Jump to content

What do you look for in a youtube channel??


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

All excellent suggestions, but to mention one in particular that hasn't been mentioned much - please know the rules. Nothing is more frustrating than searching for a battle report of your army only to find the person who's playing it doesn't have a clue what any of the models do. Especially annoying when one of those rules would have changed the game. 

While it's inevitable that some mistakes will be made, channels like Mini Wargaming make slip ups so often it hardly feels like AoS. This is probably best fixed by time to learn and get a feel for an army, but I think it's always a good idea to learn an army off screen and bring your best on screen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Aaron, i’m looking forward to seeing what content you eventually produce for YouTube.

I’m 8ish weeks into my channel: AoS Coach;

Why do I subscribe to content creators? They are interesting, they can articulate their message effectively, passionate, and have personality. 

The challenge as a content creator is that there is a significant cost in producing high quality content, however; it’ll be a while before you even return a single $1 back. 

If you enter the bat rep scene, you need to stand out from the pack. Multi cameras, know you rules, have well painted armies, and edited so i’m not just watching someone hit record on their camera. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrCharisma said:

Hey Aaron, i’m looking forward to seeing what content you eventually produce for YouTube.

I’m 8ish weeks into my channel: AoS Coach;

Why do I subscribe to content creators? They are interesting, they can articulate their message effectively, passionate, and have personality. 

The challenge as a content creator is that there is a significant cost in producing high quality content, however; it’ll be a while before you even return a single $1 back. 

If you enter the bat rep scene, you need to stand out from the pack. Multi cameras, know you rules, have well painted armies, and edited so i’m not just watching someone hit record on their camera. 

Love your stuff Coach.

I hate Battle Reports. For the Youtuber, they get views. But too often they’re not tactical, focusing on dice rolls more often than target selection. Those that tend to talk tactics tend to do some of the worst edited videos though. If you’re at the same level as Miniwargaming, you’re hitting above par.

The best Battle Reports I’ve seen is Wargamergirl, who did Warmahordes battle reports.

Looking at the most successful Youtubers, what they share is:

-Love for some or most of the Gaming Hobby

-Regular Content

-Don't sound either bored or like a news reporter while talking

-Have an opinion (Loving everything is an acceptable opinion too)

-Some beginner content

-Knowledge about the subject at hand, and being able to speak with said knowledge

-Regular interaction with commenters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love aos YouTube channels and subscribe to several.

What I’d like from a channel are as follows....

Decent battle reports with good camera work. 

Full campaigns played including firestorm and path to glory etc. 

Tactics talk and opinions of play styles and manoeuvres.

Episodes breaking down each faction which includes a look at strengths/weakness and stand out units/tactics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer shorter summary style videos that don't show hours of dice rolling.

FrontLine Gaming does a great job of explaining why the players made their decisions and the impact it had on the game.

They also toss in some narrative style or feel, even if it's a competitive matched play game, it's fun to throw out those immersive comments.

 

I will also note I think there's a lack of competitive content.

There's tons of just "here's the models I own" type of videos or they make 2K lists but they far from competitive, meaning I won't get much knowledge that will affect my future games - so I'm unlikely to watch it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, MrCharisma said:

Out of curiosity, why do you say this?

Smacks of desperation. I understand that's the way that Youtube works out which order to put videos in when you search, but I hate it when a video starts/ends with this.

If I think the video is of quality and provokes interesting thoughts then I will "rate, comment and subscribe". Not because I've been reminded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don't have an issue with the commentator asking the view to rate, comment & subscribe if it's done sensibly.  Sitting through five minutes at the beginning of a video of the commentator telling the viewer how important they are and how they couldn't produce this content without them and then reeling off a list of a dozen people who have subscribed to their patreon, etc is what really gets my goat :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RuneBrush said:

I personally don't have an issue with the commentator asking the view to rate, comment & subscribe if it's done sensibly.  Sitting through five minutes at the beginning of a video of the commentator telling the viewer how important they are and how they couldn't produce this content without them and then reeling off a list of a dozen people who have subscribed to their patreon, etc is what really gets my goat :P

This.

Bit of intro and then straight into what I'm watching for please! Also I have no issue with the YouTube content creator asking me to like, comment or subscribe as this helps them out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I only watch battle reports that are filmed (not just commented pics).

Bonus points for me if:

- editing is done to remove the "dead" moments (looking for rules, moving 80 rats, etc.) and to add useful information on overlay (lists, rules tips and info...).

