• 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.

YouTube go to Notch to try and Strike Ad Revenue Deal on Minecraft Videos

TrickRoom

Member
Jan 8, 2013
962
0
0
Youtube is now showing itself as a more visible player in these events. It used to just be all about Nintendo and Let's Players before.
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
I see nothing wrong with Mahjong getting a cut of the ad revenue.

People calling them "greedy" are just silly. It's not like they would just pocket the money. A good majority of it would go into the company, making their games better. And what's wrong with a 5-10% cut? That would mean a ton of money for the company, and not too much off each consumer. These videos get a TON of views. This could potentially employ a person at their studio.

This might be a good PR move, but skimming a little off the top for a game they created is hardly a slimy move, especially when Youtube themselves offered it to them. Also, they don't need PR. Mahjong/Notch is almost universally loved.
Who watches lets plays for the game and not the personalities playing them? They don't have any extra effort to make the actual video content, the game is made and paid for, it costs them nothing for someone to record themselves playing it. Should clothing companies get an extra cut when someone wears their shirt in a youtube video?
 

Corsick

Member
Mar 6, 2013
842
0
0
Youtube is now showing itself as a more visible player in these events. It used to just be all about Nintendo and Let's Players before.
Youtube wants to get in good graces to get bigger cuts out of the money being generated? Palling with developers to seem like they're on their side.
 

Einbroch

Banned
Mar 24, 2009
22,819
1
0
Lafayette, IN
www.twitter.com
Who watches lets plays for the game and not the personalities playing them? They don't have any extra effort to make the actual video content, just whats in it. Should clothing companies get an extra cut when someone wears their shirt in a youtube video?
It's a mixture of both. I watch Dunkey Youtube videos when he does League of Legends videos. I don't watch him when he plays other games.

Same with Pyrion Flax and DotA2. I don't watch him play FTL or anything else.
 

ComputerMKII

Banned
May 8, 2011
25,916
1
0
France
twitter.com
He is not a greedy @sshole and instead a practical man. Why importunate the community for some pennies, when they are promoting your game for free?
Minecraft has sold millions and is very popular. Accepting the deal - from a business point of view - would have earned him a lot of money with minimal drawbacks in terms of image and no drawbacks at all in terms of actual sales.
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
It's a mixture of both. I watch Dunkey Youtube videos when he does League of Legends videos. I don't watch him when he plays other games.

Same with Pyrion Flax and DotA2. I don't watch him play FTL or anything else.
The point is they're not losing anything by these videos being up. No one isn't not buying a game because they can watch some other jackass be loud and annoying and fail over them playing it. People like Achievement Hunter make a full-time job out of it, and they'd lose tons of money that is generated solely through their hard work.
 

mavs

Member
Mar 18, 2009
4,536
0
0
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.
There would be consequences if losing the money that went to Mojang meant it was no longer worth it to do full-time Minecraft videos. I can't say whether that is the case, but what do you think is a bigger threat to Mojang? Passing up a pile of cash or messing with the people who sustain their community? The safe bet is sticking with what is making them money right now, if you're a risk-taker you would have taken the Youtube money
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
Minecraft has sold millions and is very popular. Accepting the deal - from a business point of view - would have earned him a lot of money with minimal drawbacks in terms of image and no drawbacks at all in terms of actual sales.
I bought 4 copies of minecraft because of the Achievement hunter lets plays. It costs Mojang nothing in advertising dollars, and they sold 4 full priced copies of the game because of it. I definitely would not have bought that if I knew they had to pay out to Mojang or if they didn't make the videos at all because it was making someone else money.

They're already net positive with these videos, anything else is just being greedy or in the case of Nintendo, desperate.
 

Einbroch

Banned
Mar 24, 2009
22,819
1
0
Lafayette, IN
www.twitter.com
The point is they're not losing anything by these videos being up. No one isn't not buying a game because they can watch some other jackass be loud and annoying and fail over them playing it. People like Achievement Hunter make a full-time job out of it, and they'd lose tons of money that is generated solely through their hard work.
They're losing potential profit, if you want to look at it that way. I'm not talking about gouging these people for the shirt off their back, just 5% or so. 5% of all the Minecraft videos is a ton of money for Mahjong, but not too much off each uploader.

They're a business, and I don't think that taking a little money from Youtube uploaders would be a big PR hit. It's the uploader's personality that keeps people. It's the game that draws them in. People search "Minecraft" and "Final Fantasy" and the like all the time on Youtube, just looking for videos. They stumble on a funny/informative uploader and subscribe. They found them because they loved the game.

