To some degree, sure.  But, both Boogie and TB seem to prefer streaming other platforms...then again, that could be why.  Isn't really hurting them though, as much as it's hurting Nintendo for their fans not being able to see the kind of fun that can be had on the Wii U.

You're just showing that people have watched youtube videos about video games. I'm asking if it's exists, to show that people watch youtube vids and let's plays in order to see the story of a game without having to buy or rent the game.

I think Boogie is strongly overstating the effect that Youtube has on sales of non-indie games. Even a lot of smaller games see no change in sales despite getting millions of views on youtube. Exceptions to this point are just that: exceptions. While this policy doesn't help Nintendo, it certainly isn't the reason the Wii U is doing poorly.

And then theres TB who said virtually nothing.

I don't think the policy is good for anyone, but a lot of this hyperbole is just ridiculous...

So all 300k views for MGS: Twin Snakes, a game that sold 470k, are from people who played/own the game? Obviously a certain percentage of said views are from people who don't own the game. Especially since that is only one youtube video. 

as much as i like TB and Boogie i do feel Boogie is a bit overesmating lets plays would help the Wii U big time cause even without their stance on LP's i feel the Wii U would still be in the same postion as it is and well with TB is a PC only channel so he wasn't gonna cover any console only games in the first place.

Am I the only one who truly believes youtube doesn't affect sales that much? or if at all?

The only game I can think of that truly became popular thanks to youtube was Minecraft. 

I would like to see some hard evidence that Youtube really increases a game's sales by a significant margin (not including 'official' trailers and such, talking about Lets Play, Reviews, etc etc). Until someone can show me some real data, I will still believe that this 'free advertisement' on Youtube is pure crap made by gamers on the internet (which are the people who watch game youtubers in the first place).

A more important question here is would these people actually buy the game if they didn't have access to the videos? 

Marketing isn't a "hard evidence" kinda business.  They can only guess at the effects.  The general premise is the more positive exposure the better.  And YouTube brings lots of potential for positive exposure.  Especially with reviewers. But this is beside the point.  Nintendo is still behaving in an unethical way.  Commentary, news coverage, critique, and parody are all explicitly covered under the Fair Use doctrine, meaning Nintendo has no right to flag such content, which they have.  Now it is partly YouTube's fault for having the claim system set up in this way, but that doesn't excuse Nintendo.

damn... he angry! This is shitty but its with in Nintendo's own rights.... however he has a good point about how greedy Nintendo is making themselves look and how fanboys give them the "get out of jail" card every time.

Thus why i have also distanced myself from nintendo saddly :(

also i agree about the amiibos, Nintendo are being really really stupid about them!

I probably would've bought plenty of the games that I watched cutscenes of in order to understand the story. For example, I owned Halo 1- 3. I like the story of Halo games (and books), but I got worn out on gameplay, which I felt had a worstening campaign with each game. So instead of buying Halo 4 I just watched the cutscenes online and was satisfied. If I had no other option I would've just bought the game. I might've sold it afterwards, so maybe the net benefit wouldn't have been that great, but I can definitely see how this could hurt an story-heavy RPG, for example.