K-Nection Posted December 9, 2017 Share Posted December 9, 2017 This is a bit of a rant but hear me out. There is a lot of things that make me scratch my head about the internet. 1.) Adpocalypse against creators on YouTube 2.) The upcoming repeal on Net Neutrality 3.) Photobucket setting their own user base on fire 4.) The fall of Vidme (If you don't know what that is then that is one of the reasons they fell) 5.) Patreon deciding they are going to make their Patrons pay processing fees for their donations???? 6.) Loot Box Debate and abuse Yup 2017 has been interesting to say the least but just wanted to hear some thoughts from you guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 Number one only matters to YouTube content creators and does not really matter to anyone else. The same can be said for Patreon for the most part, what I mean is people other than YouTubbers use Patreon. I always find it a little sleazy whenever I watch a YouTube video and the content creator asks the viewer to donate to their Patreon. I understand that some creators are trying to make a living but at the same time nobody told them to become content creators in the first place. Therefore, why should I have to bankroll them. Content creators should understand that their might not be money to be made off YouTube and therefore they should not put all of their eggs in one basket unless there channel is doing very well. I really have no problem with Patreon doing that. They are a company and companies need to make profits. Once again people choose to use their services and if they do not like Patreon's business practices, they do not have to use their site. Same goes for Photobucket, I did not like what they did so I stopped using their product. There are plenty of other companies that off the same services that they do. Plus Photobucket kind of always sucked for me. Every time I would go on their the site would freeze up and often crash. That was one of the reasons why I stopped doing diaries on here because I got so annoyed with Photobucket constantly crashing on me. I have heard of Vidme but never viewed anything over there. I did not even know it was going under until I saw it in your post. From what I have read about the repeal on Net Neutrality, it scares me. Granted I am not as educated on the topic as I would like to be and I plan on reading more about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 I agree. The only problematic topic is net neutrality. I couldn’t care less about the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 10, 2017 Author Share Posted December 10, 2017 <p>Ok fair enough but think of it this way. When you are watching game of thrones most likely you are paying a subscription (Netflix if not in the US or HBO) to something supporting that project. Supporting a content creator is the same thing. If you enjoy their content then you can fund it.</p><p> </p><p> As far as adpocalypse is concerned if it truly don't get rectified a lot of those content creators that you enjoy will cease to exist because they don't have the funding to keep going. </p><p> </p><p> I don't understand how it is sleazy when someone is asking for help to fund their content on Patreon. They are entertainers and are asking their audience for funding. When WWE is asking you to pay $9.99 for a WWE Network subscription it is the same thing. They provide wrestling funded by their audience.</p><p> </p><p> As far as the business practice of Patreon is concerned they are a middle man type business. They lost touch on how that works and wanted to tax their donors as well as their content creators. They were solely taxing their content creators in the past but it seems like they are now going to go after their donors as well. This is a very dumb move in my opinion. This is biting the hand that feeds you. Another problem is they are the only company around that is like theirs so when they make changes like they do it hurts worse because there is no other platform to oppose it. There is another platform coming to fruition soon called Drip but it hasn't been established yet.</p><p> </p><p> Photobucket became garbage but so far imgur seems like the best alternative.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 <p>Well... you're not wrong but it's a free market. People move on to something else - imgur in my case as far as Photoshop is concerned. But as a company I don't blame them for asking some money, but free hosting has become so common that we're just not used to them charging for a service, just like the content creators you're talking about. If I would regularly use image hosting I would pay, but what they are asking isn't suitable for the 50 images a year that I'm putting on there just so it's visible on this forum, so I will not pay. If there is no more free hosting then too bad for the people. </p><p> </p><p> So I do agree with your title, but in a different understanding: it's the people on the internet (the userbase), who could to be considered depraved of their sense, willing to pay for stuff like season passes and lootboxes. It's their right though. I will speak with my wallet, but if the majority of players keep paying, it's clear that the "content creators" are acting rationally and I will have to adapt my hobbies and that's completely fine with me. </p><p> </p><p> I also don't get why Patreon would charge users too, as it's essentially the same thing as taxing the creators more. This could comes across as bad business, just like releasing paid DLC locked on a physical disk. It makes no difference except in people's perception of you as a service.