- the video and sound quality are good

- the miniatures are well-painted

- there is nice terrain

- the players are experienced and knowledgeable

- the games are entertaining yet competitive

I would only subscribe to channels for which I see regular content and a variety of armies

 

Hope that contributes to your "market survey" and looking forward to watching your work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the insight @RuneBrush@Gaz Taylor and @Caffran101 . I watch a lot of YouTube content and I believe it comes down to the execution and frequency.

It's easy for YouTubers to waffle on with long introductions, using Patron to bridge the gap that YouTube ad revenue used to provide ANNNNNNND then ask you to Like/Comment/Subscribe. 

At the end of the day, most content creators in all mediums are using their platform to serve their community and it's easy to lose sight in the race for content reach.

I often have to remind myself that this content is free... I'm not paying for it and it's taking a lot of time to produce. If that means sitting through a sponsor, their recognition of their patron donators or an engagement strategy... i'm also ok with that. If I don't like it, I won't come back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Caffran101 said:

Smacks of desperation. I understand that's the way that Youtube works out which order to put videos in when you search, but I hate it when a video starts/ends with this.

If I think the video is of quality and provokes interesting thoughts then I will "rate, comment and subscribe". Not because I've been reminded.

So I think this kind of thing has just become the norm for content producers on youtube these days. Ultimately, it's a way they get more views. If they promote engagement with their community (through likes or comments) or get subscribers, those people are more likely to come back and view subsequent content.

They'll probably get more people coming back by reminding them to subscribe, or putting a comment below that gets a reply than they will lose from the few people who don't want to listen to it.

 

For the record, I personally don't care as long as it's:

A) At the end of the video

B) Short and sweet

The latter is less important if it's at the end, because I can shut off the video early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MrCharisma said:

At the end of the day, most content creators in all mediums are using their platform to serve their community and it's easy to lose sight in the race for content reach.

I think one thing to remember (and this applies regardless of what content you're releasing) is to embrace multiple mediums to advertise your content.  Facebook, Facebook groups, Instagram, Twitter etc are all good platforms to promote YouTube content (and engage with your viewers).  I fully expect I'm preaching to the converted here, but there's a surprising number of great content providers out there who largely rely on word of mouth and lucky Google searches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, someone2040 said:

So I think this kind of thing has just become the norm for content producers on youtube these days. Ultimately, it's a way they get more views. If they promote engagement with their community (through likes or comments) or get subscribers, those people are more likely to come back and view subsequent content.

They'll probably get more people coming back by reminding them to subscribe, or putting a comment below that gets a reply than they will lose from the few people who don't want to listen to it.

 

For the record, I personally don't care as long as it's:

A) At the end of the video

B) Short and sweet

The latter is less important if it's at the end, because I can shut off the video early.

I've spent a lot of time watching the content created by XboxAhoy and TotalBiscuit, who both (I think) never, or at least very rarely, ever gave the "comment, like and subscribe" spiel. They relied on the high quality of their videos to generate an audience.

I've seen too may poor quality videos that beg me to "like and comment" on them.

Just grinds my gears a bit :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

I think one thing to remember (and this applies regardless of what content you're releasing) is to embrace multiple mediums to advertise your content.  Facebook, Facebook groups, Instagram, Twitter etc are all good platforms to promote YouTube content (and engage with your viewers).  I fully expect I'm preaching to the converted here, but there's a surprising number of great content providers out there who largely rely on word of mouth and lucky Google searches.

Really good call out. Most content platforms reward for your bringing external views onto the platform, so leveraging social networks and blogs is a great way to drive traffic. 

 

4 minutes ago, Caffran101 said:

I've spent a lot of time watching the content created by XboxAhoy and TotalBiscuit, who both (I think) never, or at least very rarely, ever gave the "comment, like and subscribe" spiel. They relied on the high quality of their videos to generate an audience.

I've seen too may poor quality videos that beg me to "like and comment" on them.

Just grinds my gears a bit :)

Mate... I do need to call out that TotalBiscuit has 2.2 million subscribers and has been on the platform creating content since ‘06. If I had that sub base, I wouldn’t be asking for them either. 

