Watching Other People Play Video Games
The notion of live streaming or recording video game playthroughs is now a clearly established part of popular culture. It is something you can do while sitting on your sofa, watching TV in your lounge. A decade ago, people were far more sceptical about it and would scratch their head and ask “why would you want to watch someone else play a game”? Yet here we are in 2025 and 15% of YouTube content is about video games. Furthermore 20 out of the top 100 content creators are producing video game related material. As of last year, YouTube videos about games were generating 6 billion monthly views, on average. Where there are views, there’s advertising. Hence there’s the potential to make a lot of money, which only encourages further growth.
The notion of live streaming or recording video game playthroughs is now a clearly established part of popular culture. It is something you can do while sitting on your sofa, watching TV in your lounge. A decade ago, people were far more sceptical about it and would scratch their head and ask “why would you want to watch someone else play a game”? Yet here we are in 2025 and 15% of YouTube content is about video games. Furthermore 20 out of the top 100 content creators are producing video game related material. As of last year, YouTube videos about games were generating 6 billion monthly views, on average. Where there are views, there’s advertising. Hence there’s the potential to make a lot of money, which only encourages further growth.
I won’t waste too much time extolling the virtues of Twitch TV and YouTube from a gamers perspective. They provide free marketing and promotion of video games along with a wealth of useful tips and hints. In many ways, videos can be far better than in-game tutorials. Content creators can also create communities. If I am considering buying a new game, I will always go online to watch some gameplay footage prior to purchase, to see if the game suits my personal tastes. Hence, in principle all of these examples are useful things. The content creators do all the immediate work and provide a service that is easy to consume and essentially free. However, if you examine this “cottage industry” a little more closely, then you’ll find that there are plenty of potential flaws and pitfalls.
Dr Disrespect is a well known internet twat
Content creators are not held to any professional standards or subject to any code of ethics. Hence, things may not always be as they appear and expressed views may be driven by other agendas, rather than being purely personal opinion. Furthermore, the bar for uploading material to YouTube is pretty low. It is technically not that difficult to do and as a result the standard of content varies greatly. The ability to press record and talk is no guarantee of quality. I suppose the politest thing that can be said is that there is a lot of “white noise” out there. The democratisation of video production has many positive virtues. People can make niche market content and connect with others all over the world to build communities. However, there is virtually no quality control and the free market approach leads to a race to the bottom.
Like many other people, I have watched YouTube videos and thought to myself “well if they can do that, so can I”. Sometimes I think with a degree of hubris, that I could do better. So I have decided to carry out a few test recordings of video game footage and see if I can edit together some content suitable to upload to my abandoned YouTube channel. So I have purchased some video editing software and will spend the next few weeks seeing what I can come up with. I have no aspirations beyond this at present. I’m more interested in the process of making videos, rather than growing a YouTube channel. The latter seems like a lot of hard work as you try to identify a target audience and then produce regular content to appeal to that demographic. It is an already saturated market that is very competitive. Plus YouTube places a lot of restrictions upon content that seeks monetisation.
A Year in TV
It is fair to say that we live in an age where we do not lack quality TV. There are numerous shows that have garnered critical acclaim or a strong word of mouth following that are deemed “must see” viewing. No doubt you, like myself, have a long “to do” list of programs that you need to “get round to watching” on top of those shows which are staples of your viewing regime. If you didn’t have enough programmes already to catch up with, we all have friends and family telling us about a “great show” that’s on a platform we don’t subscribe to, that we really need to see. It is quite extraordinary and a far cry from my youth when the UK simply had three terrestrial channels until satellite TV became popular in the late eighties. To paraphrase the former Prime Minister Harold Macmillan “we’ve never had it so good”.
