Chicken Caesar? The Hotness?

Jeff White wrote: So, some reviewers have now blatantly moved from providing critique to being nothing more than an infomercial?

Or play it once, give an objective review, then sell their complimentary promo copy for a profit on this site.

Anyway you look at, reviews, especially video reviews, have been coming out of the woodwork lately, so geeks can whore themselves out for free games. Hell, I've been tempted to do it myself.

I'd argue there's not much profit in it, though Dave. You have to play the game, read the rules, drive to a venue (unless you host, in which case you pay for snacks and have to clean up) then you have to sit and write, edit, photograph, and then edit some more. Then you get to post it to your site and others, all with different interfaces making it impossible to just copy/paste.

10 hours invested per article, 30$ to sell a used game. It's 3$ an hour, and that's not even counting expenses.

[quoteSecond, weren't you noting that you'd be first in line to help promote Capo after seeing nothing other than (coincidentally) a....PREVIEW VIDEO WITH TOM VASEL?
fortressat.com/index.php/forum/10-ameritrash/118083-capo

So, what's the difference? ][/quote]

The difference is that CAPO is not claiming hottness. It will not be a hot game until released, played by me and I declare it to be so, along with other gamers and not profiteers.

Chicken Caesar is Not hot, will never be hot, and even as vaporware stinks. The idea of declaring it hot smacks of dishonesty.

I see what you're saying. But Chicken Choker or whatever isn't claiming it either, is it? Boardgamegeek is. You have to understand that hotness is simply a measure of clicks on the subject or a related subject, not actual interest.

Fuck, when Crokigate hit, I was at the top of the hotness for 3 days. I was so impressed and proud of myself...I mean, what an achievement...(rolls eyes)...

So you see, if you take any stock whatsoever in BGG ratings, BGG Hotness, or really, anything relating to BGG, you're retarded. The whole site is a sales and marketing tool for the sole purpose of promoting products to hobbyists that has a large percentage of mentally compromised addicts as its constituents.

10 hours invested per article, 30$ to sell a used game. It's 3$ an hour, and that's not even counting expenses.

These reviewers are not only doing it for the money. They are doing it for board game fame. Salinas and his "epic films" have in his mind put him on par with Hollywood's top directors. It wouldn't surprise me if you found a director's chair in Salinas' house with a copy of Variety on it.

Salinas produces over the top commercials and then thinks he can dictate to the owner of the product.

Dude, you killed me with that Variety/director's chair bit. The visual was perfect. I think of "Board Game Fame" and all I can think is "you've got to be kidding me!"

Fame that doesn't get you paid or laid is useless. And even if Tom Vasel was not a minister, and not happily married with children, there's not a chance in hell that his videos are going to get his dick sucked. Same with Drake's articles, Thrower's articles, Salinas' videos, Lance "The Undead Viking" videos....it makes no sense to me.

Unless money or sex is the result, fame is absolutely worthless.

I think people mostly do it because they want to either "give back" for altruistic reasons, they do it because it's a hobby within a hobby, or they do it for the free shit. That's the only three viable reasons to do the reviewing thing.

I think people mostly do it because they want to either "give back" for altruistic reasons, they do it because it's a hobby within a hobby, or they do it for the free shit. That's the only three viable reasons to do the reviewing thing.

Dude apparantly you missed the article on BGG about Tom's trip to Essen. As Tom walked the halls like Travolta in Saturday Night Fever, people recognized him and he ATE IT UP!

Board game fame is a factor. Tom lives for it. Aldie and Derk need it! I have seen their faces at BGG Con as praise and applause were directed toward them.

The only person doing it to help the hobby is me. I said long ago I would accept nothing free. If I were doing it for fame, why would I self destruct any praise that was directed toward me as Steve Avery noted? You are right Board Game Fame is useless.

Steve Weeks wrote:

10 hours invested per article, 30$ to sell a used game. It's 3$ an hour, and that's not even counting expenses.

These reviewers are not only doing it for the money. They are doing it for board game fame. Salinas and his "epic films" have in his mind put him on par with Hollywood's top directors. It wouldn't surprise me if you found a director's chair in Salinas' house with a copy of Variety on it.

Salinas produces over the top commercials and then thinks he can dictate to the owner of the product.

Steve, I agree with you about much of what you say in this thread, but I think you are talking out of your ass about Jeremy. I never liked his videos, but I have been at a few game nights/days with the guy and he is a normal dude. He never mentions his videos; I wouldn't have known about them if one of my other friends didn't mention them.

He owns his videos; if he doesn't like how they are used, he should be able to dictate terms. The company can then use them on his terms or make their own shit.

