Good point - the pandemic not only made created streamers and viewers because people were stuck inside, a lot of them were also newly unemployed. Now that restrictions in most countries are lifted and at least some are finding employment again, the pool of people that can spend time watching a stream will almost mechanically shrink - and thus the "viability" of the content form.
@@redhood7105 I can relate, I'm full of regret now and realizing I should have just done pre-recorded content on RUclips all those years ago when I started streaming on Twitch back in 2015. :/
Yeah a group of engineers and I worked on an MVP for a new live-streaming platform. The three of us got everything working with a nice UI and some decent chat features; but even the with the small sample size of streamers we had testing the platform, we quickly realized how ridiculously expensive running a streaming platform actually is. It’s really hard for a new company to even consider jumping into this space. A lot of work would need to go into a new highly efficient compression algorithm or something to make it cost viable outside of owning your own ad network or some other way to collect heavy consistent revenue
The only way around this that I can see is decentralizing it so that viewers also help uploading the stream to others. Sadly, this increases delay but if done well it can make hosting viable
@@FlorianWendelborn I also thought about it, but there are a number of difficulties that also quickly came to mind: web users will most likely only be able to receive, for transmission they will need to watch from the application, the transmission speed is the quality of the stream, a user who watches in 480p will only be able to transmit 480p, a user with bad outgoing channel will only be able to receive
@@vrnehot There’s actually solutions for the 480p problem. You can simulcast multiple resolutions in such a way that e.g. 720p actually uses the 480p stream as well, so it’s some additional data on top of the 480p but it shares the 480p data
Another way I thought about is to make an excellent system inside the platform instead of directly inserting ads into the stream. Do not compete with Google in targeted advertising delivery, but come up with a way for channel authors to want to place ads through your system for a small commission, because it is more convenient
I've always wondered if torrenting & streaming could get combined to solve the problem of data egress costs. Along with context-based compression (seriously middle out compression) so the streamers face & core-content* is clear everything else is down rezzed kinda of like the flipside of foveated rendering; where on the user side you could literally use a face-filter to deep-fake higher resolution when bandwidth is bad. And whether USA's poor fiber infrastructure is severely inhibiting competition that can't purely be solved by algorthim's & codecs. *Drove me nuts with google-stadia when the whole game screen would pixelate when only I care about 10% in the center.
RUclips videos >> Twitch streams everyday of the week for me! I know before hand how much time i will have to invest to watch the content and i know the topic of the video.. no way i would sub on Twitch and look a 2h stream where the topics are unknown and the content isnt probably compressed enough! The bad side is i dont have a direct line with you but i feel i still am in touch with you watching your videos.. not sure i would have something interesting to say to you based on the topic you cover.. im more like focused on really learning from you and im achieving that already on YT 😊 hope it makes sense! Thx a lot sensei for your insights on these topics 😊
This. Asmon's take was quite similar: "I care about the YT video that will come out of the stream. The video will remain. The stream is gone after it's closed, noone will look it up"
I have been watching RUclips everyday for longer than i can remember and one very important feature for me is to set the playback speed. I usually watch everything at x2 speed to learn as much stuff in as little time as possible. I don't think that's possible with live streaming
+1. Play videos at 1.5x speed if you want to learn nuances (a technical video) and 2x speed for 'entertainment". Listening to Theo Rants now at 2x Anybody who listens to 1x video is either dull (slow) or is forced to (live) IMO. Actually some of the content creators at 1x sound a bit mentally challenged, that's how slow they talk..
Gonna be honest, I always thought streaming was stupid. It's like, "you know all of those cool things you see on live stream clips on RUclips? If you watch me for 3 hours, you might see one of those 2-15 minute clips!" My time is more precious than that. I'll wait for the good stuff to be clipped for me.
@@raylopez99 Not in the slightest. An album is art that has been crafted by people that have a record of making a specific type of art I enjoy. Live streaming is usually improved. Not only that, but if I don't like a song on an album, I can skip to one I do like. With live streaming you are stuck watching them at this point in time. No skipping ahead, because ahead hasn't happened yet.
Most of the people I know who watch stream admit that they mostly use it as background noise. Streams simply aren't all that interesting a lot of the time. If you consider edited game streams, they usually compress anywhere from 10-20 hours into a 20-30 minute video, and even then it's not like the entire video is all that entertaining either.
