Let's Play videos are great for the gaming industry, specially indie game developers. For example, Minecrafts success was partially due to all the Lets Play videos that were created on Youtube. Its essentially free publicity for video games. The prime example of this would be Seananners[1] who made a video that currently has 1.5M views. In addition, Lets Play videos allow players to preview the game before they buy it to get to know the game and see if its worth purchasing. A trailer is not always enough.
Disclaimer: I launched a website dedicated to Lets Plays 2 days ago (http://commentato.rs)
Maybe if your game is a linear pseudo-Movie that can be fully substituted by a few LP videos, you have something to worry. But that's not LPs damaging the game industry, that's the game industry churning out unoriginal and, frankly, lame games.
I watched an entire walkthrough of Batman Arkham City, but the combat system was so awesome/fun-looking that I'll eventually buy the game myself and play it (probably even go back and buy Arkham Asylum too, as it has the same combat system -- though an earlier version).
That said, I also watched through the entirety of Max Payne 3, and it didn't make me all that excited to run out and buy it. It mostly made me remember how the bullet time became less fun after hours of using it in actual game play (in the first 2 Max Payne games). In reality, it was just the story that would have driven that game for me (and in the end, I didn't really like the story that much anyways).
Also - slightly off topic - I can't tell you how many times a game has lost a sale because they didn't have some sort of free trial I could play to see if it was worth my money.
Heads up for you website! (just as a feedback: why the mandatory signup/registration?)
The only place I mentioned the website is /r/letsplay. You can see the thread here: http://www.reddit.com/r/letsplay/comments/xptph/hey_rletspla...
There are the well known groups (Yogscast; Mindcrack; the machinima groups) and then there are some sub-genres - RacefortheWool, Minecraft tourny, Redstone Development Foundation etc.
A few people noodle around on Minecraft, and then get bored. A quick look through some Youtube let's plays quickly gives a vast variety of game styles to try. People could try "superflat hardcore survival", or have a go at a Vechs map, or include redstone magic wire, etc.
Good quality let's plays enhance the game experience, and open up the game to different styles of play, or to new weird stuff the player might not have known about.
He's right that it happens, but it's actually a good thing.
If a game is so boring and forgettable that watching a Youtube video is an effective replacement, a player who purchases it will not be satisfied with the game. This directly harms the industry, because it disincentiveses people from purchasing more games in the future.
Ideally, you want to match up games with people that want to play them. Crappy games should sell zero units, and people shouldn't feel burned having spent their hard earned cash. Let's play videos aren't perfect, but they're a damn better solution than text reviews or advertisements.
Disclaimer: I'm an indie game developer that's just released the first alpha of my game [1], which has gotten most of its attention so far via let's play videos (made by myself, and others). So I'm biased in that direction, but I would have said the same thing a year ago when I was making Flash games.
[1]: http://www.underthegarden.com (shameless plug)
This I disagree with - the same goes for great games that are heavily story oriented (perhaps something like Alan Wake or Dreamfall). I'm not saying you get the full experience watching the YT video, but I think the OP's point is that you get enough value that the delta from actually playing the game isn't worth $50.
What makes games interesting as a storytelling medium is the degree of interactivity. If a game is heavily story-based but I can get all (or most) of the game's value just by watching a youtube video, is there really any benefit to it being a game, as opposed to a movie or TV miniseries or whatever?
Why not just use the game's engine to tell your story and release it as a made-for-youtube movie? Maybe with some clever narration a la the best let's play creators? I have no idea how the margins would be compared to a game, but if your game is going to bomb because everyone gets all the value just by watching some guy record himself playing it, you might as well be that guy.
You land on a deserted island. Survive the elements, build shelter and craft tools, explore the environment. Find your way home.
When it got to the point that I just didn't really enjoy playing Minecraft anymore, we started watching Coe's Quest. All the benefit if playing Minecraft with my small passenger, without all of the effort, and with a nice narrator to boot.
Since then, I've discovered several games via Let's Play series, including Terraria, King Arthur's Gold, and Dwarf Fortress. I've purchased two of them. I'm not crazy enough to try Dwarf Fortress.
I just didn't think 3-year-olds would understand or even be introduced to possessive pronouns...I can't even conceive the linguistic path it takes from saying the first word and other nouns to understanding possession and "me"...Although I guess "mine" is pretty easy for them to figure out as a way to get things :)
"Have you lost the desire to buy a game by watching a Let's Play Video?"
Yes, I have. I can't remember which game it was, but what I do remember is thinking "Oh, dang, that game does not look like fun to me. Glad I just saved some cash not buying it." So, I would have to answer Yes. However, I watch others and have rebought games including Starflight, Ultima 4, and Star Control 2 from GOG because I watched Let's Play and wanted to play it myself again.
A lot of the time, I buy my games via Steam, GoG, or the discount bundles. On the pages, they usually have 1 or 2 videos and a handful of screenshots. Too often the video teaser they have is a bunch of fading text telling me that the game has "Over 20 graphics shaders!" and some snapshots of concept art and then half a second of "actual" gameplay which shows an external camera pointed at the player doing whatever to show off the graphics instead of the HUD or how the player will actually be playing the game. Those videos hurt game sales way more than any Let's Play series I have ever watched.
I think I have the original lying around (with the code wheel and everything.. I feel old).
However, getting turned off buying a game isn't necessarily a bad thing; it might prevent you from buying a game that isn't any good, or that is hyped by the games media.
So bring on the Let's Play videos, I say!
Maybe it's just my ignorance, but I've yet to see anyone doing really good video reviews.
