|
On February 05 2013 16:50 Wheats wrote:
Does no other adblock user feel guilty for using it when watching streams? It seriously hurts me when I find myself enjoying streams that I'm not subbed to because I know I'm stealing from the streamer.
$9 to alleviate that guilt is fine by me. I really don't care how much goes to twitch since it makes me feel like less of a dick.
I too also feel guilty. I will buy Twitch turbo knowing that I can skip the ads and still support the streamer.
Really nice job there twitch
|
On February 05 2013 01:12 FXOdesRow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2013 00:59 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
This should lead to a minor improvement in revenue for the regular channels (i.e. 99% of the player streams you watch). The channels will get paid for their ads ran to Turbo users as if the ad was actually seen. This means that if someone previous ad-blocked and now has Turbo, he will count as an ad to the regular channel.
It may be tough on subscriber channels losing some members who prefer to pay for Turbo instead. With polling done by Twitch they state that the majority of subscribers pay because they want to support the channels, and less so for the ad removal. Twitch will be able to monitor what this does to those channels, and hopefully come up with something for it if it turns out to be an issue. It would be kind of cool if you had 3 slots with $1 to give to a channel with subscribers on Twitch.
It needs to be mentioned that Twitch is massive compared to the subscriber channels, and that this is a really important move for their overall business model. It is not an evil business model at all, in fact if they had never offered channels the option to get subscribers (which they didn't need to) then everything would look entirely normal. Sometimes the right move can impact people negatively, but it is important to see things in the right perspective.
Although this isn't great for us (TSL+ had a no ads feature, plans with the player channels) I want to say that I support Twitch doing this. Before anything else; we should all want Twitch to have a healthy business model. There is no doubt this is the right choice for a company like Twitch, and hopefully that will find its way back to our scene in one way or another.
Twitch already takes 50% of the subs money. If they would take 20% I'd be okay with twitch turbo but for now they are undercutting heavily the broadcasters who at the end of the day provide the content for twitch to make money on. I agree it's good for the users and for them but what about us ?
From someone who has handled the infrastructure of high bandwidth applications and the consequences of high resolution streaming, you're getting 50% because streaming; to put it bluntly, is fucking expensive.
From Twitch's point of view, they have a big problem. Adblock - loud ads, ads that end up being intrusive or repetitive. What ever it may be, ads are blocked. Twitch turbo, which gives an impression every time an ad is played when the twitch turbo subscriber does NOT see the ad is a pretty good middle ground. This essentially "pays in advance" all the ads + a shit ton more that a normal viewer would not see. A power user of twitch might find this to be a pretty good deal. The streams they watch get supported, twitch gets more reliable income that they can use as credit, or bankable assets to invest in infrastructure instead of going from paycheque to paycheque THEN making the decision to do a hardware build out or an upgrade in bandwidth tier from a backbone provider.
You've seen Own3d go under because of statements of "what about us". They offered VERY competitive rates or bonuses to streamers in order to get them to broadcast under own3d. Even with a smaller hardware and broadband investment and a more focused approach to a singular market they were very much underwater. Do I have #'s or real examples of their overhead. No.
A big thing to remember is that a company that deals in very manly amounts of video and swarms of people watching streams (120k+ for big tourny days) all watching in 1080i-can't-count-how-many-pixels-there-are-on-the-screen resolution is a titanic strain on any given system.
We can use netflix as a general example of internet streaming usage:
http://support.netflix.com/en/node/87#gsc.tab=0
Though keep in mind that these numbers are so general that to use them as canon is so beyond ill-advised you'd need a danger label on it.
So much so, that when you set up your net you don't call up comcast or verizon.
http://www.level3.com/
^ This is your new best friend. You're now tunneling so much fucking bandwidth that you need a company that owns a backbone pipe across the nation. Well, that's a cool link and claim, what's the backup behind that? Couldn't you do a torrent style stream like blizzard did for their first blizzcon forays? Why might you need a custom pipe that handles insane amounts of info? Well, some fast math might help.
