New Youtube policy forces A LOT of game play related videos to go away

Nody

Basically YT pulls anything that's more then 10s long of game play or part of the official trailer, anything boss or clip related automatically AND to spice it up forces 100% pre review by YT of all video content.

This means no Let's play series, this means no trailers can be shown, no in game photo of playing the games etc. But instead of me talking about I'll drop a few of the people I follow to explain this in detail and the impact it will have.

Myrddin

Nody wrote: »

Basically YT pulls anything that's more then 10s long of game play or part of the official trailer, anything boss or clip related automatically

As I understand it, the content isn't pulled, it's that it gets 'claimed' & can't be monetized...or maybe I have it wrong?

ShadowHearth

Well their own fault. I bet there are other sites who will gladly take all that yummy cash elsewhere.
Video game content was one of the strongest YouTube parts.

Nody

Myrddin wrote: »

As I understand it, the content isn't pulled, it's that it gets 'claimed' & can't be monetized...or maybe I have it wrong?

Copyright infriction is what will cause them to not be monetized which will most likely lead to being pulled completly (it's simply done in two steps by YT rather then asking the publisher to do it in one).

Manach

My understanding of copyright is there is an exception for fair use, which is what showing the clips are. Besides which, these are a form of publiclity for the game owners so it would be hopefully counter-inituative to pull them.

ktulu123

I see most of Force's content ID Claims are from Blizzard games. Thankfully they have been all over twitter telling guys to dispute the claims so they can solve it. As he said the most hit with this will be the "Let's Play" guys. Which is a shame, I've never been into it myself but its a huge part of gaming content on YouTube. Thankfully pretty much all of my videos are grand

Nody

Manach wrote: »

My understanding of copyright is there is an exception for fair use, which is what showing the clips are. Besides which, these are a form of publiclity for the game owners so it would be hopefully counter-inituative to pull them.

Force touched on this; 5 to 10s appears to be the limit applied by YT for showing direct content (i.e. trailer, game play etc.).

Doctor DooM

Just to point out there is multiple issues going on at the same time here.

1) Content ID sweep preventing people from monetising their videos.

2) Future copyright checks preventing videos from going up or delaying them.

It puts youtube content providers in a difficult position.

It's come to light that companies that do not WANT this to happen are getting claims too (Capcom, in my case).

GarIT

Forced Google+ membership, now this, I can see a lot of gamers using other sites soon.

SmurfX

The steady corporate creep of policies was always inevitable when google took over and it seems to have escalated fairly consistently through the years.

I personally think the monetisation of that sort of content is wrong and it would only benefit the quality of gaming channels if it was restricted to those with a genuine passion in the field rather than those who see it as a business opportunity. There's an awful lot of sob stories these days from youtube "personalities" afraid of losing their livelihood which is irritating considering youtube in its prime was filled with people purely delighted to have any sort of audience they could contribute to.

If it escalates beyond that to the point where Lets plays or gameplay footage are routinely pulled when not monetised then its a regrettable decision for games companies to go down that route. It would be on a company by company basis though and you'd imagine there'd be a good deal of backlash towards those that are doing it.

SmurfX

Manach wrote: »

My understanding of copyright is there is an exception for fair use, which is what showing the clips are. Besides which, these are a form of publiclity for the game owners so it would be hopefully counter-inituative to pull them.

Depends really, for something like Beyond, Heavy Rain, Stanley Parable or telltale games it could be seen as replacement for the gaming experience since so much of the value in those games comes from watching the plot.

Dravokivich

SmurfX wrote: »

Depends really, for something like Beyond, Heavy Rain, Stanley Parable or telltale games it could be seen as replacement for the gaming experience since so much of the value in those games comes from watching the plot.

Thatd be a valid point when its the case, but not for pulling them all outright. Should they challenge websites that provide walkthoughs as well? Becuase ive refered to youtube a few times before, when the games I was playing werent really clear on what I was meant to do.

Doctor DooM

SmurfX wrote: »

If it escalates beyond that to the point where Lets plays or gameplay footage are routinely pulled when not monetised then its a regrettable decision for games companies to go down that route. It would be on a company by company basis though and you'd imagine there'd be a good deal of backlash towards those that are doing it.

