Support NeoGAF

[SnakeEyes]

Why not? Youtubers are de facto participating in the marketing/advertising campaign of many games so I can see why they'd negociate a share of the revenue. Both parties have something the other wants so they might as well make a deal. Everyone wins, it's the free market.

Because they're already getting paid via the Youtube Hits they get. The Dev is under no obligation whatsoever to pay them extra money when they're already making money off his game, by using footage from his game to make money.

I hope he turned around and told them all to fuck right off. Talk about trying to double-dip.

No, it's the free market, as you correctly noted.

Free Market shouldn't be an excuse for people being scumbags.

 

[MormaPope]

This makes things a bit more confusing. Whats the point of bringing this up if some random Youtuber tries to do some low level, completely illogical swindling? This being acknowledged brings up the discussion about indie devs potentially using Youtubers for exposure and vice versa, but if that's already happening how can any connection be proven?

 

[NTom64]

As someone who does LP's on YT and is able to monetize them, this is ridiculous. You're lucky enough to earn ad-revenue in what's already a grey area, and you're going to literally tell devs you want a portion of their money? Which you have no right to since you didn't DESIGN the game or work on it in any way?

Ahahaha. No.

 

[LoveCake]

Really he should just name them, otherwise he is making a bigger deal of it.

Yes it's wrong they are asking him for money, but bite the bullet & name them.

 

[Hale-XF11]

Popular youtubers have A LOT of juice and if one of them tries some extortion that doesn't work, and release a video saying your game eats ass off shit mountain, that can be crippling.

I'm thinking it wouldn't be in their best interests to shit on a game if the developer has the ability to out them to the public and hurt their reputation in turn. Seems like a good way to lose subscribers.

 

[Warewolf]

Oh, really? You'd like a share of their earnings since you promoted their game? Do you have that signed marketing contract on you? No? You mean you didn't make a marketing agreement with the developer? Oh.

Maybe fuck off?

EDIT:

This makes it sound more like some enterprising chap is trying to approach him with a marketing deal, just a luidicrously overvalued one. This is a different story entirely and I frankly have no problem with it. If an indie dev wants to pay a youtube personality to market their game, go nuts. if it's done in an opaque way that could bring up some questions but otherwise this just sounds like business.

 

[Azure Dream]

People ask for money every day without legal basis.

Just say no.

"Top 10 reasons why this shitty game is shitty and not worth your money!" (Monetized)

*copyright claim*

"They're trying to CENSOR me and take my livelihood!"

(Not mocking all YouTubers, just a hypothetical "this could happen".)

 

[kai3345]

And honestly, in his case, he would probably be justified to part of the revenue, as games like Goat Simulator wouldn't sell nearly as much without youtubers.

what the fuck, no he's not

 

[jschreier]

QFT:

it's funny, the enthusiast press was always accused of what YTers are apparently actually DOING

 

[pelican]

Release names so I can justify my hate of 'youtubers' please ( ≖‿&#8790

Be like me. No names required. Talentless leaches.

 

[K.Sabot]

QFT:

zomg it's teh smok1ng gun

 

[komplanen]

This makes things a bit more confusing. Whats the point of bringing this up if some random Youtuber tries to do some low level, completely illogical swindling? This being acknowledged brings up the discussion about indie devs potentially using Youtubers for exposure and vice versa, but if that's already happening how can any connection be proven?

I think the whole point here is that there are large YouTuber(s) approaching independent game developers with a basic proposition of "We'll play your game on our channel and you will pay us a % your games sales, k?" Now I don't know about you but to me that is wrong in so many levels but even more so now that there are YouTubers so popular that they actually have tons of swaying power. What's the point in watching the Yogscast play some indie game if behind the scenes they are only doing it to get a cut of the game's sales in addition to the ad money and sponsorships they already get.

A lot of people trust YouTubers and their opinions but recent events (Machinima+EA+Microsoft etc.) have shown that maybe they shouldn't.

 

[Aquamarine]

The thing that bugs me about this is how Youtubers argue that Let's Plays should be allowed despite the fact that they're making money off of other people's copyrighted content because "we're marketing your games for free!"