A 480i stream is roughly around 3Mbps. Or 0.375 Megabytes for those people who are looking at their harddrives going "@_@ what are these numbers and what are they doing?". Let's say we're doing a TSL. 60000 Viewers, all watching in ghetto vision where TvT is a blurry cavalcade of marines getting squelched and banshee rockets. This stream for twitch is generating 22500 megabytes of data all by itself. Yea it has to take the stream being transmitted in FUCKYEA quality, dumb it way the fuck down (encoding) via some tower of power like;
http://www.visiblelight.com/mall/productview.aspx?pid=721
Where shit tier for video encoding for streams on the fly STARTS at 13,200. THEN, the encoder kicks out the signal to your backbone isp where it is distributed to your residential isp.
So, one stream for a middling tournament is generating a streaming demand of a 1080i rendering of Falling Skies season one. Per second. That is for the lowest tier of quality. Garbage tier, the tier that we complained about relentlessly to GoM when the first championship series released for the GSL.
Keep in mind that during this 60000 viewers bonanza, they have lol streaming, their entire justin.tv catalog also streaming, dota2 streaming. Right now as I write this post there are 75,000 viewers on twitch. 12000 on sc2 alone.
How much you want to wager that the majority of these viewers are in FUCKYEA encoding quality? If you want the full mackdaddy 1080i experience you are demanding bandwidth at anywhere between 15-20Mbps. We can go with an average of 17.5 Mbps or 2.18 Megabytes per second. You could totally go "Yea but I downloaded my favorite quadruple gangbang scene on my bittorrent client for that much!" and you'd be so full of shit you'd be a pinata. It doesn't matter what your speed is when you can actually handle that level of stream quality. It matters what the otherside can put out.
Because, a contract to a company like level3 gives you X access to their network. You go over your contracted bandwidth, denied. Auto shaped. Your quality which was once good, is now insanely fucking awful because level3 doesnt give a fuck about your data packet presentation as long as it gets there. The stream that was once FUCKYEA now looks like a mixture of static, snowglobe and Bob Ross's palette after painting a sweet waterfall.
Let's say out of curiosity that a full half of the TSL viewers aren't actually watching it in etchasketch mode. Instead they are watching it in FUCKYEA mode. They are dl'ing from their pipe to level3 at 17.5MBps. so... 30000. (The actual amount of people watching in perfect 1080 is not remotely close to this.) ASSUMING you've paid for the highest tier of service from level3 and have unadulterated access to their backbone, you're now punching out 525000MBps. 525 GB a second. You are asking a backbone and laterally a commercial isp to deliver a 500 GB hdd a second. Those go for 64 dollars.
So what do you do? Well if you saw this robust growth coming, you go to level3 and go "Yes, my second born is the agreed upon price" and get your bandwidth access bumped up. This level of bandwidth usage, just to touch on the whole point of this post is REALLY FUCKING EXPENSIVE. Or! You can implement shaping policy. Or encode quality based on bandwidth. Gotta pay someone that is really good at their job a really good amount of money to make sure that the correct quality of your stream is going to every single last person. Not a byte or bit more. If someone is rocking 2Mbps down, they're getting a low resolution 240 stream. Someone rocking 6Mbps down, high resolution, high FPS 480 for them. Another with a god tier 40Mbps down? The whole 9 yards for them, 1080i, 60 fps, 1920/1200.
Hrm, how the hell are you going to get all these different resolutions, frame rates and qualities? Fuck man the encoder is already merely processing this shit, your isp is going HOLYSHIT I guess we're gonna need to find a way to stabilize and normalize the delivery of the video signal.
http://www.anysystem.com/cisco-css11501s-k9.html
Cisco sells load balancers that handle bandwidth of our level of needs NEW for 27k. This one is refurbed. If you wanna risk it. Go ahead.
Hardware alone you're looking at 50k min for a node/region. You have many nodes and regions. You have many backbone deals. You pay out for multiple regions to your ISP. (I think lvl3 allows you an international bandwidth package, not sure though) You pay out for staff.
http://www.comcast-jobs.com/all-jobs/Senior-Network-Engineer-50132134-Radnor-PA/168978
You're hiring a lower tier of this job responsibility. You're also hiring encoders. UI specialists. Sales. An umpteen number of things that I can't even remember atm due to too much studying.