A lot of comments about 'why watch 2hr of content when you can see good clips on YT after the fact' - thats why it blew up during the pandemic. People wanted to have that deep connection with someone, live just meant it didn't feel like such a parasocial relationship because the creator could respond immediately.
There is a small chance that eventually we could get to a point where video encoding could cut costs low enough. I believe AV1 encoding (which twitch happily still doesn't support) is a good example of. I could see discord type live streaming working well for the smaller community streams.
I'm the process of moving all my old Twitch VODs over to RUclips, I can't stand the dumpster fire that Twitch has become. I started there in 2015! Not allowing content creators to simulcast is a recipe for disaster!
So far, no streamer was creative or interesting enough to make me watch his stream for hours. I usually watch only the distilled good stuff on RUclips. The most time, I've spent on Twitch was, when Twitch plays Pokemon started. So to me, it is a good platform, when user interaction is necessary for the stream, which is more than streamers reading the chat from time to time or reading some messages out loud. It is also great, when live really matters. For example in tournaments, where people want to know the newest state of the game as soon as possible. In other scenarios, I also see Twitch dying.
I never understood why Amazon didn’t integrate far deeper into Twitch as they could. They have a deep ad platform there and twitch streamers have shown to be great Merch pushers. Would be a way to rack up ad money and Econ fees as long as you don’t degrade the watch experience too much. Instead, I would see 3 pre-video ads and just closed the app
Hey! @theo rants I have a question for you. Would the cost reduce within a reasonable amount if a streaming platform started picking up AV1 encode/ decode & reduce the max bitrate by a lot? Maybe I'm missing something else but the bitrate reduction should lower the cost aswell? And what about increasing the delay again. Back in 2015 ish we had a delay of 15 ish seconds with the chat. I believe it costs way more to get such effective servers to provide video with such fast times. Could a platform with AV1 / lower bitrate limits/ higher delay servers be profitable?
Maybe I'm too FOSS-pilled, but it seems to me that a possible way forward is to break up the services Twitch provides and, notably, have some of the compute those services consume be either paywalled or not part of the platform/main product outright - allowing users to run those parts themselves if they choose to. For example, how much of XQC's supposedly million-dollar-per-month cost to Twitch is from just re-encoding his stream to the different qualities Twitch provides? And would it not be possible for Twitch to charge extra for that re-encoding, while offering endpoints for XQC (or whichever streamer would be interested) to upload their own pre/re-encodings if they have the capability to do so? I know that currently re-encoding is only available to streamers that get "big" enough, but this seems like an alternative that not only might be more financially manageable, but also would further empower creators instead of impede them. Pushing this type of reasoning further, maybe what would give Twitch the most resilience is to *degrade* it's primary offer to simply be that of a stream aggregator and/or viewer/stream P2P matchmaker. And have video re-encoding, as well as CDN for streams, be separate (paid) services in their ecosystem. Of course, they would have to invest more directly into OBS and/or other streaming tools to make sure people can onboard just as easily, or else most of their traffic would dry up pretty quickly. I do think this is the best way to ensure longevity for both the platform and the medium of human expression that is online streaming - and Twitch can even take advantage of this to offer more discrete places where ads can be inserted in exchange for streamer revenue if they want!
XQC’s stream being re-encoded is cheap. Sending it to hundreds of thousands of people around the world at low latency is why it’s expensive. Bandwidth isn’t free.
@@theorants Good point, I picked the wrong service; the stream delivery could take the place of re-encoding in my example. i.e. you either pay Twitch for the bandwidth used or you give them a url (or map of regions -> urls) that the Twitch client connects to. You can either host that url yourself or pay some specialized third party/CDN to take care of it. Twitch makes on-boarding easy-ish for streamers, but suffers from the bandwidth costs of its largest streamers - precisely those who would be making enough money from streaming to justify shelling out for the amount of bandwidth use they cause. I don't know what kind of pricing Twitch would need to actually turn a profit in this way, so it might just not be possible. Twitch might also simply have access to better deals for bandwidth than any streamer could.
Is it possible that they're banking on streaming costs going down long term? I don't know how viable a RUclips type video streaming would have been a while ago. Or are we only going to see marginal savings from hardware improvements?
here is an idea: you make a vtuber only Livestream platform, you're not sending the video just the audio and some tracking data that is rendered in browser 😂 that should be cheaper right? and we can all be anime girls😂
Twitch is not actually dead; viewers are looking for new refreshing content and many streamers are not delivering that at the moment. What worked pre 2021 is far different now. Twitch won't really die while top streamers still pull in a large amount of viewership, viewers like to interact and chat with the streamer and each other. The streamer needs to become more creative and be innovative.