I’m not trying to argue with you, just trying to provide logical reasoning on why creators do something that grinds your gears. Hopefully one day you check out my content, I don’t ****** you off, and I get to that 2.2 million subs too :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Impartiality. You can't find a decent well-produced podcast these days (apart from The Honest Wargamer) that isn't in bed with GW. If the rules are a bit lazy, or there's a reasons to be critical, I want to hear it. I certainly don't want to hear an apology for it because you've had a phonecall from GW (miniwargaming). So make keep yourself impartial as you gain profile. 

2. Get your facts right. If you don't know what is right, don't say it! or better still, have a good enough understanding of the rule system you are talking about/playing to play it properly

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

1. Impartiality. You can't find a decent well-produced podcast these days (apart from The Honest Wargamer) that isn't in bed with GW. If the rules are a bit lazy, or there's a reasons to be critical, I want to hear it. I certainly don't want to hear an apology for it because you've had a phonecall from GW (miniwargaming). So make keep yourself impartial as you gain profile. 

Just curious about this but what do you mean by this? I think most podcasts and YouTube channels will say what they think about a product from GW but will always be a bit biased due to the fact they are passionate about GW stuff (especially as they are diverting valuable hobby time to making the channel/podcast or it's become a full time job for them!). GW will do some bad stuff now and then, for example the new Idoneth Deepkin Dice. Brilliant idea having them transparent but don't seem easy to use during a game because of this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

Just curious about this but what do you mean by this? I think most podcasts and YouTube channels will say what they think about a product from GW but will always be a bit biased due to the fact they are passionate about GW stuff (especially as they are diverting valuable hobby time to making the channel/podcast or it's become a full time job for them!). GW will do some bad stuff now and then, for example the new Idoneth Deepkin Dice. Brilliant idea having them transparent but don't seem easy to use during a game because of this!

If you are being given free products, or invited to GW to participate in the development of the game. Would you risk being critical of said game design on an open platform, for risk of being taken off said privilege list? Miniwargaming did a very fair, but critical review of the cluster that was the Necromunda release. shortly after a tweet from the guys said they were meeting GW for closer collaboration.  The shortly after that, an apology video for the review.

 

What usually happens now is two things. I'll be accused of negativity of AoS ( I am currently building my 4th 2k army so new players can use to demo with, try again) or I'll get comment that it's somehow a personal attack. I love the game, love the community mostly. What I don't like is this little clique that seems to be forming, and it's partly down to GW getting the 'media' onside. 

 

I don't want to hear how all the AoS BFFs are doing and what they are seeing together, I want some honest looking at rules writing, some honest conversation about the company that makes the game, and some chat about making the hobby as inclusive as possible. 

 

I forgot my 3.

3. Try and report on the whole community. Just because of silly grudges within the AoS community, doesn't mean you should be prepared to pick a side. 

Will see how my number three fares when Lincolnshire has a 100+ player tournament and no-one cares to mention it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

1. Impartiality. You can't find a decent well-produced podcast these days (apart from The Honest Wargamer) that isn't in bed with GW. If the rules are a bit lazy, or there's a reasons to be critical, I want to hear it. I certainly don't want to hear an apology for it because you've had a phonecall from GW (miniwargaming). So make keep yourself impartial as you gain profile. 

2. Get your facts right. If you don't know what is right, don't say it! or better still, have a good enough understanding of the rule system you are talking about/playing to play it properly

 

I second this on both counts. Nothing worse than a video or channel that gets stuff wrong, as it ceases to be a useful source of learning. 

And a source that is a shill for GW is just irritating at best. Any form of censorship (self-imposed or otherwise) is only going to get millennials or grandads watching it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you guys big time on the rules. Nothing frustrates me more on YouTube that MiniWarrGaming having the highest production value and resources behind their channel but they get many rules wrong in every video.

@Gaz Taylor cheers for the sub my good man!

You raise an interesting point on being impartial. Most people won't want to bite the hand that feeds them, and the privileges of being on the inside is a valuable asset. Is there a risk that they lose trust of their audience if they become a puppet? Yes. Will they gain more fans by being on the inside with a scoop? Yes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-03-27 at 12:35 PM, AthlorianStoners said:

I’d love to see an age of Sigmar channel in striking scorpions style. 

Hear, hear! Lovely painted models and beautiful terrain. The thing that turns me off mostly is badly/unpainted models and terrain without a thought (it should represent a battlefield). I would never subscribe to a channel with unpainted stuff... (and square bases!) Also, it is really nice to hear the players' gameplan and tactics... and afterthoughts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...