So. What about you? That's a really good fucking question Desrow. We as a community are getting an insanely stable, high quality, responsive and community minded video streaming service for a cost many of us would dare to call "free". The sheer amount of infrastructure, upkeep, bill pay and very stiff competition/demand for bandwidth (Netflix alone uses anywhere between 60-90% of the level3 network) makes a video streaming service a very expensive venture. I keep all my ads on and subscribe to multiple dudes just to feel better about using the service.
SO! I'd be pretty happy with the 50/50. God knows they could gouge a shit load more and still make tv/movie/music companies look like Hitler incarnadine.
Sorry about the poor editing and potentially incorrect statement about load balancers for delivering correct stream quality.
Experience:
Assisted in launch of multiple metro ISP networks. Intern.
Live with a senior network engineer/traffic shaping policy writer.
If there are any questions - PM me.
|
On February 05 2013 21:25 Thurokiir wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2013 01:12 FXOdesRow wrote:On February 05 2013 00:59 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
This should lead to a minor improvement in revenue for the regular channels (i.e. 99% of the player streams you watch). The channels will get paid for their ads ran to Turbo users as if the ad was actually seen. This means that if someone previous ad-blocked and now has Turbo, he will count as an ad to the regular channel.
It may be tough on subscriber channels losing some members who prefer to pay for Turbo instead. With polling done by Twitch they state that the majority of subscribers pay because they want to support the channels, and less so for the ad removal. Twitch will be able to monitor what this does to those channels, and hopefully come up with something for it if it turns out to be an issue. It would be kind of cool if you had 3 slots with $1 to give to a channel with subscribers on Twitch.
It needs to be mentioned that Twitch is massive compared to the subscriber channels, and that this is a really important move for their overall business model. It is not an evil business model at all, in fact if they had never offered channels the option to get subscribers (which they didn't need to) then everything would look entirely normal. Sometimes the right move can impact people negatively, but it is important to see things in the right perspective.
Although this isn't great for us (TSL+ had a no ads feature, plans with the player channels) I want to say that I support Twitch doing this. Before anything else; we should all want Twitch to have a healthy business model. There is no doubt this is the right choice for a company like Twitch, and hopefully that will find its way back to our scene in one way or another.
Twitch already takes 50% of the subs money. If they would take 20% I'd be okay with twitch turbo but for now they are undercutting heavily the broadcasters who at the end of the day provide the content for twitch to make money on. I agree it's good for the users and for them but what about us ? From someone who has handled the infrastructure of high bandwidth applications and the consequences of high resolution streaming, you're getting 50% because streaming; to put it bluntly, is fucking expensive. From Twitch's point of view, they have a big problem. Adblock - loud ads, ads that end up being intrusive or repetitive. What ever it may be, ads are blocked. Twitch turbo, which gives an impression every time an ad is played when the twitch turbo subscriber does NOT see the ad is a pretty good middle ground. This essentially "pays in advance" all the ads + a shit ton more that a normal viewer would not see. A power user of twitch might find this to be a pretty good deal. The streams they watch get supported, twitch gets more reliable income that they can use as credit, or bankable assets to invest in infrastructure instead of going from paycheque to paycheque THEN making the decision to do a hardware build out or an upgrade in bandwidth tier from a backbone provider. You've seen Own3d go under because of statements of "what about us". They offered VERY competitive rates or bonuses to streamers in order to get them to broadcast under own3d. Even with a smaller hardware and broadband investment and a more focused approach to a singular market they were very much underwater. Do I have #'s or real examples of their overhead. No. A big thing to remember is that a company that deals in very manly amounts of video and swarms of people watching streams (120k+ for big tourny days) all watching in 1080i-can't-count-how-many-pixels-there-are-on-the-screen resolution is a titanic strain on any given system. We can use netflix as a general example of internet streaming usage: http://support.netflix.com/en/node/87#gsc.tab=0Though keep in mind that these numbers