It is clear that Twitch may not have fully considered the consequences of their new policies. While they may have anticipated a significant increase in revenue, the outcome has been quite different. Instead of boosting their profits, these policies have had a detrimental effect on streaming on their platform, and potentially on others as well.
Good. I've never understood the appeal of Twitch, people watching mostly gamers for 8 hours straight, and paying them hard earned money for brief acknowledgement. It's the ultimate parasocial relationship. Recently Diablo 4 came out, and I wanted to tune in to see what some of the top players thought and if it was worth buying. Then to find out there is a top player, who has a kid and a wife, had been streaming for 23 hours straight chasing a world first. That shit's just fucking sad. Not to mention all the flexing going on. Streamers suing each other over petty drama, and other streamers not involved in said drama offering to pay the legal fees. Not to mention the net contribution over all is mass procrastination. For every 1 streamer making a living, there's 10k-100k viewers every day wasting hours on end watching someone else, instead of doing something with their lives. How many more people does that inspire to start streaming, that end up wasting more time not getting anywhere. That's not to say I don't think people should be allowed to stream, or watch streamers ... but I'll be interested to see what our production rate looks like in 10 years when essential workers/trades end up retiring and have no one to fill the jobs because everyone just wants to be an influencer or a Twitch streamer.
I don’t even know why you’re streaming. Yeah, it’s good to milk the most out of your audience wherever they are, but just pump out more RUclips videos.
Making high quality videos is hard and you can't predict the return. Making clips from vods have lower risk, imagine taking a week for a video and only get 50k views vs making 5 clips from a 1h vod and generating 30k views each
@@neociber24 in that regard I see what you mean. Interact with people turn everything into content. But idk. In theos case id just pump out massive content on RUclips and disregard twitch. His best content seems to come from his rants like this one.
personally i think self hosted or peer to peer platforms / fediverse are teh way forward, take owncast or peertube as an example, teh challenge that might need to be solved is making it easier for people to find teh content they want across all these different services and offerings, but that sounds like a task an ai powered search could solve
im a musician/performer of 25 years and i cant afford to stream on twitch. worst exchange of time for return ever. Never made a penny. Never made minimum. They keep it I guess.
do you think youtube is profitable? my guess is that youtube is still in phase of spending on a platform that might be profitable in the future, when youtube will turn the ball to make profit - you will also see 50/50 ppl don't realize the cost of infra
I wonder if you could make an inverted pyramid scheme webrtc thing where one viewer serves videos to two other viewers, it'd be a total nightmare in terms of connection reliability though.
"charge the viewers right?!" -- lmaooooo if only it were that simple! people get sooo mad when they are given a 15-30 sec ad that supports the creator for FREE on the viewers behalf.. the monetization culture basically anywhere that isn't twitch is essentially non-existent! Memberships on YT are there, but I'm sure the ratio of members to subscribers for every channel is extremely low!
Twitch have become what all monopolized companies become at their peak; greedy. And they better be careful because there are other competitors who have their own fully working, high quality streaming service.
You can't complain about twitch not providing enough value for their split while at the same time saying that the competition is not up to the standard. Streaming is just too expensive.
Floatplane doesn’t rely on an ad network to monetize free users. All viewers are paying customers covering their bandwidth costs and more. Ad revenue per user is abysmally small in comparison for the service provider. But on the other hand. The reach for content creators are also a fraction, which means sponsorships are kind of out of question by default. That’s in many regards where most content creators makes the bulk of money to actually being able to provide the content. Basically, it’s a complex system
Rumble is doing it right. They've built out their own datacenters and are running on their own hardware. Doing something like this in the cloud just isn't feasible unless you own that cloud platform.
how will it help? You need compute intensive servers to run AI, for what benefit? The problem is viewers costing Twitch without paying for it relative to resource costs.
@theorants I agree with a lot of what you’ve said but you should maybe look at what floatplane is doing by Linus tech tips. They seem to be doing amazing stuff and have much higher bit rate than any other platform
@@theorants Maybe build something cool and get 2-3 yrs of running money to build an Ad ecosystem. I think with passion and a similar mentality to how T3 was created and maintained will be useful. The Ad ecosystem is something that needs to be created organicaly. Creating T3 Admin tools such as Ads + Marketing Teams CRM Web Tools. Build in a MVP process with everything including Admin teams. Yes I agree with the 2nd half of the video. But the right management style and passion will be key.
