Thread 719163134

Should devs take part of streamers' revenue?

Honestly yeah probably.
The issue is once you set that precedent the big publishers wont be satisfied with what's fair and will ruin everything for everyone.

>>719163134 (OP)
Yes. Fuck streamers

>>719163134 (OP)
The issue here is zoomers want to see someone else playing a game than playing a game on their own.
Literal a cuck generation.

Not their fault you don't make games people want to play.

haha get fucked indie devs

indie dev, Japan
:OOOOOO

>>719163134 (OP)
tell the publishers to give you a bigger piece of the pie, jap boy

Absolutely not

>>719163134 (OP)
Yes but only past a certain level of success, if you start charging people with 100 viewers to stream a game no one's gonna wanna do it lol

>>719163134 (OP)
That precedent would end entertainment

From the dawn of media, if you wanted to exhibit something publicly, you needed the rights holders permission, and that came with a price tag. You are a movie theater and want to show a movie? Pay up.
The only reason the video game streamer industry exists is because they leeched off devs for so long that not only did people forget that the exhibitor is the one who is supposed to pay, the devs actually started paying the exhibitors instead!

>>719163757
Because streamers have become an advertisement medium in of itself.
Want your shitty product to be on a billboard at the madison square? You gotta pay up.
Want your game to instantly reach out to what you suspect is your target audience? Getting a streamer to shill for you is the quickest path.

>>719163757
Copyright is a contrivance that is halting progress in the arts and sciences and only serves big corporate interests in redistributing wealth to them and only them
Copyright is the thing that is currently ensuring the poor continue to become poorer

In Japan they actually can enforce this (moral rights)

In the US making money off the back of someone else's copyrighted content is the basis of several industries

>>719163504
Zoomers have no money. The average adult zoomer carries more than $25,000 in debt.
They also have a hard moral stance against piracy for some reason, so watching a streamer play a game is their way around experiencing a game for free.

>>719163757
Video games are an interactive medium. If your game doesn't have a draw for people wanting to play it themselves then that is on the developer. Even from an older era of arcade games they had demos to entice people to play or having others watching players to see how a game plays or glean insight on how to approach the game.

>>719163134 (OP)
That's not how it works.
Hopefully this drives a revival in devs making games that are boring to stream but fun to play. No more gay VNs please.

No, retard, if you buy software you should be able to do what you want with it. What's more, streamers showing the game creates far more revenue for the game by increasing its popularity and thus sales. People have tried charging streamers and youtubers if they play their games and always end up backing down once the realize it's stupid and self destructive.

>>719163884
this.

>>719163757
>jews making records off other people's sheet music walks into the room

you're wrong and retarded, rights holder bullshit was always jewish loop holes to exploit the goyim. but now the goyim have turned the tables and thats antisemitism.

oh did we all forget when they stole literally everything on line in 2022 to make their ai bullshit? fck thes faggots.

>>719163134 (OP)
indy devs wouldnt make any money if streamers and other online communities didnt talk about their 3 hour dog shit games. they should be paying us.

>>719164075
>if you buy software you should be able to do what you want with it.
You didn't buy the software, you bought a non-exclusive license. You cannot do whatever you want with it. The same way when you buy a DVD, it is ILLEGAL to show that DVD in a public setting, you bought a license for private home use only.
If you want to show it in your restaurant, church, school, or wherever, you need to get a public license which is much more expensive.

>>719163134 (OP)
no
>make reactslop so streamers will play the game
>nobody who watches it wants to buy because it's obvious the only appeal is reactslop for people with an audience
>how could this possibly have happened to me?
they made their bed, now they need to go lie in it

Streamers are like the biggest marketers around. There's a reason big companies pay them to play their games. If your game is so shit that watching it is identical to playing it, then that's on you.

>>719163757
except they're showing gameplay, which is not covered by the game's copyright you kike
>>719163947
>for (((some reason)))
I wonder what it could be anon. it probably has to do with a certain kind of merchant

>>719163938
Why create something when you could stream yourself consuming content and make more money doing that? The issue is things are fundamentally fucked right now. Streamers should not be earning what they’re earning.

>>719164432
You make something because you have the urge to do so. Otherwise people can reduce it down to the point of why bother trying if I'm not an 18 year old girl that gets millions in a single week of opening their Onlyfans.