are so general that to use them as canon is so beyond ill-advised you'd need a danger label on it. So much so, that when you set up your net you don't call up comcast or verizon. http://www.level3.com/^ This is your new best friend. You're now tunneling so much fucking bandwidth that you need a company that owns a backbone pipe across the nation. Well, that's a cool link and claim, what's the backup behind that? Couldn't you do a torrent style stream like blizzard did for their first blizzcon forays? Why might you need a custom pipe that handles insane amounts of info? Well, some fast math might help. A 480i stream is roughly around 3Mbps. Or 0.375 Megabytes for those people who are looking at their harddrives going "@_@ what are these numbers and what are they doing?". Let's say we're doing a TSL. 60000 Viewers, all watching in ghetto vision where TvT is a blurry cavalcade of marines getting squelched and banshee rockets. This stream for twitch is generating 22500 megabytes of data all by itself. Yea it has to take the stream being transmitted in FUCKYEA quality, dumb it way the fuck down (encoding) via some tower of power like; http://www.visiblelight.com/mall/productview.aspx?pid=721Where shit tier for video encoding for streams on the fly STARTS at 13,200. THEN, the encoder kicks out the signal to your backbone isp where it is distributed to your residential isp. So, one stream for a middling tournament is generating a streaming demand of a 1080i rendering of Falling Skies season one. Per second. That is for the lowest tier of quality. Garbage tier, the tier that we complained about relentlessly to GoM when the first championship series released for the GSL. Keep in mind that during this 60000 viewers bonanza, they have lol streaming, their entire justin.tv catalog also streaming, dota2 streaming. Right now as I write this post there are 75,000 viewers on twitch. 12000 on sc2 alone. How much you want to wager that the majority of these viewers are in FUCKYEA encoding quality? If you want the full mackdaddy 1080i experience you are demanding bandwidth at anywhere between 15-20Mbps. We can go with an average of 17.5 Mbps or 2.18 Megabytes per second. You could totally go "Yea but I downloaded my favorite quadruple gangbang scene on my bittorrent client for that much!" and you'd be so full of shit you'd be a pinata. It doesn't matter what your speed is when you can actually handle that level of stream quality. It matters what the otherside can put out. Because, a contract to a company like level3 gives you X access to their network. You go over your contracted bandwidth, denied. Auto shaped. Your quality which was once good, is now insanely fucking awful because level3 doesnt give a fuck about your data packet presentation as long as it gets there. The stream that was once FUCKYEA now looks like a mixture of static, snowglobe and Bob Ross's palette after painting a sweet waterfall. Let's say out of curiosity that a full half of the TSL viewers aren't actually watching it in etchasketch mode. Instead they are watching it in FUCKYEA mode. They are dl'ing from their pipe to level3 at 17.5MBps. so... 30000. (The actual amount of people watching in perfect 1080 is not remotely close to this.) ASSUMING you've paid for the highest tier of service from level3 and have unadulterated access to their backbone, you're now punching out 525000MBps. 525 GB a second. You are asking a backbone and laterally a commercial isp to deliver a 500 GB hdd a second. Those go for 64 dollars. So what do you do? Well if you saw this robust growth coming, you go to level3 and go "Yes, my second born is the agreed upon price" and get your bandwidth access bumped up. This level of bandwidth usage, just to touch on the whole point of this post is REALLY FUCKING EXPENSIVE. Or! You can implement shaping policy. Or encode quality based on bandwidth. Gotta pay someone that is really good at their job a really good amount of money to make sure that the correct quality of your stream is going to every single last person. Not a byte or bit more. If someone is rocking 2Mbps down, they're getting a low resolution 240 stream. Someone rocking 6Mbps down, high resolution, high FPS 480 for them. Another with a god tier 40Mbps down? The whole 9 yards for them, 1080i, 60 fps, 1920/1200. Hrm, how the hell are you going to get all these different resolutions, frame rates and qualities? Fuck man the encoder is already merely processing this shit, your isp is going HOLYSHIT I guess we're gonna need to find a way to stabilize and normalize the delivery of the video signal. http://www.anysystem.com/cisco-css11501s-k9.htmlCisco sells load balancers that handle bandwidth of our level of needs NEW for 27k. This one is refurbed. If you wanna risk it. Go ahead. Hardware alone you're looking at 50k min for a node/region. You have many nodes and regions. You have many backbone deals. You pay out for