-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Gggmanlives (sponsored influencer) has negative Anthem Review taken down (now edited + reuploaded). Original did not have correct watermark.
- Thread starter Kyuuji
- Start date
EA's "Sponsored" videos are ads(Thats why when you see EA Game Changer in the video you take the comments with a grain of salt). They aren't allowed to be negative. If it was an unsponsored video then it wouldn't have been taken down. Also doesn't help Australia doesn't have a CM anymore so all this communication is shoddy because of timezones.
OP
OP
Perhaps! I'd have classed that as having an issue with the video itself but on reflection this is probably the most likely case form the info we have. Nice one.
Absolutely, just really curious to know what the actual issue was lol.
I've just checked Jackfrags BFV review and he only displays the Gamechangers logo at the start of the video.
Most of the big Destiny streamers and YouTube content creators are in the program. Don't trust anything they say.
I saw the video and I don't rememeber Gggmanlives mentioning in the the video is sponsored.
I am not 100% sure of course, so please correct me if I am wrong.
I'm really confused right now.
His preview video of Anthem doesn't do anything different in terms of disclosure than what he did with his original review, so why now suddenly the problem? He disclosed he was part of the program and recieved a review copy because of it in the review, while in the preview he disclosed he was taken on a trip to try Anthem out because he's part of said program. He used the Game Changer logo in the exact same way as well.
Unless I'm missing something?
I'm not much of a fan of jumping the gun as it tends to backfire, so I'll just wait for futher clarification on the matter (if there is any)
His preview video of Anthem doesn't do anything different in terms of disclosure than what he did with his original review, so why now suddenly the problem? He disclosed he was part of the program and recieved a review copy because of it in the review, while in the preview he disclosed he was taken on a trip to try Anthem out because he's part of said program. He used the Game Changer logo in the exact same way as well.
Unless I'm missing something?
I'm not much of a fan of jumping the gun as it tends to backfire, so I'll just wait for futher clarification on the matter (if there is any)
Sponsored content from EA GameChangers are ads. If you ever see Sponsored in EA game videos take all comments with a grain of salt.
Again not 100% sure here, watched it once when it came out but I'm pretty sure he said something very similar to what he did in his preview (maybe even the same thing) "Thanks to EA Gamechangers who helped make this video possible." Which I personally think would count as verbal disclosure.
I don't see why he wouldn't as he has for every one of his other sponsored videos as far as I can recall.
Fucking amazing how y'all keep leaving out what the tweet actually says.
Not to mention how does this not call into question his other reviews.
Review embargoes should be 24-48 hours before release. Heck, 72 hours would be preferable in the digital online world we live in with sales of products being sent out 24-48 hours before release for delivery.
Reviews should exist to benefit the consumer, not the publisher or developer. Publishers tying bonuses to metacritic scores is not the fault of the consumer, it's the toxic work environment. Paid advertisements skirting around masking as reviews are trash. Trying to control the stem of feedback or honesty is a scummy move, regardless of you paying for the pleasure.
How you decide to launch your product is how you decide to launch it. Yes patches can change things but have you looked to the state of the GAAS model in this industry with trends shifting to release a broken game and fix it later? "Early entry" used as a scapegoat for "broken game, patches coming soon".
For as much as many around here and within the industry might want to call the consumer entitled, the industry is entitled as fuck when it comes to pre-order culture and doing everything it can to obfuscate the truth for day 1 sales.
Yes, an answer to all of this is stop pre-ordering games. But I'll still talk about what I see.
This is the typical case of a company not liking a sponsored video and taking it down for a technicality. It's ridiculous, but it's the way they protect themselves from this kind of backlash.
Basically, the contract is vague or difficult to implement, so the reviews they like are given a pass, the reviews they dislike are taken down because of a different interpretation of the contract.
If the review was glowing with praise, there is no chance it would have been taken down.
Streamer predictably uses this to gain subscribers and stand out.
Basically, the contract is vague or difficult to implement, so the reviews they like are given a pass, the reviews they dislike are taken down because of a different interpretation of the contract.
If the review was glowing with praise, there is no chance it would have been taken down.