>>719163134 (OP)
I don't know what to tell you, bud. The new generations prefer their parasocial interactions more than they do gameplay. If this truly is the case it would probably be better just to only make and "release" the game played by the streamer just to the streamer and split the money with them. No one watching was ever going to play it anyway.

>>719163884
While I agree, I do think it'd be nice if the people who make games were somehow compensated since the whole concept of streaming relies on the games. But I don't think flexing IP rights is the correct avenue forward to it. The problem is the way we make infinitely replicable digital "information media" is to make it artificially scarce and treat it like manufactured goods, when it fundamentally isn't. It needs a completely different approach to financing its creation.

If you killed IP as a concept outright, nobody would buy games anyway, they'd just download them, so its not like streaming a game would "lose sales" or anything like that. You'd need a financing medium that put the price before the production, like kickstarter or patreon, so that by the time the game was actually available to the public, the creator had already gotten more or less all of the compensation they would ever expect to get for the game itself. In that model, the streaming "revenue share" issue stops mattering.

But as long as we're going to all jam our fingers in our ears and collectively pretend a video game is the same as a shirt or a sandwich, even when it's not, then revenue sharing for exhibition becomes as necessary for vidya as it has been for movies and music for the last century.

>>719164187
What part of the word "should" do you not understand you stupid cocksucker?

>>719163134 (OP)
very true. streamers that get sponsors for games can "earn" hundreds of dollars per hour for doing nothing but playing it.

also, many people simply watch streamers play games instead of buying it themselves.

>>719163367
>normalize revenue sharing with content creators
>AAA companies get too greedy, take huge cuts
>nobody streams their games anymore
>AAA implodes even more than it already does
I see no problem.

>>719163134 (OP)
Absolutely, and I've been saying this for years. """Content""" """creators""" would have nothing to stream and get rich on, if not for trillions of hours spent making video games.

>>719163134 (OP)
Demanding revenue cuts like this almost killed Nintendo's relevance in the West in the early 2010s btw

>>719163134 (OP)
no, streamers and other ecelebs should be put in death camps instead

>>719163134 (OP)
you can prohibit people from streaming your game and you can make contracts with streamers

>>719163134 (OP)
yeah this is how you get them to not stream your games lol

>>719164958
Good.

>>719163134 (OP)
Nope. Devs get their money from sales already, this is just a sneaky move to greedily snatch money from someone else.

>>719163134 (OP)
yes but ONLY because i hate streamers and think they should suffer.

>>719165008
i mean streamers are fags yeah but i'm not sure what you're actually gaining here, hope it puts food on the table

>>719165008
Said the dev until their sales cratered due to lack of free advertising

>>719163134 (OP)
>pay for internet, electricity, and gadgets just to generate ad revenue for random dude
If you think about it, people who watch streamers are actually kind of dumb. They're basically a voluntary botnet, lol. It's like letting someone mine crypto on your computer

>>719164185
This is the reality. Devs don't cultivate followers. They don't make it easy for people who post videos, often making them jump through hoops for what they need. They don't care about it at all until the topic of money comes up. Every other industry actively pays people for the simple privilege of appearing in their content - advertising is a megaindustry from paying to get product placement on television shows and movies to paying tik tokkers to review your restaurants or show off your brand of purses.

Why would game developers be entitled to something that every single industry on the face of the planet has established that the opposite is true?

>>719164625
>the way we make infinitely replicable digital "information media" is to make it artificially scarce and treat it like manufactured goods, when it fundamentally isn't
you don't get it goy! non-excludable non-rivalrous goods are not real you fucking anti-semite!
>If you killed IP as a concept outright, nobody would buy games anyway
a non-trivial amount of pirates buy after pirating though

>>719165194
How do you think this differe from watching tv

That's a good way to implode your free marketing. Jap devs are fucking retarded jesus fucking christ. Throw another nuke, maybe it will fix them this time.

charge streamers $50,000 to buy streamer edition of the game

Streamers are adverts for the game.
Streamers are such an effective advert for gaming nowadays that developers/publishers go out of their way to sponsor them to make streams or videos about the game.

Anyone who tries to do the opposite has a fundamental misunderstanding of the beneficial relationship between the game and the streamer.

>>719163134 (OP)
How do we know this is something more than 4 jap indie devs think? This could just be a lie.

Wasn't already proven that all the big streamers are botting their views?

