Freshbandito

Dang I've got a big chunk of games I'd be happy to donate but it's pretty much all PAL 360 games, Lucky someone in this thread mentioned that as being a problem as it didn't occur to me.

A story about Tom Cruise speaking japanese, gloves made out of sausages and a japanese girl who wants her boyfriend to have nunchucks. Thanks for answering my question??

What solid info is there that says it definitely is Boston anyway? did I miss an official announcement after the survivor 2299 thing was confirmed a hoax?

The two are very much different, in spec ops it tries to make it seem like your choice was monstrous. In Bioshock it says you had no choice from the beginning.

Okay, thanks.

@mb: No, I'd argue fervently that the primary element is the person and never the game in the case of the youtubers who are pulling in the numbers, whilst reading this thread and deciding to see what Pewdipie does (good god is he not aiming at people like me for his audience) I found videos of him playing some of the most obscure games and plenty of footage of him playing free browser games that have hundreds of thousands of views.

Again it's the personality that people are there to see, they're there to see their favourite personality playing games and if there was an easy recourse for these personalities to get premission then I'm sure most would to legitimize the fact that they've made themselves into a money maker through people liking their shenanigans. I sure as hell would prefer hearing about a game through one of these unique personalities (much like jeff, vinny, brad etc.) than through some dry husk of a media representative employed by the publisher/developer so again I ask; Why are the companies not approaching this social phenomenon with a savvy mind and using it to their advantage?

I won't say they have a legal right to do what they do (the law is very much on the side of the original creators and should be) I'm asking (repeatedly now) for an answer as to why people are trying to stamp it out using draconian proceedings instead of turning it into something advantageous to everyone involved and then why some people here are so supportive of this huge modern gaming culture touchstone being torn down just because "fuck pewdipie! he does not appeal to me so it should all be written off to spite this man I don't personally know!"

I'm not arguing the analogy for the sake of where money should be going, I'm trying to get across how these people use many elements, one of them being a game that they had no hand in making, to create their own content.

Also in your analogy my piece would probably be bought at a one time price (like the £40 of a game) then the owner would have the right to display it at his whim and do what he wants, I don't have the benefit of a cadre of lawyers ready to swoop down and demand royalties because someone found another way to make money with it. So that analogy is also full of holes if either of us try to use it in regards to where the money should go.

And still noone here gives a good reason as to why developers shouldn't be embracing this huge free market of an audience and finding a way to still get theirs instead of trying to stamp it out with a jackbooted heel.

That's just insultingly reductive, they're making money from people buying into their cult of personality. They happen to be playing videogames and their fanbase request games they enjoy / hate because they'd like to see their favourite youtuber's experience compared to their own.

It was only a matter of time because the companies lawyers don't see how many copies of Amnesia were bought by pewdipie fans (I know of people who bought it and haven't played it just because they like his videos), how many copies of games the two best friend's played were sold through the exposure that they gave (I bought 6 seperate games after their videos). Yes they did nothing to create the game but there's no real easy option for a starting youtuber to approach a company and tell them that they'd be interested in playing their game on their channel because the companies won't pay attention to this grass roots approach to displaying their game until the person asking is of pewdipie like stature. If the companies just realise there was a way they could cultivate this phenomenon and get the exposure they're already recieving AND get a cut of the money that I'm sure they say is deserved then everyone would be happy.

I did nothing in the production of the canvas, the paints or the scene I'm rendering. If someone enjoys what I do to bring those together in a final piece does that make the final piece any less my own?

Again you look at this and see only what the most narrow minded of company lawyers would see "THESE PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY OFF OUR GAME!"

These youtube personalities are exactly that, a personality with a cult around it and that's why people watch them, not the games. If it were truly about just watching a specific game then noone would have a problem with pewdipie when he's playing a game they adore, it's his whole shtick that people want to see. Fans find a personality they enjoy and then they watch them whatever they should chose to play.

The question of "why do they need a game?" is stupid, no offense but that's just mind bogglingly dumb... Would you ask a political satirist why he needs politics to comment upon? They aren't just magically entertaining sitting in a dark room looking at a camera, they are playing a game and it's their experience playing the game that people are there to see (not simply the game but this person who they enjoy's experience of it).

Tell you what, you certainly don't seem to understand this whole thing so I'll make you a bet. You upload a video of 10 minute stints of you playing a game in complete silence. Someone else will upload videos playing the same game but will talk whilst playing, telling people what they think about the game and what's happening and filling slow spots in the gameplay with amusing stories that play to their audiences tastes. Then see which ones garner more attention. I guarantee the video with a personality over it will be far and away the better recieved. I'd hazard a guess that there's noone doing a good job of monetizing a video of just games with no personality over it.

These people have created a brand in their personality and have some have done so well with it that they're close to household names now. If you ever were in a position where you had cultivated a loyal fanbase of thousand to millions through the power of personality whilst playing a videogame then didn't find a way to make money from it then you'd be the most short sighted and stupid of individuals. They aren't stealing money from the developers, it's money that was never going to frigging go to the developers in the first place! If they weren't doing something right to bring in these audiences then how the hell would they be making all this ad money in the first place? and if it is just the game they're playing then why the hell isn't the developer just putting bare gameplay videos up and making all the ad money!?

Then why doesn't everyone do a let's play, cultivate an audience of near millions and become a social phenome? These 'Dumb asses' are making huge wads of money doing exactly what you say you're doing for free, I'd argue that they're certainly going about this whole thing more intelligently than you.