Riot's New Weird Streaming Policy Explained
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 бер 2024
- Join in to get unique emotes, badge and spoilers for future videos:
/ @necrit
MERCH:
► www.designbyhumans.com/shop/N...
Links:
► / necrit94
► / necrit94
► / necrit94
► / discord
► / necrit94 - Ігри
Starts working at Riot -> start streaming for fun -> have a massive followage -> Leave riot -> Start monetizing
Yeah... Blaustoise comes to mind as someone who managed to do that.
Once you leave Riot, you will also suffer from lower viewership once people notice your content would not be interesting without the current knowledge about the internal state of the company.
Or you can just stream not RIot games while still working there
@@bibooooooyyyy677 May be true, but anything is better than nothing
pretty sure working at Riot is already better than streaming for most people
Take a shot for every time riot made the community roll their eyes
Gonna sue you for causing alcoholic comas
True
this is some heavy withdrawals
My eyes are in the back of my head but I don’t know if it’s from the rolling or the shots, pls send help
im dead, what now?
The slaves cannot use their chains to make themselves free.
Meanwhile Sylas
its not that serious XDD
@@the_normalgamer great minds thinks alike
Master got me working, someday master set me free
@@faustsies1366 Then why aren't they allowed to do that?
You just made riot games' HR department's work much easier . When employees ask for a reason , they will link your video
Except HR works for Riot and doesn’t care about employees as much.
Haven't been following this. However in the past Wizards of the Coast employees that were streamers before literally were not allowed to stream anymore while under employment. Most of reason we heard was because they have "insider" knowledge and could it could effect the game itself. It was a conflict of interest to have them generate revenue from a game they could control in some way. In theory with MTG there is also some financial gains to be had because their digital cards on MTGO can be traded via 3rd party sources for IRL money etc.
Yes, i can see the logic behind it.
We'll see how it goes. I think they'll get relentless backlash no matter if it's a eational decision with precedents or not though.
Hating riot has been the flavour of the month for ten years lol.
This person gets it. ^_^
Riot mad Mortdog making money off the game he designed
Look at me I’m copy and pasting league characters into a slightly different game. Much design!
@@HeartLancer this dood has never played TFT in his life xD
mortdog doesn't make the game alone. And he already get compensation for his work which is the salary he had. Also he already said that he stream for fun and donate all of the money. Hence nothing change for him
@@HeartLancer game design is focused on the systems, not the assets, animations or effects. So essentially... yes, it is much design! In fact, you could say that's actually his job! Gold star for you!
Mortdog himself said it's not a new policy and it doesn't affect his streams.
Mortdog deserve's that money.
One of the best game dev ever
This is literally because of mort
best game devs ever? Stop glazing and slobbering over his rooster man wrt
bro has reading issues, he said one of. not the.@@debodatta7398
@@debodatta7398 Try being a positive person for once, it'll make you happier.
@@tylerdavisson355 i mean hes right, plus nothing wrong about being realistic
Theory number 5 : Riot is protecting themselves against accusations of corruption.
A big difference between streaming, which Rioters can't monetize, and videos, which Rioters apparently can monetize, are the donations. If someone where to go to Mortdog, and give him 10000$ asking for the one unit he hates to get nerfed. From now on, if that unit get ever nerfed, people will argue that it's because of that donation, and not because the team just thought it was a good balance change. Same goes for people asking for a specific champion to get a skin next, or for any balance change.
So it makes sense that Riot would stop their employees from being able to receive donations while streaming their games to cull any accusation of corruption from the community. And it would also make the policy actually attain it's goal, unlike any of the other theories.
This is purely there to prevent conflict of interest issues in the future. It's pretty obvious, it isn't some cryptic thing we all need to figure out. If someone works at a company, they could influence things in the back end to their advantage in the front end. It's not very complicated. It makes perfect sense.
donations can be made on any twitch stream regardless of if its monetized or not. especially through patreon. what this does is remove ad revenue
This was the first thing my mind went to.
But someone can still donate those $10k with that same question, even if they are not streaming Riot games.
Actually not a bad theory: that could totally be the reason.