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 10, 2017 Author Share Posted December 10, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Well... you're not wrong but it's a free market. People move on to something else - imgur in my case as far as Photoshop is concerned. But as a company I don't blame them for asking some money, but free hosting has become so common that we're just not used to them charging for a service, just like the content creators you're talking about. If I would regularly use image hosting I would pay, but what they are asking isn't suitable for the 50 images a year that I'm putting on there just so it's visible on this forum, so I will not pay. If there is no more free hosting then too bad for the people. <p> </p><p> So I do agree with your title, but in a different understanding: it's the people on the internet (the userbase), who could to be considered depraved of their sense, willing to pay for stuff like season passes and lootboxes. It's their right though. I will speak with my wallet, but if the majority of players keep paying, it's clear that the "content creators" are acting rationally and I will have to adapt my hobbies and that's completely fine with me. </p><p> </p><p> I also don't get why Patreon would charge users too, as it's essentially the same thing as taxing the creators more. This could comes across as bad business, just like releasing paid DLC locked on a physical disk. It makes no difference except in people's perception of you as a service.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Now if photobucket asked for a reasonable price of lets say $20 a year I would have more than gladly paid that because I've been using them for over a decade. $400 a year was a message sent to us all saying that they didn't even want us.</p><p> </p><p> I didn't even bring up loot boxes but you do bring a very valid point. I will add it to the top of the post because that is another controversial issue this year. My stance on loot boxes and accessories is that if I paid $60 for your game then I expect to have a finashable peice of content. Pay to win is cancer to me so if people decide to throw their money at new gear so they can win in multiplayer than those are games I choose not to play. Now if all the loot boxes are just cosmetic than I am perfectly fine with that model. </p><p> </p><p> I also agree that hidden on the disc DLC is crap. This is probably another reason that publishers are pushing for digital only so you don't even have the disc to reverse engineer.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 <p>I hope they are pushing for digital-only. Way less garbage this way, as I throw away everything in the box anyway. Way better for environment too with the cutting of transport. Probably would have other bad consequences, though.</p><p> </p><p> 400$ a year is downright criminal. Had no idea that was the price.</p><p> </p><p> I personally don't have an issue with "loot boxes" as I basically grew up with it, playing MtG. That, however, is a trading card game and you could switch cards with other players. I'm not even touching on the fact that you could purchase individual cards so the gambling part was purely optional. Even in competitions the winner would get first pick of the "loot" in the "boxes" so it wasn't all random. Here it's all just a gamble with no option to craft anything using parts of unwanted content. I kinda liked it in EA UFC 2 just for the thrill of opening them and equipping fighters, but I quickly grew bored with it as there was no way to collect the cards without paying or grinding, which I refuse to do (career is more fun). When you're actually playing other people (I very rarely did), you'll find out it's not fun at all if you're not paying for it (I might've given 'em 1€). But why play it when there's another mode that offers just the unedited gameplay we used to have. No need to customize everything. But see it as a competition between people who pay to enter for the chance to win... nothing but the respect of their peers? I'll never get it, but it must be something like: "I'm a top100 FIFA player!". I guess that might impress some gamers.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milamber Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 <p>I know WhatCulture Wrestling (WCPW) had to cancel their weekly show because of the Youtube debacle, basically because of wrestling videos being broadly considered as "inappropriate content" due to the simulated violence.</p><p> </p><p> <a href="https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/06/05/wrestling-youtube-demonetized/" rel="external nofollow">https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/06/05/wrestling-youtube-demonetized/</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 10, 2017 Author Share Posted December 10, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="milamber" data-cite="milamber" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I know WhatCulture Wrestling (WCPW) had to cancel their weekly show because of the Youtube debacle, basically because of wrestling videos being broadly considered as "inappropriate content" due to the simulated violence.