Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    No, the streaming platforms are. You really don’t know much about this stuff. See, that profit is where the royalties should be coming from.
    you dont know anything about twitch or game sponsorships obviously, people like shroud got paid tens of thousdands of dollars from EA to stream apex legends for example

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Die View Post
    Stuff like that is going to make pewdiepie a target. He is making advertising firms look worthless. Why pour money into your marketing department when you could just hire pewdiepie or someone with that sort of influence? Someone is gonna get him discredited and banned because he is upsetting the current order of things.
    How? For what? He just doing what he does. Its purely up to the consumer to buy a product. Its not him that’s disruptive, its the consumers.
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    How the fuck is this trolling?

    Discussing moderation is against the rules. Infracted.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Die View Post
    Stuff like that is going to make pewdiepie a target. He is making advertising firms look worthless. Why pour money into your marketing department when you could just hire pewdiepie or someone with that sort of influence? Someone is gonna get him discredited and banned because he is upsetting the current order of things.
    Outside of large conglomerates that hire both, this is exactly what happens now? I'll always be baffled why people watch others play video games when I can just as easily play the same as actually enjoy playing it, but these people aren't called "influencers" for nothing.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Hellobolis View Post
    That’s Blizzard and only Blizzard. They can do that, but it doesn’t mean anyone else has to let you profit from their copyright without paying royalties.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by apelsinjuice View Post
    you dont know anything about twitch or game sponsorships obviously, people like shroud got paid tens of thousdands of dollars from EA to stream apex legends for example
    Thats underselling it lol, Ninja reportedly got paid a million and asmongold hinted he was offered 200k+ to stream it for just one day.

  6. #26
    The real truth is the streamers should be paying the developers and publishers of the games they stream. They should be buying a license like any real business and paying for the content they use.
    But they do, the user is signing an EULA on installation or first run. If companies were really upset about it, they'd add clauses regarding streaming; they don't, because streaming and other recording of gameplay benefits 99% of games released.
    If you are particularly bold, you could use a Shiny Ditto. Do keep in mind though, this will infuriate your opponents due to Ditto's beauty. Please do not use Shiny Ditto. You have been warned.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeanix View Post
    well yea they are using thier work for profit ofc they should.
    You know, I don't know the copyright laws too in-depth, but I know I can't include a copyrighted video on YouTube for example. I can however include that same copyrighted video on YouTube if what I'm doing is under fair-use.

  8. #28
    Companies can go after content creators if they want. Most won't tho because they know streamers do nothing but help them and it would be super bad PR for them if they did.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    SNIP ALL POSTS
    You have no idea about this industry...
    There would be no streaming of anything if your posts are true.
    Ninja, shroud or DrDisprespect are literally paid thousands of dollars to just play and promote games.
    Even Google responded that this guy is full of shit:

    The recent tweets by Alex Hutchinson, creative director at the Montreal Studio of Stadia Games and Entertainment, do not reflect those of Stadia, YouTube or Google.

    Well... this person is probably one of the examples why Stadia is soo bad.

  10. #30
    I would be perfectly fine if the DEVELOPERS got royalties from streamers.
    However, we all know that money will go into the pockets of overpaid CEO's and their Shareholders.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crabby
    I'm Commander Crabby, and this is my favorite forum on the website.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by apelsinjuice View Post
    you dont know anything about twitch or game sponsorships obviously, people like shroud got paid tens of thousdands of dollars from EA to stream apex legends for example
    ... which isn’t really what’s being discussed. You can’t call an EA contractor the same as someone streaming with zero permission from the company. Nice try with the strawman though.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mendzia View Post
    You have no idea about this industry...
    There would be no streaming of anything if your posts are true.
    Ninja, shroud or DrDisprespect are literally paid thousands of dollars to just play and promote games.
    Even Google responded that this guy is full of shit:

    The recent tweets by Alex Hutchinson, creative director at the Montreal Studio of Stadia Games and Entertainment, do not reflect those of Stadia, YouTube or Google.

    Well... this person is probably one of the examples why Stadia is soo bad.
    Hahahahaha, just because a new unregulated industry exists doesn’t mean it’s legal to profit off someone else’s copyright. Hence all the dmca claims that have nothing to do with music.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    No, they aren’t. See, for that to be the case the streamer would have to have a deal with said company that stipulates as much.
    Yes they do. Lots of people who are on the fence in regards to trying something stay on the fence until they see the product in use. There are many games that I would not have tried/spent money in until i watched a "content creator" play it and talk about it in a vid.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Hahahahaha, just because a new unregulated industry exists doesn’t mean it’s legal to profit off someone else’s copyright. Hence all the dmca claims that have nothing to do with music.
    Yeah... you and Alex guy are right and Google, streamers, indie companies are wrong...

  14. #34
    Google has distanced themselves from the initial tweet said this is not their position or belief, it's was just one guy's opinion. So this is a bit of a dead talking point right now.

    However, I do agree with the creative director who originally made the comment and I do think it will be a point of contention sometime in the future. Streamers are profiting and making an entire living in some cases off of sharing someone's work from the masses.

    I cannot buy a movie and stream it to the internet and turn a profit just because I am in the lower third.