multiple regions to your ISP. (I think lvl3 allows you an international bandwidth package, not sure though) You pay out for staff. http://www.comcast-jobs.com/all-jobs/Senior-Network-Engineer-50132134-Radnor-PA/168978You're hiring a lower tier of this job responsibility. You're also hiring encoders. UI specialists. Sales. An umpteen number of things that I can't even remember atm due to too much studying. So. What about you? That's a really good fucking question Desrow. We as a community are getting an insanely stable, high quality, responsive and community minded video streaming service for a cost many of us would dare to call "free". The sheer amount of infrastructure, upkeep, bill pay and very stiff competition/demand for bandwidth (Netflix alone uses anywhere between 60-90% of the level3 network) makes a video streaming service a very expensive venture. I keep all my ads on and subscribe to multiple dudes just to feel better about using the service. SO! I'd be pretty happy with the 50/50. God knows they could gouge a shit load more and still make tv/movie/music companies look like Hitler incarnadine. Sorry about the poor editing and potentially incorrect statement about load balancers for delivering correct stream quality. Experience: Assisted in launch of multiple metro ISP networks. Intern. Live with a senior network engineer/traffic shaping policy writer. If there are any questions - PM me.
Very good write up, you should write blogs about streaming / technical blogs. Liking your style and all the information. Some people really have no clue about how much a running network, streaming and technology overall does have in running costs.
|
On February 05 2013 15:01 ArvickHero wrote:
they should integrate a donation system like Afreeca's balloons/stickers, I would totally shoot balloons at my favorite streamers lol. It honestly adds a lot to the viewer/broadcaster dynamic and makes watching streams much more enjoyable lol
While i agree this is would be good idea, donating trough paypal works just as well. A lot of gamers on twitch are getting ridiculous sums of money this way.
How much does set of balloons cost in Afreeca and how big of a cut does Afreeca take from every purchase btw?
|
Hrmm I dont get this? So Streamer X is going to hit the ADs button, I won´t see ads witch twtich turbo, neither can i watch content, because the streamer usually won´t go on till ads have finished.
|
On February 05 2013 22:17 plgElwood wrote:
Hrmm I dont get this? So Streamer X is going to hit the ADs button, I won´t see ads witch twtich turbo, neither can i watch content, because the streamer usually won´t go on till ads have finished.
It's not like the stream just stops. Yeah you run ads during breaks but rather than getting ads you get whatever music is playing or what not. The biggest thing is no more pre-roll ads too. Many times when you're just browsing streams it gets very tiring seeing an ad come up after the first 5 seconds before you figure out what's going on on that stream.
I generally adblocked because if I'm streaming a tournament myself and look at another stream to get updates of another match going on, obviously the ad playing would mess up the stream going from my end. Now I went turbo and I don't need to worry about costing anyone any money.
|
I think this was made for viewers like me... I havent found a reason where I wanted to step up and Subscribe.... but I use twitch.tv to watch so many streams but feel guilty when at times I have ad-block up (commercials are so damn annoying)... now I can have ad-block up without a problem and just get turbo  ~
now maybe streamers will do commercials even more often?
|
personally, I think this is good for twitch bad for streamers.... I have been around this community and supported many players from the shadows rarely do i find a topic that i feel needs my 2 cents but this is actually retarded 8.99 for twitch and only thing the players recieve are the POSSIBILITY that someone who would have previously used ad block might have bought a turbo acct so they might recieve that 1 1 millionth of a penny that they werent recieving before...... desrow said before they already take 50% of his subscription.. i bet they have 0 plans on reducing the amount they take from personal subscribers.... when i subscribe to a stream its because i like the player and i wanna support the player, but lets be honest here the perks of getting no ads is pretty nice too? this will hurt the subscriptions for the players and theres no benefit for the players at all for you to purchase this service.... just fyi 9$ monthly for 0 ads is more than any of u guys give them in ad revenue in a month by probably triple.... I dont use ad block and never have, i like supporting esports in any way that i can and i feel like this is a big f you to the players from twitch considering this can only cause harm to players revenues and no real gain...