>>719164625
>While I agree, I do think it'd be nice if the people who make games were somehow compensated
They are, through increased sales. There is no problem that needs solving.

>>719163757
I always thought it was gay that you couldn't put the radio on in a business without paying a license

>>719165373
or people watch streamers instead of buying the game

>>719165227
because copyright says so. you show assets in public, you pay for it
on the flipside, people have claimed since forever that it's fair use
>the entire game is rarely shown (streamers don't tend to 100% games, and they often skip parts outright)
>the character of the work is fundamentally different. the purpose is different too. it's a video. people are watching, not playing. furthermore, people come to watch for different reasons ranging from interactions with the streamers to watching high level play
>the effects streaming has are overwhelmingly positive. it draws more eyeballs to the game and piques the audience's interest, and it's not a substitute for the original (watching is not the same as playing, especially not in the case of gameplay-heavy games, or the ones with heavy DIY/creative elements like minecraft)

>>719165305
Well, people who watched TV were treated as mindless drones back then

>>719165725
They don't.

If the games they made weren't walking Sims with no gameplay i would want to play them myself. I swear 75% of what streamers play are glorified short films.

>>719165760
>because copyright says so.
Nobody does or should care.

>>719165770
There are tons of people who think watching a game counts as playing it.

>>719163134 (OP)
Weren't you already called a parasitic faggot by literally everyone on the last thread on the topic?

>>719163134 (OP)
>>719163757
remember that time Nintendo limited streaming rights and streamers were crying, calling Nintendo the archdemon for demanding a cut of their streaming profit.

Big streamers do but the small ones don't. Ideally, streamers should just be round up and shot.

if a streamer can just stream an entire game and make money off it, why can't I stream a streamers entire stream and make money off it?

>>719166005
you can actually it's called react content

>>719166005
There are several channels that just do that

>>719163134 (OP)
I'm like 90% sure that, legally, a game dev's creator can tell a platform to take a streamer's content with their game in it down, and if the platform owner doesn't comply the platform holder can get sued for damages. Which indirectly let's them force streamers, streamer producers, or the platform to buy a license.

Problem is the bad publicity and the fact that anyone who cares about the money doesn't have the money to sue every streamer.

>>719165725
Yes this is the misunderstanding.
If you create a game and you as the developer do not think it has enough merit on it's own to be purchased and instead is just streamer bait, you cannot then complain when no one buys it and just watches a streamer.
Easy example of streamer bait that became massively successful because it appeals to the viewers to play it themselves and choose different options is MiSide, an example of an experience that is so appealing/interesting that the viewer wants to play it themselves despite it's linear nature is Mouthwashing. There are more examples for both but those are easy ones.

Saying "hey wait no one is buying my game I demand the streamer pay me" shows a clear flaw in the developer's approach to making their game.

>>719165760
>because copyright says so
False. The rest of your post is discarded. No reason to read it when you lied to begin with. Don't waste time typing gay retarded shit based on an actual falsehood.

Let us know when you learn that there is no "copyright" that says if someone looks at your screen while you play Super Bing Bing that you're liable for damages, and a second time once you learn that arcades never got sued because they charged for access to play games that other people could watch you play.

>>719166047
>>719166056
but what if I stream EVERY streamers stream on my own website called Twitch2?

Anything that harms streamers, I'm in support of.

>>719165725
That's if your game is shit.

>>719164432
You are supposed to make something because you want to, not because it is the most profitable way of living for fucks sake. Talk about being completely devoid of a soul.

>>719163134 (OP)
>start going after streamers and their revenue
>entire streamer economy collapses overnight
>which causes incurable damage to the entire already-glassy entertainment industry, destroying countless properties that rely on a streaming ecosystem to get any headway
>Nobody wins, nobody profits

Go for it. Do it. I want to see some fucking blood. SHOW ME SOME FUCKING BLOOD.

>>719163882
>advertisment
more like highway robbery. There are reports of devs that were called by streamers or their managers, telling them they only play their game if they pay up

>>719166118
You would be hailed as a hero for making a viable alternative.

>>719163134 (OP)
Yes. I’m a streamer myself and think this.

>>719163134 (OP)
>jeweler makes more money than the miner who dug up the gold
Not an issue, that's how capitalism works.

>>719166224
I want this to happen and prove that "free exposure" was a scam.