But we might just have to agree to disagree.
 

ComputerMKII

Banned
May 8, 2011
25,916
1
0
France
twitter.com
I bought 4 copies of minecraft because of the Achievement hunter lets plays. It costs Mojang nothing in advertising dollars, and they sold 4 full priced copies of the game because of it. I definitely would not have bought that if I knew they had to pay out to Mojang or if they didn't make the videos at all because it was making someone else money.

They're already net positive with these videos, anything else is just being greedy or in the case of Nintendo, desperate.
Wasn't the deal about Mojang taking a share of the money (not all of it) though?
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
They're losing potential profit
How


what

how is that a thing


its not profit if its potential. You don't say you lost money because people didn't buy your thing.

Wasn't the deal about Mojang taking a share of the money (not all of it) though?
Youtube gets 95% of the ad revenue, partner gets 5%. What part do you think is going to be split to go to the IP owner?
 

Einbroch

Banned
Mar 24, 2009
22,819
1
0
Lafayette, IN
www.twitter.com
How


what

how is that a thing


its not profit if its potential. You don't say you lost money because people didn't buy your thing.



Youtube gets 95% of the ad revenue, partner gets 5%. What part do you think is going to be split to go to the IP owner?
Potential income stream. Don't be difficult.

Also, focusing on one extremely minor part of a post and not acknowledging the rest of it is hardly a way to prove a point.
 

Sandfox

Member
Jan 25, 2012
22,624
0
0
There would be consequences if losing the money that went to Mojang meant it was no longer worth it to do full-time Minecraft videos. I can't say whether that is the case, but what do you think is a bigger threat to Mojang? Passing up a pile of cash or messing with the people who sustain their community? The safe bet is sticking with what is making them money right now, if you're a risk-taker you would have taken the Youtube money
I think Minecraft is big enough to where that wouldn't be too big of a consequence and even then this would only stop/limit the people who make money off of their Minecraft vids.
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
Potential income stream. Don't be difficult.
From what? People don't buy the game because they can watch the yogscast instead? And I'm being difficult?

Again, how come Youtube hasn't approached American Eagle to give them ad revenue from videos where Adam Sessler is wearing their shirt with the logo clearly visible? I wonder if PSY has to lose out on thousands for wearing his 60 dollar sunglasses.

It's fucking crazy.

Yogscast fucking made Minecraft, and if you search "minecraft" right now you don't see it for pages. Give me a break. This content doesn't get popular because of the game, otherwise they wouldn't have commentary over the game audio at all.
 

Einbroch

Banned
Mar 24, 2009
22,819
1
0
Lafayette, IN
www.twitter.com
From what? People don't buy the game because they can watch the yogscast instead? And I'm being difficult?

Again, how come Youtube hasn't approached American Eagle to give them ad revenue from videos where Adam Sessler is wearing their shirt with the logo clearly visible? I wonder if PSY has to lose out on thousands for wearing his 60 dollar sunglasses.

It's fucking crazy.
I never said that, although I'm sure that goes through some heads. You can't compare someone wearing a shirt in a video to someone talking about a game and making massive profits off your game. Am I saying that they DESERVE the money? No. All I'm saying is that I can see why a company would want a cut when someone is using their product (and pretty much their product alone) to make money, and that a small cut could actually be pretty beneficial to a company as small/moderately sized as Mahjong. Maybe it's because they're still somewhat indie (although one could argue that, too). If it was Sony or Bungie wanting a cut I don't know if I'd be as sympathetic towards them making money off user's uploads.

All I'm saying is I don't see it as slimy, wrong, or unethical. At least in this case. And that's my opinion.
 

Dusk Golem

A 21st Century Rockefeller
Sep 15, 2011
19,008
2
800
Portland, Oregon
www.twitch.tv
He also linked to these two articles about YouTube and Let's Plays that he says he agrees with:

http://www.develop-online.net/blog/477/Lets-Play-Nintendo
http://dinnerbone.com/blog/2012/09/28/lets-watch-lets-plays/

