Maybe they should stop begging for money then.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AngryCentaurGaming (ACG) needs your help (youtube problems/demonetazion)
- Thread starter Jamiaro
- Start date
Maybe they should stop begging for money then.
xrnzaaas
Member
He announced he needs help, people gave him money (and then some). But that does not mean he'll get a steady income from now on.
Myself and another poster in this thread both challenged your definition of begging.
You didn't respond.
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
The formal definition for reference since it's coming up a lot:
It has a far more negative connotation about it than the definition would imply though.
It has a far more negative connotation about it than the definition would imply though.
ScaryShark
Banned
So you think gaming criticism is going to cease to exist or become irrelevant faster than the children who like Minecraft personalities and eventually get older?
Did Roger Ebert's audience grow or erode with time? Gaming criticism will always be relevant and of interest to people because it's not as personality based as a lot of the gaming content on YouTube.
Freeman76
Member
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
It almost entirely is (if you count their format for the review as part of that) when it comes to deciding which of the thousands of people doing the same thing you wish to support. The discussion is around single content creators having long-term sustainability, not game reviews in general.
ScaryShark
Banned
I was responding to someone who said long term stability on Youtube is a 'myth', I responded that if there is a type of gaming content that would be long term sustainable it would be criticism. Sorry if this 'crap' is to hard for you to follow through three posts, I broke it down in to as bite sized a format as I can.
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
This is fair, but from what I understand Youtube isn't making it clear what sort of content is ad restricted to content creators which is a pretty major issue.
Yabberwocky
Member
I hadn't realized how steadily ACG had became my go-to for video reviews. The quality and density in each review is phenomenal, let alone the constant roll-out of reviews and content, there's never a quality dip.
Yep, this.
Yep, this.
The poster did say "individual" which I think is the key part. Criticism is not going anywhere... critics are a dime a dozen.
I purely didn't respond because in your case what you were saying was boring and not worth my time, and in the case of the other guy all I could have said was "I disagree" and that would have been equally boring and not worthy of anyone's time.
But to lay it out, I disagree with your definition of begging. I don't believe that the analogies you used are at all representative of the situation.
Harlock
Member
Everything is super misterious. I doubt that is just tags and titles. And whatever it is, will change again.
MAX PAYMENT
Member
I've never paid for reviews and I'm not going to start now.
ScaryShark
Banned
It's cool if you disagree that someone who does game criticism, especially in the professional way that ACG does, is less sustainable long term than building content around having a persona like so many large gaming channels do, but my post is certainly relevant to the topic at hand.The ๖ۜBronx;246401932 said:
I didn't get tired of AO Scott as I got older because he's not a character or presenting himself through video taped reactions, but I probably would get tired of iBallisticSquid as I got older and his audience is a lot more volatile than someone who reviews things.
I can say with complete certainty criticism will exist in 30 years, Minecraft video channels? I'm much less certain. If ACG keeps up the quality of his content with the voice he currently he has, he can do this a very long time.
Ah, I apologize for not keeping a perfect eye on where this thread had diverged from its original intent.
You never bought a gaming magazine in your life? How old are you...12?
Max Payment doesn't pay?
The ๖ۜBronx;246401858 said:
Hey English isn't my native language, so i ain't about the enter a semantics debate, but it seems to me like the common interpretation of "begging" is to ask for something, for nothing in return, appealing to sheer good will.
Aside from the "earnest" part, almost any money transaction could be defined as begging otherwise.
If you think about the argument of "mom & pop" shops' value over digital stores and GameStops and Amazon, is that considered begging? The added value they offer over the competition (personable staff, a certain atmosphere, level of competence, etc) is something you don't get out of other venues, and it's what they're suggesting you pay the extra for.
Now you may not care about that stuff (i personally don't) but i still wouldn't call buying games there giving money to a beggar, despite them not being in the best position right now.
A niche market will always have to rely on the strength of its community's bond more than a mass one, but i don't see that as to imply that the value proposition isn't there, or that anyone is doing anyone else a favor.
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
I'm not sure why you keep reducing it down to this when literally no one is saying otherwise. For someone that openly insults and mocks others for their lack of ability to keep to a topic (currently sustainability for individual authors as the climate changes and becomes increasingly competetive) you sure do seem to love doing it yourself.
MAX PAYMENT
Member
This is why I see it as begging. Because whether you pay or don't pay, you're still going to get the same thing as everyone else. Sure he could stop making videos, but there's a million and one reasons he could stop making videos.
Also his patreon will not just be supporting his channel, it will be supporting his lifestyle too. At that point you're not paying for a service, you're paying to support him. And if he's asking for you to pay to support him personally, that's begging.
Maybe the best comparison is those God channels where they ask for 'donations'.
ScientificPizza
Banned
thank you so much for your completely necessary contribution to this thread
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
Sure. Which is why I said that the phrase has a far more negative connotation than the definition would imply. Language is fluid to a certain extent so I would agree that in most cases, the term begging isn't applicable in a colloquial sense to the situation here. It remains that on a literal level it is though.
