Update 2:
More here, thanks to Hobbes in this post of the thread.
——
Update: Situation is still muddy but seems to be:
- -
The video has now been reuploaded (below). The only thing that's changed is the removal of the EA watermark so it seems something within it conflicted with the Gamechangers program.
Edit for clarity:
For some reason have seen a number derails defending EA as not being one of the worst companies in existence, which no one here has really made any real point of saying.
To add some context this is the only video of this content creator I've seen and certainly hold no affection for them. Nor is this a "defend him" thread. I made a point at the start of referencing how this is all apt in the face of a recent figure telling people they should trust influencers and the like over reviewers. People that are typically paid by a company to check out their game, over people working independently within industry establishments and the like (Kotaku, Gameinformer etc).
Yet we have one such person who is part of the EA Gamechangers program, posting a negative review of the game and it having been removed. I think that serves as a solid point for discussion. I also want to know whether this was supposed to be your standard promo-video that the content-creator then framed as a review, or whether EA are moving to actually paying people to assign good reviews and scores to shit/bad games.
If it's the latter then I have an issue with both sides of the camp, as muddying the waters with reviews that are paid to be posiitve is a blight on the industry regardless of whether the tactic employed elsewhere. I don't think because a bad practice is common, that it should be afforded complacency - as some have suggested in this thread.
Either way, this is a small crack in the veneer of 'EA Gamechangers' that gives us a peek into the underbelly. I think that's quite interesting as it's something we don't get too often, and don't have tabs on every deal EA has with different creators, but when they appear it's rarely in a favourable light.
Update (2/22/2019): EA has shared additional information with GameDaily related to the Gggmanlives Anthem video and the allegations that EA had it removed for negative content. EA runs two separate programs for influencer and content creator videos. Game Changers is the unpaid program (that will cover expenses to EA events), but as we know from the Apex Legends launch, EA also does directly sponsor influencers to generate content.
There are two separate watermarks that are used in these instances. For Game Changers, the watermark says, "Presented by Game Changers." That's the watermark Gggmanlives used in the past and told GameDaily was present on his original video (before it was re-uploaded). The other watermark, used when there's a sponsored content agreement and money changes hands is "Sponsored by EA."
EA has confirmed to GameDaily that it specifically requested that Gggmanlives replace the "Presented by Game Changers" watermark on the video with the one that reflects sponsorship, because that was the relationship for this content. He previously published another video from an event EA hosted in Tokyo with the Game Changers watermark that he says met EA's approval.
In a conversation on Twitter via direct message, Gggmanlives confirmed to me that he did receive compensation for this video, but claims it was under the Game Changers program (which EA told GameDaily in a comment earlier does not support review videos). As stated in the original story below, EA does not typically pay Game Changers more than a small stipend for incidentals when flying them out to events.
Gggmanlives has also tempered his assertion that EA has definitely blacklisted him. "I assume that relationship is severed now," he told me.
In his re-uploaded video and in a tweet pre-dating the re-upload, Gggmanlives is confident EA has blacklisted him. "I had to re-edit my original review for Anthem, because it was deemed too negative," he says. "And I guess on top of that, I've been added to the long list of blacklisted YouTubers."
Gggmanlives declined to share the contract he signed related to the videos or his correspondence with an EA PR representative in which he says that he was told to remove the video for its contents.
More here, thanks to Hobbes in this post of the thread.
——
Update: Situation is still muddy but seems to be:
- Guy is an 'EA GameChanger' and received the game as part of this.
- Guy puts up negative Anthem review - according to users here this has the usual disclosure he's done in other videos
- EA demands he takes down the video, he complies.
- Guy claims he's blacklisted and video was taken down for being negative
- Guy reuploads the video without the EA watermarks and disclosure
- EA reaches out and says he isn't blacklisted and the issue wasn't with the content, instead with the disclosure
- Guy disputes this as disclosure was the same as prior videos that were more positive, and still up.
- End result so far is a review by a paid influencer with no disclosure.
- -
The video has now been reuploaded (below). The only thing that's changed is the removal of the EA watermark so it seems something within it conflicted with the Gamechangers program.
Edit for clarity:
For some reason have seen a number derails defending EA as not being one of the worst companies in existence, which no one here has really made any real point of saying.
To add some context this is the only video of this content creator I've seen and certainly hold no affection for them. Nor is this a "defend him" thread. I made a point at the start of referencing how this is all apt in the face of a recent figure telling people they should trust influencers and the like over reviewers. People that are typically paid by a company to check out their game, over people working independently within industry establishments and the like (Kotaku, Gameinformer etc).
Yet we have one such person who is part of the EA Gamechangers program, posting a negative review of the game and it having been removed. I think that serves as a solid point for discussion. I also want to know whether this was supposed to be your standard promo-video that the content-creator then framed as a review, or whether EA are moving to actually paying people to assign good reviews and scores to shit/bad games.
If it's the latter then I have an issue with both sides of the camp, as muddying the waters with reviews that are paid to be posiitve is a blight on the industry regardless of whether the tactic employed elsewhere. I don't think because a bad practice is common, that it should be afforded complacency - as some have suggested in this thread.
Either way, this is a small crack in the veneer of 'EA Gamechangers' that gives us a peek into the underbelly. I think that's quite interesting as it's something we don't get too often, and don't have tabs on every deal EA has with different creators, but when they appear it's rarely in a favourable light.
Last edited: