61–70 of 106 posts
Curse is terrible. It's like the (current) Sourceforge of gaming sites. I seriously don't know why Twitch/Amazon would consider acquiring it.
Are you able to say why you think Curse is terrible?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Discord Dev here) Awesome to hear Discords a good fit for workplace environments too, we've heard a couple success stories around remote teams swapping. Search is a huge priority for us, but its also something we wanna spend time getting right. e.g. soon!
This is a long shot, but if you could sign a HIPPA waver, I could convince the bureaucrats at my workplace to jump in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the semi-irony here is their source-project management site for addon developers is called "curseforge". I use curse mostly to handle addons for games I play a lot (world of warcraft primarily). Every now and then, when I bump into some terrible interface on their client or bad practice by their business managers, I have wondered how much work it would be to move to an open addon publication system. If you get all th…
It's been many years now, but if memory serves... The precursor system to Curse was actually originally a shared SVN server a group of addon authors (called Wowace; still around somewhat) were using to collaborate on addon development. SVN checkouts were so convenient for distributing addons that the authors started using it to keep their own addons up to date, and then usage started to rapidly spread among "ordinary…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't pay to watch, they pay to support the streamer. Most streamers have subscriber/donation/cheer notifications appear on-screen in some way. Making partner on Twitch (which enables subscriptions) requires the streamer to have a consistent number of viewers each time they stream, and they must stream fairly often. It's not uncommon to see streamers with a fairly sizeable number of subscribers any given month.
Alright, I understand that. You suggest it's an ethical decision rather than economic; that streamers deserve the support. But why? I fund a few YouTubers on patreon, because they create content in the traditional sense, e.g., research, writing, filming, editing, etc. That's hard work. Streamers don't do any of that; they literally sit in their basement and play video games all day. Why do they need support? Sure, wa…
I don't suggest any such thing. I think supporting a streamer or not is pretty amoral. It's all about whether or not you feel that you would like to contribute financially to a given streamer whose work you enjoy.
As for why they need support? I don't think many people would say that streamers universally "need" anything. It's about whether or not you personally would like to give money to a person who brings you entertainment. You admit that there are a few YouTubers who you support on Patreon. Many Twitch streamers (most that I've seen) are also YouTubers and produce content there based on their streaming.
At the end of the day, I think your misconception is that you think of "supporting the streamer" as a transaction in payment for content produced and that entertainment is not content (or in some other way not worth supporting in the same way that traditional "content" is).
The question is simple: Is the content entertaining to me? Do I want to show my appreciation for the entertainment? That's all.
Personally, I have not subscribed to any Twitch streamers and I don't intend to. I appreciate what they offer, but I do not feel compelled to subscribe. And I don't think there's any moral quandary there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't pay to watch, they pay to support the streamer. Most streamers have subscriber/donation/cheer notifications appear on-screen in some way. Making partner on Twitch (which enables subscriptions) requires the streamer to have a consistent number of viewers each time they stream, and they must stream fairly often. It's not uncommon to see streamers with a fairly sizeable number of subscribers any given month.
Alright, I understand that. You suggest it's an ethical decision rather than economic; that streamers deserve the support. But why? I fund a few YouTubers on patreon, because they create content in the traditional sense, e.g., research, writing, filming, editing, etc. That's hard work. Streamers don't do any of that; they literally sit in their basement and play video games all day. Why do they need support? Sure, wa…
Some questions one might ask to challenge your example (but I don't want to imply you are wrong, it's your money you are giving to people you don't have to pay, it's your personal decision what you do with it):
Are your example YouTubers directly spending money on research/editing/filming, or are they also "just" investing time? Why is time spending research more deserving of money than time spend streaming if you enjoy the output of both?
How does money enable their creativity in ways that are not "less time spend making money in other ways = more time for content tantalor enjoys"?
With the creators I support on Patreon, I don't really think or know about how much time they spend on what they are doing (and some of them don't have a day job, so one might argue that they apparently already had enough money and my contribution doesn't enable anything more for me).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I just said, and you confirmed: Discord doesn't have a functional business. Discord currently makes no money. "Opportunites" are just that, opportunities. A lottery ticket is an opportunity, but it is not a business. Discord promises it will always be free with "no gotchas". It specifically notes no "slot limitations" as an example of that, which indicates premium tiers are unlikely. They promise to never charge f…
> And I have not ever seen an emoji pack for a chat service as an appealing sales item that's going to fund a startup. You underestimate gamers as a market. Valve's built a thriving business on virtual hats. Twitch sells access to premium emotes and a wider range of username colors as a subscription upgrade. "Cosmetic purchases" are huge. Discord could also do what Twitch does and let streamers offer recurring donati…
My thinking is that hats aren't that profitable without these kinds of tricks, and Steam effectively sponsored everything that happened at Valve before they implemented "gambling".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Discord Dev here) Awesome to hear Discords a good fit for workplace environments too, we've heard a couple success stories around remote teams swapping. Search is a huge priority for us, but its also something we wanna spend time getting right. e.g. soon!
This is a long shot, but if you could sign a HIPPA waver, I could convince the bureaucrats at my workplace to jump in.
Twitch is dying? They had 258k+ people watching The International. There were 130k watching an EULCS quarterfinal today. And those are just a couple of streams of the thousands that are online at any given time. Not to mention the popular streamers who have 10 of thousands of subs who pay $5+ a month which Twitch gets part of. Twitch is most definitely not "dying."
Curse is terrible. It's like the (current) Sourceforge of gaming sites. I seriously don't know why Twitch/Amazon would consider acquiring it.
Because as far as I know it has the only useful mod management tool. It's nice, works and doesn't cause problems. Every time I come back to WoW, there's the Curse client, ready to help me get my mods and settings all sorted again. It has never failed me. Are you able to say why you think Curse is terrible?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't pay to watch, they pay to support the streamer. Most streamers have subscriber/donation/cheer notifications appear on-screen in some way. Making partner on Twitch (which enables subscriptions) requires the streamer to have a consistent number of viewers each time they stream, and they must stream fairly often. It's not uncommon to see streamers with a fairly sizeable number of subscribers any given month.
Alright, I understand that. You suggest it's an ethical decision rather than economic; that streamers deserve the support. But why? I fund a few YouTubers on patreon, because they create content in the traditional sense, e.g., research, writing, filming, editing, etc. That's hard work. Streamers don't do any of that; they literally sit in their basement and play video games all day. Why do they need support? Sure, wa…
The way you chose to phrase this hints at your opinion towards playing a lot of video games.
I personally have subscribed to a tournament host and various (ex-)professional players at times just because I valued the content they produce enough to be okay with giving money to them.
> Does a streamer with more support produce better content than a streamer with less support?
In many cases yes they do, because higher income can make way for dedicated streaming hardware, better gaming hardware, better internet connections and probably other things too.