Dev pulls bad critique from youtube. Too far?

aN.Droid

Totalbiscuit (The cynical brit) posts a video review in his WTF is series of The Day One: Garrys Incident.

The review was not favorable and was at the top of youtube search for the particular games keywords. Devs took issue with his non positive review and used their powers to have it pulled from youtube causing a copyright strike against Totalbiscuits account. For anyone who doesn't know. 3 of these and your channel is kaput.

It turns out that the dev's actually gave him implied permission to make a video review. Even gave him a game key to do it!

I think it is way out of line and will not purchase anything from this dev in the future. I bought this one and after 5 minutes I realized it was rubbish. Stay away.

Here is totalbiscuits response to all this. He makes some very good points in the video and I am looking forward to the devs response.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0

P.S. I am not a totalbiscuit fan at all and usually find his videos really grind on me but he has his following and I am totally against this from a dev.

cherryghost

I both enjoy his videos and I completely agree with him. The devs trying to pull a veil over negative feedback is just plain bad form.

Kiith

It's also really stupid of them. Surely they know the story will get out, and just make them look terrible, as well as having released a bad game.

jaykhunter

Pretty disgraceful actions. I hope it gets picked up my major gaming news outlets. Hope yer man gets his copyright strike undone, it severely limits youtube accounts (15 minute max, no live broadcasts etc) and that'd ruin such a big account. Although he explained why the claim was fraudulent and it's implications I got the idea that he is prepared to accept the strike.

Overheal

The game has already been metabombed

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/day-one-garrys-incident

Steam Mods of the game's discussion forum have also pinned what basically amounts to "we think it was a d*ck move too, but use your indoor rage"

http://steamcommunity.com/app/242800/discussions/0/810938810880057618/

A Dev responds,

We protected our copyright because Total Biscuit has no right to make advertising revenues with our license.

Which is cows poo

and someone posted a petition on change.org

https://www.change.org/petitions/valve-corporation-remove-day-one-garry-s-incident-from-the-steam-store#share

The only piece left is for lulzsec or anonymous or Julian Assange to get involved.

nesf

He's completely in the right. I do enjoy his videos sometimes. But if he says critique one more time...

Taylor365

Limericks wrote: »

I bought this one

Why for the love of god why!?

ancapailldorcha

Read the positive reviews on Metacritic.

SmurfX

I find it difficult to share his moral high ground or believe his ambitions for enlightening gamers on software quality when he monetises his videos and describes his practise as a "business" when he operates on a service without hosting costs. At the end of the day if he was paying those hosting costs that the other businesses he likens himself to are, he'd have the grounds to defend his own legal right to content and not leave it to a 3rd party.

Retr0gamer

It's unfortunately far too easy for people to do this on youtube. If a company (not even a big one) makes a copyright claim against an account google will act on it without investigating the validity of the claim.

Dcully

I like TB`s work, im subbed to his channel, he like others makes great content.
At times he can grate on me but then again nobody is perfect.
He is 100% correct in this case and that was a great response from him that will have those silly devs scratching their heads as to how they respond if they bother.

Sonics2k

I stopped being a big time listener of TB back when he was started doing his WoW Radio podcasts Classic WoW to Wrath of the Lich King and have enjoyed him since then.

He is, without a doubt, an opinionated, ego-centric tool. And I love him for it.

He's also completely right in this scenario. Having a video removed because of the nonsense claim that that he infringed copyright is just complete nonsense.

I'd already seen a few reviews of this game and few are positive in any real way. Hopefully this guys actions completely ruin his rep and we never see or hear from him again.

From everything I've seen about this game, it's completely and utterly bugged. Have not seen the TotalBiscuit one, as I've no idea who he is, but I have watched the humorous BirgirPal one. If you make a game as riddled with bugs as that one is, then surely you deserve bad reviews.

grizzly

Could he not host the videos himself? I don't think Google will change it's polices based on isolated incidents like this as they'd probably make a up less than 0.001% of cases.

Grumpypants

He is free to use any of the other hosting platforms that don't use this strike option. Build his own site and publish there.