But then if they turn around and ask for a cut of revenue, that argument evaporates, so why exactly should game publishers allow Let's Plays again?

Because when you purchase a game, you should be able to share your experiences with people.


Consider two scenarios:


Scenario 1: You can invite a bunch of friends over and they watch you play a single player game. Here, you are showcasing the game to your friends.

Scenario 2: You host a local game tournament with 20 friends where they all participate. In this tournament, each person pays $2 to the host. The winner gets $20 and the host pockets the other $20. You're showcasing the game to your friends and pocketing a bit of money at the same time.


These are both scenarios which I would assume that most people would have no problem with. Now extend this to YouTube. You have an individual channel where you showcase a game you purchased and friends and strangers watch you present. You earn a little bit of money from ads you decide to incorporate into this showcase.

Here, the focus point is a game's unique experience. When you share a movie online you are duplicating that exact experience. But when you share a game online, you are showing people one possible experience. Why is any share of money you get from showing people things...payable to the company? Do you owe anything when you show a bunch of friends a single player game? So why should it apply to a bunch of random people on the Internet?

Conversely, why does the company owe you any money? You're just showing it off to friends (virtual friends in this case). The company has absolutely no obligations when they didn't agree to any kind of oral or written contract. Frankly, the fact that YouTubers are requesting even MORE money is outright abhorrent. It's disgusting.

 

[BeamImpact]

im speechless, actually youtube should take away a percentage of the youtubers ad income ad give it to the indie developer
the youtuber asking for more sound just plain wrong imo

 

[ComputerMKII]

Because they're already getting paid via the Youtube Hits they get. The Dev is under no obligation whatsoever to pay them extra money when they're already making money off his game, by using footage from his game to make money.

I hope he turned around and told them all to fuck right off. Talk about trying to double-dip.


Free Market shouldn't be an excuse for people being scumbags.

You are right and I've modified the post you've quoted to rectify my position. Freedom can be used for many things, some good, some bad and if you do bad things you should expect people to look down on you and refuse to do business with you.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

Or he doesn't want a lynch mob against some random person whose behaviour he objects to but who he doesn't want to be punished in any way?

Sub-tweeting does nothing but put the lynch mob in detective mode.

 

[David___]

The thing that bugs me about this is how Youtubers argue that Let's Plays should be allowed despite the fact that they're making money off of other people's copyrighted content because "we're marketing your games for free!"

But then if they turn around and ask for a cut of revenue, that argument evaporates, so why exactly should game publishers allow Let's Plays again?

Go boot up your system/game and don't press any buttons at all. Even if the work is microscopic the video maker is applying their skill(or lack thereof in some cases) and voice to make the video.
That and they have no leg to stand on since its considered a transformative work https://transformativeworks.org/what-do-you-mean-transformative-work

 

[Neuromancer]

We don't negotiate with terrorists.

 

[macewank]

This makes things a bit more confusing. Whats the point of bringing this up if some random Youtuber tries to do some low level, completely illogical swindling? This being acknowledged brings up the discussion about indie devs potentially using Youtubers for exposure and vice versa, but if that's already happening how can any connection be proven?

What he's basically saying is that some Youtuber, name unknown, reached out to him and offered to do a video for his game in exchange for a portion of revenue.

As in, "buy my time". Ultra shitty/shady of the vid maker. Definitely want a name, because I'd be done watching em.

 

[ponpo]

Could I get away with extorting devs for money based on a GAF OT? Some game threads have lots of views, I'll just use that as a bargaining chip.

 

[deltatheta]

I'm thinking it wouldn't be in their best interests to shit on a game if the developer has the ability to out them to the public and hurt their reputation in turn. Seems like a good way to lose subscribers.

You have a lot of faith in YouTube viewers being made aware of such a hypothetical controversy and in taking the correct side in a he-said/she-said situation when it's their favorite YouTuber vs some indie game dev they've never heard of.

