Cpaz
Member
NOTE: I don't know if this is the right place for this topic, if you are an admin/mod please either move it for me, or say it needs to be moved. I can then try and contact someone.
For those unaware, Gamejolt announced recently that they would launch a "Partners" program. While I haven't used it personally, nor do I plan on using it (as I don't have a need at the moment). I would like to know who would use this, and if so why?
For me, personally, I don't see too much issue with this idea. Have a bank of content for youtubers, and give developer of the game promotion. This could make marketing for developers much easier.
But...
There is one big point that has me concerned:
"Shared revenue"
This is where I think Gamejolt doesn't understand the already existing dynamic between indie devs and content creators.
To directly quote from the page:
First, it sounds abusable. If someone decides to make the purchase from a later date but still watched the video, does the content creator get a cut still? They wouldn't be using the referral link, so i'd think not. Unless they went out of their way to find that referral link again, which is still inconvenient.
Second, why does the content creator get a cut to begin with? I understand that content creation like youtube is difficult. But not only does this take away from the developer funds, it also add inherit and blatant bias towards the content creator. It gives them a reason to say it's good regardless of their opinion. For youtube especially, this is not good. At all. It also misrepresents the product to the consumer.
So. Yeah. I believe the "shared revenue" needs to either be reworked, or removed entirely. Then it just becomes a much more convenient form of press releases through gamejolt, which would be cool!
However with the issues I've listed above, i'm hesitant to support this sort of practice.
That isn't to say that the consumer wouldn't be aware of this whole thing, however, as stated here:
With all that said. Please, if you have differing thoughts, or have thoughts to add, don't hesitate to state them.
Thanks for reading this novel of a post!
For those unaware, Gamejolt announced recently that they would launch a "Partners" program. While I haven't used it personally, nor do I plan on using it (as I don't have a need at the moment). I would like to know who would use this, and if so why?
For me, personally, I don't see too much issue with this idea. Have a bank of content for youtubers, and give developer of the game promotion. This could make marketing for developers much easier.
But...
There is one big point that has me concerned:
"Shared revenue"
This is where I think Gamejolt doesn't understand the already existing dynamic between indie devs and content creators.
To directly quote from the page:
So, here's the thing. Gamejolt is basically saying that (presumably, they haven't provided details) if someone visited the store page from the video/stream's given referral link, they will take some of the funds from that purchase away from the developer/gamejolt (if gamejolt does take a cut, which I will assume they do). This is not the greatest for both ends."Developers in the program will show appreciation for your hard work by sharing 10% of revenue with you on sales resulting from your videos/streams!"
...
"As a partner, you will be able to generate a referral link for any paid game in the partner program. Simply use that link in your video description, or while streaming. Any purchase resulting from that link gives you 10% of the sale."
First, it sounds abusable. If someone decides to make the purchase from a later date but still watched the video, does the content creator get a cut still? They wouldn't be using the referral link, so i'd think not. Unless they went out of their way to find that referral link again, which is still inconvenient.
Second, why does the content creator get a cut to begin with? I understand that content creation like youtube is difficult. But not only does this take away from the developer funds, it also add inherit and blatant bias towards the content creator. It gives them a reason to say it's good regardless of their opinion. For youtube especially, this is not good. At all. It also misrepresents the product to the consumer.
So. Yeah. I believe the "shared revenue" needs to either be reworked, or removed entirely. Then it just becomes a much more convenient form of press releases through gamejolt, which would be cool!
However with the issues I've listed above, i'm hesitant to support this sort of practice.
That isn't to say that the consumer wouldn't be aware of this whole thing, however, as stated here:
So. Ok. Fair enough. But I still think there could be a risk of manipulation on the consumer's part. Seeing that (hypothetically speaking here) their favorite youtuber could ask them to buy a given game through that referral link in the video, rather than a genuine recommendation. This doesn't create helpful comments towards the game either. At least, not from youtubers, given the inherent bias."Gamers will be presented with a message prior to their purchase letting them know the game is part of the Game Jolt Partner Program. They will be aware that a portion of the revenue will go to you as a partner, as well as the developer."
With all that said. Please, if you have differing thoughts, or have thoughts to add, don't hesitate to state them.
Thanks for reading this novel of a post!