He came across really bad in the whole thing. Trying to make out that he makes the videos to protect the consumer and not to just make money.

I have no problem with him making money just be honest about it. Admit you attacks people's revenue stream to make money for yourself and you are not some consumer white knight.

Shiminay

This is something TB's been fighting against before - he won't review Sega games anymore because they hit a massive amount of YouTubers with DMCA notices.

It's a pretty shoddy abuse of the system and a really poor excuse saying "he's not allowed to make money off our stuff" when making this sort of content and living off the ad revenue is exactly what he does - it's his job and for anyone to expect him to not do that after having been sent the code to do it is a mong. He also runs a professional Starcraft 2 team, but they don't really make any money from what he and his wife have said before (she recently stepped down as the team's manager).

I wouldn't mind, but he's not terribly difficult to get on side, you make a public note to him and anyone else who was sent the review code and who thought it was awful and say "well tell us what needs fixing, lets work with you and your fans to get a proper beta sorted" and then it's all back on him.

uncle_sam_ie

Wow, it really is a crap game.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x15fmac_wtf-is-day-one-garry-s-incident_videogames

Sonics2k

Grumpypants wrote: »

He is free to use any of the other hosting platforms that don't use this strike option. Build his own site and publish there.

He came across really bad in the whole thing. Trying to make out that he makes the videos to protect the consumer and not to just make money.

I have no problem with him making money just be honest about it. Admit you attacks people's revenue stream to make money for yourself and you are not some consumer white knight.

The thing is though, TB openly admits that they make money from the ad revenue when people visit their Youtube page.

They don't make any money directly from the game they review, rather the banner ads that appear on the side of the page. This is actively encouraged by youtube, and is no different to how a magazine works.

Companies will pay a magazine X amount of money for ad space, especially on it's cover reviews and main articles.

SmurfX

grizzly wrote: »

Could he not host the videos himself? I don't think Google will change it's polices based on isolated incidents like this as they'd probably make a up less than 0.001% of cases.

Of course he could but he'd have to pay for it himself then which would hit his wallet. He'd rather just continue with his entitlement at the operation of someone elses service.

Shiminay wrote: »

This is something TB's been fighting against before - he won't review Sega games anymore because they hit a massive amount of YouTubers with DMCA notices.

SEGA's reasoning was those particular high ranking videos interfering with their official website rankings and their own business as a result. They're well within their rights to remove interfering copyrighted material and wasn't for censorship reasons.
It's entirely hypocritical of him to condemn them for trying to promote their own products as much as they can given what he does. His campaign is entirely geared towards protecting a livelihood he very much enjoys rather than the campaign for free speech he'd like people to believe it is.

NTMK

SmurfX wrote: »

SEGA's reasoning was those particular high ranking videos interfering with their official website rankings and their own business as a result. They're well within their rights to remove interfering copyrighted material and wasn't for censorship reasons.

Sega DMCA'd videos with no copyrighted material because of its ranking. Its shouldnt be within there rights to DMCA videos from channels that have written consent from sega to publish this material.

Maybe sega should do what every other channel has to do and advertise there videos instead of abusing DMCA to takedown the videos and channels above it

ShadowHearth

He is 100% right and he does fight for the right things.

You might like or not him, but he is right. That developer goes in to **** list for me anyway.

Jonny7

Grumpypants wrote: »

He came across really bad in the whole thing. Trying to make out that he makes the videos to protect the consumer and not to just make money.

He openly states he makes money from this - it's literally his job

So he's pointing out how this affects him and the flaw in the current system

Getting 3 strikes will effectively put him out of business on Youtube - TB can be a bit of a pre-Madonna on all things internet but in this case he's right, the games dev is clearly in the wrong

Not entirely sure of what alternative platforms there are, but it's highly doubtful they are easy to transition to and keep that audience/revenue

It's clear that the game is atrocious and there appears to be attempts to put up fake reviews.. past experience shows how the gaming community reacts to this kind of behaviour.. pitchforks..

