So youtube should receive 0% of the revenue?Let's Plays are a joke. Devs should receive 100% of the revenue. The only reason people are butthurt is because they fear they can't sit on their ass all day and play video games anymore to make a living.
Its called how do we sort this white elephant out and make it profitable (it cost $millions a day to keep youtube running*) and the answer is monetise every video you can by throwing money** at copyright holders so you can get revenue sharing on videos where people have refused or not accepted offers (usually because they don't own the copyrights or their account has too many black marks to be eligible).Some weird shit is happening at YouTube, and it doesn't look good for viewers or small producers
Notched asked them not to swear due to young children, they did anyway, notch was upset, yogcast said minecon was crap and complained notch didn't pay for the whole group to fly to the event (only 3 of the 6 or something like that).
Opening for Twitch to strike?Looks like gamers might want to find a different video service soon.
Looks like gamers might want to find a different video service soon.
The irony of this all is that while Youtube is trying to monetize their service, their actual video player is in worse shape than ever.
The irony of this all is that while Youtube is trying to monetize their service, their actual video player is in worse shape than ever.
Half the time 720/1080p isn't even working, or it takes 30 seconds for the resolution upgrade to kick in. Pre-buffering long[er] videos doesn't work and pausing a video for a longer period causes the playback to crash when continuing the video.
Blip requires you to fill out forms carefully to make it look like a TV show and even then you don't know if you are acceptable. And you need a Facebook account to comment.People need to make that jump to blip.tv again.
I recall the first big jump to over there was when youtube was up to some weird tricks.
Some weird shit is happening at YouTube, and it doesn't look good for viewers or small producers
That's a lot more work than splitting with only one entity. Furthermore, youtube ToS prohibits monetization of video game footage (among other things of dubious legality), sans permission. If they approached uploaders of such footage, that could be construed as waiving that policy and would overall just complicate things.Surely Youtube can arrange ad revenue split with the original video uploader??
well Nintendo didn't.
Youtube and Google are stabbing the back of people who was before incentived to make games videos using Youtube as platform.
Yeah, is there something missing here? Notch says he could've gotten "a cut" of the ad revenue, not "the video creator's cut" of the ad revenue. Are we sure they weren't offered a 3-way split? I'm not sure what would be so bad about that. Unless Notch just really believes the video creators should get all of the ad revenue...I don't understand why this can't be a 3 way thing though. Creator, IP owner and Youtube all getting a cut. Why does it have to be IP owner and Youtube only?
Notch is the kind of guy who values positive community relations over personal monetary gain.Does "It was tempting" mean he didn't do it? Why?
I don't understand why this can't be a 3 way thing though. Creator, IP owner and Youtube all getting a cut. Why does it have to be IP owner and Youtube only?
Yeah, is there something missing here? Notch says he could've gotten "a cut" of the ad revenue, not "the video creator's cut" of the ad revenue. Are we sure they weren't offered a 3-way split? I'm not sure what would be so bad about that. Unless Notch just really believes the video creators should get all of the ad revenue...
I'm curious because I don't think I've seen a definitive answer for it but does a game publisher actually have any rights to a video that someone else made of a game, like a tutorial or something? Is that true of any software?
People are going to stop recording livestreams of certain games because they aren't getting paid? Now who's chasing profits?
The quality will decrease if there is no money for the creators. How is this not obvious?
You are talking about hours of work recording the gameplay and commentary. Hardware to capture footage and render it or stream it, software to edit videos. All the time you spend editing it to make it look presentable. etc etc.
Remove the incentive of actually getting some money back for all that effort and you are left with 12 year olds recording with their cellphones.
Then notch remembered he's so rich that it has overcome any motivation he will ever have for the rest of his game development career.
Yeah, is there something missing here? Notch says he could've gotten "a cut" of the ad revenue, not "the video creator's cut" of the ad revenue. Are we sure they weren't offered a 3-way split? I'm not sure what would be so bad about that. Unless Notch just really believes the video creators should get all of the ad revenue...
Even if YouTube introduced some kind of split payment system there wouldn't be a whole lot of money for the uploader when all is said and done.
As far as I know (could be wrong), YouTube takes a 45% cut right off the top from all ads on its site. Then if you're partnered with one of the big networks (necessary for a lot of gaming channels that want to monetize) that company typically takes ~25% of your earnings. And if Notch were to take a 25-30% cut or whatever there's just not much earnings potential for the uploader.
He's got no shareholders to please. He'll err on the side of whatever he wants.
If Nintendo didn't monetize youtube when given the chance, their shareholders would be pissed.
Not everyone is a selfish asshole who's just in it for the money.Does "It was tempting" mean he didn't do it? Why?
As much as it would annoy the fans I would've personally done it as a businessman. The fans would get over losing a cut of their profits if it meant more money towards making Minecraft an even better game.
Whats unique about Nintendos shareholders compared to shareholders of every other AAA developers/platform holder?
Why isnt EVERY publicly traded developer doing it?