$69 for the BLOK. How much do they pay you for the Grumpy Gamer post I wonder! 😊
As a note aside, it reminds me that some of these 'content providers' do not only do that for charity or to be of service to the community. I'm pretty sure some of them make a decent living out of it. I haven't anything against that, quite the contrary, but it's also nice to keep that in mind when people accuse each other of disrespecting such 'selfless' content creators. It's like being unable to criticize the sale pitch of a car seller because, hey, the guy makes some real effort in informing you about that damned airbag, and that bow tie doesn't fold itself.
(Please all see this is as a jest, not a provocation.)
I think it's very interested though, and quite revealing. I also appreciate that Tantrum House is rather transparent about that.
Just to be clear: I do appreciate the YouTube contents of the paid channels (although very occasionally as aside from the BLOK video that I always look forward to, I do not watch anything). I think most of them are passionate and sincere. They are competent advisers and I have nothing against the fact that they get paid for that. It seems only fair.
However, I feel a bit uncomfortable when this paid content is treated as a dedication to the community that we should unequivocally and unanimously praise and be grateful for. When money gets involved, the boundary between 'informative advertisement' (as does the Solitaire Times), which is truly and preciously valuable, paid or not paid, and 'a deliberate attempt to influence you towards purchase' becomes blurry. Because of this blurriness, we are in the position where a content that is engineered to increase the likelihood of you performing a given behavior is treated as something that is selflessly offered to you. Which of course seems a bit weird to me. But in the end I don't care much!
I am all for expressing preferences and opinions, regardless of whether the 'content creator' is paid or not. If someone doesn't like what JW and I are doing, they have every right to say so. The same goes if we received money. And let's admit it, no one is doing things selflessly and for the greater good of the community. There is either an inner need for expression (in the case of free content) or a need for income.
For me, the only thing that changes when someone is getting paid is that their opinion on the merits of a game cannot be trusted.
I agree about 360$ being reasonable for a video. 59$ for BLOK seemed a bit too much at first, but then thousands of people will see it, so I guess it's worth it.
$69 for the BLOK. How much do they pay you for the Grumpy Gamer post I wonder! 😊
As a note aside, it reminds me that some of these 'content providers' do not only do that for charity or to be of service to the community. I'm pretty sure some of them make a decent living out of it. I haven't anything against that, quite the contrary, but it's also nice to keep that in mind when people accuse each other of disrespecting such 'selfless' content creators. It's like being unable to criticize the sale pitch of a car seller because, hey, the guy makes some real effort in informing you about that damned airbag, and that bow tie doesn't fold itself.
(Please all see this is as a jest, not a provocation.)
Re: grumpy 😄
Re: side note, this is why I didn't share this on my 1PG threads. 😉
I think it's very interested though, and quite revealing. I also appreciate that Tantrum House is rather transparent about that.
Just to be clear: I do appreciate the YouTube contents of the paid channels (although very occasionally as aside from the BLOK video that I always look forward to, I do not watch anything). I think most of them are passionate and sincere. They are competent advisers and I have nothing against the fact that they get paid for that. It seems only fair.
However, I feel a bit uncomfortable when this paid content is treated as a dedication to the community that we should unequivocally and unanimously praise and be grateful for. When money gets involved, the boundary between 'informative advertisement' (as does the Solitaire Times), which is truly and preciously valuable, paid or not paid, and 'a deliberate attempt to influence you towards purchase' becomes blurry. Because of this blurriness, we are in the position where a content that is engineered to increase the likelihood of you performing a given behavior is treated as something that is selflessly offered to you. Which of course seems a bit weird to me. But in the end I don't care much!
And one last thing (after that I'm done, promised!): I don't think their prices are crazy. $360 for a preview video seems reasonable to me.
I am all for expressing preferences and opinions, regardless of whether the 'content creator' is paid or not. If someone doesn't like what JW and I are doing, they have every right to say so. The same goes if we received money. And let's admit it, no one is doing things selflessly and for the greater good of the community. There is either an inner need for expression (in the case of free content) or a need for income.
For me, the only thing that changes when someone is getting paid is that their opinion on the merits of a game cannot be trusted.
I agree about 360$ being reasonable for a video. 59$ for BLOK seemed a bit too much at first, but then thousands of people will see it, so I guess it's worth it.