I'd love a 5-10 minute video that demonstrates gameplay (not just random B-roll stuff, but specific clips intended to showcase what you actually do in the game) and also provides the reviewer's impressions of the game as a whole.
However I find most "Let's play" videos deadly boring , especially for games I haven't played yet. I've never watched a full one. Though sometimes I do enjoy watching parts of the ones with amusing commentary especially for retro games since it's a lazy way to re-live the experience.
Basically, I've never watched an LP instead of actually playing a game and I've actually avoided watching LPs of games I intend to play at some point, just to avoid spoilers. There might be a few people who have but, overall, the marketing benefit outweighs the downsides (unless, of course, you release an awful game that gets famously ripped apart).
Interestingly, Michael "slowbeef" Sawyer, the Something Awful goon who's credited with creating Let's Plays, can't stand a lot of YouTube Let's Players. He and diabetus do Retsupurae [2], which is basically them commenting over other people's commentary tracks and mocking them.
[0] http://lparchive.org/Sonic-The-Hedgehog-2006/
1. You can learn from them if you are stuck. (A good game should always optionally hint you to what to do next.)
2. Platform exclusive games
3. Some people just don't have the time, motivation or simply the ability[1] to acquire the reactive skills needed to progress in a game, just to unlock the next cut scene. It's simply tiresome at some point. Especially story-heavy action games suffer from this.
Basically you know you will eventually beat this sequence anyway, if you put enough dedication into it, but on the other hand the reward of advancing is just not high enough to continue playing. So you stop playing, which is bad for the game, not you.
See Spec-Ops: The Line, Max Payne 3, Alice, Batman: Arkham Asylum, all very good games but at some point just not worth you're time if you're tired of doing the same thing over and over again (mostly shooting people) and you basically just want to enjoy the story at some point.
A good example was L.A. Noire where one could skip the action sequences, sadly the story was kind of boring.
Maybe there could be some kind of "Big Brother" mode where you just hand over the action sequence to some reflex-superior AI which does the nasty stuff for you. Until then videos are simply the best thing. People just like to be passive at times.
It's OK to withhold achievements or other bragging rights from people who progress in that way, but this way the storytelling aspect of single player games are accessible to way more people than they are right now, which would ultimately result in a bigger exposure of those and better games for all.
[1] http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/08/03/ga...
Saying they're ruining the gaming industry is a bit harsh. What's ruining the gaming industry are people buying the same games over and over again without rewarding the developers who are trying new things. Yes I'm looking at you Activision. At least a company like Ubisoft is TRYING to do new things. And then some other big developers like Sega and Square-Enix have fallen on their faces.
A great example is Trauma Center for the Wii. I was busy working on my thesis late at night and would pop on a stream to pass time while my processes ran. Trauma Center was the type of game I would have never picked up, but during the stream, the caster was covering the forensics section of the game. For a mostly point and click game with cheesy graphics, the unraveling story behind a wife killing her family was completely unexpected. Literally, the story drew me in and I picked up the game to playthrough the entire thing.
"Let's Play" videos are still a delicate thing, mostly because you can't just set up a stream and expect money. It requires community building and generally speaking, you're personality has to be engaging enough that someone is willing to stare at a little box of you while you game.
I don’t have to pay $50 for a youtube-video
Here we use the venerable warez defense - these videos are like demo videos in that they make you want to play the game yourself.
I get to see everything in HD, no matter how bad my system is(even on mobile)
So we can get the full game experience, even on an underpowered smartphone over a bad connection. The future is awesome.
I don’t have to go through the hassle of installing a 10GB+ game
The future is indeed awesome.
I can fast forward boring parts or skip parts
I play Angry Birds during boring videogame sections
I can relax after work and don’t have to think while watching or I can choose to figure out the next steps myself and then say “Yes, I would have done it the same way”
We can do the same with video episodes and movies, and many are written to have main characters make dumb mistakes so viewers feel smarter.
It’s just as rewarding as figuring out something by playing myself
No it isn't, and that's why these videos are good for the industry.
That might just be my instinct - when I'm watching someone having fun, I want to participate and have fun too. I suspect many people watch these videos semi-passively while doing something else, which does not necessarily translate into a lost sale. If anything it's hurting TV.
If some games are a lot more fun to watch than to actually play for a significant proportion of its potential player base, then I would argue that's a problem with the game itself. It's possible that "let's play" videos might actually push the industry to make better games.
Overall my guess would be these videos are either neutral for the industry as a whole, or actively helpful by increasing exposure to games and creating stronger gaming communities.
The decreasing amount of demos for games is probably feeding into more people watching LPs or pirating the games. I know a few of my friends pirate games because they don't want to sink £30-40 pounds into a game only to find out they hate it. Even if you've owned previous games in a series you can't rely on that experience to determine whether you'll like the next game, as I've discovered with several games lately.
Also, the author's assertion that watching the LP was a sufficient substitute for playing the game seems like it may not stand up against more choice based games like Mass Effect, at least for me. I could certainly see myself not watching any longer if the person playing started wildly diverging from how I'd react to situations. Even if someone is generally close to how I'd play there would be divergences in the choices.
Those don't represent lost sales, these people wouldn't have bought the game anyway.
Most modern games are just not very fun to play. There's no challenge, because challenge is hard and makes playtesters quit. So let's hold hands.
And then you have the tutorials. Sometimes an entire game ends up as one big game tutorial. Most hardcore players would prefer a quick rundown of controls during a loading screen and then to be let loose and make mistakes. But no, first here's a 30 minute tutorial level you can't skip.
Also in the case of a story-driven game, I might decide to watch a Let's Play of the previous game to refresh my memory on basic plot points.
If anything they are good for the gaming industry.