>>719166224
The entire thing needs to fall.

>>719165725
Yeah I'm sure the creator of Suika game just hated all the streamers who shilled his game for free. He almost went bankrupt when nobody bought it too!

>>719166224
>suddenly less cheaters
>no shitty streamerbait games
>less video game drama
>less vtuber and booby streamer
>less fotm slop
>less fake fans

>>719166237
Ok? Did the streamer or manager hold a gun to the devs head and force him to sign the contract? Just say no.

>>719163134 (OP)
Nintendo used to do this! Before I think 2018 Nintendo would claim everyone of their 1st party gameplay and take all your ad revenue. You had to enter the Nintendo Partner Program and they would split the revenue with you. The problem is they would only split the revenue after a few days the video was up and they wouldn’t let you put in privated videos to put it in the system first they “manually reviewed” the videos and it took days sometimes a week. The problem is 99% of your views and ad revenue is from the first day or two your video was up (unless your video goes viral randomly after months or unless there’s a sale of a game or a new sequel anmounced or something). So although my videos got millions of views with Nintendo IPs they would get thousands and I would get dozens of dollars lol it was garbage. They realized it was garbage and scrapped it because people weren’t covering Nintendo games online as much. Now Nintendo videos are really popular compared to the old days and everyone covers them.

>>719166114
>completely disregard fair use defense in the second half of the post
what does being illiterate feel like
>someone looks at your screen
that's in private you sperg. a stream on twatch is public (or so claim the publishers)
>arcades
the games were made to be put in venues. it was done with the approval of publishers you stupid retard.

I'm all for it. total streamer death, total eceleb fan death.

>>719166237
and everyone rightfully relentlessly mocks those publishers
no one likes sticks in the mud who sit on piles of games like dogs in the manger

>>719166224
never post again, zoomzoom. fuck you and fuck your favorite streamgroid.

>>719163134 (OP)
No.
Because a dev is retarded about monetizing, why should other people pay for his terrible monetization?

Streamers make more money because they have multiple revenue sources. A streamer will monetize their merch, youtube video add revenue, patreon, multiple streaming platforms (most streaming platforms twitch allows multi streaming now), twitch subs.
Am I forgetting anything?
Compared to most devs....
>sell the game
And that's it. So no wonder someone who is trying to monetize every possible aspect of their existence is making more money off doing their work compared to a dev who thinks selling a game will outperform that.

>>719166584
>cutting your nose to spite your face
stupid retard, copyright is cancer. don't give corpos more power

>>719166494
>less fake fans
for the love of god please. secondaries are the fucking worst, its impossible to talk about some games simply because of how many retards dont have the full picture.

>>719164375
>except they're showing gameplay, which is not covered by the game's copyright you kike
They're showing the rest of the game too. If they were only showing gameplay they'd have to only show the streamer using the controller, and not the screen.

>>719166720
Copyright is fine what's cancer is patents.
>sorry, i own showing an arrow pointing at the objective you can't use it not even if you write your own code and make the arrow graphic yourself
And yes this is a real example.

>walk in
>pay $5
>go home
>play full game
>return game
>developer only earned money from the initial sale
>middleman profited on game developers work
How do they get away with it bros? Does the magic voodoo copyright have a clause written that said it only counts if you don't have a franchise? Do game developers know that they've been getting away with this for 40 years and counting? Someone's gotta warn them about this.

>>719163134 (OP)
8 years of stable wage pay vs. at best 2 weeks of playing?
Doubt

>>719163884
Copyrights and patents in the US were originally limited to 14 years.
Now patents are 20 years - while copyright is the life of the author + 70 years.
You'd think there'd be more money in patents so that would what kept getting extended, but I guess our politicians care more about the advancement of science than the advancement of culture.

>>719164105
You still have to pay the composer if you sing/play and then sell your own recording of copyrighted music.

>>719166957
Akshually. For something like libraries it has been standard for them to pay more per book. I would assume it was the same for rental stores back then. I did not work at one, so I can't say for certain, but at least with video stores it was that way. So you would pay 4x or more per copy bought, and you would have to keep renting it out to recoup the loss.
So for devs rental stores were not a big issue. Resellers however were a big deal.