NTMK

Jonny7 wrote: »

Not entirely sure of what alternative platforms there are, but it's highly doubtful they are easy to transition to and keep that audience/revenue

Revenue is there if you can pull it off but the biggest block is the traffic youtube gets. if you build your audience there you usually build it from people already on youtube.hosting on other sites mean they have to go out of their way to view your stuff

Youtube wont change its policy until someone huge gets taken down i.e Pewdiepie, yogcast before they realise its affecting their ad revenue

uncle_sam_ie

It looks like the devs are backing down now.
http://kotaku.com/studio-accused-of-blocking-youtube-vid-over-criticism-1448796126

"We contacted Wild Games for comment, and were told by "Stephane" that, "after seeing all the negative impact today we decided to withdraw our complaint to YouTube."

SmurfX

NTMK wrote: »

Sega DMCA'd videos with no copyrighted material because of its ranking. Its shouldnt be within there rights to DMCA videos from channels that have written consent from sega to publish this material.

Maybe sega should do what every other channel has to do and advertise there videos instead of abusing DMCA to takedown the videos and channels above it

They made a request and youtube approved it. Youtube just don't want that sort of hassle so usually cave, the general problem with relying on a 3rd party to defend your business interests. It's not a scandal.

Shiminay

YouTube are like Boards in that they provide a platform and don't want the hassle of being stuck in the middle of 2 arguing parties, one of which is using it's platform. It makes sense for them to have a blanket rule and approach for these sorts of issues.

I just watched the video that TB posted. It's clear to see his law degree training coming out in that, he makes points and supports said points with evidence in a very methodical manner

Nody

NTMK wrote: »

Sega DMCA'd videos with no copyrighted material because of its ranking. Its shouldnt be within there rights to DMCA videos from channels that have written consent from sega to publish this material.

And he got the DMCAs removed by Youtube; how ever Sega now lost out further revenue by the fact TB refuses to do anything with them.

NTMK

Shiminay wrote: »

YouTube are like Boards in that they provide a platform and don't want the hassle of being stuck in the middle of 2 arguing parties, one of which is using it's platform. It makes sense for them to have a blanket rule and approach for these sorts of issues.

I dont mind the takedown system given youtubes size its the abuse of the system that needs to be curbed. Abusers of the system should be blocked from using it.

The appeal system is also a pain in the hole if youre not a huge channel like TB's.

NTMK

Nody wrote: »

And he got the DMCAs removed by Youtube; how ever Sega now lost out further revenue by the fact TB refuses to do anything with them.

He did, a lot of channels didnt though and sega still havent apologised for it.

wayne040576

Youtube changed the appeal process last year to reduce abuse like this. As far as I know, under the new system he has two options.
Abide by the takedown or

Appeal. Then the content owners have to either back down on the complaint or take it to the DMCA to file a formal complaint under its process. They'd be pretty stupid in this case to do that.

Tomk1

TB's vid: "This video is no longer available: The Day One Garry's Incident Incident" has prob got more likes than the original video would have got views.

It's not new for a Dev to write false reviews on metacritic.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/day-one-garrys-incident
"Live to ride" had a few initial (10)s from new single game-review users, but in fairness to that game's Dev they didn't pull down negative videos. I enjoyed watching the full playthrough to find out what happened in that story.

Anyway, Wild Game Studio should pull the game, and if the studio isn't now broke, finish developing, then ask TB to review before relaunch. But with the way they've handled this, the community will not forget.

Retr0gamer

Sometimes these things happen not because of the developers but because of a publishers legal department having a brain fart of idiocy so might not be quite right pointing the finger at the developers.

johnny_ultimate

This situation does seem like an abuse of the system: if you request a review, be ready for a negative one, point blank.

But (there's always a but) I do not agree youtube video makers and lets players should have completely unrestricted ability to upload videos of games. *unpopular opinion incoming* Sure, some leeway is good, and in fairness Total Biscuit - as much as I hate the guy's style of 'critiquing' - keeps things compatibly short and focused - well, as far as rambling youtube reviews go. But I know if I was an indie developer and the entirety of my game was uploaded to youtube within days or hours of release I'd be pissed. Others might be happy with the publicity, it's all dependent on the individual in question. It's easy to say the same rules don't apply to games as is the case with films or TV because games are interactive and are not a passive medium. But there are as many crazy gamers out there who will watch a Let's Play in its entirety and skip the game, compared to those who might have a glimpse at one and opt to buy the game for themselves. This particularly affects games focused on narrative, or that try something quirky or new.