There is also the envy between colleagues. Some people can't handle the fact that someone below them or equal to them is earning far more money and admiration despite that person doing an extra job (streaming). Should the streaming colleague then get promotions within the company others may feel bitter and assume its because they stream and they're popular. These are dumb reasons but from all the jobs i've worked, this seems like a real possibility. Also given Riots treatment of others its also likely that they don't like that they're making money off of their IP whilst working for the company - similar to how Marc Merill got bitter about a pro player complaining about the game and said something along the lines of "congrats on the career you have on the game we made".
lets be fair if it wasnt for peopel enjoying pro plays and getting better at the games then their game would be dead in the water, gd luck having a game when no ones plays it
It's ONE Mortdog stream playing dota underlords and this policy goes bye bye
He would never do it so im sure they arent worried.
Doubt it...
Mortdog is nice and all but he is the tft guy.
And i think so long as he doesn't split stream attention from other tft creators or tournaments, riot wouldn't mind wether he has less, more or the same views. I think they just don't want the attention to their game veing absorved by one or two devs who also do it without any ruleset so to speak (hence why we have phreak for example haha)
We can see it as misguided or wathever, but i can see the logic behind it, they may do a 180 on it, but we d9n't know for sure, and if it happens it may very well be out of raw backlash and not necesarily anything more practical than that
@@magical571 It have more to do with conflict of interest than stealing spotlight from other CC
03:42 Hey that's me at the top right corner 😂
9:31 "I think I tricked them pretty well" LOL
These changes probably come from a concern of conflict of interest or that devs will say stuff they're not supposed to because there's a monetary incentive to doing so (i.e. they'll go viral announcing things that maybe don't exist or leaking things early)
This person gets it. ^_^
That's what NDA is for. It's to prevent people from leaking the game that if they do it there will be consequences.
I guess...but they can still stream the games and talk about the content still... this doesn't really stop that.
That would be illegal due to NDA reasons
@@Plonom that really depends on the NDA. And an NDA doesn't prevent an employee from going viral saying things that aren't true. A dev could promise a ton of shit for content, go viral and then leave the player base disappointed and angry at the company when none of what was stated turns out to be true. They could also vaguely hint at future projects without specifically breaching their NDA. The new terms reduce the amount of incentive that people have to directly or indirectly cause this kind of harm to the company, and I don't think anyone viewing it as evil or oppressive is doing so with an objective gaze.
Meanwhile Warframe by Digital Extremes has fans input create new Warframes and even have accepted fan art.
Then there is brawl stars, supercell has an skin competition and the skin with the most votes gets in the game
If I remember correctly, somewhere in the terms of use Riot says that whenever you do something fanmade about their games, they can use it for future projects and you cant sue them
Still people will try. Every company, no matter if they have every kind of protection they have for being sued, wants to avoid legal litigation as much as possible.
yeah The Pokemon Company also has that, to be honest i think most big companies have those terms
Not everything in the terms of service can be enforced the way it is stated, especially creative works like fanart. They may use the TOS to stop you from monetizing it, but if they try to make money off of it, you could still sue them for using your work.
Thats standard practice as a result of DOTA. DOTA started as a warcraft custom mod and grew into its own massive thing blizzard made no money on. No company will ever allow that to happen again.
Its also not legally enforceable as that clause breaks nearly every single labor law in the world. A contract or agreement can't be enforced if it breaks the law.
So while it is in there, there's no way for riot to actually act on it.
9:09 one of maybe the main fuel to this argument is "u can type Karthas ult"
Funny part is that back in the days, Riot hired me to do their login screens, then they disbanded the mograph team just so eventually they could hire all of us again because they dont have a mograph team anymore 🤣
Mortdog got mortdogged
Sounds like Riot just made an incentive base bonus added to their payroll. If these employees steams and gets big they can earn extra bonuses on their pay checks. This would make sense to try and get other employees to stream for bonus money as its free advertisement.