<p> </p><p> <a href="https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/06/05/wrestling-youtube-demonetized/" rel="external nofollow">https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/06/05/wrestling-youtube-demonetized/</a></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Thats funny because they are not giving WWE the same treatment?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mootinie Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="K-Nection" data-cite="K-Nection" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Thats funny because they are not giving WWE the same treatment?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think it's more to do with the advertisers themselves. They likely don't want their brands being attached to wrestling content that isn't WWE.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 11, 2017 Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Mootinie" data-cite="Mootinie" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think it's more to do with the advertisers themselves. They likely don't want their brands being attached to wrestling content that isn't WWE.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Nope thats false. Let me educate you gents on how the current demonitzation works. They have about 8,000 employees watching videos an algorithm tells them what videos are considered "advertiser friendly."</p><p> </p><p> Now if a video gets flagged for demonitzation which is most likely all videos because I've yet to see a video be safe from it now. Then you can opt to get that video reviewed. But it is not put into the cue to be reviewed until it has garnered 1,000 views within a 7 day period.</p><p> </p><p> For small creators it would take them weeks or months to even get 1,000 views so they don't even get a review. For larger creators they can get half a million views before a person is able to manually review that video. During this time their videos are considered non advertiser friendly and the creator makes nothing off of them. This whole system screws big and small creators alike.</p><p> </p><p> Never at any point is an advertiser involved in this process. </p><p> </p><p> Something I do want to point out is the hypocrisy in how YouTube has dived out this algorithm. Casey Neistat put out a video where he was telling all of his audience that any advertiser revenue that was made in the video he was donating that plus $10,000 of his own money to help the victims of the Las Vegas shooting. YouTube flagged that video and demonitized it and even confirmed that in a manual review.</p><p> </p><p> They made a statement that they don't want to want to run ads on a video about a tragedy. But then people quickly started pointing out that Jimmy Kimmel's YouTube page was running ads on his opening monologue video talking exclusively about the Las Vegas shooting. To this day you can go to that video and it is still running ads. Also CNN and MSNBC always have ads running on their videos talking about and reporting on tragedies.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted December 11, 2017 Share Posted December 11, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="K-Nection" data-cite="K-Nection" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Ok fair enough but think of it this way. When you are watching game of thrones most likely you are paying a subscription (Netflix if not in the US or HBO) to something supporting that project. Supporting a content creator is the same thing. If you enjoy their content then you can fund it.<p> </p><p> I don't understand how it is sleazy when someone is asking for help to fund their content on Patreon. They are entertainers and are asking their audience for funding. When WWE is asking you to pay $9.99 for a WWE Network subscription it is the same thing. They provide wrestling funded by their audience.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I do not see why I should fund it or why a content creator expects me to fund it. If someone is making videos as a living they should be fully aware of the pitfalls that come with the job. One of those pitfalls is that YouTube controls how the money is distributed. This is what the second or third time that YouTube has done this now (Messed with the monetisation of videos).</p><p> </p><p> The content creators choose to try and make a living off YouTube, if they are not getting enough money then they must find another means of making money. Knowing how YouTube works and how it often screws with the way it pays people, should be a red flag that it might not be the most reliable way to make a living full-time. Plus having a big channel that you can make a living on is such a shot-in-the dark thing.</p><p> </p><p> I enjoy watching Bearing and he has a good following. That being said there is a smaller channel run my English comedian Chris Dangerfield that is as enjoyable but he hardly gets any views.</p><p> </p><p> My point is you could have a great channel but you might not connect with an audience for some reason. If that is the case making a living off YouTube and the ad revenue from the site is risky. </p><p> </p><p> I have never felt a tinge of obligation to pay for videos that are made on YouTube, when the vast majority of them are a step above or on par with Public Access television quality wise. I think most people would laugh if someone on Public Access were to ask for money to fund their program. I also would never feel obligated to pay the guy in the subway station money who is playing an instrument either.