It is fair to say that we live in an age where we do not lack quality TV. There are numerous shows that have garnered critical acclaim or a strong word of mouth following that are deemed “must see” viewing. No doubt you, like myself, have a long “to do” list of programs that you need to “get round to watching” on top of those shows which are staples of your viewing regime. If you didn’t have enough programmes already to catch up with, we all have friends and family telling us about a “great show” that’s on a platform we don’t subscribe to, that we really need to see. It is quite extraordinary and a far cry from my youth when the UK simply had three terrestrial channels until satellite TV became popular in the late eighties. To paraphrase the former Prime Minister Harold Macmillan “we’ve never had it so good”.
Yet there are downsides. The most obvious one is the fact that most people cannot subscribe to all the platforms they would like to and that there are simply too many competing services. So we all make tough choices based on what permutation of subscriptions offers us the most choice and then use other family member’s login details to cover the shortfall. Then there is the concept of “TV poverty” for those on low incomes who have no other recourse other than what is available for free. Internet access is still poor in some regions of the UK, meaning that streaming is not always the best option available. It has been mooted that the UK government intends to phase out digital terrestrial television by 2030 and replace it with streaming exclusively but until the internet divide is addressed i cannot see this being viable.
Freely, the proposed streaming replacement for UK digital terrestrial TV
TV has always had a curious relationship with cinema. In many ways they have been opposites at different periods of time. In the fifties and sixties cinema was considered the cerebral medium and TV was the poor, populist relation. At present it is the opposite. Film is driven by franchise spectacles, where TV is the home of complex, well written dramas. That being said, TV is not averse to creating franchises with an eye on long term longevity. This can come with its own set of problems. I started watching From on the understanding that this complex sci-fi horror drama would not make the same mistakes as the TV show Lost. Sadly the plot is dragging and there is little progression. One cannot escape the feeling that this show with its interesting premise and strong cast, is deliberately being dragged out for obvious financial reasons at the risk of the public just getting bored and switching off.
Another issue is time that elapses between seasons of a popular show. If more than a year goes by then it can be a struggle to recollect all nuances of the plot. Sometimes, I will have to rewatch the final episode of the previous season to jog my memory. On a few occasions, I have watched YouTube summaries of the previous series to bring me back up to speed. I find it kills your interest in a show if you have to do homework to keep on top of it. Sadly, some shows just drag on too long and end up diminishing their brand. It is argued that the optimal number of seasons is between five and seven. NCIS is a prime example of a popular show that has just gone on for too long. The most beloved characters have gone and it currently suffers from very poor writing. Conversely, its recent spinoff show, NCIS Origins, is the complete opposite with tightly written, well conceived and minimalist episodes.
NCIS Origins is a far better written show than NCIS
I enjoy good television but if left unchecked it could totally monopolise all my leisure time. Therefore I will make the decision to not watch some shows as I would rather spend the time on some other hobby. Unfortunately, just like the film industry, the current business model for television has an element of “fear of missing out” built into its marketing. Do you want to be one of the “cool kids” discussing the latest episode of a show and thus be part of a shared cultural moment, or will you watch it a couple of years later and discover that none of your mates want to talk about it anymore as they’ve moved on? Another cultural change is whether we “accept” that YouTube is a form of TV? I regularly watch YouTube on my lounge TV and for many, this is what they watch instead of “old school” TV. I suspect that 2025 will have more changes in store for us and will therefore be an equally interesting year in television.
Twitch.tv
Until recently I’ve been somewhat sceptical of Twitch. I’ve tried in the past to find both content and personalities that chime with me but have seldom had much success. Sadly, all too often I find the humour and general banter of some streamers to be not to my liking. Then there is the issue of channel monetisation. I appreciate that streaming is a business for some and that there is a requirement to attract subscribers and encourage donations, but I do feel that it’s not always approached in an appropriate fashion. Twitch and streaming culture is often aimed towards the younger viewer. Being of an older age group, the light and casual approach to presentation and interaction is not always to my taste. However, I have now managed to find some streamers who are more to my liking and have subsequently reviewed my opinion on the medium.