if they wanna do this i feel there should be more benefit to the players directly not just twitch's pockets the price is way more than they would make off any 1 person watching streams even if hes watching 5-6 hours a day... so to sum up the issues i see with it
1: no gain for streamers
2: asking for a price like 9$ per user who would probably watch about 3$ worth of ads per month....
3: making a statement involving so highly how this will "still support" the players which is total crap if ur not using adblock in the first place this does absolutely 0 more for the players....
4: if players are now gonna have to offer even more to there personal subscribers why is twitch not changing the amount they pocket from the personal subscriptions?
could probably think of tons of more things i find WRONG with this picture.... this helps twitch and twitch only, I love twitch its my favorite streaming platform but when your selling lemons dont call it lemonade...
|
The pricing is ridiculous, didn't even read past that point.
|
Right now I'm looking at this through the same lens that resulted in the creation of iTunes/Netflix/Hulu/Steam: convenience as a driver of consumer action.
As piracy escalated throughout the last 15 years and companies began to feel the profit crunch, there have been a few different tacks that companies have taken to try to respond. Some have been mainly preventative (DRM in general, Ubisoft, Diablo 3 come to mind), some have been punitive (MPAA/RIAA legal actions), and others have basically embraced those consuming their content for free and asked "why do people choose this over the legitimate method?" A meaningful percentage of the time, the answer has been convenience. Netflix, Hulu, Steam, and iTunes, among other companies, have been highly successful because they made it as convenient or nearly as convenient to pay for products as to get them for free. I think that's what Twitch is trying to do here.
Watching twitch without adblock, turbo, or a subscription to the channel you're viewing is a bit of a chore compared to the alternative. You get to see the stream, sure, but you have to be in the tab/window to mute or skip commercials. Commercials aren't normalized to the same volume as your stream audio or the rest of the audio on your PC, so even if you want to watch them to be a stream viewer with a good conscience, it can be a very jarring experience. Some commercials can't be muted without muting your entire PC (though this has become less common, in my experience). There's no bonus inherently attached to not using adblock--you have to subscribe to each channel that you want to skip ads on and you don't receive chat emoticons or text color or whatever as a result of forgoing adblock--so it's a very unattractive proposition. Remember that the alternative is watching everything uninterrupted forever thanks to one tiny browser plugin.
With Turbo, I think Twitch is trying to find a middle ground between having customers subscribe to every channel where they don't want to see ads and having a huge majority of users block all ads for free. It's a first effort (first in the entire industry, as far as I know) so it's bound to have issues and need tuning. Twitch has proven to be pretty communicative with its streamers and viewers about issues with its systems, so hopefully they're not 100% married to the exact current state of Turbo as their future and will be willing to make changes as needed. I'm cautiously optimistic overall.
(In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I'm a long-time adblock user and have blocked ads on twitch 100% of the time since long before it was called twitch. I am strongly considering subscribing to Turbo, just as I've subscribed to Netflix, bought music on bandcamp/amazonmp3/bleep/other sites, and come to prefer purchasing things on Steam over downloading them for free. I believe there are many like me that this Turbo idea will appeal to. But I'm also 29, married, and employed full-time. A large part of Twitch's market doesn't match up with that at all.)
|
It's going to be funny when a streamer gets a turbo viewer majority on his stream and just starts pounding out those 60s commercials over and over.
|
On February 05 2013 23:50 theqat wrote:
Right now I'm looking at this through the same lens that resulted in the creation of iTunes/Netflix/Hulu/Steam: convenience as a driver of consumer action.
