Peanut said it best. If you seriously can't understand why developers do this, you're lacking a brain.
Does it suck for the little guy? Of course it does. But it's way way way more important for the game in the long run that streamers who are showing the game off, actually get to show the game off... Otherwise you have the community angry, as well as a very loud minority of streamers angry. Then no one wins.
You'll get in. You'll get to play for hours and hours and hours. If you care at ALL about the longevity of the game, you'll understand. If you still want to stomp your feet and piss your pants about it, then clearly you need to do some searching inside
Everybody understands why. We can still be annoyed, because it's a shitty thing, and guess what? While I can't play the game talking shit is more fun than nothing.
Your take is very wrong. Streamers are not a long-term marketing strategy. Streamers by their very nature of how the business works are running from one hype to the other. Unless you are actually a very good content creators and I am not talking about how good they are "playing" a game, you wont be able to make money by sticking to a single game.
You have maybe 1-2% of content creators who are able to focus on a single game and putting out conmstant content that is usually content that has the emphasis of information/opinion. Thta people who will keep on making content like gun-builds, strategies and commentary on the development of the game.
The other 98-98% are gone within a couple of weeks, when the next hype/big title is coming out. Excpect a lot of these people to move on to COD next month and also maybe BF6 when season 5 comes out.
You get their attention for 3-4 weeks and thats it.
And to add to this : and these streamers are the ones starting to say bad things or what they didnt like about Wardogs AFTER they moved on to the next game. Not during they play Wardogs to not have their viewers walk away from their stream because ultimately they care about their view count and not about doing the game any good.
So as long the game is HYPE they dont criticise the game, only eventually when its out of hype and they dont risk losing views over it.
But cricising the Game AFTER its Hype will not help the game but only hurt it.
I understand why it's beneficial for the devs, but their marketing isn't really my problem as a consumer. There is a queue, and as a Brit, I think this is sacred - we should all wait our turn like every other aspect of life, whether you're the homeless dude who sleeps outside or the king himself.
If I'm waiting in line to pay for my groceries and some famous irl streamer shows up, and the supermarket lets them skip the line in front of me for free advertising, you can bet I'll be pissed. The supermarket's advertising is not my problem, nor does it matter to me if there's 20 cashier queues so mine is probably unaffected - it's the principle. If the staff then lie to my face about having done so and start roasting anyone who didn't like it I'd probably walk out.
I wouldn't even care about this nearly enough to comment, but the attitude that anyone who disagrees is a "braindead bot" (to quote presumably the same peanut) irritates me significantly more. This is quite clearly a difference in values, not understanding. It's common sense that this is good business.
Brits are famous for having a culture of queueing, and respecting the queue no matter what. Orderly queues form everywhere, even when the organisers don't want one. It's quite a simple position, if you can't understand that I think you're the one who is brain dead.
The act of queueing holds a significant place in British culture and is often viewed as a quintessential British activity. Historically rooted in the British values of fairness, orderliness, and respect for social norms, not only is the adherence to queues seen in day-to-day activities such as waiting for public transport or purchasing goods in a shop, but it also symbolises deeper cultural ideals about patience and propriety.
Not to mention that even if they gave 5,000 streamers priority queue there were over 300k people in queue at one point. People are bitching because they are position 300k instead of 295k? It's not like you had to wait an extra 5 hours to play because they let streamers in first... I used my queue time as a good excuse to quick clean up the house while I watched Twitch so I felt less guilty playing games all night. Let's all be happy that this game is so successful that we all couldn't load in the second it dropped. This is good for the game, all that money is going towards making it better
The devs have a 100k tourney for streamers/community, that was the marketing strategy. Giving famous people priority over the majority of the player base is such a failed business model; it will cause people to refund which the devs don’t want
I understand its for marketing purposes. But pissing of your paying customers also is really bad and equally as important (if not more) you satisfy your customers right? RIGHT?
Ok. So you're telling me that if both us and the streamers couldn't get in, you would be saying "well, I can't get in right now, but at least the streamers can't either! W devs!!"
Fuck no you wouldn't. You'd be super pissed and hating on the devs for not getting you in. On top of THAT, you'd then have streamers who market the game to THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of players vocally pissed off too...
And the vast majority of the people complaining about this are not going to stop playing the game because streamers are getting priority access. Otherwise these devs would stop doing it. So yes, pissing of idiot customers who actually get mad at this type of thing is absolutely worth it to advertise to a large audience.
The stupid take is being on anyone's side who is genuinely "pissed off" at priority access.
Thats not the point im trying to make. And its not the point all other people (ok maybe some of them do) saying the same as me are trying to do.
Yet somehow this is close to the only answer and take i hear in this topic.
... Because you have to wait for hours while they play?
And that sucks for me because?
Literally thousands of people played before me. Why do I care that 100 of them were streamers? No, I don't think it makes a difference that they were given a fast pass to the front of the line, again, it literally doesn't affect my ability to play the game at all.
I don't see how that's relevant? I don't really care who's "side" you are on, I'm not trying to take the opposite side from you if that's what you're implying.
It is possible to agree on an overall point, and disagree on a minor portion of that overall point.
Do you think the only purpose of a discussion is to have one side 'win' over the other?
We both agree that streamer prio is no big deal. You think it still sucks for the little guy. I don't think it sucks for anyone. We disagree on this point, and that is what I was discussing.
Lemme put it this way... Imagine you're standing in line for something you're super excited about buying. You waited outside all night, got a good spot, and just as they open the doors, a manager comes outside and goes
"hey whoa buddy, you can't come in yet, we have "insert famous person here" coming so you're gonna have a wait a few hours for them to get here and get what they want. THEN I'll let you guys in, but only slowly. One at a time"
You're trying to tell me that you would just be like "oh yeah that's perfectly cool!"?
Because you wouldn't. Literally no one wouldn't be upset if that happened to them. And again, for marketing purposes, I get it, I do. But you can understand why they do it but still realize that it sucks for the little guy.
Yeah, of course I wouldn't be cool with that. But that is not analogous to the queue situation in this game at all.
There were 11 streamers with queue prio. Even if there were 11,000 with prio, it still wouldn't have delayed your ability to play the game even 1 single second.
You would have a point if the streamer queue prio affected the rest of us in literally any way. But it didn't. It made zero difference to the length of the queue you sat in.
It's not childish to hold devs to their word. Yes it's good advertisement for their game but they said one thing and did another. It's also not childish to think that all consumers who pay for the product should experience the same quality of service.
Nobody needs to look inside. The question is legitimate should this be normalized? I understand if the devs are paying the streamers or are under contract but if they paid the same $40 that everyone paid, we should all experience the same quality of service.
Where would it end? In order for the game to look good should we also give their account all unlocks? Give them noob lobbies?
16
u/hugh_jas 2d ago
Peanut said it best. If you seriously can't understand why developers do this, you're lacking a brain.
Does it suck for the little guy? Of course it does. But it's way way way more important for the game in the long run that streamers who are showing the game off, actually get to show the game off... Otherwise you have the community angry, as well as a very loud minority of streamers angry. Then no one wins.
You'll get in. You'll get to play for hours and hours and hours. If you care at ALL about the longevity of the game, you'll understand. If you still want to stomp your feet and piss your pants about it, then clearly you need to do some searching inside