Until recently I’ve been somewhat sceptical of Twitch. I’ve tried in the past to find both content and personalities that chime with me but have seldom had much success. Sadly, all too often I find the humour and general banter of some streamers to be not to my liking. Then there is the issue of channel monetisation. I appreciate that streaming is a business for some and that there is a requirement to attract subscribers and encourage donations, but I do feel that it’s not always approached in an appropriate fashion. Twitch and streaming culture is often aimed towards the younger viewer. Being of an older age group, the light and casual approach to presentation and interaction is not always to my taste. However, I have now managed to find some streamers who are more to my liking and have subsequently reviewed my opinion on the medium.
For me, Twitch is as much about the audience viewing as it is about the individual streaming. Part of the attraction of the platform is the scope for interaction between streamer and viewers. I find that streams that attract substantial audiences lose this quality quite quickly. The text chat scrolls up at a prodigious rate and the moderators will often struggle to separate appropriate questions and banter from general shenanigans and trolling. I also find that some of the commercial streams and official channels of known corporations to be as bland and as hollow as mainstream television. However, a when you put an entertaining and gregarious streamer together with a small but enthused audience, you’ll often be rewarded with a very enjoyable two-way conversation.
Fortunately, my concerns over being able to find suitable content and streamers has benefitted recently by Twitch adding a “communities” option to their browse feature. In the past you had to search for material you like by game only. The addition of this button (although it is still in beta) means that it is easier to track down streamers with similar interests and aspirations. At present is somewhat rough and ready, lacking somewhat in variety. However, there are some promising categories such as tabletop, painting and fitness. It is reassuring to see this side of Twitch, which for to long seems to have been dominated my core gamers, focused on achievement, speed runs and competitive gaming. If handled properly, there is scope for it to become a much broader media platform, which is possibly what its owner, Amazon is considering.
Finally, it would be remiss of me not to mention the Twitch community that I’ve recently discovered. The Moogle’s Pom Tavern is a collective of streamers “who focus on chill streams where we share positivity and of course, video games”, to quote their website. What I like the most about this friendly group, is their upbeat and laid-back perspective on gaming. It all done for fun, rather than any other motivation. The streams are engaging, with a lot of banter. You soon get to know everyone and it’s very much like a social evening down the pub with mates. A lot of the participant do other creative projects, so they’re an invaluable source of information as well. Overall, it’s a great place to hang out, away from the some of the more brash and bellicose aspects of Twitch. So, if you feel so inclined, do checkout their schedule and come along and have a chat. It may make you revise your opinion on streaming, as it did with me.
Fun With The Jackbox Party Pack 3
For me, the best sort of fun is that which occurs organically and spontaneously. I not a big fan of organised fun, predicated on a predetermination that “everyone will enjoy themselves” (whether they want to or not). Therefore, I’m sure that it will come as no surprise to you that I hate institutions such as Holiday Camps and bullshit like Secret Santa in the workplace. However, this is not a post about the psychology of group interactions and humour but simply a slap on the back to Jackbox Games. Specifically, I had a crash course on The Jackbox Party Pack 3 last night, courtesy of Wolfyseyes Twitch Stream. Let it suffice to say that it was immense fun and I cannot remember laughing so much in a long time. It was a good job I wasn’t on Discord. The games themselves were a creative and enjoyable platform for the fun and mirth but the real comedy gold was down to the crowd of people playing.
For me, the best sort of fun is that which occurs organically and spontaneously. I not a big fan of organised fun, predicated on a predetermination that “everyone will enjoy themselves” (whether they want to or not). Therefore, I’m sure that it will come as no surprise to you that I hate institutions such as Holiday Camps and bullshit like Secret Santa in the workplace. However, this is not a post about the psychology of group interactions and humour but simply a slap on the back to Jackbox Games. Specifically, I had a crash course on The Jackbox Party Pack 3 last night, courtesy of Wolfyseyes Twitch Stream. Let it suffice to say that it was immense fun and I cannot remember laughing so much in a long time. It was a good job I wasn’t on Discord. The games themselves were a creative and enjoyable platform for the fun and mirth but the real comedy gold was down to the crowd of people playing.