Yeah......... that is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. No offense to you but if that is the reason Riot is doing this they are rtarted (youtube rules). There is not a single world where working for free, streaming for hours and hours AFTER your day job btw, that people would just put a smile on their face and say "yeah, you're right, this side hustle that is entirely separate of Riot Games and is literally me as an individual NOT as a Riot Games employee, because I'm not on the clock at work, streaming in my free time shouldn't be monetizable for me." Riot Games makes more from even the worst skin releases in League than 99.999999% of Rioters that stream would make in months from streaming to 10-50 viewers. Outside of people like Riot August there is no one that watches Rioter streams. If this is their way of trying to add a pay bonus incentive to their workforce it is about the most absurd and dystopian way to do it. Literally saying to your employees "Don't try to explore other avenues of income while literally giving us, Riot Games, free advertisement." Like you mention bonus money for free advertisement like that isn't quite literally what they would be doing streaming League/Valorant/TFT/etc. anyways. Last time I checked it costs Riot Games $0.00 for their employees to create a Twitch account, download Streamlabs, click start stream and broadcast their computer to Twitch via Amazon servers that are footing the costs of hosting.
However, if a company allows you to keep streaming and on the back end offers a bonus as long as you look normal and not side charging funds from our player base is normal without the streaming but maybe we're seeing the future...@@YuYuYuna_
@@YuYuYuna_ couldn't finish reading your reply because it sounded too dumb
i found it okay@@Zuvas
I would only watch mortdog for his behind the scenes knowledge
More likely Riot doesn't want to be associated with any endorsements an employee might have.
I remember Mortdog got asked by his chat that, if he was offered a blankcheck in another game company, would he drop TFT & Riot games to go work on another game in said company...
And his answer was basically yes and no.
He said that he currently has a good thing going on with riot but if someone else had a great vision and offered him a lead role in it, then he'll consider it.
So, they are going to kill one of their biggest sources of advertisement for their game?
Not really. I don't even watch league or tft livestreams. People like necrit come first in my list. Then guys like phreak lol, but those aren't live and so far the policy only specifies on streams.
But if they go, you still have nemesis sh8n shin necrit nickyboi exil, etc etc etc etc etc
And i think you may be confusing all streams with just those coming from employees.
Someone else will fill the niche i assure you
Dev streaming is still a small % of their the stream about their game. I really don't think this decision is based on marketing strategies. It's something else. I Think the overlapping interest makes the more sense.
Not many Riot devs stream Riot games. And 99% of streamers people watch playing Riot games, are not Riot devs.
Probably not, people who watch league or tft streams are people who are already actively playing these games. It's preaching to the choire kinda stuff. It will have very little impact on their reach to the new audience, however it will have a big impact on the existing community's perception towards riot.
Montecristo said it best
Riot is horrified of another Cadrel incident happening. Cadrel was one of the better colour commentary people they have ever had. But because he made so much money co-streaming, he didn't want to continue that and has gone full time co-streaming.
Riot didn't like that
SO
They don't want people to have better options then working at riot.
They are essentially worried that the side gig of streaming makes them more money then working at riot could, so they could leave
I think it's more of the aligations made about former Rioter Blaustoise using his employment at Riot to get other streamers to co-stream with him.
Evidently the aligations had enough merit to warrant their legal team to enforce their streaming policy (this rule isn't new, it's in their internal rule books)
my only good theory (and ppl like riot agust say it) is "donate for x thing that only riot employers know" it may sound dumb but if a random tips for 500 bucks i know for sure one riot employer will do it
They earn like 100 an hour at work, 500 is not even a days worth of work
You're acting like Riot Games doesn't know the Twitch accounts their employees stream on. It sounds dumb because it is dumb. There is no legitimate concern here. It is quite literally Riot Games saying to their employees "Be good lil corporate slaves and be loyal to Riot Games only"
@@YuYuYuna_ Actually a legitimate concern, which was my thought as soon as SpiderAxe tweeted it, is the prevention of accusations of people claiming "X champion only got buffs because x riot dev who streams plays it" which is something that has been accused of A LOT towards some people like Phreak and August. Obviously that kind of accusation is a bunch of horseshit, but it's still a good thing to prevent. Now people can't claim that as easy if Rioters don't earn Twitch money from streaming playing x champions who may have gotten buffed
Another potential point of view is in many places you can't work for free or volunteer for a company that employes you (working odf the clock) and playing a riot game as a job (Streamer) could be viewed as working off the clock. Also it could be just an HR attempt to get employees to have non riot lives as well. Imagine going to work for 8-10 hours then getting off and spending all your off time interacting with your work. Seems a bit unhealthy to have entire life be about league or Valorant etc.