Money. 10_000 opened unix sockets is going to eat up a server and the routers sitting in between. You would have to put computer servers in co-location internet buildings across the earth's surface (like netflix, google, amazon). Since most guys don't know how to do that anymore, somebody might try the cloud route. No way you're going to rent VMs to make a Video Platform because it would cost like $1000 an hour. The cloud also counts your broadband bandwidth usage and charges you a meter fee. Really expensive. Video eats 5Mbps or 10Mbps; multiply that by 10_000. You better hope the ISP doesn't reset their over-burdened cache-routers because some firewall flagged your streams as possible security flooding attacks. Your video better use RTMP^^UDP or whatever protocols that help alleviate sending direct stream sockets to everybody. So many things need to happen to rebuild twitch like money. The Gaming industry could do it, because people will pay to see a video game played. Live streaming a talk show, nope. Back in the 2000s it was easy to start because companies were willing to bet and test the possibilities of unknown streaming platform. 10 years later, we all know that a free streaming company is like owning a boat; nothing but debt. You better have a second source of revenue to support the streaming platform. The original guys of youtube were in heavy debt and lucked up because google bought them out. Google still does not make profit from youtube. This might be the first company to stop streaming video and bow out. Its going back to where these companies will sign certain streamers to exclusive deals.
Live content is just inherently harder to consume. Specially when you're working a job.
Good point - the pandemic not only made created streamers and viewers because people were stuck inside, a lot of them were also newly unemployed. Now that restrictions in most countries are lifted and at least some are finding employment again, the pool of people that can spend time watching a stream will almost mechanically shrink - and thus the "viability" of the content form.
Even when I didn't have things to do I couldn't stomach it. Lives were never a thing to me.
Live is too much pressure
😅
@@redhood7105 I can relate, I'm full of regret now and realizing I should have just done pre-recorded content on RUclips all those years ago when I started streaming on Twitch back in 2015. :/
Yeah a group of engineers and I worked on an MVP for a new live-streaming platform. The three of us got everything working with a nice UI and some decent chat features; but even the with the small sample size of streamers we had testing the platform, we quickly realized how ridiculously expensive running a streaming platform actually is.
It’s really hard for a new company to even consider jumping into this space. A lot of work would need to go into a new highly efficient compression algorithm or something to make it cost viable outside of owning your own ad network or some other way to collect heavy consistent revenue
The only way around this that I can see is decentralizing it so that viewers also help uploading the stream to others. Sadly, this increases delay but if done well it can make hosting viable
@@FlorianWendelborn I also thought about it, but there are a number of difficulties that also quickly came to mind: web users will most likely only be able to receive, for transmission they will need to watch from the application, the transmission speed is the quality of the stream, a user who watches in 480p will only be able to transmit 480p, a user with bad outgoing channel will only be able to receive
@@vrnehot There’s actually solutions for the 480p problem. You can simulcast multiple resolutions in such a way that e.g. 720p actually uses the 480p stream as well, so it’s some additional data on top of the 480p but it shares the 480p data
Another way I thought about is to make an excellent system inside the platform instead of directly inserting ads into the stream. Do not compete with Google in targeted advertising delivery, but come up with a way for channel authors to want to place ads through your system for a small commission, because it is more convenient
I've always wondered if torrenting & streaming could get combined to solve the problem of data egress costs.
Along with context-based compression (seriously middle out compression) so the streamers face & core-content* is clear everything else is down rezzed kinda of like the flipside of foveated rendering; where on the user side you could literally use a face-filter to deep-fake higher resolution when bandwidth is bad.
And whether USA's poor fiber infrastructure is severely inhibiting competition that can't purely be solved by algorthim's & codecs.
*Drove me nuts with google-stadia when the whole game screen would pixelate when only I care about 10% in the center.