</p><p> </p><p> Oh and I would never pay for the WWE Network. It is total crap. <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> <em>Edited to add:</em> The reason why I find it sleazy to ask for Patreon money goes back to what I was saying previously. Content creators choose to post their content on a site which is free for the public to use. It is also a site which notoriously messes with they way it pays ad revenue to content creators. Therefore, I find it sleazy for content creators to expect me to be a patron of their hobby/job, when they willingly post their content on a site that is free to view.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted December 11, 2017 Share Posted December 11, 2017 <p>I stopped paying for the WWE network this month because I don't feel the month will be worth it and I lack the time to truly get my value's worth. The past months I've only watched PPV's (usually worth the value alone) and some NXT but this month I wanted to give a signal that I don't like the current direction. The signal probably won't come across but it's 12$ I save. (btw: do you get a full month after subscription or is it fixed calendar months?)</p><p> </p><p> As for paying for videos: I'm not doing it, even though I enjoy whatculturegaming and some wrestling shows, but I'm not 'hooked' on them so if they would start charging I'd simply do something else without truly missing it. And there's also the belief that they are gaining some money just by advertising. Even now you still need to view "content creation" as a hobby. If you expect to make money you'd probably be very disappointed. I saw on Patreon that a SFV modder (one of the only ones) was making a huge amount of money (imo) for something people are doing as a hobby anyway. I'm happy for him, but it's a dangerous precedent as he got sued by Capcom. once they saw the cash he made on their behalf.</p><p> </p><p> On Twitch I know you need to hit a certain viewing cap before you make money at all, so all donations go straight into the pocket of Twitch itself, which is scandalous because people honestly believe they are supporting the creator, who will never see the money, even on attaining the required cap (not 100% sure on this last thing though).</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 11, 2017 Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> <em>Edited to add:</em> The reason why I find it sleazy to ask for Patreon money goes back to what I was saying previously. Content creators choose to post their content on a site which is free for the public to use. It is also a site which notoriously messes with they way it pays ad revenue to content creators. Therefore, I find it sleazy for content creators to expect me to be a patron of their hobby/job, when they willingly post their content on a site that is free to view.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well the fact that YouTube has created a monopoly on the video streaming genre is another reason people are upset. They have no competition. These are still donations and you don't have to support if you don't want to. I just don't get the word choice sleazy.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitsukaikira Posted December 11, 2017 Share Posted December 11, 2017 I do not see why I should fund it or why a content creator expects me to fund it. If someone is making videos as a living they should be fully aware of the pitfalls that come with the job. One of those pitfalls is that YouTube controls how the money is distributed. This is what the second or third time that YouTube has done this now (Messed with the monetisation of videos). The content creators choose to try and make a living off YouTube, if they are not getting enough money then they must find another means of making money. Knowing how YouTube works and how it often screws with the way it pays people, should be a red flag that it might not be the most reliable way to make a living full-time. Plus having a big channel that you can make a living on is such a shot-in-the dark thing. I enjoy watching Bearing and he has a good following. That being said there is a smaller channel run my English comedian Chris Dangerfield that is as enjoyable but he hardly gets any views. My point is you could have a great channel but you might not connect with an audience for some reason. If that is the case making a living off YouTube and the ad revenue from the site is risky. I have never felt a tinge of obligation to pay for videos that are made on YouTube, when the vast majority of them are a step above or on par with Public Access television quality wise. I think most people would laugh if someone on Public Access were to ask for money to fund their program. I also would never feel obligated to pay the guy in the subway station money who is playing an instrument either. Oh and I would never pay for the WWE Network. It is total crap. Edited to add: The reason why I find it sleazy to ask for Patreon money goes back to what I was saying previously. Content creators choose to post their content on a site which is free for the public to use. It is also a site which notoriously messes with they way it pays ad revenue to content creators. Therefore, I find it sleazy for content creators to expect me to be a patron of their hobby/job, when they willingly post their content on a site that is free to view. This is exactly how I feel about it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="K-Nection" data-cite="K-Nection" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Well the fact that YouTube has created a monopoly on the video streaming genre is another reason people are upset. They have no competition. These are still donations and you don't have to support if you don't want to. I just don't get the word choice sleazy.