I'm a youtuber, and have seen statements from 2 gaming companies they want nothing to do with this as the people effected effectively give them free advertising.

I know for a fact that youtube have been claiming aggressively for at least one of these companies against their wishes.

landsleaving

This was, surely, inevitable. Fair use (or fair dealing as we say here) was never intended to include things like let's plays or people using huge amounts of game content to make money for themselves.

I've been wondering for a while if there'd be some action taken. If a game company decided to take action against youtube for allowing money to be made from their content, it could be big issue for them, and a hugely expensive one.

I'd guess some game company complained a lot, and forced youtube's hand.

Nody

landsleaving wrote: »

This was, surely, inevitable. Fair use (or fair dealing as we say here) was never intended to include things like let's plays or people using huge amounts of game content to make money for themselves.

But the flip side of that is I'll never buy a game with out seeing actual game play and often I'll add games to my buy list because of said Let's play videos because it looks fun (and not some scripted set of pictures, latest example being XCom being Christmas buy rather then 2014/5 4.99 EUR GOTY edition for example because of Force's Lets Play series in it).

landsleaving

Nody wrote: »

But the flip side of that is I'll never buy a game with out seeing actual game play and often I'll add games to my buy list because of said Let's play videos because it looks fun (and not some scripted set of pictures, latest example being XCom being Christmas buy rather then 2014 for example because of Force's Lets Play series in it).

Oh I totally agree, it's in the game companies interest to have the let's plays up, but it's technically against the law - even if it's in everyone's interest to ignore that law! That's why I'd guess some company made a big legal threat behind closed doors. Some eejit somewhere saying things like 'control the message' and 'brand coherence' and 'push the envelope' or whatever it is corporate people say when they want to do something stupid.

Doctor DooM

landsleaving wrote: »

This was, surely, inevitable. Fair use (or fair dealing as we say here) was never intended to include things like let's plays or people using huge amounts of game content to make money for themselves.

I've been wondering for a while if there'd be some action taken. If a game company decided to take action against youtube for allowing money to be made from their content, it could be big issue for them, and a hugely expensive one.

I'd guess some game company complained a lot, and forced youtube's hand.

It doesn't matter if a company complained, Google were protected by the DMCA. Unless someone files a DMCA and they failed to take the video down, they were protected.

SmurfX

Doctor DooM wrote: »

I'm a youtuber, and have seen statements from 2 gaming companies they want nothing to do with this as the people effected effectively give them free advertising.

I know for a fact that youtube have been claiming aggressively for at least one of these companies against their wishes.

Why would it be of any interest to youtube to pull content that the rights holder doesn't want pulled?

Doctor DooM

SmurfX wrote: »

Why would it be of any interest to youtube to pull content that the rights holder doesn't want pulled?

The question we are all asking.

The only answer I can think of: If you wanted youtube to be a marketing platform where the only thing that could be said about a product is approved by its owner and positive, this would be a good step.

mikom

Advertisers, advertisers, advertisers, money, money, money, shareholders, shareholders, shareholders.

Google would want to watch themselves.
People are getting antsy and will move on.

ShadowHearth

Big publishers dont see youtube as free advertisement platform they see it as " Hey! That person is making money out of our content!".

Sorry, but I have no problem with Youtubers making money of their youtube channels. They put time and effort in to it and for a lot of them it is a hard Job. If someone thinks that a lot of proper youtubers just play games and get **** loads of money just for that should get back to reality.

So what I see happen from now on:

1. There will be only publisher approved Videos on youtube. So it means "only good or nothing" content.

2. A huge shift of gaming content from youtube to a different platform.
3. A new player like youtube to raise, but only gaming focused. I have a feeling that twitch will have a sub webiste or a new part of twitch which will be gaming youtube. They already got name out and it is only a matter of time.
4. There is a HUGE GOLD MINE out there now, which google/youtube decided to throw away. It will be picked up fast.

Doctor DooM

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Big publishers dont see youtube as free advertisement platform they see it as " Hey! That person is making money out of our content!".