>>719166874
>Copyright is fine
anon, we still can't have sherlock holmes stories because the doyle state are a bunch of kikes who sue anyone into the ground despite doing nothing with the character itself

video games havent been effected by inflation because video game players are all poorfags and losers, so inflation would destroy the industry
the average gamer is poorer and poorer every year

>>719167053
its literally only because disney refused to let the mouse enter public domain and lobbied until they were told to fuck off.
thats it, thats the only reason.

>>719163134 (OP)
Sure, I think that's a decent idea since watching is apparently as popular as playing. I suppose the concern would be balancing exposure.

>>719167373
>One single cartoon company wielded more political power than the entire pharmaceutical industry
How did they do it? Why did we let them wreck our creative commons?

>>719163134 (OP)
I think it's more a problem of price strategy. Often times a big content creator will play a game and that will inspire thousands of people to go pick it up, which can be a dramatically substantial boost for the dev. If a big creator is playing your game but other people aren't swooping in to grab it too, either your game is priced too aggressively or your game is just a joke.

>>719165673
Assuming the OP pic is true, I think it's kind of fucked that a game's developer would make less money than the streamer who played it. So yes, there is a problem to be solved.

>>719163134 (OP)
Well on one hand I think no the devs dont deserve that money
But on the other hand I think streaming being a viable job thats paid more than things that actually matter is actively harming society

>>719163134 (OP)
No
not part
Devs should take ALL revenue from streamers

Streaming really is the thing that makes me feel like an old man, I want to actually play the game myself not have my surrogate big brother/imaginary girlfriend do it for me, now here's $100 so you briefly mumble my name and I pretend you care about me.

>>719165874
Those people aren't going to buy and play any game, let alone one they've not heard of because you tried to jew your own advertizer.

>>719167053
Things always start fine and then you realise the slope is infact slippery
Every single time
Regardless of context or what the issue was

>>719165886
Remember when Nintendo admitted they were fucking right and backed off?

>>719163134 (OP)
Yes!
Game devs deserve the money more. They made the interesting game which is the reason people watch.
Respect game devs. Disrespect Streamers.

>>719163134 (OP)
Why are the Japs like this?

>>719167705
Cartoons were a very important propoganda tool.
Especially during the days before the internet where basically all media was corporate produced.

>>719163134 (OP)
Yes
Fuck streamerniggers

>>719167243
>back then
Rental stores still exist today. I used Family Video as a reference because there was one just two blocks from me. I actually worked there Family Video when I was in college. There was no special circumstances. Sometimes the manager would put his own games on the shelf and even went to Walmart to buy copies of Black Ops to put on the shelf. I would pick games up at Gamestop midnight launches and he'd not only pay me for the time, but he'd let me keep the preorder bonuses, like how I got the Black Templar armor in Space Marine 1 for doing pickups. When games stop getting rented, they put them in the front to sell off, which is why the manager put his own games on the shelf. He managed multiple stores in my county.

That Family Video was previously a Movie Gallery that shut down, and after Family Video shut their doors it ended up as an independent store called [my city] Video. They still rent games. But I miss that part of my life where I'd go to work late at night and when the store was empty, we'd spank it to DVD porn in the curtain room or play Armored Core against each other and take turns making shitty mechs in the office. A few of the other Family Videos he owned also turned into similarly-named independent stores though about half closed. Activision does not have a publishing arm that exists to work with single stores located in small towns.

>>719168206
So if I am someone who makes hammers for a living, its unfair that people making houses are making more money off using my hammers to build houses, than I am from selling them?
You are right, I should be getting a cut off everyone using my tools to create something. In perpetuity ofc.

So question, where do you draw the line?

>>719163436
this lol

>>719166382
It's not a scam, retard. Many indie games have exploded in profitability when a big streamer or youtuber shows them off.

>>719163436
SPBP

>>719164668
So if you spend 200M making a movie, all theaters have to do is buy a DVD of it for $5 and they can show it in their every location while giving nothing back to you?

>>719163134 (OP)
Japanese devs/publishers have the weirdest parasitic relationships with the software they help build

>>719168675
>blames japs for Judeo-American laws.
They don't have a choice, it's submit or nuclear genocide.

>>719168728
I worked at a video store my step father owned for a while, so I can assure you that if you go trough legal channels, you have to pay more for a license that allows you to rent media.