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I thought I was clear in my edited comment, if not this is why I chose to use the word... </p><p> </p><p> Content creators willingly go on YouTube to post content. YouTube is a site that almost anyone (I say almost because I am sure there are countries where people are not allowed to view the site, I do not want someone coming on here and pointing that out) in the world can view for free. It is also a site that notoriously messes with how it doles out ad revenue. I assume most potential content creators are at least aware of the fact that they may not make enough money in order for them to make videos full-time on the site.</p><p> </p><p> Therefore, I find it sleazy for people to ask for money on a site that is free for everyone to watch. If someone is not making enough money off ad revenue then maybe it is time for them to find something different. They should not expect or request others to subsidize their hobby.</p><p> </p><p> Now I understand that it is a request and that people are trying to make a living off it. That being said nobody is owed a job and to ask people for free money is just off putting to me.</p><p> </p><p> I feel the same way about GoFundMe as well. I cringe anytime I see someone talk about having a GoFundMe page up. Granted a lot of people are doing it for good causes but there are also a ton of grifters on there.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I thought I was clear in my edited comment, if not this is why I chose to use the word... <p> </p><p> Content creators willingly go on YouTube to post content. YouTube is a site that almost anyone (I say almost because I am sure there are countries where people are not allowed to view the site, I do not want someone coming on here and pointing that out) in the world can view for free. It is also a site that notoriously messes with how it doles out ad revenue. I assume most potential content creators are at least aware of the fact that they may not make enough money in order for them to make videos full-time on the site.</p><p> </p><p> Therefore, I find it sleazy for people to ask for money on a site that is free for everyone to watch. If someone is not making enough money off ad revenue then maybe it is time for them to find something different. They should not expect or request others to subsidize their hobby.</p><p> </p><p> Now I understand that it is a request and that people are trying to make a living off it. That being said nobody is owed a job and to ask people for free money is just off putting to me.</p><p> </p><p> I feel the same way about GoFundMe as well. I cringe anytime I see someone talk about having a GoFundMe page up. Granted a lot of people are doing it for good causes but there are also a ton of grifters on there.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> And I will clarify of why I find it off putting that you use the word sleazy</p><p> </p><p> Definition of Sleazy (of a person or situation) sordid, corrupt, or immoral.</p><p> </p><p> You stated your reasoning but none of that aligns with the definition of sleazy unless you actually think they are sordid, corrupt or immoral by trying to find funding to make their content.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitsukaikira Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="K-Nection" data-cite="K-Nection" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>And I will clarify of why I find it off putting that you use the word sleazy<p> </p><p> Definition of Sleazy (of a person or situation) sordid, corrupt, or immoral.</p><p> </p><p> You stated your reasoning but none of that aligns with the definition of sleazy unless you actually think they are sordid, corrupt or immoral by trying to find funding to make their content.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> "That being said nobody is owed a job and to ask people for free money is just off putting to me."</p><p> </p><p> That sums it up. You're not entitled anything and to act like it by asking for donations is pretty immoral.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn michaels Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="mitsukaikira" data-cite="mitsukaikira" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>"That being said nobody is owed a job and to ask people for free money is just off putting to me."<p> </p><p> That sums it up. You're not entitled anything and to act like it by asking for donations is pretty immoral.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Kinda have to agree with this one. When I see guys hosting multiplayer servers and receiving hundreds of dollars for it, or guys hosting youtube channels and asking to be payed for it, more than that, expecting to be payed for it...I mean, it is kind of sleezy. It does seem like entitlement. Granted, no one is forced to pay, only those who want give money, but I fail to see why creators doing a hobby expect to get money for it. If they have a product they wanna sell, they can do it like everyone else and actually sell something to earn money.