RUclips videos >> Twitch streams everyday of the week for me! I know before hand how much time i will have to invest to watch the content and i know the topic of the video.. no way i would sub on Twitch and look a 2h stream where the topics are unknown and the content isnt probably compressed enough! The bad side is i dont have a direct line with you but i feel i still am in touch with you watching your videos.. not sure i would have something interesting to say to you based on the topic you cover.. im more like focused on really learning from you and im achieving that already on YT 😊 hope it makes sense! Thx a lot sensei for your insights on these topics 😊
usually the chit chat that some people are not interested in is also not part of the vods
This. Asmon's take was quite similar: "I care about the YT video that will come out of the stream. The video will remain. The stream is gone after it's closed, noone will look it up"
I haven't monetised but I'm streaming 3 hours a day to 10 or so people. I'm just bleeding twitch of money 😅
I have been watching RUclips everyday for longer than i can remember and one very important feature for me is to set the playback speed. I usually watch everything at x2 speed to learn as much stuff in as little time as possible. I don't think that's possible with live streaming
+1. Play videos at 1.5x speed if you want to learn nuances (a technical video) and 2x speed for 'entertainment". Listening to Theo Rants now at 2x Anybody who listens to 1x video is either dull (slow) or is forced to (live) IMO. Actually some of the content creators at 1x sound a bit mentally challenged, that's how slow they talk..
@@raylopez99 I just don't like the sound at a higer rate then like 1.2 - 1.3 🤷♂️
@@Tobsson Same here. I would gladly watch/listen to someone "spew information" at 5x, but "voice" at even 1.5x is unbearable for me.
The great thing about RUclips and similar platforms is that you decide when to watch whatever video you want. It's like async TV.
Gonna be honest, I always thought streaming was stupid. It's like, "you know all of those cool things you see on live stream clips on RUclips? If you watch me for 3 hours, you might see one of those 2-15 minute clips!"
My time is more precious than that. I'll wait for the good stuff to be clipped for me.
I bet you listen to the "Greatest Hits" compilations in music and drink your wine/scotch "blended" too? Smart, smart.
@@raylopez99 I usually listen to full albums, because I know I like the band. And I don't drink alcohol.
@@darkdudironaji You are exception then to your own rules...that proves the rule.
@@raylopez99 Not in the slightest. An album is art that has been crafted by people that have a record of making a specific type of art I enjoy. Live streaming is usually improved. Not only that, but if I don't like a song on an album, I can skip to one I do like. With live streaming you are stuck watching them at this point in time. No skipping ahead, because ahead hasn't happened yet.
@@darkdudironaji
My dude over there really thought he owned you lmao
Most of the people I know who watch stream admit that they mostly use it as background noise. Streams simply aren't all that interesting a lot of the time.
If you consider edited game streams, they usually compress anywhere from 10-20 hours into a 20-30 minute video, and even then it's not like the entire video is all that entertaining either.
I just realized, Every Streamer I watch on Twitch, I found via RUclips first.
next video: i fixed twitch
A lot of comments about 'why watch 2hr of content when you can see good clips on YT after the fact' - thats why it blew up during the pandemic. People wanted to have that deep connection with someone, live just meant it didn't feel like such a parasocial relationship because the creator could respond immediately.
People don’t care about streams on Twitch, they care about the RUclips video.
RUclips please fix your chat 😢
Dude, you’re amazingly insightful. Your content is awesome because you have first hand experience.
“Commend anyone trying to create it.“
I’m looking at you Floatplane
Theo on Floatplane?? Ask Luke!!
2:44 "not the other way around" thats pretty accurate!
There is a small chance that eventually we could get to a point where video encoding could cut costs low enough. I believe AV1 encoding (which twitch happily still doesn't support) is a good example of.
I could see discord type live streaming working well for the smaller community streams.
They are going for AV1 now
I'm the process of moving all my old Twitch VODs over to RUclips, I can't stand the dumpster fire that Twitch has become. I started there in 2015! Not allowing content creators to simulcast is a recipe for disaster!
So far, no streamer was creative or interesting enough to make me watch his stream for hours. I usually watch only the distilled good stuff on RUclips. The most time, I've spent on Twitch was, when Twitch plays Pokemon started.
So to me, it is a good platform, when user interaction is necessary for the stream, which is more than streamers reading the chat from time to time or reading some messages out loud. It is also great, when live really matters. For example in tournaments, where people want to know the newest state of the game as soon as possible. In other scenarios, I also see Twitch dying.
New camera?)
The image looks awesome!
Yep! S5II X, lots of videos coming soon about how much I love it
@@theorants nice! Also looking forward to buying my first camera, for now just recording videos on my iPhone on my other channel.