But you are right, if you ignore the legality you can make more money. Did you know that you could also pirate games and get them free, and even sell pirated copies? But hey, the pirated shit aint legal, and so is renting out copies of games you do not have a rental license for.

>>719168839
Its spreading to the west.
But damn, I got a glimpse in how asia operates because of v-tubing, and holy shit its dystopian.

>>719163367
yea this

>>719163134 (OP)
streaming is performance art
they already paid for the game or were given a copy. devs don't get paid twice

>>719168816
That's redistribution of the product. Showing yourself playing a game is not redistributing the product any more than it's stealing from Ford to upload a video of you driving around in a mustang.

E-celebs are the same problem as only fans. People want the company of certain people and will gladly spend all their time and money to keep those people fed and prosper.
It's parasitical since these "content creators" are what they are by being "transformative" of other peoples work.
Can't control that, it's a free market. You can't exactly punish that either. Anybody can make money by putting themselves out. You most likely won't get as big as pewdiepie/assmansgold but you can make something, with that just enjoy what you're doing and take advantage while things are still good.

>>719168842
Jap copyright is way more strict than ours and we didn't tell them to adopt it.

>>719163134 (OP)
streamers and sportsball players making so much money is whats wrong with the world

>>719168592
Now that we've finally hit the bottom of the copyright slippery slope and works are finally reentering the public domain, I wonder if we'll see increasing pushes to extend patent protections.
After all, if mere writers and artists get such extensive protections, shouldn't inventors who advance science get even more? Otherwise they might not be inclined to invent, just like they said writers wouldn't write without copyright protections.

>>719168761
if you're talking about FOTM streamerbait slop then you'd be right. The amount of games that benefitted and aren't shit can be counted with one hand.

>>719169001
How do you define the difference? Can the theater owner record himself watching the movie and then play that in his cinemas?

>>719168726
This. Fuck streamers.

>>719163757
>From the dawn of media, if you wanted to exhibit something publicly, you needed the rights holders permission, and that came with a price tag.
What you meant was "from the dawn of modern copyright laws".
Also yes video game companies should kill streaming culture, not because it's somehow morally acceptable but because it would be really funny and disruptive to certain pockets of modern pop culture.

>>719163134 (OP)
Streaming helps sell games, especially smaller ones. If (you) are an indie developer and some big streamer covers it, sure he'll rack up money doing so but it can sell copies for you.

Streamers are the biggest trick the Jews convinced society was normal

>>719169121
If he's providing a running commentary or something, yeah he should be able to.

>>719168730
>if I am someone who makes hammers for a living, its unfair that people making houses are making more money off using my hammers to build houses
Yes it is. You're really missing out. You should charge them for a hammer subscription. Can't you see how they're stealing your profits with their hard work?

>>719163757
I wouldn't even know 80% of games nor play them if I haven't seen them in Youtube or Twitch

>>719169380
Not even close
If you think streamers are the worst of all the jewish blessings then you don't hate jews enough

>>719169380
nah that's onlyfans, mass immigration, and homosexuality. streaming is up there too tho

>>719163367
that'd kill AAA though which is good and force smaller games to replace them

>>719169380
>independent and unaccountable entertainers are part of the kike machine actually!
How?

>>719168631
Devs can suck my dick

>>719169380
ENTER
CENTRAL BANKING

>>719163134 (OP)
Putting myself in the shoes of a streamer, if some faggot demanded i give them money for streaming a product i paid for, i would simply tell them to get bent or stop streaming the game. They're lucky they even get the free advertising, their only goal should be that their game sells many units.

>>719163947
>Zoomers have no money. The average adult zoomer carries more than $25,000 in debt.
I'm soooo glad I'm not one of them, lmfao.

>>719168997
Talking sounds like a performance art with the way you're putting it. Doesn't make it any less pretentious.
Speaking of performance arts, things like movies/tv shows require a special license in order to show them in a public gathering under public performance rights licensing . Considering streaming is not exactly a private ordeal I imagine it's going the way of films and movies in the next few years. It only survived for so long since it's relatively "new".

>>719163134 (OP)
I wonder how many games actually have booby-traps coded in them to fuck over streamers.

>>719163947
>They also have a hard moral stance against piracy for some reason, so watching a streamer play a game is their way around experiencing a game for free.
I'm calling bullshit on this one. My kid, and my brother, pirate whatever they want from sites we trust because we ourselves used to be pirates.