It's more about possible complaints about bribery and NDAs. There's a much higher chance of screwing it up when you're playing the game NDAs are directly about, and people could easily donate trying to push for a certain change. Removing any chance of these cases is just so much better for the PR team.
@@josuoh9888 I'm unsure if this removes the ability to donate or just ad revenue. But even if it does remove donations. People could still get bribe offers on social media DMs or while playing non riot games etc.
It could be as simple as Riot legal not wanting to have employees playing ads for non partner sponsors during their game in a way that partner sponsors could say Riot was violating exclusively of arrangement. For example if they play an ad for hyper x headphones but Razor is the official headphone partner of Riot.
@@Midnight_Premiere This as well. So, this policy by Riot isn't that crazy and honestly letting them stream still is free enough as it is.
Hey, those are Pajama pants, I've got the same!
You know the video will be good when the thumbnail is on fire
I really enjoy Necrit's content. I like the way he unfolds controversy with a funny take. But I also feel sometimes the arguments in the video lacks some "malice", how we say in my country. A lot of those "theories" are easy explained if you remember Riot is a company, and companies are money driven. Yeah their games are amazing, but in the end if something threats profit numbers or public opinion about the company, they will address it.
Personal theory: They did it because Riot doesn't want the knowledge of the devs to change the way players see and play the game. A developer saying that a certain champion gets balanced to be bad may lower the playrate (and even winrate) of that champ. A developer showing a good strategy on tft may change the meta of the game in a way Riot doesn't want it to. So on.
I’m glad you gave enough theories to give both sides a chance to be heard
in my opinion, i really like the patch notes streams that phreak does, the thing is, some of the thing legit, is asking for getting the flame he is getting, for the example of "u can write, karthus ult" when the community said was a bad change
he has the right ideas, but doesnt know how to say it, thats the thing
And then when August starts streaming and promoting sth like Dota, they will cancel him for that...
Mort leaves decides to make his own auto battler
I think it is an understandable concern and change from the company
I feel like if I had a hobby I was being successful in, and my company said 'no, you can't do that', that'd decrease my motivation to work with them, not increase it.
what doesnt add up to me is, how is riot allowed to control how their employees make money outside of working for them??? Like revenue earned outside of their job is their own revenue right?? Like for some partners on Twitch, it's effectively a second job. It's not like they're streaming from the Riot offices on the clock right? (Not sarcasm, i'm clueless about this)
It can be seen as a conflict of interest, since getting paid incentivizes Rioters to use their position to affect the game or leak/tease information to get views (and thus money). A company probably don't want you to work for a competitor either, which is why Non-Compete Agreements are a thing. There you basically sign a contract that you're not gonna join a competitor if you quit your job, because they don't want to spend all the money to train you only for you to immediately quit and use all that skill they paid for to work for a competitor.
Basically, there are lots of ways they can control work-related things outside of work, all depending on what kind of contract you have.
Does Riot have an NCA?? I find it hard to believe that TWITCH(a streaming platform) can compete in the same market as RIOT GAMES(a Game Development company)
@@TheGamingMalamutt You ignored the first part of my comment, I was listing different ways a company can control what you do outside work.
One aspect that seems to have been ignored is the co-streaming and monetizing of Riot esports games. As we saw recently, the people who have been allowed to be stream partners and commentate on esports games have been having high viewing numbers and were competing actively with the Riot official esports broadcasts.
Can be a good thing for Riot august...then he might focus on working for at least correct chara designs...
Riot hates that casters and others have another stream of money. Instead of paying them like human beings they rather cuz their money.
I don't think so. I feel like them wanting to desincentivize people like phreak from streaming, or people like mortdog streaming at the same time as the tournaments etc, is way more realistic.
Sure it's shitty if it leads to less devs publishing content. But so far, it's specifically streams, which very obviously points towards not wanting to split the attention, so we can still have patch breakdowns or set explanations on youtube if they want to.