As piracy escalated throughout the last 15 years and companies began to feel the profit crunch, there have been a few different tacks that companies have taken to try to respond. Some have been mainly preventative (DRM in general, Ubisoft, Diablo 3 come to mind), some have been punitive (MPAA/RIAA legal actions), and others have basically embraced those consuming their content for free and asked "why do people choose this over the legitimate method?" A meaningful percentage of the time, the answer has been convenience. Netflix, Hulu, Steam, and iTunes, among other companies, have been highly successful because they made it as convenient or nearly as convenient to pay for products as to get them for free. I think that's what Twitch is trying to do here.
Watching twitch without adblock, turbo, or a subscription to the channel you're viewing is a bit of a chore compared to the alternative. You get to see the stream, sure, but you have to be in the tab/window to mute or skip commercials. Commercials aren't normalized to the same volume as your stream audio or the rest of the audio on your PC, so even if you want to watch them to be a stream viewer with a good conscience, it can be a very jarring experience. Some commercials can't be muted without muting your entire PC (though this has become less common, in my experience). There's no bonus inherently attached to not using adblock--you have to subscribe to each channel that you want to skip ads on and you don't receive chat emoticons or text color or whatever as a result of forgoing adblock--so it's a very unattractive proposition. Remember that the alternative is watching everything uninterrupted forever thanks to one tiny browser plugin.
With Turbo, I think Twitch is trying to find a middle ground between having customers subscribe to every channel where they don't want to see ads and having a huge majority of users block all ads for free. It's a first effort (first in the entire industry, as far as I know) so it's bound to have issues and need tuning. Twitch has proven to be pretty communicative with its streamers and viewers about issues with its systems, so hopefully they're not 100% married to the exact current state of Turbo as their future and will be willing to make changes as needed. I'm cautiously optimistic overall.
(In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I'm a long-time adblock user and have blocked ads on twitch 100% of the time since long before it was called twitch. I am strongly considering subscribing to Turbo, just as I've subscribed to Netflix, bought music on bandcamp/amazonmp3/bleep/other sites, and come to prefer purchasing things on Steam over downloading them for free. I believe there are many like me that this Turbo idea will appeal to. But I'm also 29, married, and employed full-time. A large part of Twitch's market doesn't match up with that at all.)
im 24 married work full time and could pay this 9$ a month easilly but i wont simply because no one here can honestly say this wil ldo more good for the players than it will do harm
|
Didn't you just say that "making a statement involving so highly how this will "still support" the players which is total crap if ur not using adblock in the first place this does absolutely 0 more for the players...."
I'm using adblock and will be in any circumstance without turbo so, by your own definition, wouldn't it support the players I view without a subscription? Would that not be doing them more good than me continuing to view their streams without a subscription and with adblock?
|
Twitch provides good infrastructure and working streams. Also it is the last of it´s kind. If it was down..yeah that would suck
I am okay with ads, but i dont want them to be loud as hell, and also i dont like them playing everytime a stream (re-)opens.
So I watch tournaments mostly with adblock+ . I guess they could change their Ads to "streamer activated only , but at least 5 per hour".
|
Time to unsub to all my Twitch streams and just pay for this. I'll actually be saving money haha.
|
On February 05 2013 09:47 SoOJuuu wrote:
i rather watch adds then pay ~$120 a year.
No thanks.
Thats like 1-2 paydays for esports!! And you benefit and feel happy! What a deal!