Sorry, but I have no problem with Youtubers making money of their youtube channels. They put time and effort in to it and for a lot of them it is a hard Job. If someone thinks that a lot of proper youtubers just play games and get **** loads of money just for that should get back to reality.

So what I see happen from now on:

1. There will be only publisher approved Videos on youtube. So it means "only good or nothing" content.

2. A huge shift of gaming content from youtube to a different platform.
3. A new player like youtube to raise, but only gaming focused. I have a feeling that twitch will have a sub webiste or a new part of twitch which will be gaming youtube. They already got name out and it is only a matter of time.
4. There is a HUGE GOLD MINE out there now, which google/youtube decided to throw away. It will be picked up fast.

I would very much agree that there's probably hushed meetings going on right now in Twitch's head office.

I do feel I should stress that while this might be the vision of youtube, and that's still conjecture, a lot of publishers disagree with it.

Duggy747

Twitch can scoop this up if they do it right.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Duggy747 wrote: »

Twitch can scoop this up if they do it right.

not if they dont sort out their
(1) awful lag in eu
(2) awful awful awful vod system

Nody

Duggy747 wrote: »

Twitch can scoop this up if they do it right.

Personally I'm thinking the likes of Netflix; adding unique content and a insanly fast back end network with an already big paying subscription base (free to watch in normal resolution, pay $4.99 for 1080p and access to their fast network or similar deal).

ShadowHearth

Nody wrote: »

Personally I'm thinking the likes of Netflix; adding unique content and a insanly fast back end network with an already big paying subscription base (free to watch in normal resolution, pay $4.99 for 1080p and access to their fast network or similar deal).

Actually, if netflix would pick this up I would be happy as ****.

Burgo

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

not if they don't sort out their
(1) awful lag in eu

I found the "twitch.tv europe lag fix" has made it a lot better.

ShadowHearth

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

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Actually, if netflix would pick this up I would be happy as ****.

The last thing I would want is to see Netflix full of Just Play videos. It's bad enough atm having to wade through all the crap Discovery Channel documentaries but it would be ten times worse if it was full of crap, cheap looking home made videos.

I can understand the reasoning behind this move and tbh it's been a long time coming. A lot of people seem unable to understand why a developer or publishers would be for it as they believe that a Just Play video is free advertising. Can you imagine how developers must feel after spending years on a project to go onto YouTube and find that someone has uploaded their entire game online reveling all the twists and surprises. I'll often check out gameplay videos for something I'm curious about but can't get a demo of but I'd never watch more than a few minutes and if there was any major spoiler in the footage I'd be quite annoyed.

ShadowHearth

Deleted User wrote: »

The last thing I would want is to see Netflix full of Just Play videos. It's bad enough atm having to wade through all the crap Discovery Channel documentaries but it would be ten times worse if it was full of crap, cheap looking home made videos.

I can understand the reasoning behind this move and tbh it's been a long time coming. A lot of people seem unable to understand why a developer or publishers would be for it as they believe that a Just Play video is free advertising. Can you imagine how developers must feel after spending years on a project to go onto YouTube and find that someone has uploaded their entire game online reveling all the twists and surprises. I'll often check out gameplay videos for something I'm curious about but can't get a demo of but I'd never watch more than a few minutes and if there was any major spoiler in the footage I'd be quite annoyed.

well it is already separated as Netflix and "for kids"? so all they need to do add one more separate category - "Gaming". Sorted.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

well it is already separated as Netflix and "for kids"? so all they need to do add one more separate category - "Gaming". Sorted.

It would never happen given the various rights issues involved. And there's not really much of a separation between Netflix and the Kids version. The only difference is that on the kids menu you don't get PG13 upwards films but on the normal Netflix you still have loads of kids shows and films there.

ShadowHearth

Deleted User wrote: »

It would never happen given the various rights issues involved. And there's not really much of a separation between Netflix and the Kids version. The only difference is that on the kids menu you don't get PG13 upwards films but on the normal Netflix you still have loads of kids shows and films there.

Well I was adressing your issue of "clustering your netlix", which I think completely solved. Making a separate entry as it is different content, easy to do it.

As for Netflix in general - we dont know. It was just an idea and food for thought.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Well I was adressing your issue of "clustering your netlix", which I think completely solved. Making a separate entry as it is different content, easy to do it.