I don't know, we'll see
Dude riot employees make like 2x industry average 😂
This is definitaly not a decision based on making money. Dev streaming is still insignificant. I would go more with he route of overlapping interest. Imagine August starting to rush out champ design because is stream pops off everytime a champ comes out.
I don't think this is actually new, but I guess they might've removed this for some time. I followed a Rioter who used to stream regularly on Twitch but was small, 10-20 viewers on average, and he had to remove his affiliate status on Twitch as he was warned by someone in Riot he could not do this. This is waaaay back, season 4 or 5 maybe
I think the nice part about this policy in Rito's eyes is that if it doesn't work out, they can just revert back and there would be very little controversy or long-lasting impact
My guess is either IRS or FTC came up and said "oh you have streamers working streaming on twitch? Are you paying taxes for that revenue? Are you crushing any competition unfairly?" Riot decided to avoid any risk and told them to disable revenue.
they r not gonna take mortdog away from me
4 minutes passed and i haven't heard a "Phreak out" joke
11:47 The line so nice he did it twice.
I honestly don't know how I feel about this from a legal perspective. Riot has the ability to set policy but the consequences for said policy can't be getting fired in this instance because it runs afoul of labor law. Your work can not dictate what other sources of income you are allowed to pursue when you are not on the clock. I doubt anyone would raise a fuss for it but if Riot tries to make an example then they could be sued for it. Maybe they can argue they weren't being fired for monetizing a stream and instead were fired so some other reason but if the former employee can prove they were fired specifically for to make money in an independent way from riot then they would have plenty of leverage.
The main worry is if it ever went to court then it could set a very scary precedent if Riot wins (Which is unfortunately the outcome most likely to happen given the amount of money they can throw at the problem). Giving companies a legal precedent to control who is allowed to stream their games is bad. Giving companies any power over what their employees are allowed to do outside of work hours is bad.
Seriously the theory, 'Riot is trying to get their employees to focus more on their work and is stifling outside opportunities' is not a good look. I doubt it is this at all, if for no other reason than it is the most legally bad one.
From a legal perspective you don't fire them, just ban them from the game. Riot has full authorithy over bans so just ban them and its pretty much gg for the stream
how does that even work, u cant deactivate subs, im pretty sure ads play automatically on twitch too etc.
u can turn off ads or lower them down to a certain point where u dont get money from ads but thats it x the rest they cnt control
you can break the contract at any time for a penalty which they would need to pay or just new renew after it expires which is the most likely solution.
@@Thisisnotasign so in other words riot is telling the devs not to keep their affiliated status so people cnt sub to them but still doesnt stop donations but of course they can change their panels to not have a donation link
I would love to hear about the story that happened to Tolkin, as far as I understood he wasnt allowed to co-stream any Riot events due to having too many viewers
Although they might still stream for fun, TBH I'd love to see rioters starting to stream the competitor's games now that riot just said F-U to them...
Bro, is riot ok? They should at least know you are supposed to space out stuff that creates drama so it doesn't feel so constant, right?
The community surrounding Riot is extremely toxic, explosive and over emotional, so they don't really do that. They base most of their responses on bigger voices like Pro Play, Content Creators and when something causes a statistically detrimental effect like reduced player rates.
The fact of the matter is that Riot is a better company than all its competitors, so its very ironic that everyone treats it like the worst. You'd much rather have riot running your game than Ubisoft, Blizzard-Activision or EA.
So I don't blame them for ignoring the drama, and making change where its sensible.
@@Haatroxx They haven't nerfed BOTRK yet. Therefore rito is garbo.
well the CEO changed this year, it's a finances guy so the finances guy is just doing finances stuff
Disagree. Better to dump it all at once like ripping off a wax strip.
The way you’re suggesting it would make it feel constant. Drama in January, then may, then August, that’s yearly drama at that point. Throw it all up in March? One and done.
9:50 I just remembered the Jessica Prize GW2 Scandal. She didn't know who she tried to paint as misogynist was so famous in the player community and as supporter since the first GW he had a npc on his name... that means he was so loved by both players and company and cleared so many checks... she was bewildered she was fired after.
13:36 as a brazilian, yes, that make sense
There was also a rioter who used insider knowledge of upcoming buffs and stuff who would coach people and make money off of it. Theres been a LOT of rioters just using the fact they work at riot to get ahead at times. Prob related to this.