I'm all for criticism and freedom of speech, but that doesn't give any excuse for large scale copyright infringement. Creators need to retain some control over their creations, and the youtube users of the world do not have the right to abuse the generous leeway they're typically given. When a takedown notice is issued for an hour long video featuring a huge chunk of content creators would rather people discover on their own, then I don't think a takedown notice is completely unjustified. Illustrative clips, short videos etc? All good. But not everything.

jaykhunter

I definitely see where you're coming from. Like if you watch a complete let's play of the Walking Dead Game there's little incentive to re-hear the same dialogue. The Dev's argument, whilst not applicable to this case, has general merit. It does seem odd how users can monetise videos with large amounts of gameplay footage, instead of the developers receiving at least a slice, if not the whole thing. I'd wager most viewers keep watching for so long is due to the video footage, as opposed to if it were in still photo/podcast form on YouTube.

Anyway, in this case the Dev has no good ground to stand on, having given TotalBiscuit a steam key for the purposes of a YouTube videogame review, and publicly allowing others to do so. Whoever made the decision to try and censor a popular videogame reviewer did not think that decision through, and the company might fold over it.

nesf

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

But there are as many crazy gamers out there who will watch a Let's Play in its entirety and skip the game, compared to those who might have a glimpse at one and opt to buy the game for themselves.

Eh? I know no one like that and I know rather an assorted bunch of gamers. My kid watches some Let's Plays and guess which games he bugs me to get him next? Let's Play is possibly the best advertising many game genres (narrative dependent excluded) out there right now.

I mean, just look at the effort that competitive game developers are making to make their games easier to record (automatic replay saving) or stream (Twitch integration into the game itself).

Overheal

SmurfX wrote: »

I find it difficult to share his moral high ground or believe his ambitions for enlightening gamers on software quality when he monetises his videos and describes his practise as a "business" when he operates on a service without hosting costs. At the end of the day if he was paying those hosting costs that the other businesses he likens himself to are, he'd have the grounds to defend his own legal right to content and not leave it to a 3rd party.

Even Thomas Paine had to eat. Not that TB is a revolutionary or anything.

Remember you're posting that comment on a website that monetizes this discussion.

Fact is his rights are no less valid because of the lack of hosting costs; he does have production costs to factor in. Add to that he is effectively his own lawyer which would normally cost the average person money.

At the end of the day Game Publicity is a free benefit to both the developer and the producers of that content. Youtube wins on the traffic too. Everybody is a winner. I feel like the money argument is a red herring in the matter.

ScumLord

SmurfX wrote: »

I find it difficult to share his moral high ground or believe his ambitions for enlightening gamers on software quality when he monetises his videos and describes his practise as a "business" when he operates on a service without hosting costs.

Many people make money off the youtube advertising agreement. The users provide content for youtube and youtube share the spoils with people you generate a lot of views. We don't complain that youtube make money off content they don't produce.

Many people make a living creating content for youtube, it's how the system works.


As long as the content is in review form then everyone should have the right to give their opinion publicly.

degrassinoel

I cant stand TB, but those dev's were completely in the wrong, really bad form. If it had of been a good review/critique they'd have left it alone.

Vicxas

I watched the review, and all the points he made were completely valid, backed up by the video too.

Devs took it too far by asking for it to be removed, and its not like the devs have had amazing games in the past. Ive read past reviews and they were awful too.

ScumLord

It's like nobody explained how the internet works. Try to keep something quiet, everybody hears about it. Want everybody to hear something, nobody listens.

All this company has done is create a ****storm around their terrible game. Any fool could have told them that would happen.

