people wont buy the game, but I remember the story of that kid without functioning hands that said that he watch let's plays since he cant play the games. Usually if people do not buy the game, is that they cant buy the game. I prefer that they watch the game than pirating it. Only truly linear games will get spoiled that way.

It doesn't matter if it's advertising or not. In the end it's their content and if they don't want see see people monetizing gameplay videos that's up to them.

This might be a bad decision but it's not up to us to decide whether it is or not. If you want to make money from youtube videos you should make original content or work under fair use. Posting full games obviously does not fall under fair use.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

I think it's crazy that people make money from doing video walkthroughs.

Pardon my ignorance, but people can make money off of video game walkthroughs on Youtube??? I knew walkthroughs existed, but I didn't know people were getting paid for them.

 

[VE3TRO]

I dont know why people keep saying the channels are not earning much money.

I'm going to be honest now and say I was earning $5500-6000/£3800-4200 a month last year and I wasn't getting some views like other channels.

In 2011 I earned £41,000 (before tax) in ads on Youtube.

If channels are hitting a 2-4 million views which are monetized a month then they will be earning a few thousand a month.

Don't think these people are earning fuck all.

Pardon my ignorance, but people can make money off of video game walkthroughs on Youtube??? I knew walkthroughs existed, but I didn't know people were getting paid for them.

Some channels are earning money off all types of videos including trailers which all they did was download and reupload.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

I dont know why people keep saying the channels are not earning much money.

I'm going to be honest now and say I was earning $5500-6000/£3800-4200 a month last year and I wasn't getting some views like other channels.

If channels are hitting a 2-4 million views which are monetized a month then they will be earning a few thousand a month.

Don't think these people are earning fuck all.



Some channels are earning money off all types of videos including trailers which all they did was download and reupload.

Oh, I see. Thanks.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Here's a question;

I make 2 videos.

Video 1: My commentary with just the game logo, monetized
Video 2: My gameplay with no commentary, unmonetized

Video 2 links to Video 1 for comments, to be played back while watching, i.e. in another tab/window

What can they do?

 

[SlasherJPC]

I dont know why people keep saying the channels are not earning much money.

I'm going to be honest now and say I was earning $5500-6000/£3800-4200 a month last year and I wasn't getting some views like other channels.

In 2011 I earned £41,000 (before tax) in ads on Youtube.

If channels are hitting a 2-4 million views which are monetized a month then they will be earning a few thousand a month.

Don't think these people are earning fuck all.



Some channels are earning money off all types of videos including trailers which all they did was download and reupload.

So what kind of views are you getting now and how much are you seeing in return?

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Here's a question;

I make 2 videos.

Video 1: My commentary with just the game logo, monetized
Video 2: My gameplay with no commentary, unmonetized

Video 2 links to Video 1 for comments, to be played back while watching, i.e. in another tab/window

What can they do?

I like this thinking, it shows a level of ingenuity

In a strictly legal sense, they could still have video 2 taken down, as infringement of copyright takes place whether you make money or not. However, if the policies they've put in place say they won't take gameplay videos down if they're unmonetised, you should be fine.

I would expect them to change their policies though if lots of people realise they can do your trick.

Edit:

You're basically making a videogame Rifftrax. But you may notice those guys don't link to a youtube video of the film they're meant to be played with.

 

[Zaibach]

Really sucks for those who make a living off this stuff, but I always thought it was weird that receiving money for let's plays was even possible. Definitely seemed like a "too good to be true" wild west Internet thing that just wouldn't last.

aaww shucks, now they'll have to go get real jobs like the rest of us

 

[Dead Man]

Edit:

You're basically making a videogame Rifftrax. But you may notice those guys don't link to a youtube video of the film they're meant to be played with.

That's because they don't have to since the movie is the same for everyone that watches it.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

That's because they don't have to since the movie is the same for everyone that watches it.

No. It's because they don't want to infringe copyright.

Your "because" is the reason that the Rifftrax model is feasible for movies but not for videogames.

 

[Dead Man]

No. It's because they don't want to infringe copyright.

Your "because" is the reason that the Rifftrax model is feasible for movies but not for videogames.

Well yes, of course they don't want to infringe copyright, but the reason they don't need to do it is because of the experience being the same.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Well yes, of course they don't want to infringe copyright, but the reason they don't need to do it is because of the experience being the same.

I think we're on the same page. I'm talking about why they don't do it. You're talking about why they don't need to do it. Both are correct