He owns his videos; if he doesn't like how they are used, he should be able to dictate terms. The company can then use them on his terms or make their own shit.

I think this is subject to debate. Salinas' videos are TOTALLY and mean totally dependent on the product, unlike Tom's videos. In Tom's videos you see a nerd talking about a game. In Salinas' videos you see the game with a rules voiceover.

Salinas and Tom are both paid emplyees. They are ad men.

I agree they are ad men, but the time to film the video makes it Salinas'. If he were trying to make money of the videos and companies asked him to stop because he is filming their components, then I could see the complaint. He made these videos for whatever reasons suited him and then the companies used them in ways he didn't like. He has every right to make them create their own videos and stop using his. If there wasn't any value to his labor, then the companies would have done it on their own already.

Dude apparantly you missed the article on BGG about Tom's trip to Essen. As Tom walked the halls like Travolta in Saturday Night Fever, people recognized him and he ATE IT UP!

Seriously? Link that up, brother. I'd love to see that.

Board game fame is a factor. Tom lives for it. Aldie and Derk need it! I have seen their faces at BGG Con as praise and applause were directed toward them.

I dunno, it's one thing to have a cult of personality, like a reviewer, and another to be the brains behind a huge social networking site devoted to nerds. Aldie and Derk aren't just some schlub who writes or vids about something someone else made. They created something used millions of times a day and is recognized (for better or worse) as the de-facto leader in boardgame sites.

The only person doing it to help the hobby is me. I said long ago I would accept nothing free.

OK, this is where we part ways. There's plenty of people (myself included) who do it for more altruistic reasons than free shit or fame. I give most of my shit away, and I certainly don't have the "fame" thing, and I make a good living, so there's no real impetus for me to do this other than just to do it. Especially since I get games that I really, really don't want to review, yet they get sent to me.

If I were doing it for fame, why would I self destruct any praise that was directed toward me as Steve Avery noted? You are right Board Game Fame is useless.

Because some people thrive on infamy and controversy where others live for high praise and the love of the masses. Not saying this is the case with you, but I am saying that self-destructing is not the opposite of getting benefit.

At the end of the day, we don't know why people do what they do. We can infer, suggest, theorize...but only the individual knows why they do what they do.

I agree they are ad men, but the time to film the video makes it Salinas'. If he were trying to make money of the videos and companies asked him to stop because he is filming their components, then I could see the complaint. He made these videos for whatever reasons suited him and then the companies used them in ways he didn't like. He has every right to make them create their own videos and stop using his. If there wasn't any value to his labor, then the companies would have done it on their own already

I
'm no lawyer but I have read the fair use copyright rules and it seems to me Salinas comes close to crossing the line. You can hold up a game in a video and comment on it but when you dissect it and shove the camera up every crevass of the game, I dunno.

To me its kind of like a movie reviewer showing the whole movie in a video and then giving you his review.

Not at all, Steve. Fair use is SPECIFICALLY for this kind of thing. Journalists get a pass, almost wholesale, in using copyrighted material for the purpose of education, criticism and news reporting. He passes muster on all 3, although education is a little hairy.

17USC:T107 wrote: Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

(1)the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2)the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3)the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4)the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

What the companies did is wrong on a variety of levels. They took his product, without license, and posted it to their website. IIRC, they edited it as well. That's illegal. If Salinas had any balls, he'd have sued them since he's done with the video business. He'd most assuredly have won.

I know what you're saying, with regard to the fact that his videos contain imagery of ALL of the game bits, so he can be said to be using ALL of the product for his videos, but the fact is that he is using them for critical purposes as well as news reporting.

The caveats in the bulleted sections are there to guide judges who would hear suit against infringement when someone is using another's work principally in another product, such as taking a board game and using the art in a video game of your own creation, then selling it.

Jeremy's in the clear, at least in regard to this. It's arguable that others could bring suit against him for use of their music in his videos, but that's another story.

Not at all, Steve. Fair use is SPECIFICALLY for this kind of thing. Journalists get a pass, almost wholesale, in using copyrighted material for the purpose of education.

What the companies did is wrong on a variety of levels. They took his product, without license, and posted it to their website. IIRC, they edited it as well. That's illegal. If Salinas had any balls, he'd have sued them since he's done with the video business. He'd most assuredly have won.

Interesting discussion. Believe me there is no crime in editing a long winded Salinas video. It is a blessing!

Aldie and Derk aren't just some schlub who writes or vids about something someone else made. They created something used millions of times a day and is recognized (for better or worse) as the de-facto leader in boardgame sites.

Aldie and Derk don't write anything. They count on the fact that most of their users haven't read Tom Sawyer! Whitewashing that Fence is fun!