>>719163134 (OP)
it's Phillip's fault

>>719163134 (OP)
Twitch has to pay big streamers money to play games they otherwise might not (called the Bounty Board), because the advertising is that valuable. Now imagine you want to advertise your game via a reasonably sized streamer, and you tell them they have to give you money for the privilege. The developers who would benefit most are going to be the guys who would be willing to waive the revenue sharing

if its so easy why dont devs stream?

>>719163884
>"Copyright is a contrivance that is halting progress in the arts and sciences and only serves big corporate interests in redistributing wealth to them"
>look inside
>the "big corporate interests" are the actual creators of the media being showcases
>the "arts and sciences" is some douche going "WHOAAAAAAAAAA WASN'T THAT SICK" while looking at what someone else made
okay

>>719167243
I'm pretty sure video game rentals were bought at the regular price. It's a big reason why Nintendo made such a stink about them and tried to get them banned.

>>719170172
Because they're spending all their time making games, that you enj-oh wait, this is /v/ continue.

>>719170005
The funny thing about online advertisement is that it's so obtrusive and abrasive that it works against the brand interest. Unless you're advertising something where it's really fucking important and so you don't care if you take a rep hit, you should really avoid video ads. Because you'll end up with people seeing your ad a thousand times in the course of a day and fucking hating you and your product and wanting to destroy you and murder your CEO.

>>719163134 (OP)
I highly doubt it honestly.
If someone has streamed 60 hours in a week and spent 9 hours of that week playing your game; while earning 30k in the month.
That is 30k / 4 = 7.5k/w
7500 / 60 = 125p/h
125 * 9 = $1125 for a 9 hour session playing a game?
30k is more than most of them earn.

Sounds like screeching over the 1% of streamers that get 30k+ sponsor deals.
But even so, that's nowhere near what a dev would be making from the release of the game unless it's a seething literal who indie that released a game and sold 10 copies.

>removing the monetary incentive for game developers until only the most autistic people are left and are in it only for the love of the game

I don't see a problem here.

>>719163134 (OP)
THEN STREAM YOUR FUCKING GAMES YOU RETARDED NIGGERS

>>719163436
Hmmm your making a compelling argument anon

>>719169436
Does the guy driving around in a Mustang have to provide commentary?

>Devs had enough of streaming services leeching off of them
>Viewbotting is getting cracked down
This cancerous subculture can't die fast enough

>>719169496
Mass immigration was pushed by the Catholics

>>719163436
SPBP

>>719171140
No, because watching a video of driving a car is not the same as owning and driving a car. The same is true of games.

>>719171551
Why are you comparing a utility machine to an entertainment product

>>719171332
No it wasn't.

>>719163134 (OP)
Sure, car manufacturers should take a percentage when their cars win a race ...

>>719171606
They are not fundamentally different. Unlike movies and video games, which are. If you watch a movie, you've watched the movie. If you watch someone play a game, you have not played the game.

>>719163436
>Fuck streamers
don't mind if I do

>>719163134 (OP)
Wait till you hear how much more shareholders make compared to both the streamer and the developer combined.

>>719170172
devs get fired the moment the game is out anon. the companies would also blacklist them if they tried anything funny
hell, they never invite devs to events because they want only the execs and PR people to speak to journos, lest devs make a name for themselves

>>719163134 (OP)
Why not just make a game that's fun to play but not to watch in long content streams?

>>719171616
Yes it was Padre

>>719163134 (OP)
Yeah. The current copyright system is too binary, either it's infringement so the publisher gets everything or it's fair use so the publisher gets nothing.

A sensible middle ground would be a compulsory licensing scheme, so the publishers get something but can't control things. It's not impossible, cover songs already have a system like that.

>>719163134 (OP)
Devs are already too concerned with how their game will look like on stream compared to how it will look like for players

Imagine how much worse this would make things, games would be designed primarily for streaming.

>>719163134 (OP)
Yes
Not because they deserve it but because I like it when streamers get upset

>>719171804
That's not true, watching someone play JRPGs is the same as playing them

Yeah. One could argue that streamers serve as advertisement for the game and that more people will buy it thanks to them, but you could also say that they may eat up sales for something more story focused if they are planning to stream the whole game and not just play it once or twice.

The problem is that if revenue share is implemented in some shape or form, the money will never reach the devs unless they are indie.