As for Netflix in general - we dont know. It was just an idea and food for thought.

The way Netflix works is that Ben if they had a seperate area for Just Play videos the normal Netflix would still be flooded by them. Personally I think that it's a ridiculous idea and one that I'm glad will never happen. Just Play videos are one of those odd pointless things I've never understood. Watching someone else play a game seems like a complete waste of time and as I said, developers must be constantly annoyed when their games are thrown up online hours after release. Could you imagine if that happened with films or TV?

Doctor DooM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The last thing I would want is to see Netflix full of Just Play videos. It's bad enough atm having to wade through all the crap Discovery Channel documentaries but it would be ten times worse if it was full of crap, cheap looking home made videos.

I can understand the reasoning behind this move and tbh it's been a long time coming. A lot of people seem unable to understand why a developer or publishers would be for it as they believe that a Just Play video is free advertising. Can you imagine how developers must feel after spending years on a project to go onto YouTube and find that someone has uploaded their entire game online reveling all the twists and surprises. I'll often check out gameplay videos for something I'm curious about but can't get a demo of but I'd never watch more than a few minutes and if there was any major spoiler in the footage I'd be quite annoyed.

That's what dmca is there for.

ShadowHearth

Deleted User wrote: »

The way Netflix works is that Ben if they had a seperate area for Just Play videos the normal Netflix would still be flooded by them. Personally I think that it's a ridiculous idea and one that I'm glad will never happen. Just Play videos are one of those odd pointless things I've never understood. Watching someone else play a game seems like a complete waste of time and as I said, developers must be constantly annoyed when their games are thrown up online hours after release. Could you imagine if that happened with films or TV?

I think you just generally dont like "lets plays" and Twitch and you just starting to blabbing non sense.

It would be extremely easy to do for netlflix a separate category for video games as it is quite different content from movies, cartoons, TV series. Even The ones who want gaming content would just use something like "Netflix game edition", those who need just Netflix will use "Netflix". You making a problem where there is no Problem.

As for your view on the Lets plays and video game content on youtube - Its totally different topic. I can only imagine how Pissed of Mojang is that youtubers using Minecraft so Vastly on Youtube. I bet he only lost money from it and did not got popularity or free marketing or gazilion copies of minecraft sold by Yogcast alone. Yes there are only bad sides of it. :pac:

Doctor DooM

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I think you just generally dont like "lets plays" and Twitch and you just starting to blabbing non sense.

It would be extremely easy to do for netlflix a separate category for video games as it is quite different content from movies, cartoons, TV series. Even The ones who want gaming content would just use something like "Netflix game edition", those who need just Netflix will use "Netflix". You making a problem where there is no Problem.

As for your view on the Lets plays and video game content on youtube - Its totally different topic. I can only imagine how Pissed of Mojang is that youtubers using Minecraft so Vastly on Youtube. I bet he only lost money from it and did not got popularity or free marketing or gazilion copies of minecraft sold by Yogcast alone. Yes there are only bad sides of it. :pac:

As true as this is, the situation were in is also not just about let's plays.

For example I film competitive gaming tournaments. By and large these games live and die by their popularity over media outlets like YouTube. No way the devs want my larger ilk to vanish. Every fun moment in a tournament inspires one or two more people to pick a game up.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I think you just generally dont like "lets plays" and Twitch and you just starting to blabbing non sense.

It would be extremely easy to do for netlflix a separate category for video games as it is quite different content from movies, cartoons, TV series. Even The ones who want gaming content would just use something like "Netflix game edition", those who need just Netflix will use "Netflix". You making a problem where there is no Problem.

As for your view on the Lets plays and video game content on youtube - Its totally different topic. I can only imagine how Pissed of Mojang is that youtubers using Minecraft so Vastly on Youtube. I bet he only lost money from it and did not got popularity or free marketing or gazilion copies of minecraft sold by Yogcast alone. Yes there are only bad sides of it. :pac:

It's not that I don't like them, I just find them incrediably pointless.