ScaryShark
Banned
You said otherwise in your first post in this very thread.The ๖ۜBronx;246402264 said:
So I posted that I disagreed with you and said the type of content ACG makes would shield him from the up and down nature of Internet entertainment and the type of stuff that is popular on YouTube. I'm not sure how my responses aren't relevant.The ๖ۜBronx;246399958 said:
I then posted that the voice of the critic will sustain and age with the audience. ACG isn't playing a character. The way his videos are, will age. So it's not a profession that will just evaporate for him as he ages. These are a direct response to a post you made.The ๖ۜBronx;246399958 said:
I never openly insulted or mocked anyone in this thread. I responded kind of sharply to someone who took the effort to respond to my post as 'crap'. You seem annoyed only because I disagree pretty strongly with your original assertion and then are telling me my responses aren't relevant to the discussion. Weird.
Those God channels who ask for donations are literally scams. They ask for money in return for services they cannot and do not provide.
You are comparing someone who is asking for donations to support the sevice they provide to people who scam and take advantage of people who are often already in financial difficulties by claiming to have answers and solutions they can not provide.
This is not a good comparison.
Patrons do get exclusive rewards, 99% of the time.
As for the lifestyle thing, you mean he uses the money to buy food, pay the bills and in general pay for the stuff a salary would pay for? Uh, isn't that what money is always for? When you pay Netflix, those money get used to produce shows, which means giving thousands of professionals actors, directors, stunts, production folks, etc) money to support their "life style".
What's the difference?
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
Except I didn't as I was referring to an individual, not questioning whether the critiquing of games would still be around in 30 years.
ScaryShark
Banned
The individual, that this thread is about, whose channel revolves around criticism. It's super relevant to the post you made question someone's long term financial viability.The ๖ۜBronx;246402608 said:
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
- The issue of whether game reviews will be relevant in years to come
- The issue of how one single reviewer maintains sustainability in that environment for years to come
I'm talking about the latter, you keep returning to the former. If "game reviews are popular" is enough then you could say the same for any semi-popular person doing the same on YouTube, which in itself isn't sustainable as the playing field continues to expand.
ScaryShark
Banned
This is such a warped view of things and I'm going to go out on a limb and say you probably don't apply this logic to much else outside of this discussion on a message board. If you work, is the work you do basically just a complicated form of begging? After all, your paycheck isn't just going to to the thing you produce or contribute to at work, it's also supporting your lifestyle.
I think I already know what your answer would be, but is a PBS telethon 'begging' in your mind?
To me, 'begging' almost always comes in the form in that the person being asked is doing it in the form of charity. Which is 100% not what ACG or a lot of people using Patreon are doing. They're just cutting out the middle man in a transaction of a service or good for the compensation people think it's worth.
True but this is not what its sold on. Its sold very much on the support of the content creator. The value being offered is the support of a personality you are emotionally engaged with fist, and actual tangible benefits second. This is what seems backwards to me.
So the difference is that netflix doesn't post videos asking people to pay up to support their employees. They offer a service that either is or isn't attractive and people pay appropriately.
If youtubers are having to post videos begging (and I appreciate people take issue with this word, so apologies if it seems harsh) for donations, then clearly the value being offered by their service isn't naturally enough.
xrnzaaas
Member
I also feel like I've travelled back in time using a time machine. The "everything on the Internet should be free" argument was discussed a million times already.
Netflix literally put videos asking you to subscribe in front of unrelated YouTube videos, on billboards, bus stops, websites, magazines, newspapers, radio, tv, inserts read adverts in podcasts.
They 'beg' a lot more than a video posted on the youtubers own channel does.
Edit: also this patreon exists because advertisers no longer want to pay him. The people watching value his content, which is why patreon is even viable.
Darkstorne
Member
This is true, but I can also understand why. Explain what the rules are and there will definitely be a rush to create videos specifically designed to tick all the boxes for maximising income, rather than being designed to create great content. That's why I'm a big fan of separating the revenue stream into other sites, like Patreon, so content creators can focus on creating great content rather than on pushing ads or ticking through Youtube's list of what even qualifies for ads in the first place.
The issue to overcome here of course is getting back to the point we were at 10+ years ago, where we were much happier to pay for reviews and interesting analysis of entertainment through magazines. We're at a weird point today where the majority of people expect this sort of content for free.
ScaryShark
Banned
ACG has a sizable following already. As years go on in criticism his voice is likely to remain fairly consistent and likely will improve in certain ways as he is more experienced with his craft and the medium. His current base should not wane or change very much. It's not like he's some dime a dozen reviewer. His reviews are thorough, eloquent and academic. That's unique in a sea of characters and over the top reactions. There are very few elder statesmen of video game criticism. ACG can be one of those and that has real value to people.The ๖ۜBronx;246402714 said:
You posed the question that he's going to face a financial uncertainty, I countered that and you then proceeded to tell me what I said was irrelevant without actually explaining why ACG's future prospects in this medium are uncertain. There's really nothing to be said if you can't at least meet someone half way in their direct responses to your posts. *shrug*
But I think this is mostly a problem of platform perception.