First off, for those unfamiliar with the concept, here’s succinct summary of The Jackbox Party Pack franchise, taken from Wikipedia. "The Jackbox Party Pack are a series of party video games developed by Jackbox Games for many different platforms on a near-annual release schedule since 2014. Each installation contains five or so games that are designed to played in large groups, including in conjunction with streaming services like Twitch.tv and provide a means for audiences to participate". Last night Wolyseyes hosted the games from his PC and streamed them. Players then joined the game via a webpage using an authorisation code. For some games joining via a tablet or phone was more practical than a computer. To play you watched the live stream and interacted via your mobile device or web browser. It’s simple and very effective means of bringing people together online as well as great fun. The technology works well.
The games themselves are very creative. Guesspionage is based around making educated guesses about questions drawnfrom data gleaned from the internet. For example, one player would have to guess what percentage of US citizens use a car wash. Once they have made a choice, the other players would have to guess whether the answer is in fact higher or lower. The questions themselves are comically trivial in nature but cunningly contrived because they’re the sort of things that once asked, you really want to know what the answer is. Trivia Murder Party is a stylised horror based trivia game. You get to answer questions and amass money but if you get a question wrong then your avatar will be killed. This game includes some very droll banter from the narrator as you play it. Furthermore, once your character is dead you still get to compete and have a chance to win in the final round. Some of the questions are a little US-centric but that’s to be expected from such products.
However, the game that proved the most fun and provoked the most mirth from the participants was Tee K.O. It’s a drawing-based game, in which you have to create several designs for T-shirts along with some pithy phrases and tagline to go with them. Once everyone has completed several of each, the players are randomly assigned a selection of images and phrases combined into completed T-shirts. These then go head to head and the players vote for which one is best. As you can expect the artwork is often bizarre and the mottos are somewhat left field. I made the school boy error of being far too ambitious with my picture, trying to quickly pen a picture of Cthulhu. Left it suffice to say it was paired with the most random of phrases. We played several rounds of Tee K.O. and I was laughing so hard at times I had tears in my eyes.
I won’t bore readers with an excess of examples that have been taken out of context. Much of the humour and banter you share with friends is purely situational and impromptu. But I will happily sing the praise of these games by Jackbox as they are a perfect conduit for bringing people together online. It was nice to spend time with a diverse group of players from around the world and make new friends. As a result of last night, I have joined a new Discord channel as well as started following some new streamers and twitter accounts. Overall it was a great evening and a welcome change to take part in gaming that isn’t based around an excess of competitiveness, shooting stuff in the face and people getting angry. I really look forward to doing it again soon.
Money Changes Everything
When I look back at the various posts I’ve written about gaming over the past decade, several themes regularly occur. Player toxicity, marketing hype and industry shenanigans are three that never seem to go away. Pre-order culture, fans enthusiasm and launch day disappointment are also perennial bad pennies. However, there is one point that I constantly find myself reiterating. Yet despite its staggeringly obvious nature it is habitually overlooked and ignored. Namely that money changes everything. Regardless of the nature of a situation, be it the cost of an item in the cash store, alterations to a games mechanics or the relationship between a You Tube personality and their audience, if it involves some sort of financial exchange then it fundamentally alters the dynamic of that given situation.
When I look back at the various posts I’ve written about gaming over the past decade, several themes regularly occur. Player toxicity, marketing hype and industry shenanigans are three that never seem to go away. Pre-order culture, fans enthusiasm and launch day disappointment are also perennial bad pennies. However, there is one point that I constantly find myself reiterating. Yet despite its staggeringly obvious nature it is habitually overlooked and ignored. Namely that money changes everything. Regardless of the nature of a situation, be it the cost of an item in the cash store, alterations to a games mechanics or the relationship between a You Tube personality and their audience, if it involves some sort of financial exchange then it fundamentally alters the dynamic of that given situation.