There are huge issues legally with them which is why the Netflix idea would never go anywhere. Netflix is a mess when it comes to sorting content and the last thing it needs is to have thousands if people uploading their play through videos.

Sure there are some titles which benefited from the exposure of play through videos but a lot of developers and gamers lose out. If I spent years working in a game and the day it was released someone uploaded the whole thing online I'd be pretty annoyed and having spoke to a number of developers they too find it irritating.

title such as mine craft or Terraria can benefit from gamer created videos as both games are unique for each gamer and as such they can be a showcase for just what's possible within the game world, where as something such as The Last of Us is more linear and if someone ups a play through then it simply spoils the individual experience. You can I could play 100 hours of minecraft and have two totally different experiences. Not something that you can have with most titles.

Doctor DooM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There are huge issues legally with them which is why the Netflix idea would never go anywhere. Netflix is a mess when it comes to sorting content and the last thing it needs is to have thousands if people uploading their play through videos.

Sure there are some titles which benefited from the exposure of play through videos but a lot of developers and gamers lose out. If I spent years working in a game and the day it was released someone uploaded the whole thing online I'd be pretty annoyed and having spoke to a number of developers they too find it irritating.

title such as mine craft or Terraria can benefit from gamer created videos as both games are unique for each gamer and as such they can be a showcase for just what's possible within the game world, where as something such as The Last of Us is more linear and if someone ups a play through then it simply spoils the individual experience. You can I could play 100 hours of minecraft and have two totally different experiences. Not something that you can have with most titles.

What legal issues?

There aren't any. If a company doesn't want a game on YouTube, they scrape it with a copyright bot and use the legally binding dmca procedure to perform an instant take down.

Doctor DooM

Doctor DooM wrote: »

What legal issues?

There aren't any. If a company doesn't want a game on YouTube, they scrape it with a copyright bot and use the legally binding dmca procedure to perform an instant take down.

We're discussing the possibility of play through a on Netflix which would be a legal nightmare.

ShadowHearth

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not that I don't like them, I just find them incrediably pointless.

There are huge issues legally with them which is why the Netflix idea would never go anywhere. Netflix is a mess when it comes to sorting content and the last thing it needs is to have thousands if people uploading their play through videos.

Sure there are some titles which benefited from the exposure of play through videos but a lot of developers and gamers lose out. If I spent years working in a game and the day it was released someone uploaded the whole thing online I'd be pretty annoyed and having spoke to a number of developers they too find it irritating.

title such as mine craft or Terraria can benefit from gamer created videos as both games are unique for each gamer and as such they can be a showcase for just what's possible within the game world, where as something such as The Last of Us is more linear and if someone ups a play through then it simply spoils the individual experience. You can I could play 100 hours of minecraft and have two totally different experiences. Not something that you can have with most titles.

So we finally got around that bridge where it would not be possible to actuall have it on netflix.

Then to adress your issue with sorting and recomendation. You said it yourself, Netflix Kids just blocks all over 13 content. Now tell, how hard it would be just to Label each Gaming related video with "gaming" tag. Then make normal Netflix ignore "gaming" tagged videos and display the rest. Then you create "Netflix for gamers" profile same way you got "netflix for kids", but in the Gamer profile you get only all videos with "gaming" tag. Its extremely easy even from programming point of view ffs.

As for legal Issues - What ****ing Legal issues? Netflix does not show everything, only the videos it has rights to show. Same would be with Video games. Deals with publishers etc. Keep in mind, we just talk about alternatives and "what could happen and who could take over that gold mine". Just an example, Twitch is freaking broadcasting any game you want and you can watch Vod too, how come twitch is not getting same bull****? Maybe, because they got better thought out system?!