Does it not give them an unfair advantage monetizing insider information?
It does. Even if it doesn't technically stop them, it at least doesn't reward it
@Necrit As someone who guest starred on the Ruined King game voicing a character inspired by yourself, would you fall under the employee category? Though that would likely only be for active employees.
Tencent game think in future, no in present. This new policy going to have effect in the long term.
“YOU employees shouldn’t be making extra money on the side from streaming OUR games *hisssssss*”
🤔 does RIOT’s higher ups realize they sound like dragons lording over their hoard?
i wouldn't put it pass mid tier to new streamers complaining about riot devs taking up top spots, it might sound petty or we're not sure if that affects it, but realistically like Necrit's point 1 , having more streamers in the field is definitely better
Idk the past couple months have just killed my interest in Riot as a company. Thought they were on an upswing, but it seems like plenty of people knew it was going down hill beforehand.
riot: ok taking away monetization will improve our developers productivity and loalty, surely they won't disagree with this
developers: ok you know we could just stream and leave the company right?
honestly from my point of view this solves nothing also because it just increases the risk of a mad employee just leaking everything
Just rito making sure the 2% of their employees who do play their own game stop.
A quick note on the whole "can't look at fan design" bit; it's 100% TRUE. Mark Rosewater, head designer of Magic the Gathering is very active on twitter and tumblr answering questions about almost any topic, especially magic. One thing he will state very often when fans offer up card ideas that get any more detailed than a vague suggestion or request is to STOP as he can't look at fan designs for legal reasons. If they did and then they made cards with those designs then that opens potential legal feedback. But if they don't look at them but it happens, then it's plausible deniability. He's very happy to know fans make their own cards and is even willing to talk about card designs in general to help people get better at making them(something he actually does. he has an entire series of articles about designing your own game using magic and it's cards as an example!), however he can't look at anything specific because he doesn't want to risk the trouble.
There's likely a bit of that here, or was at least for Mort and his TFT talks.
I would think that since the employees are technically making money from playing a riot game, legally, Riot, while not actually paying them for streaming, the law looks at it like the employees getting extra pay for their emplyers same game etc etc. And it might either tax riot more for 'earning' more or maybe they can't be letting the employees earn more than others.
I really don't know, but most things do usually boil down to money.
Necrit i need your help, i saw a poll of who would win in a fight between thresh and swain, and i had my doubts, what are your take on this? Isnt swain demon one of the 10 primordials?
Seeing how last years (and this one too) Riot policies went, I am confident in saying: The mmo will never happen and this start Riot decline.
All the policy does is reduce reason to stream their game for employees, leading to less free marketing.
I think the logic is they think streamers remove potential players instead of giving them free promotion anymore.
Riot speedrunning killing their company
What else Riot, you’re gonna start removing League news content?
Theres content?
Devs leeching off of the success of the game they developed, how shameful.
Ya know what, don't ever sign a contract saying you can't work on a second job.
Crazy how Riot claims to be doing this for the community but doesn’t listen to the community….
Maybe riot is trying to skip twitch earning and gives some sort of bonus directly to workers that stream.
Another theory. Riot is cheap because of the recent massive layoffs and might want to make some people to quit so they save more money
People always jump to the big examples like Mortdog or Phreak but what this really does is hurt the little guys way more. Mortdog is a lead designer, he probably earns a lot more doing his job than streaming but this does shut down streaming as a prospect for anyone else working at Riot hoping to do this on the side and hopefully earn some money from it.
what does that mean? they are also not allowed to take any donations?
10:30 Nope. Riot Lawyers have this covered. Any fanmade item based on any riot ip belongs to riot the moment you make it public.
Under regular circumstances someone might turn to streaming over their job, but when their job involves maintaining the popularity of the game which people watch them stream it's a bit of an oxymoron to think they would throw away that position.
Im a long time fan of Riots stuff. However, I was recently banned from Valorant for 3rd party software. I honestly dont cheat and have never cheated on online games. I have no 3rd party software that I know of unless the mods i have for elden ring or lethal company flagged me or something. I contacted their customer support because its very obvious if you look at my game history that i dont cheat. No one cheats to suck as bad as I do. They basically told me too fucking bad in a nice way. So, im done with riot. I spent too much in their games to just get banned randomly. I uninstalled all of their stuff and they wont ever get another dime.