>>719171332
whatever you say, Chaim

>>719164075
>buy a book for 10 bux
>make a film adaption of it
>make 100 million
Problem, writers?

>>719172597
Face facts Chris

>>719163134 (OP)
"Wanna see how retarded this question is OP? Here...

"Should car-makers take part of a driver's revenue?"

>>719163134 (OP)
Nah that's just pure greed and also infringes on the rights of the streamer.
Devs have the right to protect their product too so they can just request nobody stream their games and go after those who ignore them, but to ask for money from what is essentially a transformative work is just being greedy.
It's also why Hololive also asks for permission for everything anyway and why they adhere to the terms set for the perms, such as only allowing non-profit streams or one-stream only perms.

>>719163134 (OP)
/v/ only agrees with dev because they are japanese
if this was posted by a tranny westerner they wouldn't agree

>>719169891
It's not a moral line, it's just that most of them are technologically illiterate, too retarded to pirate or even to use fucking google, and scared of catching viruses

>>719163134 (OP)
it is up to publishers. they can claim every video made about their game and court will support it in most cases.
nintendo was claiming every video about their games and offered partner program that gave you some kind of % of your income back after taking their share (they dropped it few years ago).
but if publishers all come together and collectively say "yeah, we want that revenue" then first of all they would get horrible reaction from all of the public.
and indie scene would just clap and say "you can play our games on your streams" and it would bury aaaa game industry even harder.

>>719163134 (OP)
>game industry making record profits year after year
>has never been more profitable
>game devs: WAHHHHHHHHHHHHH WE WANT MORE MONEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

>>719169538
>independent
Everyone somewhat relevant is very likely under an agency that handles management, finances, collaborations and to some extent schedules. Medium and plus streamers should be more seen as part time workers than self-employed.

>>719172232
No. Mass immigration has been driven by athiests and jews in all western nations irrespective of whether those nations were predominately protestant or catholic. I will say in the US catholics do also support mass immigration because almost all US catholics are spics, but they weren't here when the policies were created.

>>719172738
If I was a writer I would be thrilled, my book sales are about to increase 100 fold.

>>719171818
That's a man.

>>719163134 (OP)
Fuck no, that's retarded. Should every lets play or gameplay video's revenue also go to devs? Stop being a kike.

>>719163134 (OP)
in japan you can't stream games without permission from the dev/publisher so i don't know what they're crying about
you literally gave them permission to stream your game

>share 20% of profits with the rights holders of whatever you're streaming
>can now stream anything that doesn't violate the tos of whatever platform you're using, with no fear of copyright or dmca stuff, from movies to videogames or whatever
Would this take off or would streamers or rights holders reject it?

Also why do people throw insane amounts of money at streamers instead of buying videogames or whatever?

>>719174472
They're complaining that their evil retarded court system doesn't let them extort foreigners too.

>>719169578
this and fiat money has basically ruined saving, common person nowadays has to know how to invest to at least retain the value of his money

>>719174771
Movie and TV producers would never accept a 20% cut, and streamers would just play other games rather than give up revenue.
>Also why do people throw insane amounts of money at streamers instead of buying videogames or whatever?
The same reason some people blow money on cam whores instead of just jerking off to the exabytes of free porn on the internet. It's also worth noting only a small minority of people actually do this.

>>719163134 (OP)
Once I take over the world I'll force devs to pay everybody who streams their game. No more pirating advertisement for you, codemonkey.

>>719163938
Especially for indie games who would go completely ignored without random idiots on the internet pushing their stuff.

>>719164050
VNs are terrible streaming content, retard-san.
>b-but some more gay shit
You don't know what you are talking about and are therefore - unsurprisingly - wrong.

>>719164187
>you bought a non-exclusive license.
That's what some gay lawyer says. He might be your master, but I refuse to be a slave to his gay word magic. So no, I bought the software and I will try to hurt you in any reasonable way I can if you try to steal it from me.

>>719170172
some do, but it should be obvious that the average game dev is not as good an entertainer as full time streamer

>big publishers shell out infinite amounts of money so that streamers play their games
>retarded indies come in and think that the streamers should be paying them instead
I'm sure the indie scene would really profit from streamers just sticking with AAA trash. Really looking forward to how far a small stuido's marketing budget of $0 will carry them through the traditional avenues for getting the word out.