I don't really watch streamers, but the only way I could find the first GOP debate was as an overlay in the corner of somebody's Twitch stream of Arma 3 and it made the whole experience better.

"...but people genuinely like watching pro players compete (the equivalent of watching top streamers)."

Nobody ever paid to watch LeBron James spaz out and scream rape jokes and other obscenities up and down the court because somebody tried to steal his ball, then airball twenty shots in a row while giggling like a twit. That is exactly what the highest-traffic game streamers do. They're clowns - not even rodeo clowns, who are still involved in a sport, just painted caricatures of substance abuse.

I'll grant you, "See it in action before you buy it" is a perfectly fine reason to watch LPs. Douchey return policies are the norm for vidcons, especially in the age of downloads and DRM, so it's important to see if a game will be worth your time and money in the first place. Just don't pretend streamers are somehow incorruptible just because they're not affiliated with the established game 'zine circlejerks.

I don't watch streamers, but I will look up a long play to check out a game, or if I'm playing a game where a specific part has me stumped. The only other LP'ers I tend to watch are Yahtzee and his buddy occasionally.

I don't watch streams, but I sometimes watch LPs and recorded/archived streams - or rather, I should say, I sometimes listen to them, in the background, while I'm doing something around the house.

There are only a couple channels I've found which I enjoy - Scott Manley (the astronomer who plays Kerbals, Crusader Kings, and various other highbrow nerd games) and Previously Recorded (Red Letter Media / Stroke Guy people's gaming show). Skallagrim has done some amusing Let's Plays in the past, too, and if PnP gaming counts, then I also like listening to random Google Hangout D&D games, such as those run by GentlemanGamer.

I dont get watching people play computer games, I also dont get watching people play sports.
I *understand* the premise of course but watching someone do something is just not as fun as doing it yourself imo.
Seems like a inefficient usage of time for maximising happiness.

Are the successfully Let's Play guys basically watched by women? I think it's more sad girls wanting to spend time with their make-believe boyfriend.

The food analogy is pretty dumb: plenty of people pay for cable in order to watch The Food Network, which at this point IS just watching celebrities eat food: unless you're really good at eyeing what little shots of the food preparation process they're using, you're not learning anything. His analogy only works in a situation where you buy a game, and just have your friend play it.

I don't really play games a lot, but I usually look up a let's play before I buy, just to see if it's something I'd be into, since I'm pretty particular. The one time I was sold on a trailer without seeing any gameplay was Borderlands 2, and I wished I had seen a LP or knew that it was more linear (guess I just wanted a more stylish Fallout) but I still had fun and watching a LP wouldn't have been a dealbreaker, especially for the 9.99 pricetag.

Oh, shut up, you waste of human consciousness.

@Mr. Esquire Cat, that's true.. I like watching the Tour De France, but it just makes me want to ride my bike. And I like watching the World Cup and I usually go out and play a pickup game of soccer. Difference is I could never do the Tour De France, do a bicycle kick, etc.. and I won't even get started on more extreme sports like basejumping or even skydiving. I'll just let other people do that.

Video games are a little different. It's fun to see someone kill it in a speedrun, or do some impossible shit in Dance Dance Revolution or pinball, but I'd rather just participate in a tournament myself, even if I'm probably going to get my ass handed to me, because I won't get hurt.

Seconded

This is a Jimmy Kimmel video, yes? I assume it is, owing both to your comment and to the preload image. HOWEVER, I do not wish to confirm this theory by clicking "play", because if I do, and it IS Jimmy Kimmel, then Youtube will conclude that I enjoy his videos, and I will never be able to get rid of him.

They already force me to look at advertisements for his channel every time I open my homepage; I can't imagine the damage an actual view would do.

You have great wisdom, EH. I unthinkingly clicked on a Jimmy Fallon clip months ago, and YT has been recommending him to me ever since.

ONE. FUCKING. CLIP.

At least it's not recommending Tapir mating videos. I still have no fucking idea why it decided I should be watching those.

Although, admittedly, they are fascinating.

I never clicked anything even remotely related to it but I've been getting Taylor Swift Vevo for about 6 months.

The mystery here, of course, is that Youtube doesn't even try to disguise that there's some kind of pay-for-play type weighting going on in their "personalized" recommendations.

>> I've been getting Taylor Swift Vevo for about 6 months.

Yes! Taylor Swift, too. She doesn't show up on my recommendations, but her Vevo channel does show up on my homepage, right below Jimmy Kimmel. The only Taylor Swift song I've ever clicked on (with this device/ profile) was that crowdsourced Taylor Swift animation posted here a few months back.

Are you referring to MST3k? I guess that could be apt...since the idea is that the streamer can actually add something through commentary. Note I said *can* not *does* and obviously what viewers consider a worthwhile addition is entirely subjective.