Streamer predictably uses this to gain subscribers and stand out.
I fully believe that the video was taken down because of disclosure stuff and him being in the Gamechangers program, and he chose to leverage it and say it was because he was 'too real' to build an audience out of the shitstorm that he knew this would cause.
A few weeks ago he went on a sponsored trip to Japan to preview Anthem and came back with a really positive video and got raked over the coals for it from his audience for being a paid shill. This gets his cred back and will gain him new followers from the Youtube gamer community which is ready to jump on any anti EA bandwagon.
EA's PR people aren't stupid, they wouldn't do an obvious move like taking down a video for being negative and get it 100x the attention it would usually get. Especially when there are already dozens of negative Anthem reviews on Youtube to begin with.
A few weeks ago he went on a sponsored trip to Japan to preview Anthem and came back with a really positive video and got raked over the coals for it from his audience for being a paid shill. This gets his cred back and will gain him new followers from the Youtube gamer community which is ready to jump on any anti EA bandwagon.
EA's PR people aren't stupid, they wouldn't do an obvious move like taking down a video for being negative and get it 100x the attention it would usually get. Especially when there are already dozens of negative Anthem reviews on Youtube to begin with.
Gonna have to hear the specifics honestly.
If the dude failed to disclose properly then fair play, but I'd like to know what he did differently for this review that warranted the takedown.
Because EA could totally be using a technicality to remove negative criticism, which is still pretty bad.
If the dude failed to disclose properly then fair play, but I'd like to know what he did differently for this review that warranted the takedown.
Because EA could totally be using a technicality to remove negative criticism, which is still pretty bad.
JackFrags at least gives it like it's. He is very open and honest about issues within BFV.
At least that is my view as someone who has 150 or so hours in BFV and Jack brings up same issues that I have faced with the game.
This doesn't mean that some content creators aren't brown tonguing it up towards EA, but there is also members of "EA GameChangers" programs that says like it's.
This seems fairly likely. I wouldn't be surprised if he got a takedown notice, and immediately jumped to "I'm blacklisted" because, true or not, makes for great clicks and drama. But, this is assuming he didn't know what the issue was and...
... and he was quick to re-upload, which indicates to me that he spotted the error quickly enough, and fixed it in the process while bolstering his added story. He sounds sloppy, and EA is just being EA.
That part is ridiculous though because he still owns the content and can reupload it as desired.
Itd be alot different if ea could delete the video for good
You'll notice he does this in non-sponsored videos. In his normal videos he can do what he likes. Sponsored Videos are ads, so no major negativity allowed basically.
Its simple. Anthem is reviewing poorly and looks like it could bomb. Ybarra and the Gamechangers stuff is trying to stop the bleeding.
This is my feeling, plus why issue a review of a game based upon an incomplete version at an event?
I like GGG, but I've not watched the video yet so not 100% sure of what has happened.
My 'take' earlier in the thread is that I am creeped out by the existence of 'influencers'.
The tweet amuses me because of the implication, that I made explicit in my previous post. Nobody can take the high road in this incident, least of all gggmanlives.
There is definitely a breach somewhere, and I doubt it is due to it being critical. I've seen plenty of Game Changers be constructively critical over EA/DICE games including BF, Battlefront 2 etc.
The safe bet is that he just fucked up on the disclosure requirements so EA pulled it so they didn't get fucked in the ass by an advertising agency
Apparently dude said he was blacklisted by the publisher to save face with his audience, turns out he lied. Influencers are dodgy, world keeps turning.
"An Honest Review of Anthem" - The Reaper Hunter
"A Brutally Honest Review of the Anthem Demos" - Ninja Pups
"Is Anthem Any Good? My Honest First Impressions" - Force Gaming
"Anthem - Honest Review | A True Hate Love Story" - Rustopholis
*HONEST* Day 1 Anthem Impressions & Thoughts" - Blessious
"The Honest Truth about ANTHEM(Should you buy it)" - Jesimein
EA GAME CHANGERS, BABY!