Just food for thought: If person gets same entertainment/experience from just watching the recording ( never playing it himself and buying product ) or playing it by himself the actual game, then maybe the game is **** in the first place?

brevity

I dont know if any of you guys follow xcal but he's posted this video

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

Some of the copyright claims appear to be complete B.S.

johnny_ultimate

I completely respect a creator's right (and, by extent, its distributors / publishers) to protect their content: that's a fundamental part of copyright laws. If they don't want it on YouTube, they should have the right to request its removal. I've said it before, but the likes of the 100+ part playthroughs of entire single player campaigns are simply ripping the piss (as well as being profoundly uninteresting, IMO). I see no reason why that sort of blatant copyright infringement should make money for the video makers and not the content creators. I'm all for critical commentary (although I wouldn't consider a lot of gaming video commentary particularly critical :pac:), but you can do that without having to use dozens of hours of content someone else - or indeed hundreds of other people - have created. People aren't allowed upload whole films with their own commentary attached - and while that's not directly comparable to games, it just shows that in other mediums no-one would get away with republishing the same amount of content game video makers would under justifications of criticism or fair use.

An interesting person to note here is Masahiro Sakurai, creator of Super Smash Bros. He's decided against creating a story mode or in-game cutscenes for the next installment as he felt all the surprises he'd planned were ruined after they were uploaded to video sites within hours or days of release last time around. Now, Super Smash Bros. Brawl's story mode wasn't exactly the best thing since sliced bread, but I think it's a shame his artistic intentions were compromised, regardless of whether the results were particularly inspiring or not. I can't imagine he's alone in that sort of view, either.

That said, I definitely think some genres and games benefit from a heavy online video presence - fighting games, stuff like Minecraft, highscore based games etc... I'd be surprised if many of those companies were opposed to the capturing community, which helps keep the games relevant and popular. There's also something to be said for reviewers who use a sensible amount of illustrative footage without taking advantage.

There's a compromise to be reached here, and I don't think existing copyright law is cut out for it (further complicated by the interactivity of games). It would also be a shame if the whole situation turned into a copyright cluster**** with everyone attempting to grab a piece of the pie, as seems to be the case in some examples from the last few days. I do think developers and publishers are entitled to some control over how much content is used, and certainly are entitled to financial earnings when their work is helping create a sizable revenue stream. Stuff like the upload and streaming features on the new consoles is a good example of a partial compromise, allowing the developers to have some control over what's uploadable, and handily restricting the amount of content that can be used in one go.

Just for the record, I find a vast majority of Lets Plays incredibly dull and pointless, and wouldn't be particularly concerned if they disappeared tomorrow. But I recognise there's an ever-growing audience for them, illustrated by the fact many game publishers feel the revenue is significant enough to actually do something about it.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

So we finally got around that bridge where it would not be possible to actuall have it on netflix.

Then to adress your issue with sorting and recomendation. You said it yourself, Netflix Kids just blocks all over 13 content. Now tell, how hard it would be just to Label each Gaming related video with "gaming" tag. Then make normal Netflix ignore "gaming" tagged videos and display the rest. Then you create "Netflix for gamers" profile same way you got "netflix for kids", but in the Gamer profile you get only all videos with "gaming" tag. Its extremely easy even from programming point of view ffs.

The point was that even if there is a Netflix for gamers the normal interface would still be full of gaming videos. It's simply a case that you can set up a Netflix gaming and then never have it interfere with the normal Netflix.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

As for legal Issues - What ****ing Legal issues? Netflix does not show everything, only the videos it has rights to show. Same would be with Video games. Deals with publishers etc. Keep in mind, we just talk about alternatives and "what could happen and who could take over that gold mine". Just an example, Twitch is freaking broadcasting any game you want and you can watch Vod too, how come twitch is not getting same bull****? Maybe, because they got better thought out system?!

If Netflix were to start showing playthrough videos from gamers irate at Youtube and their handling of this then it would result in a rather restrictive system. Those who create the playthroughs would first have to obtain permission from the developer/publisher before starting work on their video. That may seem easy enough but there could be a dozen people who own a part of the rights and clearing the material could take weeks. Twitch are getting away with it at the moment but don't be surprised to see them face similar restrictions as youtube are imposing.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Just food for thought: If person gets same entertainment/experience from just watching the recording ( never playing it himself and buying product ) or playing it by himself the actual game, then maybe the game is **** in the first place?

I think the problem is that if someone watches a playthrough of a game they are less likely to go out and buy that game. Would you watch a film if you had seen how it ended or knew of all the twists? Anyone I know who watches playthrough videos rarely would then go out and play the games themselves

johnny_ultimate

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

That said, I definitely think some genres and games benefit from a heavy online video presence - fighting games, stuff like Minecraft, highscore based games etc... I'd be surprised if many of those companies were opposed to the capturing community, which helps keep the games relevant and popular. There's also something to be said for reviewers who use a sensible amount of illustrative footage without taking advantage.

