Everyone is talking about Google Stadia, but it’s not the reasons Google would want. A producer for one of Google Stadia’s game studios made an absurd and perhaps threatening proposal on Twitter saying streamers should pay developers to stream their games. While the music, television, and movie industries can make a buck off of copyright laws, the gaming industry doesn’t work that way. With how things are now, there’s no reason why any game company wouldn’t want free advertising from streamers or YouTubers. It’s a win-win situation for everyone. A once small, struggling, unknown game like Among Us is now one of the most played games in the world thanks to streamers. The proposal suggested by this producer would only ruin the current dynamic between gamers and developers.
This isn’t exactly the kind of controversy Google needs right now. Stadia hasn’t had the best time getting gamers to invest into the cloud streaming platform, going so far as to offer things such as Google Stadia Pro for free in an attempt to entice players. Google Stadia was launched to compete with other game cloud streaming platforms such as Xbox Game Pass and PlayStation Now, but hasn't quite gained meaningful traction.
The producer who got Google Stadia back in the spotlight is Alex Hutchinson, Creative Director at Stadia Games & Entertainment studio in Montreal, Quebec Canada. Hutchinson stated on Twitter, “Streamers worried about getting their content pulled because they used music they didn't pay for should be more worried by the fact that they're streaming games they didn't pay for as well. It's all gone as soon as publishers decide to enforce it.” He followed-up in another tweet saying, “The real truth is the streamers should be paying the developers and publishers of the games they stream. They should be buying a license like any real business and paying for the content they use."
Why Developers DON'T Charge Players To Stream Games
While Hutchinson was originally referring to Twitch’s newest policy regarding music copyrights, the primary backlash received is because of the proposal that streamers pay developers and publishers for a license to play their games. What make these comments so absurd is the fact that it is normal for game developers to contact popular content creators and give them a code for an upcoming game for them to play and promote on their platforms. It is also common for gaming companies to fly content creators out to play games early and talk about it with their fans. The gamers typically don’t have to pay anything because game developers are giving to them. Even then, many content creators still buy copies of the games given to them to give away to supporters. While the argument can be made that gamers are making money off of playing games, the game companies are also getting publicity, which leads to more people buying and playing their games.
Although Hutchinson pitches the idea that streamers should have to buy a license to stream games, it can be argued that the money from these licenses wouldn’t go to the game developers, but rather the executives of the company. This is why developers benefit at a lot more from content creators intentionally or unintentionally promoting games by streaming or posting about them. The more exposure a game gets, the more likely gamers will buy it, which thus puts money in the developers’ pockets.
Hutchinson may’ve gotten people talking about Google Stadia again, but even Google is choosing to distance itself from him for the backlash he’s received. It might be safe to say that Google has no plan to put Hutchinson’s idea into consideration. Besides, Google has other things to worry about, like how Stadia might be killing the environment. All the more reason for Google Stadia to phase out of the spotlight once again.
Sources: Alex Hutchinson/Twitter, Geoffrey Card/Twitter, Dantdm/Twitter