@@theorants Now we can see your crisp shirts even crispier 👍 I am an enjoyer of your shirt collection
I never understood why Amazon didn’t integrate far deeper into Twitch as they could. They have a deep ad platform there and twitch streamers have shown to be great Merch pushers. Would be a way to rack up ad money and Econ fees as long as you don’t degrade the watch experience too much. Instead, I would see 3 pre-video ads and just closed the app
Management incompetence
Twitch has always been a shitty platform I’ve never been able to understand why people even use it.
It was great for so long, hate to be the “I miss the old days” guys but it really was special
great video theo... filleted perfectly about the current state of streaming and what options we(as users of the platform be it consumer/producer) have
I’m usually on Rumble for sports, RUclips for news and Content Craters. I’m still on Twitch but I only follow two people.
What about P2P Video Streaming? Wouldn't that help with the cost? IP of the users would leak but is that too much of a concern?
Hey! @theo rants
I have a question for you. Would the cost reduce within a reasonable amount if a streaming platform started picking up AV1 encode/ decode & reduce the max bitrate by a lot?
Maybe I'm missing something else but the bitrate reduction should lower the cost aswell? And what about increasing the delay again. Back in 2015 ish we had a delay of 15 ish seconds with the chat. I believe it costs way more to get such effective servers to provide video with such fast times.
Could a platform with AV1 / lower bitrate limits/ higher delay servers be profitable?
15 seconds is a long time. The original update to lower that latency was magical - no one is going to want to go back.
Maybe I'm too FOSS-pilled, but it seems to me that a possible way forward is to break up the services Twitch provides and, notably, have some of the compute those services consume be either paywalled or not part of the platform/main product outright - allowing users to run those parts themselves if they choose to.
For example, how much of XQC's supposedly million-dollar-per-month cost to Twitch is from just re-encoding his stream to the different qualities Twitch provides? And would it not be possible for Twitch to charge extra for that re-encoding, while offering endpoints for XQC (or whichever streamer would be interested) to upload their own pre/re-encodings if they have the capability to do so? I know that currently re-encoding is only available to streamers that get "big" enough, but this seems like an alternative that not only might be more financially manageable, but also would further empower creators instead of impede them.
Pushing this type of reasoning further, maybe what would give Twitch the most resilience is to *degrade* it's primary offer to simply be that of a stream aggregator and/or viewer/stream P2P matchmaker. And have video re-encoding, as well as CDN for streams, be separate (paid) services in their ecosystem. Of course, they would have to invest more directly into OBS and/or other streaming tools to make sure people can onboard just as easily, or else most of their traffic would dry up pretty quickly.
I do think this is the best way to ensure longevity for both the platform and the medium of human expression that is online streaming - and Twitch can even take advantage of this to offer more discrete places where ads can be inserted in exchange for streamer revenue if they want!
XQC’s stream being re-encoded is cheap. Sending it to hundreds of thousands of people around the world at low latency is why it’s expensive. Bandwidth isn’t free.
@@theorants Good point, I picked the wrong service; the stream delivery could take the place of re-encoding in my example.
i.e. you either pay Twitch for the bandwidth used or you give them a url (or map of regions -> urls) that the Twitch client connects to. You can either host that url yourself or pay some specialized third party/CDN to take care of it.
Twitch makes on-boarding easy-ish for streamers, but suffers from the bandwidth costs of its largest streamers - precisely those who would be making enough money from streaming to justify shelling out for the amount of bandwidth use they cause.
I don't know what kind of pricing Twitch would need to actually turn a profit in this way, so it might just not be possible. Twitch might also simply have access to better deals for bandwidth than any streamer could.
@@J4j4yd3r or twitch/streamers offering their own in-browser torrent system to lower distribution costs
Is it possible that they're banking on streaming costs going down long term? I don't know how viable a RUclips type video streaming would have been a while ago. Or are we only going to see marginal savings from hardware improvements?
i love twitch and its pool content
Dont forget the back mirror content
I’d be interested to know how Floatplane compares
here is an idea: you make a vtuber only Livestream platform, you're not sending the video just the audio and some tracking data that is rendered in browser 😂
that should be cheaper right? and we can all be anime girls😂
I support this idea. Then I don't have to see any vtubers on other platforms :D
Twitch is not actually dead; viewers are looking for new refreshing content and many streamers are not delivering that at the moment. What worked pre 2021 is far different now. Twitch won't really die while top streamers still pull in a large amount of viewership, viewers like to interact and chat with the streamer and each other. The streamer needs to become more creative and be innovative.
