obviously that happens but the positive outweighs the negative. 

Even if it does promote the game, they still deserve money for what they made.
Choosing to split the revenues is them being fair.

You dont deserve to make more money just for recording a gameplay than the guys who made that game from scratch.

people watch them for the creators personality. they are entertaining. If they were to cut their presence off youtube for a certain game you can bet your house total game sales will go down and the other games left on youtube will do much better. 

Those 40 men aren't all named Bob Cratcet are they?  No, they get paid for their work.  And I'll let you in on a little secret: they see maybe a cent of the money made from game sales.  

LP's are basically free advertising with greater success than a commercial.  

Wow, he certainly picked the right name for his YouTube channel. Maybe if he calmed down and read things more carefully he'd see most of what he is about to pop a blood vessel over is actually incorrect.

Also, I gotta laugh at the line you threw in about Microsoft being in a "distant second place" and needing to "do everything in their power to turn things around". So you're telling us you believe YouTuber's seeing a video titled "Fanmade Halo: Covenant Strike" instead of just "Halo: Covenant Strike" is going to sell them less consoles? You're reaching.

So? Even if they are ads, they are still made by Microsoft, or published by them, they took the initial financial risk to fund the game, they deserve the money when someone watches an entire playthrough of the story. If we cant filter out who buys the game because of the exposure, there's no wrongness in requesting a split of the royalties.

There's an argument here that multiplayer/open world games are exempt from this. Well, sure minecraft relies on youtube to sell minecraft, but they still have 100% right to request money for every video uploaded, because it's their game, that the devs are actively working hard at. Mojang has to pay the employees, pay the light bills, pay for their childrens education. They made a game so that consumers can buy.

Some LP's dont have the personality/commentator. Even so, I hardly think playing a game (which many people do for free) and talking over it (Also free) doesn't constitute an entire revenue cut off of microsofts games.

They chose to buy a rig to stream video of them playing a game. It's not a job with great job security, but they chose it, and so risk-reward.

Perhaps because youtube videos and the like are actually more like advertising for which MS (and Nintendo) don't have to pay a dime. So the question is why can't youtubers, who put is a decent amount of effort to make their videos, be given a reasonable amount of license and make a buck from these games since they are advertising the games for the publishers and platform holders?

Honestly, I've said that a few times...there are some games that I just don't care to play, but I love watching other people play. For example, I watched a full playthrough of Hatoful Boyfriend and though that it was an awesome game with fantastic writing, but I don't really care to ever play it myself

@Topic: It is a really dumb policy, and it seems to possibly be paving the road to nuke a bunch of videos when a new trailer comes out (like what SEGA did). Still, its a little alarmist to get too upset before anything is actually done with the policy

How can free advertisment possibly be hurting your business?  Ad's cost a lot of money to create; LP's are free and reach an audience more inclined to give a damn and actually buy the game.  Any finacial risk they took in making the game is made back in sales, any sale they lose from people who watch an entire game on youtube was a sale they were never going to get anyway.