I think that a lot of the appeal of watching videos of Minecraft and the like is to see what others are doing. As the game is unique to the individual there's nothing to spoil or run and it can in fact result in gamers getting more ambitious.

Similarly I've always saw videos of fighting games or multiplayer Star Craft to be in a similar vein. People like watching people who are good at something and having seen a few videos of SF or Star Craft and it's akin to watching a master pianist. I find both videos to be rather boring but I respect the level of skill it takes to get that good at something.

Doctor DooM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We're discussing the possibility of play through a on Netflix which would be a legal nightmare.

Again, all they'd have to do is put a dmca mechanism in place.

Doctor DooM

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Again, all they'd have to do is put a dmca mechanism in place.

For Netflix it would never get to that as there's not a chance that they would allow anyone to upload a video that there weren't signed contracts allowing permission to use the game. It would mean that people who wanted to upload a play through would have to go through a lot of effort in order to be allowed to showcase their video.

brevity

I like some lets plays, probably up to a point, then I guess it gets kinda repetitive. If it's two friends going through a game, say xcal and Waldodude, I do enjoy the dynamic between the two more than them going through the game.

Will be interesting to see what happens if PewDiePie has to stop as well. Considering he has over 17m subscribers and each video of his regularly hits the 3million views mark, would have an effect on YouTube as a whole?

Robert ninja

Deleted User wrote: »

The way Netflix works is that Ben if they had a seperate area for Just Play videos the normal Netflix would still be flooded by them. Personally I think that it's a ridiculous idea and one that I'm glad will never happen. Just Play videos are one of those odd pointless things I've never understood. Watching someone else play a game seems like a complete waste of time and as I said, developers must be constantly annoyed when their games are thrown up online hours after release. Could you imagine if that happened with films or TV?

You don't understand lets plays? Is it too complicated or something? Are you confused as to why people watch sports, too? If you can call that a pointless waste of time then how is it different from the games themselves? And comparing uploading movies and shows to unique gameplay... you're actin' the maggot.

I think the Netflix idea is great, I just think they should make it a seperate category and not entirely gaming related... just a user videos section. Unfortunately the world revolves around Darko so it will never happen.

I don't even watch conventional lets plays, I enjoy in-depth game analysis and competitive multiplayer. I'm worried about how all of these channels will be affected and imagining how better they would thrive on some decent competition, at 60+FPS, no ads, no bot harassment and lightning fast download - If only.

landsleaving

Netflix isn't for user-generated content, so that's why it won't happen. They've a totally different model to youtube. Dailymotion or something like that would be a more viable alternative. No idea if you can monetise videos there though.

Robert ninja

Robert ninja wrote: »

You don't understand lets plays? Is it too complicated or something? Are you confused as to why people watch sports, too? If you can call that a pointless waste of time then how is it different from the games themselves? And comparing uploading movies and shows to unique gameplay... you're actin' the maggot.

I think the Netflix idea is great, I just think they should make it a seperate category and not entirely gaming related... just a user videos section. Unfortunately the world revolves around Darko so it will never happen.

I understand them and as I said in a previous post I can respect people who are amazing at Fighting games or Minecraft but don't see the point in watching a play through of a single player gamer. Bar fighting games or stuff like Minecraft there are no games that are truly unique.

Netflix would never allow user created videos to be upped as it's a legal minefield.

Robert ninja

Deleted User wrote: »

Bar fighting games or stuff like Minecraft there are no games that are truly unique.

Deleted User wrote: »

Netflix would never allow user created videos to be upped as it's a legal minefield.

Companies often split or create new departments. Just look at Microsoft and Sony, their gaming department are wholly separate to the larger body of the company. I don't care about netlfix, they just have a better video architecture than youtube (money talks). I don't care who the competition is as long as it does everything you tube refuses to do. Ultimately, there was just too much power in the hands of the users and Google don't have a good record for respecting their users.