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 I don't see anything wrong with it. It's begging, except those that do don't realize it. People on the street do it as well. Makes the donators feel better about themselves. Nothing wrong with that except it positively enforces them to keep it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="mitsukaikira" data-cite="mitsukaikira" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>"That being said nobody is owed a job and to ask people for free money is just off putting to me."<p> </p><p> That sums it up. You're not entitled anything and to act like it by asking for donations is pretty immoral.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Ok this is becoming a stalemate but I'll offer one last point. If someone is maiking video content and saying the words if you like more of this content you can help support it here and gives a link. How is that asking for free money? To me that is sounding like he is looking for funding to keep making content not give me free money for being a lazy bum.</p><p> </p><p> Ok lets say that Adam left Grey Dog and went independent again. He starts a kickstarter for to fund his next TEW like game would you guys consider that sleazy? I'm just curious of where the line is drawn at this point.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I don't see anything wrong with it. It's begging, except those that do don't realize it. People on the street do it as well. Makes the donators feel better about themselves. Nothing wrong with that except it positively enforces them to keep it up.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The difference between that bum on the street and a video creator is that guy who is shooting the video is actually doing something (in most cases) to entertain his or her audience.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="shawn michaels 82" data-cite="shawn michaels 82" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Kinda have to agree with this one. When I see guys hosting multiplayer servers and receiving hundreds of dollars for it, or guys hosting youtube channels and asking to be payed for it, more than that, expecting to be payed for it...I mean, it is kind of sleezy. It does seem like entitlement. Granted, no one is forced to pay, only those who want give money, but I fail to see why creators doing a hobby expect to get money for it.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> How is it sleazy if this person is hosting a server that people use and he gets paid for it? Does the person have to have the word LLC or corporation behind their name before it is not sleazy? Also why can't your job be your hobby as well? Almost everyone you see on WWE watched it as a hobby and love what they do. My cousin is an artist that went to school and got his degree and now gets paid by drawing all day. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If they have a product they wanna sell, they can do it like everyone else and actually sell something to earn money.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> But if they are providing a service as in entertainment or news then how is that different? This is the mindset that I'm talking about. We would watch these people for hours on end and then people would be "put off" that they make money sinking in their time providing people with content to watch. This blows my mind honestly.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitsukaikira Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Personally, I find crowdfunding to be pretty awkward, entitled, ...I guess sleazy. So, yeah. If Adam left Grey Dog and Kickstarted a new TEW, I would not support it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="mitsukaikira" data-cite="mitsukaikira" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Personally, I find crowdfunding to be pretty awkward, entitled, ...I guess sleazy. So, yeah. If Adam left Grey Dog and Kickstarted a new TEW, I would not support it at all.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Would it be better if he had just one backer like EA that would try to install some sort of pay to win lootbox multiplayer in it then? That is why crowdfunding is getting more popular is because you don't have big companies pouring in their influence. It is literately the fans funding the creator's vision.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitsukaikira Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 <p>I don't care about "big company" influence. What is that, exactly? Big companies come with a lot of people who have a lot of experience. I work for a "big company". Blizzard is my favorite game dev company, they're a "big company". </p><p> </p><p> Do I like EA? No, but this isn't about EA.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Nection Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="mitsukaikira" data-cite="mitsukaikira" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="44450" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I don't care about "big company" influence. What is that, exactly? Big companies come with a lot of people who have a lot of experience. I work for a "big company". Blizzard is my favorite game dev company, they're a "big company". <p> </p><p> Do I like EA? No, but this isn't about EA.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Ok so big companies are not sleazy? I just wanted to see where the line was.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.