Think these explains why he made the decision not to do it. It wouldn't of been slimy in my opinion for them to do it, though I would think it would be a bad decision move. Minecraft videos are insanely popular, and the game definitely wouldn't of reach 10,000,000 sales without the attention and widespread of these videos. Amnesia's developer Frictional Games also says that one of the big reasons they did so well was YouTube, as well as Thomas Was Alone, and many other indie devs at least saying that people who watch Let's Plays not only are really supportive of the LP'er, but also of the developers behind the games and when big LP'ers play their games, their sales can go higher than any other period of time, even launch day. Thomas Was Alone mentioned TotalBiscuit did a video on his game in January, two months after Steam release and 6 months after first release, and the very day he made the video his game solf 8 times more than the second highest selling day, launch day on Steam. Both articles (and the Minecraft dev in question) seem to agree that Let's Plays are good for their business and doesn't just help the LP'er, but themselves as well, and are supportive of the traction, especially as most YouTubers' don't make all that much and the amount earned is small to what games earn usually.
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
I never said that, although I'm sure that goes through some heads. You can't compare someone wearing a shirt in a video to someone talking about a game and making massive profits off your game. Am I saying that they DESERVE the money? No. All I'm saying is that I can see why a company would want a cut when someone is using their product (and pretty much their product alone) to make money, and that a small cut could actually be pretty beneficial to a company as small/moderately sized as Mahjong. Maybe it's because they're still somewhat indie (although one could argue that, too). If it was Sony or Bungie wanting a cut I don't know if I'd be as sympathetic towards them making money off user's uploads.

All I'm saying is I don't see it as slimy, wrong, or unethical. At least in this case. And that's my opinion.
You're not saying anything. You're saying they lost potential money because someone made a funny video featuring their video game. You're not saying how they miss out on money? It wouldn't exist without them talking about it. I mean jesus, even small scale indie devs should thank their lucky goddamn stars if AH decides to play their game. They'll get 1 million views and it wont cost them a cent.

Mojang didn't take the offer, Nintendo did. Presumably a whole lot of other people were approached, in a somewhat inane move by Youtube to alienate their content creators even further. They really like trying to fix things that aren't broken over there.

The core concept of this idea is so crazy I cant help but laugh. Having to pay someone to advertise their game and drive interest in it. Insane.

If youtube doesn't touch the money that goes to the uploaders, then thats different. If they're willing to miss out on some of that money they should just give it to the uploaders anyway.
 

jakonovski

Member
Feb 11, 2008
5,679
0
0
I can't help but think that this is just a logical step in the overall trend of making things just a little bit more difficult for the 99%, inch by inch. Scratch another avenue of getting gainful employment, the megacorps need more money!
 

Tacitus_

Member
Dec 7, 2008
17,977
0
0
You're not saying anything. You're saying they lost potential money because someone made a funny video featuring their video game. You're not saying how they miss out on money? It wouldn't exist without them talking about it. I mean jesus, even small scale indie devs should thank their lucky goddamn stars if AH decides to play their game. They'll get 1 million views and it wont cost them a cent.

Mojang didn't take the offer, Nintendo did. Presumably a whole lot of other people were approached, in a somewhat inane move by Youtube to alienate their content creators even further. They really like trying to fix things that aren't broken over there.

The core concept of this idea is so crazy I cant help but laugh. Having to pay someone to advertise their game and drive interest in it. Insane.

If youtube doesn't touch the money that goes to the uploaders, then thats different. If they're willing to miss out on some of that money they should just give it to the uploaders anyway.
Look, as much as you're ranting, you must see that this was the completely right away to approach the deal. Even Notch admits as much in this tweet.


Some will want the free advertisement, some won't.
 

LAUGHTREY

Modesty becomes a woman
Mar 19, 2008
7,534
0
0
Look, as much as you're ranting, you must see that this was the completely right away to approach the deal. Even Notch admits as much in this tweet.


Some will want the free advertisement, some won't.
If they want to go the copyright infringement route, I say let them and see what happens. If uploading gameplay without permission becomes against the law, negative game reviews will cease to exist and lets plays will become audio only. A company would be stupid to do anything but encourage it. Games that have built in broadcasting will flourish, and backwards ass companies will wither and die as they try to grasp at money they don't deserve.
 

Tacitus_

Member
Dec 7, 2008
17,977
0
0
If they want to go the copyright infringement route, I say let them and see what happens. If uploading gameplay without permission becomes against the law, negative game reviews will cease to exist and lets plays will become audio only. A company would be stupid to do anything but encourage it. Games that have built in broadcasting will flourish, and backwards ass companies will wither and die as they try to grasp at money they don't deserve.
The game is the developers IP and unauthorized videos of said IP are illegal. Game companies can - and will - yank videos that they haven't authorized from youtube. How do you think leaked trailers get pulled from private accounts? Not to mention, SEGA went absolutely nuts with this a while ago and had a shitload of videos of their games pulled with copyright grounds and got several accounts banned due to the volume of copyright pulls this decision made.
Besides, Youtube operates its own content right management so they don't have to deal with DMCA requests.
 

