Yes.

Game reviewers aren't making millions. Rental places share profits and people who lend games to their friends/used games... yeah they should probably be pissed off at them too.

But none of those examples are as bad as guys making millions off your work while not sharing any of the profits. It would be one thing if he was making thousands, but hes making MILLIONS. In most other industries people who want to show copyrighted work have to share profits.

That's an incorrect analogy. For the mixer, watching it being used does not give you its primary benefit: Mixing stuff.

I can watch videos of cars all day, it won't transport me to my job.

However, games are entertainment. Some people derive entertainment from watching games, especially very linear games that depend on story such as Heavy Rain or other Point N' Clicks. Some people are only really interested in the story of a game and so on.

Because Let's Players hate Nintendo for this. They want 100% of the money.

I stopped reading when I got to his tired and moronic movie analogy.

I feel like if this came from a more respected developer, people might not hate on it so much. Phil is regarded as a douche, perhaps rightfully so, but he's not completely without a point here. A compromise really ought to be made. I get that it's "free advertising" but personally I think that's a stupid argument. The fact that some douchebag can make $4 million a year by playing games and recording his asinine reactions to them, without having to give any credit to the people who made the games, is offensive to me.

Thiefs?

Nonsense. This guy has no idea.
Scenario 1: I come to your house and rob your house, burn your house down. That is a crime. There is a high chance of me getting caught and being sent to prison.
Scenario 2: I stream or download from internet, I harm no one. No crime has been committed.

He obviously has a strong opiniuon that most people don't agree with.

Buut you don't need to hate him just because you don't see eye to eye.

He is technically right that Game Devs should have every right to charge people making revenue off of their content (Nintendo does this I think).  But really, the smart move for developers would be to allow youtubers to use thier games to make money as the game dev. benefits also as it is basically free advertisement of thier game (most Devs. already do this).

Anyways, its his opinion, if you don't agree, then just move on, not everyone has the same opinion, and he is just one of thoes people who is very strongly opinionated, and vocal about his opinions as well.

He has a point. If there is revenue, the content owner should be included. Simply talking over it doesn't negate copyrights.

Good point, what about game plots on wikipedia and many many other outlets. If you can just read the story, then why play the game? (Well written)Story driven games make up likl %5 of all videogames.