"A Brutally Honest Review of the Anthem Demos" - Ninja Pups
"Is Anthem Any Good? My Honest First Impressions" - Force Gaming
"Anthem - Honest Review | A True Hate Love Story" - Rustopholis
*HONEST* Day 1 Anthem Impressions & Thoughts" - Blessious
"The Honest Truth about ANTHEM(Should you buy it)" - Jesimein
EA GAME CHANGERS, BABY!
Last edited:
There are companies that literally kill people or create wars for profit.
EA is a shitty company, one of the worst? Don't do that.
I imagine that EA wants to be strict and consistent with things like disclosure, since there are FTC guidelines that they'd want to follow if they don't want to risk getting in trouble. From https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/bus...tcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking
There will maybe be some differences in this case since the guy is from Australia, but that's the gist of it. Even if it's not a straight-up advertisement they would probably still want their influencers to follow the guidelines.
There will maybe be some differences in this case since the guy is from Australia, but that's the gist of it. Even if it's not a straight-up advertisement they would probably still want their influencers to follow the guidelines.
Sounds like there was a breakdown in communication. This may already be in place, but if not, a helpful policy would be to reach out to influencers before going through the Takedown process. Something like "We noticed part of your video isn't adhering to all the disclosure agreements and if the video isn't updated to be in compliance with 24 hours, we'll have to send a takedown notice as we'll be in breach of our disclosure contracts." To me, this seems like it would be pretty standard and maybe they did try to reach out but his inbox or communication method was just flooded and didn't see it. Hard to say, as the influencer himself has already shown himself to be not the most honest of narrators (stating he's been blacklisted, making assumptions), but either way, it feels like this could have been easily resolved without the controversy, and I really really doubt EA would be stupid enough to take down a video based on editorial critique given their policies.
Is he blacklisted really because of something negative or other breaches of contracts? I mean, I like him, but it's easy to turn things around and sell it as 'they dumped me because I said this and that' while it may or may not something entirely different.
If this is true, though, and it is because he criticised EA, this is some EA-bullshit right there.
If this is true, though, and it is because he criticised EA, this is some EA-bullshit right there.
I mean, I used to watch Jackfrags, but his channel has become advertiser heaven. EA is the prime suspect but there's others too like Nvidia.
Just look at BF5. When it was revealed he said he played it and it was the best thing ever. Then the public has access to the beta and he goes "yeah tihs needs time, its not that great". It conceded with EA announcing the delay to work more on the game. Pretty clear that his "honesty" here is heavily influenced by EA's "we'll fix it guys, don't worry" pivot.
Plus, each time there's a new update coming, he isn't afraid to point out flaws of the game, only to say "but the update will hopefully make everything right!" and then the update comes out "best. game. ever." until.... another update gets announced and its back to "we need to talk about BF5, guys!"
Look, I'm not saying he's an EA corporate shill or anything, but the way he presents his opinions often tend to pivot in a certain way and it's hard to ignore the EA gamechanger association.
He's not blacklisted (see threadmark); his original video was just taken down with EA saying it was a disclosure issue and it has been reuploaded since then.
How common is that title scheme in general on YouTube when it comes to people giving their opinions about... anything? I can see using word "honest" driving more clicks as people can perceive it as being more straight shooting about views X.
I'm pretty sure most of those aren't gamechangers? If they are they've done a truly earth shatteringly piss poor job at disclosing it.
Like I hate the "honest review" thing more than most, I stated as much in the review thread about it.
But at least way you worded the post came off as you insinuating they were all sponsored by EA.
Until the day influencers are called advertisers im never trusting any of them
influencer is a ridiculous phrase and there are so many different levels of what publishers pay for - it is impossible to know the deal with each one
the whole influencer situation needs to be properly regulated
influencer is a ridiculous phrase and there are so many different levels of what publishers pay for - it is impossible to know the deal with each one
the whole influencer situation needs to be properly regulated
Alright, thanks for the heads up! I'm still not used to the threadmark feature and rather look out on OP updates.
What a twist indeed. So he was not blacklisted but this is what he thought because they asked him to take the video down because conditions on disclosure on sponsored weren't met?
We don't really know at this point and as it's 1AM here in NSW where we both live I doubt we'll know anything till later this morning. Even then the info might be under non-disclosure.