|
On February 05 2013 15:53 FXOUnstable wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2013 11:09 dae wrote:On February 05 2013 10:42 banzaiib wrote:
I use adblock, and I'm not sure why the vast majority of people don't. I'm not saying anyone should or should not use it, I'm just saying I fricking love it. yeah yeah... you can say, "well if everyone did that, there would be nothing to watch," but that isn't true. Twitch and youtube would just figure out a way around it. Bottom line is, adblock is not seriously enough affecting "impressions" to warrant doing anything about it directly... unless I'm completely wrong and twitch has yet to implement a solution, but I see this "subscription move" on twitch's part as evidence against that. They're simply making bank on the vast majority of peoples' ignorance of adblock and how to use it. I watched ads during the superbowl, because I couldn't block them, but 1/2 the time, i just muted the TV (they were pretty bad... I mean, how the hell was there a pistacio harvesting commercial during the damned superbowl... but I digress). Are you saying I shouldn't mute my TV? Same logic as saying I shouldn't use adblock. <shrug>
<3 You are wrong. Adblock is cutting ad revenue for the sites/streamers by way more then 50%. Cutting into it short term yes, long term no, making people watch ads just to support streamers when they have no intention of buying the products in the first place does nothing other than lower the CPM rate for the ad because the company isnt getting the return they expect. Example, company gets 1000 impressions, they expect $20 in sales from it, so the CPM will be $10 Lets say people stopped using adblock, and just watched to support, say its 20% of people do this. that turns this 1000 impressions into 800 because 200 are completely pointless and will never buy the product. This means that the company doesn't see a $20 sale, they see $16 so the next time they buy addspace they will lower the CPM to accomodate for the reduction in sales. This was a rough off the top of my head but you should get the point. In the long run let adblock people adblock but just tell them to piss off if they EVER ask for anything from the streamer or organisation running the stream because they are useless to them.
Uhh, advertising doesn't work like that. It is a very nebulous investment for a company to make, and basically impossible for the company to determine whether the advertisement is paying off or not. Sure, there are some ads that have referral ID's when you click them to help the company track it, but the majority of Twitch ads are for things like cars, deodorant, McDonald's...there is no way for them to pinpoint their sales as accurately as you are describing.
Furthermore, just because someone uses adblock doesn't mean they wouldn't buy the products if they could see commercials for them. Adblock users are consumers too. If anything, the fact that so many people use adblock would discourage a company from investing as heavily in internet marketing.
|
On February 06 2013 00:17 theqat wrote:
Didn't you just say that "making a statement involving so highly how this will "still support" the players which is total crap if ur not using adblock in the first place this does absolutely 0 more for the players...."
I'm using adblock and will be in any circumstance without turbo so, by your own definition, wouldn't it support the players I view without a subscription? Would that not be doing them more good than me continuing to view their streams without a subscription and with adblock?
because your probably the minority your viewing 1 add does not make up for the subscriber amounts that will most likely be lost because of this the people using adblock the MAJORITY by common sense will just keep using adblock for free rather than pay 9$ a month..... so i would assume the people using adblock that will somehow have a change of heart and decide rather to pay 9$ a month are in my eyes going to be very few people...
|
On February 06 2013 00:17 theqat wrote:
Didn't you just say that "making a statement involving so highly how this will "still support" the players which is total crap if ur not using adblock in the first place this does absolutely 0 more for the players...."
I'm using adblock and will be in any circumstance without turbo so, by your own definition, wouldn't it support the players I view without a subscription? Would that not be doing them more good than me continuing to view their streams without a subscription and with adblock?
which is more beneficial to a personal stream 100 people per month casually watching there stream without adblock or 2 subscribers? answer that question and it just kills the whole arguement people are making for why this is okay...
and believe me 100 is being VERY generous to how many people would buy this and watch a stream that were using adblock before...
|
On February 06 2013 00:52 LiMEX17 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 00:17 theqat wrote:
Didn't you just say that "making a statement involving so highly how this will "still support" the players which is total crap if ur not using adblock in the first place this does absolutely 0 more for the players...."
I'm using adblock and will be in any circumstance without turbo so, by your own definition, wouldn't it support the players I view without a subscription? Would that not be doing them more good than me continuing to view their streams without a subscription and with adblock? because your probably the minority your viewing 1 add does not make up for the subscriber amounts that will most likely be lost because of this the people using adblock the MAJORITY by common sense will just keep using adblock for free rather than pay 9$ a month..... so i would assume the people using adblock that will somehow have a change of heart and decide rather to pay 9$ a month are in my eyes going to be very few people...
By your reasoning, no one is subscribing to any players because they could just be using adblock instead. If you do the numbers, what you're saying just doesn't nearly add up. It's really hard to imagine there being a large number of people subscribing only to block ads to begin with. They're offering a solution that attempts to compete with adblock and still gets revenue to the streamers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