Tldr: DONT buy anything on a game from Riot. You can get banned for litterally no reason and you WONT get your account back and they wont tell you why either
so this is clearly a copy and paste bs
Bot copy pasta smh
i think it's just a thing to prevent people from pulling a blau(if you didn't know, blaustoise was a rioter that got into streaming and got popular because he was a rioter)
9:45 hold on: RIOTTTTTTTTTT
Necrit saying Dunkey is the ninja of league is a fun analogy😂
I think it’s to prevent leaks n keep confidentiality
Every point, other than Rioters potentially leaving riot for streaming, basically has no impact in monetisation.
They don't want us realizing how flawed their champ designing and balance arguments are, over and over and over again.
A lot of companys do not want any employee engaged with the public in media they like to have PR positions that are trained to handle this sort of thing and often have vague rules In policy allowing them to fire anyone who causes a issue for them publicly threw association
there is a conflict of interests here, normal stuff. I'm surprised it took them this long to do it
There isn't but sure. You act like this is something new. There are literally thousands of devs for hundreds of different games that stream on their FREE time off work. 99.99999% of the time hasn't been a problem before. Stop defending blatant corporate douchebag-ery. They're doing it because they don't want their developers to make money on a potential side hustle streaming.
Agreed.
This is kinda awesome when people stream their games that they are developing, for example Steve from Warframe. It's kinda interesting seeing these streams =).
Now that's why Mort didn't stream on Sunday...
10:40 Is that really a thing? Because if that is the case the devs should also not look at Reddit or whatever, where ideas also might get posted.
I remember discussing champ designs back in Season 1 & 2 on the forums together with the community and devs that were active there.
This was a common thing and I loved it. I remember we were sitting in school and even submitted one of our ideas that we came up with (basically Jarvan, but with todays Mordekaiser ult).
i mean i think something similar happened when seraphine was teased and/or released. Someone claimed seraphine was based on her as she was dating a rioter at the time
i smell a reason, and i smell a phreak
If you're a rioter with a big community on twitch, it's way harder for riot to fire you.
Because firing you becomes a public situation and this will affects the player base. They want to cut this off as soon as possible to limit this effect
Me questioning how I totally didn't realize Necrit was European XD
Wait for rwal? XD both the accent and the looks are so obvious lol
it will bring a stop to smurfs in low elo _ big win
This is perfectly normal business practice however, no conspiracies in it. If you work for a company and you are not part of PR you should not get in touch with consumers of said product on personal level. Ever. This is completely logical course of action that prevents toxicity and keeps good naem of the brand. Only thing I am confused about is how the hell did they not have these internal rules already in place.
Maybe it could be that some rioters sold their streaming time as work time to the higher ups and therefore effectively earned two salaries for playing the game. By banning the monetization there would be no insensitive to do so and they would focus more on work.
How much longer is this community planning on pretending Riot are a good company?
I feel like it's not so much that we think they're good, just ever so slightly better than blizzard.
No one thinks that anymore, how many clips do you have people calling riot dog shit? It's literally trendy to hate riot and league
@@1mintyboi Being slightly better than shit doesn't make you a delicacy or even edible.
as long as they remain better than literally all their competitors...
@@Haatroxx But they literally aren't?
Okay, one of explanations comes into my mind:
Imagine Rioter who want to earn money on streaming. He plays good with some champion. He wants to get wievs so he makes something from inside to make one specific champion stronger or maybe item or anything.
The only thing I can think of is because monetizing creator content from employees could be considered insider trading.
There is another thing which is, Riot pays for ads and then a Rioter is collecting money from an ad that Riot paid for while also directly paying the employee. In this scenario, Riot in a way is paying their employees twice, but taxed only once which could result getting in trouble with the government for (even though partial) tax evasion and they want to avoid this scenario by playing it extra safe.
Just in case people missed it, Necrit offered possible theories. Some were compelling and others weren't. Either way we don't know why they did this, and we don't know what it might or might not achieve. Let's defer judgement for now, no?