Phil Fish compares Youtubers to pirates

[Gemini73]

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/phil-fis ... es/0134240

Good work, Phil.

[KK]

I haven't bought Fez.

[Dual]

I haven't bought Fez.

I just watched a load of lets play videos on the Youtube. For free.

Just to spite the neckbeard twat.

[Gemini73]

[Mafro]

I haven't bought Fez.

Same, and I never will.

[Trelliz]

I got it as part of a humble bundle, giving no money to Phil Fish.

[TheTurnipKing]

I think Phil Fish has lost himself more sales of Fez than Youtubers ever cost him.

[jiggles]

His point is that people are monetising footage of his game without giving him a cut, not that people just post let's play videos. Which, from one perspective, is reasonable enough. You wouldn't expect someone to release a cover version of a song without the original writer getting their dues. But at the same time, you wouldn't expect Lego to get a cut of any tutorial videos posted by someone on YouTube.

I watched the video they buried in the bottom of the article yesterday and it's fascinating, particularly the light it puts on the replies that already exist in this thread:

[KomandaHeck]

Why does he get treated like a celebrity? He's shown himself to not have a strawberry floating clue in the past and he almost always goes back on his comments (Fez will never come to PC) so who gives a gooseberry fool what he has to say anymore?

[TheTurnipKing]

His point is that people are monetising footage of his game without giving him a cut, not that people just post let's play videos. Which, from one perspective, is reasonable enough. You wouldn't expect someone to release a cover version of a song without the original writer getting their dues. But at the same time, you wouldn't expect Lego to get a cut of any tutorial videos posted by someone on YouTube.

I watched the video they buried in the bottom of the article yesterday and it's fascinating, particularly the light it puts on the replies that already exist in this thread:

I think the question is why he thinks he deserves a cut.

The obvious parallel is with movies, but I think that's slightly misleading. A game is a medium. Does the canvas maker get paid every time someone views a famous art work? Phil has, in effect, already been paid for his work when he slapped a price-tag on it and sold it. If he wants to get paid everytime someone uses his work as the basis for a video, well... that's probably do-able with the correct licence agreement when he sells his game. But in many ways, that devalues his game and then he should probably be asking for less up-front.

Either way, with Nintendo, Sony and MS going in this direction this gen, it's probably a timely raised question.

[Cal]

But more importantly: PewDiePie makes $4million a year?

How in the name of all things Holy is this even possible?

[Mafro]

Is he back on Twitter yet after he shat himself and strawberry floated off when someone on Gametrailers criticised him and he pulled the plug on Fez 2.

[PES Fan]

Don't understand the criticism.

When developers see some talentless person like pewdiepie earn £4m a year then they obviously going to want a cut.

It's most likely taking it to the extreme comparing it to piracy. But I do think developers should get a certain cut from youtubers especially for lets plays.

[TheTurnipKing]

Then you're an idiot and you deserve everything you get.

The difference between gaming and other mediums is the transformative nature of gaming. Two people can play the same game and have two completely different experiences or react to it in a different ways.

This SHOULD be the case. If every player is getting exactly the same experience then you have, IMO, failed as a designer of interactive software.

[DaveDS]

Don't understand the criticism.

When developers see some talentless person like pewdiepie earn £4m a year then they obviously going to want a cut.

It's most likely taking it to the extreme comparing it to piracy. But I do think developers should get a certain cut from youtubers especially for lets plays.

The problem is there is absolutely no evidence that these youtube let's plays affect sales in a negative way whatsoever. His point of view, which is certainly not unique, might seem like it makes sense on the surface, but when you break it down and actually think about it, these video's are simply raising awareness for their games, it's free advertising. Instead of paying websites, TV companies etc tons of money to advertise their games, these people are doing it for free for them.

Just think of it this way, are indie games more or less popular now then before these let's plays were around? Nintendo are also perhaps the most outspoken company trying to stop these youtube videos, and have now finally decided they will come up with some scheme where they can share profits with video creators. They've been doing great recently haven't they? I wonder what boost the Wii U would have if more people got to see some of the games being played. Who knows.

While someone earning $4m a year on youtube is ridiculous, that's the world we live in, if anyone feels what he has done is so easy, then the good news is anyone and everyone is free to try and replicate it.

[DaveDS]

Super Meat Boy developers gives his opinion on the subject...

I could see if i wrote some grand story in my game that acted like a movie being upset for people “showing my movie” via YouTube. I guess i don’t care as much because i never write my games like movies, i don’t think watching someone play my games does anything more than make people want to PLAY my games.. because my games were designed to be enjoyed through gameplay… but whatever. I can understand both sides, i personally see it as advertising especially when lets players have a lot of fun with the game. Games aren’t at all the same as movies or music.. so its a bit fuzzy. I think a good middle ground would be simply getting permission.. if people don’t want you showin off your game i think you should have the ability to say don’t post video of my work… but it doesn’t bother me personally.

http://www.junkiemonkeys.com/super-meat ... ue-matter/

[Jay Adama]

Phil Fish is undoubtedly a bit of a twat but I loved Fez and recently bought it again on the PlayStations for £3 odd.

It's like how Braveheart is great but you feel weird watching it now because Mel Gibson is a racist lunatic.

[jiggles]

If the youtuber in question paid for the game then Fish has received his payment

Well, like I'm saying, you wouldn't expect someone to be able to make a ton of money selling their cover of a song and get away with producing a HMV receipt for the original CD when the songwriter's lawyers come looking for royalties.

The problem with LP videos right now is that there are no real laws for it. People can pick and choose their own comparisons to cases in other media, but it's never a like-for-like comparison, so it really just ends up being a whole bunch of opinions and nobody's right or wrong.

Personally, I think they should still post videos if they want, but stop monetizing them and get a real job, but that's primarily down to me being jelly as strawberry float.

[Rog]

It's like how Braveheart is great but you feel weird watching it now because Mel Gibson is a racist lunatic.

Or how Braveheart is great but it feels weird watching now you know William Wallace was a paedophile.

[PES Fan]

Don't understand the criticism.

When developers see some talentless person like pewdiepie earn £4m a year then they obviously going to want a cut.

It's most likely taking it to the extreme comparing it to piracy. But I do think developers should get a certain cut from youtubers especially for lets plays.

The problem is there is absolutely no evidence that these youtube let's plays affect sales in a negative way whatsoever. His point of view, which is certainly not unique, might seem like it makes sense on the surface, but when you break it down and actually think about it, these video's are simply raising awareness for their games, it's free advertising. Instead of paying websites, TV companies etc tons of money to advertise their games, these people are doing it for free for them.

Just think of it this way, are indie games more or less popular now then before these let's plays were around? Nintendo are also perhaps the most outspoken company trying to stop these youtube videos, and have now finally decided they will come up with some scheme where they can share profits with video creators. They've been doing great recently haven't they? I wonder what boost the Wii U would have if more people got to see some of the games being played. Who knows.

While someone earning $4m a year on youtube is ridiculous, that's the world we live in, if anyone feels what he has done is so easy, then the good news is anyone and everyone is free to try and replicate it.

I know quite a few people who watched a lets play of a game like Last of us and didn't buy it. Because they watched all of it on youtube. It works both ways.

Nintendos short comings have nothing to do with YouTube. Also Microsoft don't allow monetisation from their first party games.