MDMAlliance said:
| S.T.A.G.E. said:
Reviews are arbitrary. It can effect the individuals choice when it comes to a sale no different that word of mouth (which is free advertising in itself). People watch reviewers because they trust or are entertained by their viewpoint and thus take into consideration what they say when they make decisions. This is the same for wine conisseurs or movie critics.
Reviews, previews, lets plays...its all exposure for products dude. If companies deny this they are missing something. You think they were is not area of effect, you give little credit to the booming new media source that is Youtube. Youtube has made stars in music, dance, videogames, etc and more.
Hell pro gamer Swoozie was even given free copies of DOA to give to his Youtube following since he's so popular by tecmo last gen. There is an effect.
I know the definition and the definition you gave in bold is exactly what Youtubers are doing.
|
Except it's not advertisement because reviews are done with the premise of checking whether or not it should be bought. Advertisement is solely done for the case of selling the product. An advertisement for a product would not, in any way, turn potential buyers away from the product. Youtubers are NOT reviewing a game to make people buy the game, that's not their intention. Youtubers also do NOT do Let's Plays in order to get people to buy the game, though some of them may tell you at the end of their video to try it out (in that case, what the YouTuber says at the end is advertisement), but the Let's Play itself was not advertisement. Also, pewdiepie doesn't refer to it as "free advertisement." He specifically says "free exposure and publicity" because he knows it ISN'T advertisement.
|
Then lets just do it your way and call it free publicity. The argument still continues regardless, just a different wording.