COYVB

Grumpypants wrote: »

He came across really bad in the whole thing

I disagree. There's only one party that came across bad here

COYVB

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Sometimes these things happen not because of the developers but because of a publishers legal department having a brain fart of idiocy so might not be quite right pointing the finger at the developers.

Definitely the devs in this case, but you're right, it's usually the publishers

cherryghost

Devs have issued an apology and the video is back online.

ShadowHearth

cherryghost wrote: »

Devs have issued an apology and the video is back online.

I dont think TB should even put it back up anymore. Even bad press is too good for developer. Some sucker will try buying the game just of curiosity.

Grumpypants

ScumLord wrote: »

As long as the content is in review form then everyone should have the right to give their opinion publicly.

He does have that right, but he has no right so to speak of to publish on Youtube. As a mod on Boards i am sure at some stage you had to protect its interests and remove a post or two.

Youtube set a rule and when you sign up you agree to abide by that rule (TB didn't). They are bound by copyright laws and look to protect protect themselves.

If he remade the video without content that anyone else owns then i'm 100% behind his right to voice his opinion, if he pays his own way to create a platform to voice that opinion I again will support that, and anyones right to criticize his opinion. Just like I support the Devs right to protect their IP (even if it is a silly move).

He set out to hurt that game and its ability to make money, so to get upset that they are hurting his ability to make money is quite strange.

He is mounting a campaign with little risk to himself. He is free to host that video on his own site or on the escapist site if he wants and suffer the consequences himself.

There is a much more interesting debate to be had on the greater implications of copyright from in-game videos. I just don't think this case is a very good one to spark that debate.

With all the next gen consoles having "share" options and many players having capture cards will Devs be out there filing copyright claims on anything that shows the game in a bad light? Or is this all part of the bigger picture and good for exposure for the game?

What about live streaming, if you have worked for four years on a game that is heavily story driven like the Last of US do you want someone to live stream that a ruin the story?

Or what about the time a very big publisher of a very popular online game saw this as "lost revenue" and tried to "tax" the streamers. The streamers just moved to a new game and the publisher soon realized that they lost a ton of free advertising.

This is all new, no one has really thought it through and people will make mistakes. The thing is to try to find a balance that works for everyone and not get hung up on this ugly witch hunting that is all too common online these days.

ShadowHearth

Grumpypants wrote: »

He does have that right, but he has no right so to speak of to publish on Youtube. As a mod on Boards i am sure at some stage you had to protect its interests and remove a post or two.

Youtube set a rule and when you sign up you agree to abide by that rule (TB didn't). They are bound by copyright laws and look to protect protect themselves.

If he remade the video without content that anyone else owns then i'm 100% behind his right to voice his opinion, if he pays his own way to create a platform to voice that opinion I again will support that, and anyones right to criticize his opinion. Just like I support the Devs right to protect their IP (even if it is a silly move).

He set out to hurt that game and its ability to make money, so to get upset that they are hurting his ability to make money is quite strange.

He is mounting a campaign with little risk to himself. He is free to host that video on his own site or on the escapist site if he wants and suffer the consequences himself.

There is a much more interesting debate to be had on the greater implications of copyright from in-game videos. I just don't think this case is a very good one to spark that debate.

With all the next gen consoles having "share" options and many players having capture cards will Devs be out there filing copyright claims on anything that shows the game in a bad light? Or is this all part of the bigger picture and good for exposure for the game?

What about live streaming, if you have worked for four years on a game that is heavily story driven like the Last of US do you want someone to live stream that a ruin the story?

Or what about the time a very big publisher of a very popular online game saw this as "lost revenue" and tried to "tax" the streamers. The streamers just moved to a new game and the publisher soon realized that they lost a ton of free advertising.

This is all new, no one has really thought it through and people will make mistakes. The thing is to try to find a balance that works for everyone and not get hung up on this ugly witch hunting that is all too common online these days.

Emmmm.... WTF?

He gets a review copy and he gives his opinion about it. It is a mini review. They did not liked Review so they pulled it. Developer is clearly taking a piss. I dont understand how can anyone even find a way to see some sense or defend developer.