What do u think about live podcasts, audio only?
It is clear that Twitch may not have fully considered the consequences of their new policies. While they may have anticipated a significant increase in revenue, the outcome has been quite different. Instead of boosting their profits, these policies have had a detrimental effect on streaming on their platform, and potentially on others as well.
Good. I've never understood the appeal of Twitch, people watching mostly gamers for 8 hours straight, and paying them hard earned money for brief acknowledgement. It's the ultimate parasocial relationship. Recently Diablo 4 came out, and I wanted to tune in to see what some of the top players thought and if it was worth buying. Then to find out there is a top player, who has a kid and a wife, had been streaming for 23 hours straight chasing a world first. That shit's just fucking sad. Not to mention all the flexing going on. Streamers suing each other over petty drama, and other streamers not involved in said drama offering to pay the legal fees. Not to mention the net contribution over all is mass procrastination. For every 1 streamer making a living, there's 10k-100k viewers every day wasting hours on end watching someone else, instead of doing something with their lives. How many more people does that inspire to start streaming, that end up wasting more time not getting anywhere.
That's not to say I don't think people should be allowed to stream, or watch streamers ... but I'll be interested to see what our production rate looks like in 10 years when essential workers/trades end up retiring and have no one to fill the jobs because everyone just wants to be an influencer or a Twitch streamer.
I don’t even know why you’re streaming. Yeah, it’s good to milk the most out of your audience wherever they are, but just pump out more RUclips videos.
Making high quality videos is hard and you can't predict the return.
Making clips from vods have lower risk, imagine taking a week for a video and only get 50k views vs making 5 clips from a 1h vod and generating 30k views each
@@neociber24 in that regard I see what you mean. Interact with people turn everything into content. But idk. In theos case id just pump out massive content on RUclips and disregard twitch. His best content seems to come from his rants like this one.
Didn’t even have twitch before I found Primeagen
personally i think self hosted or peer to peer platforms / fediverse are teh way forward, take owncast or peertube as an example, teh challenge that might need to be solved is making it easier for people to find teh content they want across all these different services and offerings, but that sounds like a task an ai powered search could solve
im a musician/performer of 25 years and i cant afford to stream on twitch. worst exchange of time for return ever. Never made a penny. Never made minimum. They keep it I guess.
do you think youtube is profitable?
my guess is that youtube is still in phase of spending on a platform that might be profitable in the future, when youtube will turn the ball to make profit - you will also see 50/50
ppl don't realize the cost of infra
I think for youtube its gone be more profitable than for twitch
I believe RUclips is in profit, but not from live. It’s in profit thanks to the video, shorts and Premium platforms
@@MichaelBrooksUK I think if they are gone keep live, and possible make it better, the costs live is gone take is less than they will get in total
It’s their own datacenters 😂
I wonder if you could make an inverted pyramid scheme webrtc thing where one viewer serves videos to two other viewers, it'd be a total nightmare in terms of connection reliability though.
"charge the viewers right?!" -- lmaooooo if only it were that simple! people get sooo mad when they are given a 15-30 sec ad that supports the creator for FREE on the viewers behalf.. the monetization culture basically anywhere that isn't twitch is essentially non-existent! Memberships on YT are there, but I'm sure the ratio of members to subscribers for every channel is extremely low!
I wonder if p2p streaming technology is mature enough to provide similar experience while lowering the cost significantly.
I can't remember a time when twitch was run well
streaming is like the tv... tv is dead because no one want to sit behind a screen at a fix time for X hours
true i find it the same for tiktok too. the only time i do watch anything live is sports/ esports.
RUclips Live is still the best we can get.. I install and uninstall the twitch app many times and while working Twitch is just a distraction..
9:10 how we know that this video was edited by Theo :)
Hmm?
@@AndersonSilvaMMA when he edits his own videos he often forgets to remove those extra takes that other editors usually edit out
@@JLarky Thanks!
Back to work, back to school, back to office. Hard to watch live content when youre back to the bustle.
Twitch have become what all monopolized companies become at their peak; greedy. And they better be careful because there are other competitors who have their own fully working, high quality streaming service.
I do hope Twitch figures it out but yeah it's not looking good.