People are motivated to blog, podcast, live stream and make videos for a variety of reasons. Some do it to please themselves, where some like to please others. It is actually possible to achieve both. If you are persistent in your endeavours and communicate with your audience positively, then you will get some traction. But there are consequences to being successful and I’m not talking exclusively about having an audience of millions. Even a modest site such as Contains Moderate Peril can be subject to some basic internet cause and effect mechanics. Audiences, or readers in my case, consume content voraciously. They also foster expectations regardless of whether you’ve directly instigated them. If you create new material daily, your audience will grow to expect it daily. If you significantly deviate from such a schedule there are consequences. In my case, between March and April last year I took a break from writing and as a result my traffic tanked. It has taken a year plus to recover. Interruptions to the podcast schedule also killed the listener numbers.
Now the reason I mention this is because, even before you’ve got to the point of taking money from your audience, you have to deal with their expectations, regardless of whether they are founded or not. I have known several fan related sites that have been criticised for changing direction, deviating from perceived schedules or having the unmitigated gall to cease producing their free service. But the moment you accept money from your audience, then your independent status is lost. You are no longer providing content but a service. Fans are often blighted by a malady which seems to equate support with direct input. Add money to that spurious equation and you will inevitably have problems. It doesn’t matter what route you take or what platform you use to raise capital, paying is perceived by some as buying a share in “You Incoporated”. Thus, we have Twitch streamers who are criticised for how they spend the money they are “given”, fansites lambasted for championing or not championing specific issues. And at present, popular You Tube personality Joe “Angry Joe” Vargas is at war with a faction of his so-called “Angry Army” of subscribers.
I have in the past toyed with monetising both this site and the associated podcast(s). For a brief period of time, I asked for PayPal donations when the hosting costs were getting extravagant. However, that ended when I was offered a sponsorship deal with Host1Plus. When I moved the site in 2015 to Squarespace I decided it was easier to simply bank roll all my projects myself because it just guaranteed that I could do my own thing free from any external constraints. That’s not to say that I don’t support the notion that people providing content on the internet should be paid, because I do. It’s just that the Huffington Post business model and the fallacy of “exposure” has done a lot of damage. Sadly, Joe Public has become use to getting “free stuff” and it’s very hard to try and overcome that mindset. So, for the present I look upon my online projects as “indulgences” and will fund them myself to maintain my creative control.
If one broadens the scope of the argument that “money changes everything” it is clear that it permeates everything in life and alters are relationship with it. In the UK, university education used to be selective and free of charge. However, now it is more accessible but as more people use it, is chargeable via a deferred loan. Some students no longer see education as a self-determined process of personal improvement but simply as the buying of a service. Thus, academic under achievement is seen not as a personal failure, but as a business dispute. Such a mindset shows how money alters the perception of any undertaking. Thus, some MMO gamers want bespoke content that suits their needs, You Tube subscribers feel that they should dictate what content is posted on a channel and the entire field of crowdfunded projects is rife with complaints, acrimony and misplaced demands.
Now it is fair to say that there is nothing inherently wrong with the traditional business and customer relationship, as long as both parties accept it as such. The same can be said regarding the free content providers and their audiences. Both are perfectly equitable arrangement as along as everyone understand their respective role. Sadly, the internet has impacted upon this perception. Fans think they’re on the board of director’s, Patreon subscribers fail to understand what “donation” actually means and support for any undertaking in general is seen as a point of leverage. Plus, any sort of financial transaction means some sort of contract. Adding a legal veneer to a situation only adds to its complexity.
As I’m writing this very post, someone on my Twitter timeline has just tweeted about how their patrons can now vote on what they review next. If they are happy with this situation then that is fine but it highlights exactly how “money changes everything”. Contains Moderate Peril is never going to make me rich or even break even. But for the present it is exclusively my platform and that makes the operating costs worthwhile. If you feel the need to tell me what I should or should not be doing on my personal site then that is your prerogative. However, I can also ignore your demands and tell you to fuck right off with a clear conscience. So, my advice to any budding blogger, podcaster or You Tuber, is to think long and hard before you take the proverbial “King’s Shilling”. A source of revenue may well be all fine and dandy but at the costs of your independence?