 

[komplanen]

Could I get away with extorting devs for money based on a GAF OT? Some game threads have lots of views, I'll just use that as a bargaining chip.

Haha man that brought up memories of that Amazon guy burning himself alive trying to do just that. Even though his intentions were for the good, it was such a dumb idea

 

[SeventhSon]

This is the circumstance where I would support the dev filing a copyright claim and getting "reverse" monetization on the particular 'tubers' videos.

 

[JonathanEx]

It may not just be big ones already making bucks though - I've heard of smaller YTers at least try and float the idea, or do specific deal codes for their channel - as more people try and struggle to make an income from YouTube. If they don't have ads bringing enough income, why not set up affiliate codes?

Conflict of interest, obviously. Not that this defends a shitty idea. It's a shitty idea. But not necessarily coming from those already making bank.

Could be, though. Ah it's shitty.

 

[SlasherJPC]

It's bad enough that once youtubers get to be of a perticular fanbase size ,they only flock to other hugely popular youtubers for collaborations, etc to enable further fan growth and money. I've seen a few youtubers on GAF fall into this same typical mindset sadly. This is a whole other level. My guess is he is having some youtubers approach him and say "Hey will do this video on your game and get you extreme exposure, but we want a cut of the profit from the sales" which just blows my mind. No deal, no videos.

 

[piratethingy]

Well, nothing to see here.

 

[ponpo]

Haha man that brought up memories of that Amazon guy burning himself alive trying to do just that. Even though his intentions were for the good, it was such a dumb idea

RIP Tony ;_;7

 

[Marjar]

Absolutely disgusting.

I hate how so many Youtubers are just in it for the money instead of for making quality content.

 

[jett]

I understand asking for a fee, but a sales percentage? You have to be some high level of douche.

 

[MormaPope]

I think the whole point here is that there are large YouTuber(s) approaching independent game developers with a basic proposition of "We'll play your game on our channel and you will pay us a % your games sales, k?" Now I don't know about you but to me that is wrong in so many levels but even more so now that there are YouTubers so popular that they actually have tons of swaying power. What's the point in watching the Yogscast play some indie game if behind the scenes they are only doing it to get a cut of the game's sales in addition to the ad money and sponsorships they already get.

True and agreed.

But without some sort of exposure or evidence the severity or relevance of this problem is completely up in the air. With the EA, Machinima and Microsoft pay per views, dishonest advertising scandal the main consequence afterward was simply "I'll view Youtube videos with more apprehension". With this issue things can be covered up and hidden so well that its impossible to even suspect someone seriously, along with there being so many youtube personalities that keeping tabs on who could've done what is challenging.

I understand what naming names would do, and it wouldn't be pretty, but this issue will go unchecked and be forgotten if there isn't some sort of fallout.

 

[Orayn]

It's one thing to ask for permission to monetize videos of somebody's game, but to ask for a share of the developer's money just to make the videos? Take a hike, you greedy scumbag.

 

[Freshmaker]

So they played his game, monetized it and expected him to pay them too?

What are they going to do? Take down their videos and deprive themselves of income to stick it to the dev?

Way to attack someone with zero leverage.

 

[frankie_baby]

YouTube should just get rid of monitisation, giving money to Arse holes just makes them greedy and want more money, get back to people doing it for fun

 

[SlasherJPC]

Absolutely disgusting.

I hate how so many Youtubers are just in it for the money instead of for making quality content.

Very few do it for the fun and passion. If anything the smaller guys not making anything are the ones you know are just doing it for content, etc. Granted it would be great to have a stay at home job to spend more time with my family and kid, I gotta work a 9-5 job and still make videos when I have time cause I enjoy it.

 

[heidern]

I don't see the problem with the concept really.
If the youtubers ask for a cut fine. The developer can say yes or no. The youtuber can choose to show or not show the video.
On the other hand, the developer can ask for a licensing fee for the use of their copyright and again the youtuber can choose pay to show or not pay and not show the video.
Or they negotiate an agreement of some kind.

 

[patapuf]

Well, nothing to see here.

actually, if a YT personality would be promoting a game for which he earns revenue % without disclosing that fact, that's most certainly an issue.