You can't complain about twitch not providing enough value for their split while at the same time saying that the competition is not up to the standard. Streaming is just too expensive.
can't have anything nice under capitalism 😔
They just need to focus on a great hooli chat
What about LTT's floatplane?
Overpaying content creators hurts them too I bet
Discord tho
I went to Twitch because of ThePrimagen and because RUclips chat is so fucking delayed.
Why not just use a federated solution Peertube and have the cost be put back on the streamer and have the audience pay for the stream?
What about Floatplane? Luke has said that the platform is profitable, and the costs don't seem that high at all.
Floatplane doesn’t rely on an ad network to monetize free users. All viewers are paying customers covering their bandwidth costs and more. Ad revenue per user is abysmally small in comparison for the service provider.
But on the other hand. The reach for content creators are also a fraction, which means sponsorships are kind of out of question by default. That’s in many regards where most content creators makes the bulk of money to actually being able to provide the content.
Basically, it’s a complex system
Why watch twitch when i can watch at my own pace on RUclips
Rumble is doing it right. They've built out their own datacenters and are running on their own hardware. Doing something like this in the cloud just isn't feasible unless you own that cloud platform.
YT live is better anyway. Video quality is way better on a phone connection.
Time to think about how AI can reduce streaming costs. The thing is... you need to hire a ton of developers again to get it done. 😂
how will it help? You need compute intensive servers to run AI, for what benefit? The problem is viewers costing Twitch without paying for it relative to resource costs.
AI is extremely expensive.
yes i yse twitch because of you
You and Tpain 😂
Twitch died because it got too popular.
TikTok live less go? 😅
Step one: Stop banning people for stupid reasons.
@theorants I agree with a lot of what you’ve said but you should maybe look at what floatplane is doing by Linus tech tips. They seem to be doing amazing stuff and have much higher bit rate than any other platform
Very close with Luke. Since they're pay-to-enter, their cost basis is very different, and they still struggle to make enough money to justify it.
More layoffs today.
hi
Live content is not going anywhere, live streams of kick, instagram, rumble, RUclips, and Tik tok are blowing up and doing good.
as a creator why do you care about stake owning kick, and the ad situation of rumble or kick , you get a fair revenue split and freedom
Twitch needs an "Elon-Treatment"
To kill it faster? It's not worth 40b, to reduce its value by 22b in a month would end it real quick.
Nope wrong
Why not build a Twitch replacement?
The second half of this video.
@@theorants Maybe build something cool and get 2-3 yrs of running money to build an Ad ecosystem. I think with passion and a similar mentality to how T3 was created and maintained will be useful. The Ad ecosystem is something that needs to be created organicaly. Creating T3 Admin tools such as Ads + Marketing Teams CRM Web Tools. Build in a MVP process with everything including Admin teams.
Yes I agree with the 2nd half of the video. But the right management style and passion will be key.
There are open source streaming solutions, but scaling is always hard in any case. They could be starting points.
Money. 10_000 opened unix sockets is going to eat up a server and the routers sitting in between. You would have to put computer servers in co-location internet buildings across the earth's surface (like netflix, google, amazon). Since most guys don't know how to do that anymore, somebody might try the cloud route. No way you're going to rent VMs to make a Video Platform because it would cost like $1000 an hour. The cloud also counts your broadband bandwidth usage and charges you a meter fee. Really expensive. Video eats 5Mbps or 10Mbps; multiply that by 10_000. You better hope the ISP doesn't reset their over-burdened cache-routers because some firewall flagged your streams as possible security flooding attacks. Your video better use RTMP^^UDP or whatever protocols that help alleviate sending direct stream sockets to everybody. So many things need to happen to rebuild twitch like money. The Gaming industry could do it, because people will pay to see a video game played. Live streaming a talk show, nope. Back in the 2000s it was easy to start because companies were willing to bet and test the possibilities of unknown streaming platform. 10 years later, we all know that a free streaming company is like owning a boat; nothing but debt. You better have a second source of revenue to support the streaming platform. The original guys of youtube were in heavy debt and lucked up because google bought them out. Google still does not make profit from youtube. This might be the first company to stop streaming video and bow out. Its going back to where these companies will sign certain streamers to exclusive deals.
Twitch sucks, Kick streaming for the win
So he doesn't like twitch but I's scared to leave or he wont/can't make money. Or/and is afraid yo start over on another platform 🥱🥱