There are reviews for everything in this world. The hotel I work in had one bad review on that massive hotel review website. So what? Hotel should have a right to put it down, because it makes negative image?

I think it is clear, that youtube is doing more good then bad to Game developers. Its a GOD DAMN FREE ADVERTISING! Nothing wrong in youtubers actually getting payed for that too. They need to eat too.

If some games can be played and completed in one setting on youtube and dont give any point in actually playing it yourself, then maybe its a **** game in the first place?

ScumLord

cherryghost wrote: »

Devs have issued an apology and the video is back online.

Internet justice is done.

Grumpypants wrote: »

He does have that right, but he has no right so to speak of to publish on Youtube. As a mod on Boards i am sure at some stage you had to protect its interests and remove a post or two.

Youtube set a rule and when you sign up you agree to abide by that rule (TB didn't). They are bound by copyright laws and look to protect protect themselves.

As far as I am aware you are aloud to show clips of video when reviewing something. I don't think review shows have to pay just to give their opinion on something. If that was the case descriptive pictures couldn't be used in papers. If that is the case he broke no copyright laws.

If it's not the case then it's next to impossible to give fair impartial descriptions or reviews of anything.

CrinkElite

I watched the video on dailymation thanks to Uncle Sam ie for the link.

While I agree that the developers acted irrationally, I think TB's review is an unfair appraisal of the game.

Fair enough, overall it looks like a stinker but complaining about the game not pausing while in the inventory system??
That's a design decision that seems to work well for hits such as Minecraft and Stalker.
Whingeing about the FOV keys not being in the options screen, whingeing about being killed by one hit.

He just set out to sh1t all over the game right from the start.

If I was the Dev who'd been pouring my efforts into this game I'd be livid, It's just not even handed criticism.

All the same they shouldn't have acted the way they did but I'm sure they felt they weren't getting a fair go.
Sometimes that can make you act irrationally and without full consideration for the consequences.

nesf

Grumpypants wrote: »

As a mod on Boards i am sure at some stage you had to protect its interests and remove a post or two.

The difference is, there's no automatic process. Boards is small enough that a small number of people can review all takedown requests. Mods can act on their own discretion but generally that's restricted to very clearly defamatory material (e.g. such and such enjoys the company of children too much and similar crap).

Grumpypants

ScumLord wrote: »

Internet justice is done.

As far as I am aware you are aloud to show clips of video when reviewing something. I don't think review shows have to pay just to give their opinion on something. If that was the case descriptive pictures couldn't be used in papers. If that is the case he broke no copyright laws.

If it's not the case then it's next to impossible to give fair impartial descriptions or reviews of anything.

When you get a review code it is usually accompanied by a set of media assets that can be used. Artwork, screenshots and video clips. Others will set guidelines or requests that you don't record in a spoiler section for example.

Other devs don't mind and actively encourage you to record and show game footage. Each one is different and as a media publisher you look to protect yourself.

But at all times that is their copyrighted material. They always own that but it is very rare to hear of anyone getting in any serious trouble around copyright law in reviews.

nesf

CrinkElite wrote: »

I watched the video on dailymation thanks to Uncle Sam ie for the link.

While I agree that the developers acted irrationally, I think TB's review is an unfair appraisal of the game.

Fair enough, overall it looks like a stinker but complaining about the game not pausing while in the inventory system??
That's a design decision that seems to work well for hits such as Minecraft and Stalker.
Whingeing about the FOV keys not being in the options screen, whingeing about being killed by one hit.

He just set out to sh1t all over the game right from the start.

If I was the Dev who'd been pouring my efforts into this game I'd be livid, It's just not even handed criticism.

All the same they shouldn't have acted the way they did but I'm sure they felt they weren't getting a fair go.
Sometimes that can make you act irrationally and without full consideration for the consequences.

He has never pretended to give even handed criticism. In general his reviews have a lot of personal bias in them. In fairness though, he normally flags this, especially when it's not the general mood (e.g. disliking a previous iteration of the game that was generally popular and so on).


I think he can be an annoyingly opinionated bastard but to be fair he makes no effort to hide this or to pretend to be something else from what I've watched.