70 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @der_ketzer said: Yes. And if they are willing to pay you nothing is wrong with it.

    Well, I am not willing to pay someone (in money or time watching ads) so that I can watch them play games and talk while they do so. Not on Youtube.

    If Google needed the money to keep the site going, that's one thing, but to give money to NintendoCapriSun or Chocobotamer for uploading stuff to Youtube is silly.

  • Being a professional Youtube LPer is no different then singing a song you didn't write

    You are the person who makes it entertaining and many LPers spend all day recording and editing videos
    The amount of work some of them put in means a lot of them to do what they love which is making videos means they have to quit their job and often get less than minimum wage as they spend all their time making videos and then lose 1/2 their income to adblock.

    You could argue any job where you don't have a regular income is a hobby but Youtubers But if youtubers like NerdCubed spend hours making and recording game play videos finding new ways to experience the game they should be paid for their work...

  • @Chyron8472 said: That's like if I invited people over to my house to watch me play a video game, and I charged by the head for it because people think I'm funny.

    How about if I got into building and flying remote controlled airplanes, and charged people for coming to watch me fly them? (by myself, not at an official event that actually cost someone money to organize.)

    It's a hobby, not a job. People play games because they are fun, and they make LP's because they enjoy it.

    In fact, I don't think I'd ever pay money just to watch a Rifftrax, either.

    But it isn't like that either. It is just simple ad that barely wastes your time. If you don't think that the youtubers deserve that 30 seconds, then you clearly don't like their content and shouldn't be watching it. It's a dick move to take someone's product(the video) but then not pay for it because you don't like that they are making money off of it. I'd be furious if this was my job(for whatever reason) and people like you used adblock just because they didn't like that this was my job.

  • @Gman5852 said: But it isn't like that either. It is just simple ad that barely wastes your time. If you don't think that the youtubers deserve that 30 seconds, then you clearly don't like their content and shouldn't be watching it. It's a dick move to take someone's product(the video) but then not pay for it because you don't like that they are making money off of it. I'd be furious if this was my job(for whatever reason) and people like you used adblock just because they didn't like that this was my job.

    You have a point there but it is still not a product because it would go against the definition itself. Thing is. If he does not actually do purchases based on advertisement he/she sees, then he/she wastes advertisers money by not buying everything they show you and pay to show for you. Unless you can afford to buy everything you see as an advertisement on Youtube, you are wasting advertisers money period and yet that is not morally wrong.

  • @Clord said: You have a point there but it is still not a product because it would go against the definition itself. Thing is. If he does not actually do purchases based on advertisement he/she sees, then he/she wastes advertisers money by not buying everything they show you and pay to show for you. Unless you can afford to buy everything you see as an advertisement on Youtube, you are wasting advertisers money period and yet that is not morally wrong.


    It is the advertisers choice to spend money advertising whilst it is not the Youtuber's choice whether or not someone chooses to use Adblock...

  • Again, I think this is much nicer than Nintendo turning into Crown Prince Dickface and claiming copyright and having LP's taken down, which they would technically be within their rights to do so.

  • @Shadowknight1 said: Again, I think this is much nicer than Nintendo turning into Crown Prince Dickface and claiming copyright and having LP's taken down, which they would technically be within their rights to do so.

    Just because they could have done something worse, doesn't mean they get off the hook.

  • @Gman5852 said: Just because they could have done something worse, doesn't mean they get off the hook.

    If you say so. I happen to agree with the idea that LP's should be a hobby, not a source of income. This isn't even like movie or game reviews like the Nostalgia Critic or the Angry Video Game Nerd. This is strictly gameplay with someone talking over it. Not sketch comedy that's written.

  • @Shadowknight1 said: If you say so. I happen to agree with the idea that LP's should be a hobby, not a source of income. This isn't even like movie or game reviews like the Nostalgia Critic or the Angry Video Game Nerd. This is strictly gameplay with someone talking over it. Not sketch comedy that's written.

    Basically that. The thing is, sure, it requires skills to be able to give an engaging LP, and it somewhat requires effort in that one has to actually play the game, but it's nowhere near a review, where the words are carefully picked out and written down beforehand. LPs always run on a hit-and-miss basis. It's why LP highlights exist, to get the comedy out of the shit.

  • I think the barrier needs to get so high that those who want ad payments on their LPs can enforce them even when you have ad blocker. It shouldn't be up to people to choose whether a person has a right to making money or not. Switch over from flash to HTML5 encoding and it will be asker for people to enforce these pay walls.

Add Comment