Dictator93

Member
Jun 29, 2011
23,812
4
660
Look, as much as you're ranting, you must see that this was the completely right away to approach the deal. Even Notch admits as much in this tweet.


Some will want the free advertisement, some won't.
It is also fun and fosters commmunity spirit... but the only reson businessmen care is because it is "free advetising."

This world sometimes man...
 

mavs

Member
Mar 18, 2009
4,536
0
0
I think Minecraft is big enough to where that wouldn't be too big of a consequence and even then this would only stop/limit the people who make money off of their Minecraft vids.
Even if that's true now, it clearly wasn't the case before the game sold millions. Youtube videos by players sold the game, so moving to a model that reduces the amount of Minecraft videos would be new territory for Mojang.
 

Starwolf_UK

Member
Dec 5, 2008
17,023
0
0
twitter.com
I don't understand why Youtube is actively going to them.
Heres why.

Youtube sees ad-free minecraft videos getting lots of hits.

Google wants Youtube into the Black sometime this decade.

Putting ads on videos is one way to get into the black.

Youtube allows copyright holders to take down videos (see: SEGA) or embed ads in videos that of their copyright. Youtube gets a cut from the ads on this service of course so is interested in actively seeking these offers out.

Why Youtube just doesn't stick ads on everything (would would also solve this) or ask the LPers in question is these moves could get them accused in court of profiting on copyrighted work (do we really want a Viacom vs. Youtube round 2 only without Google being like "this happened before we own youtube, innocents class dismissed!").
 

BlazinAm

Junior Member
Mar 11, 2012
4,011
7
530
www.twitch.tv
It's like getting paid for someone else to do work advertising your game for you.

Rooster Teeth would be fucked, and I know I buy like 1 in 3 games they play because I saw them play it.

This is 100% retarded. Didn't Nintendo agree to this?

Oh wait, good thing Nintendo doesn't have any fuckin games to advertise. Not going to be missing out on all the Let's Plays people wouldnt be doing anyway.
Rooster Teeth have a deal with Microsoft for years now.
 
Aug 8, 2012
6,747
231
650
I dont think Roostertteeth have much to worry about, when they are this popular anyone would love to partner up with them and split the revenues.

This hurts the medium and the small subscription guys way worse. Companies can just tell them to go F themselves, take it all and there isnt a damn thing they can do.
 

creid

Member
Nov 17, 2005
3,057
0
0
They definitely should get all the (non-youtube) revenue, that's beside the point.

Youtube gets the lions share of the profits from ads as it is, you think theyd cut out their chunk to give to the IP owner?
No, I was assuming it would be the video creator that gets his/her share of the profit split.
 

eternalb

Member
Mar 15, 2007
1,184
0
1,135
Los Angeles
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.
Whoa, I thought the other networks sold their own ads? They still have to share that with YouTube? So it sounds like being a direct YouTube partner's the best way to do things then for youtubers, since thee's less parties sharing the profits?
 

cRIPticon

Member
Jul 25, 2006
1,764
34
1,020
Notch, for as long as I have known him, is all about community. Started with his participation at javagaming.org back in 2001 and he has remained the same community focused guy. It has been wonderful to see him become successful and, where many can become blinded by such sudden success, he knows how important and integral the community is. Big ups to Markus.
 

Akey

Banned
May 7, 2012
298
0
0
This thread has just went silly in some of the comparisons....jeans..really. anyway I'm sure you will see more of this as time goes on if a company has x amount of content streamed. Its a hard line to draw. If someone streams the entire story or your game or just the music in the game should they not get paid. This cherry picking of what is allowed from a company and what is not can simply not be done and is a all or nothing approach.

I also find it odd to paint Google as a bad guy in this. There is many other video services out their but none of them on their best day comes anywhere close to the hits youtube does on its worst day. If they did they would face the same issues.
 

staticneuron

Member
Jul 7, 2010
5,612
0
0
Florida
Whats unique about Nintendos shareholders compared to shareholders of every other AAA developers/platform holder?

Why isnt EVERY publicly traded developer doing it?
Shareholders are different people. They make choices on what is brought up at the meetings. The what could be different could be anything from deciding vote to whether or not it was brought up as a topic.

Also, when it comes to IP protection large companies normally leave it up to the legal department. The Department of course is not the same as the PR or marketing aspects, so sometimes you will see legal action performed by a company that you would think is a bad PR move. It is most likely because PR is not involved. The legal dept is not interested , nor paid, to care about PR, they just focus on protecting the interest of their company in terms of legal aspects.

Companies made up of a few people or solo businessmen, have to put their hands on everything therefore they will take in other ramifications into account.