Patreon is still seen as a "please help me out" first and value proposition second (which I think is a wrong perception) and so it's like people asking what the hell were they paying for (if they didn't even get the disc), in the first days of digital delivery, or even people arguing that piracy isn't really theft.
I think the misguided perception calls for that kind of video now, but it won't necessarily, in some years when the platform will be more accepted as a standard for trade of services.
There's also the issue pointed out above (not by me) about a lot of people expecting some things to just be free for no real reason (as an artist i see that a lot) just because that's how they're used to it.
Doesn't make it logical or right, but it's still something you have to fight against on a daily basis, in some businesses.
(Yes, a lot of people not in the industry really expect you to spend 10+ hours on an illustration for them for free because "you like drawing anyway", and are offended if you refuse)
Real_Madrid
Member
Or he just wants more money. Stable income is something subjective in this case, if he rents a really expensive appartement/house, then yes, he needs more money from patreon/youtube. That doesn't mean he really needs it.
I think you're right, the fact that youtube was always historically free is a problem, and drives down value perception.
However I don't think the perception of patreon being seen as "please help me out" will change unless the value proposition improves. I think there's genuine issue there.
Now obviously some people value things differently, and that's why there are so many paying, but that's the case with any service. And that doesn't mean the value being offered is fine.
Another question you've got to ask yourself is, what happens when ACG in a year or two says "sorry this isn't sustainable and I'm going to have to create fewer videos". What about all the people that support him? I'm sure many will be understanding, but many will question the value of what they've been paying for.
Won't be an issue if it is sustainable, but if it isn't (which the begging videos suggest) then that will be a problem. And this is just one youtuber.
The à¹ÛBronx
Member
Honestly I've been trying but I feel we're both missing the loops in each other's conversation, I feel lost as the points I try to make are the ones not being countered and presumably you share the same frustration. Just wanted to say as I typically don't disregard what people say in a discussion and enjoy discourse, just for some reason we've ended up tripping up over ourselves on this one.
My concern in general was only out of a desire for this content to continue so I feel we're both speaking from the same position in that regard.
Peroroncino
Member
They can stop paying then, if, until that point they were receving the exact amount of quality content they expected for what they've paid, it shouldn't be an issue, after all people are not paying a year in advance, they pay monthly.
@Karak
Since you're probably reading it, I hope it works out for you man, I love your reviews and I hope you can continue doing them.
It also sucks seeing so many people using the word 'beg' here, ACG's doing one of the best reviews on YT, both quality and quantity - it's clear he's putting a shit-ton of work into his channel and it really bothers me when people are easily dismissing that, this isn't remotely comparable to actual begging.
I really like the discussion around the long term sustainability, although I do not think it is a big problem because people can simply stop paying him, but some posts around here are simply really sad. This thread derailed rather quickly I think.
Support him if you are able to and if you like his current content output or support him not if you do not feel comfortable to pay for stuff you think should be free. But do not cry about having choices, please.
Support him if you are able to and if you like his current content output or support him not if you do not feel comfortable to pay for stuff you think should be free. But do not cry about having choices, please.
For the value proposition, that problem is twofold I think.
First of all, there's the issue of piracy, and in that sense locking stuff like illustrations or comics behind a paywall is just going to have it be distributed elsewhere for free anyway.
Secondly, for a lot of this type of content, people aren't going to pay up before they even have a very good idea of what it is they're paying for, and that usually work out easier if you just let them consume it and then simply say: "listen, if you want more of this, I need money the justify staying home doing it".
You're still paying for a service, that fact that others are enjoying it for free shouldn't be a problem (though I know it is for some).
Gating everything away, with the miniscule amount of exposure a guy on the internet gets nowadays, is just begging to be never even seen by 99% of your potential audience.
As for you second point, that's really ACG's problem, like it is anyone else's who creates entertainment.
What happens when Netflix (sorry for keep using the same example) decides that 10mo is not worth it and asks for 12 or 15? Some will bail out, some won't, but that's their problem to deal with.
What happens when Netflix decided to cancel that one show you were paying it for? That's between you and them, essentially.
But that applies to almost anything.
You can argue that a big company like Netflix can sustain itself much better than X Patreon guy, absolutely, it's not a 1:1 comparison, and I would suggest anyone working on their own (which in turn makes you much more personable and flexible) to also look out for additional revenue streams, be it merchandise, extra commissions, free Lance... But that's not that different from having to have various part time jobs instead of a steady full time one.
Where I live, job security is a pipe dream for most of the (young) population, and a traditional job is really not that secure at all.
Other countries may far better, though.
Finally, there's also the argument of passion and being willing to forgo a bit of security to do what you love, which I think does come through in what you produce, and it's a big part why stuff like traditional wrpg on Kickstarter were so well received, vs other endeavours that felt more of a cashgrab.
There are many people who make their living off of youtube ads, it's important that they know what kind of content they can produce to still receive ad revenue.
psychotron
Member
Fantastic reviewer that more than deserves to be compensated for his work. An awful lot of entitled assholes we have around here.