It's worse than any kind of "moneyhat" we accuse game journalists of taking and the big YT guys have a lot of reach.

 

[Speedy Blue Dude]

You guys thought people like TotalBiscuit gave publicity to these games for free?

 

[PhoenixFyre]

The more of his tweets I'm reading, the more I'm starting to wonder if a YouTuber didn't approach him with a marketing deal of sorts. Like "Hey, I'll do a ton of Let's Plays on your game and show it off in a good light if you pay me this much."

Still crappy, but not that different than what seems to be going on in the "AAA" arena.

 

[Aquamarine]

YouTube should just get rid of monitisation, giving money to Arse holes just makes them greedy and want more money, get back to people doing it for fun

Do you think Google / YouTube has any moral stance on this? Fuck no.


Here is the kind of money they make from ONE YouTuber:

They make WAY too much money off of these suckers to want to stop monetization.

The more YouTubers monetize game videos = The more money Google makes.

 

[ComputerMKII]

I don't see the problem with the concept really.
If the youtubers ask for a cut fine. The developer can say yes or no. The youtuber can choose to show or not show the video.
On the other hand, the developer can ask for a licensing fee for the use of their copyright and again the youtuber can choose pay to show or not pay and not show the video.
Or they negotiate an agreement of some kind.

Yes, that's my point. I don't have a problem with the concept but the execution was despicable.

 

[Gattsu25]

Well, nothing to see here.

You have no problem with the concept of a youtuber that will only release a video for an indie game if they are guaranteed a piece of the revenues for the game?

 

[MormaPope]

The more of his tweets I'm reading, the more I'm starting to wonder if a YouTuber didn't approach him with a marketing deal of sorts. Like "Hey, I'll do a ton of Let's Plays on your game and show it off in a good light if you pay me this much."

Still crappy, but not that different than what seems to be going on in the "AAA" arena.

Its on par with what happened with Microsoft and Machinima earlier this year, but even more sneaky and with less doubt from the beginning.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

Yogscast is the name popping up as one of the channels that does this.

That's a pretty serious direct accusation. Does he substantiate it?

 

[Roshin]

People beg for money all the time. Just say no.

 

[Aquamarine]

That's a pretty serious direct accusation. Does he substantiate it?

Considering how Notch called them out for being a bunch of egotistical assholes a couple of years back, it really wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

[Gattsu25]

Yogscast is the name popping up as one of the channels that does this.

Wasn't yogcast one of the channels that cropped up during the intentionally undisclosed BF4 campaign?

 

[redhood56]

Absolutely disgusting.

I hate how so many Youtubers are just in it for the money instead of for making quality content.

There is a quote that I like from the youtuber documentrary Please Subsribe[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9R-vWqY72YIt is not about making videos that you love it is about playing the game of youtube". Yeah I agree completely.

 

[Branduil]

Could I get away with extorting devs for money based on a GAF OT? Some game threads have lots of views, I'll just use that as a bargaining chip.

"As you can see on this spreadsheet here, I spent a full five hours photoshopping the main character's head onto the antonio banderas .gif, as well as an additional hour creating 'doge' meme pictures with a photoshop of the canine sidekick. Personally I think these are worth at least $50 overall; that's a bargain price, really."

 

[figadapaura]

Wow, the audacity of some people. You don't deserve earnings for playing a game jfc.

 

[KissVibes]

I'm thinking it wouldn't be in their best interests to shit on a game if the developer has the ability to out them to the public and hurt their reputation in turn. Seems like a good way to lose subscribers.

Doesn't matter if you release proof after the fact. Damage is already done, the video exists, and fans wont believe you because it only happened after the video trashing your game became popular.

These YouTubers have a crazy number of fans and they will just believe the developer is bitter and making things up, or simply think the game is shitty anyway and the damage has been done already.

Most indie guys wouldn't risk that and simply cut deals. Especially those making games without any backing but their own. Which is why this guy needs to fucking name people and prevent them from pulling the same shit in the future.