    Distribution is an immensely powerful tool. I think it is merely the ubiquity of streamers and volume of games that keeps stream(er)s in the clear for now. So many streamers and cheap games. When the need for exclusivity comes about to stand out in the marketplace, a change to monetization w/r/t streaming for individual profit will be coming.

  15. #35
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    31,235
    Quote Originally Posted by Mendzia View Post
    Yeah... you and Alex guy are right and Google, streamers, indie companies are wrong...
    I mean, they legally are allowed to push for royalties for their product, in much the same way the music industry is doing.

    That doesnt make it practical, or a good idea seeing as games benefit far more from streaming.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by CastletonSnob View Post
    He's correct in a very technical sense, but the video game market doesn't work in this manner.

    In the base sense, yes pubs/devs could pull their products from streamers. Using the radio/tv station example, it's somewhat reasonable that streamers should pay a broadcast fee for the games they play.

    BUT

    Unfortunately for this person he doesn't understand how the economics of radio vs the economics of video games actually works. With radio, music is the end product, the user simply listens to it. With video games, the end product is interacted with, which requires the user to own the game. There is also the issue of how the radio station makes money vs the streamer. The radio station is being paid directly by advertisers, where as the streamer receives this second hand. Ultimately with radio the end user hears the music, nothing more, its consumed. With videogame the streamer is essentially advertising the game to a potential end user who will buy it if they want to actually interact with it. The argument that the streamer usurps sales is ridiculous, simply because they can't duplicate what it is to play a game for an end user. Chances are if someone doesn't buy your game because they saw a streamer playing it, they were never going to touch your game anyway, probably never even hear of it.

    There is a small argument here for treating Twitch as a radio station. You could make the case that Twitch should be required to carry a broadcast license for games that people who stream from their platform are streaming. You are putting twitch in the radio station role, where the streamers are more like DJs/show hosts.

    Another big BUT here... streaming is the best free advertising these games get, Nintendo or Acti could pull their games and they'd still see millions of sales, making streamers charge to play their games wouldn't hurt large titles or studios at all in the sales/advertising market. But for little games like Among US that would be dead already without streamers, they would be foolish to pick up such a business practice.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    Google has distanced themselves from the initial tweet said this is not their position or belief, it's was just one guy's opinion. So this is a bit of a dead talking point right now.

    However, I do agree with the creative director who originally made the comment and I do think it will be a point of contention sometime in the future. Streamers are profiting and making an entire living in some cases off of sharing someone's work from the masses.

    I cannot buy a movie and stream it to the internet and turn a profit just because I am in the lower third.

    Distribution is an immensely powerful tool. I think it is merely the ubiquity of streamers and volume of games that keeps stream(er)s in the clear for now. So many streamers and cheap games. When the need for exclusivity comes about to stand out in the marketplace, a change to monetization w/r/t streaming for individual profit will be coming.
    they can, but most games would not make even half of what they do without twitch/youtube in todays gaming world, when a new game released and some big twitch streamers show it off to hundreds of thousands of viewers obviously the game will get a lot more customers

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    That’s Blizzard and only Blizzard. They can do that, but it doesn’t mean anyone else has to let you profit from their copyright without paying royalties.
    you really going to insist someone googles all the major publishers for you? it's common knowledge only Nintendo had a profit sharing policy.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by StillMcfuu View Post
    He's correct in a very technical sense, but the video game market doesn't work in this manner.

    In the base sense, yes pubs/devs could pull their products from streamers. Using the radio/tv station example, it's somewhat reasonable that streamers should pay a broadcast fee for the games they play.

    BUT

    Unfortunately for this person he doesn't understand how the economics of radio vs the economics of video games actually works. With radio, music is the end product, the user simply listens to it. With video games, the end product is interacted with, which requires the user to own the game. There is also the issue of how the radio station makes money vs the streamer. The radio station is being paid directly by advertisers, where as the streamer receives this second hand. Ultimately with radio the end user hears the music, nothing more, its consumed. With videogame the streamer is essentially advertising the game to a potential end user who will buy it if they want to actually interact with it. The argument that the streamer usurps sales is ridiculous, simply because they can't duplicate what it is to play a game for an end user. Chances are if someone doesn't buy your game because they saw a streamer playing it, they were never going to touch your game anyway, probably never even hear of it.

    There is a small argument here for treating Twitch as a radio station. You could make the case that Twitch should be required to carry a broadcast license for games that people who stream from their platform are streaming. You are putting twitch in the radio station role, where the streamers are more like DJs/show hosts.

    Another big BUT here... streaming is the best free advertising these games get, Nintendo or Acti could pull their games and they'd still see millions of sales, making streamers charge to play their games wouldn't hurt large titles or studios at all in the sales/advertising market. But for little games like Among US that would be dead already without streamers, they would be foolish to pick up such a business practice.
    yes if anything twitch should be paying the games companies for having their games on their platform if anything, not the streamers who is doing free advertisment

  20. #40
    Immortal Nnyco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Haomarush
    Posts
    7,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    No, they aren’t. See, for that to be the case the streamer would have to have a deal with said company that stipulates as much.
    Yes they are, its literally free advertisement.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Crabs have been removed from the game... because if I see another one I’m just going to totally lose it. *sobbing* I’m sorry, I just can’t right now... I just... OK just give me a minute, I’ll be OK..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •