An interesting article about the corporations that produce Vtubers, or at least the potential problems that the people behind these characters could be/are facing. (Although not all Vtubers are...
An interesting article about the corporations that produce Vtubers, or at least the potential problems that the people behind these characters could be/are facing. (Although not all Vtubers are produced by corporations, some are just regular, standalone streamers, not that they are any more stable than your average streamer.)
“I do play games, I promise I play games. Just not this type of game.” A tiny animated girl wearing a shark hood named Gawr Gura demurs on stream as she maneuvers a 3D shark through the ocean of the video game Maneater. “I wanted to play this game so I could wow everybody with my shark skills but all I’ve done is make a fool of myself.” Her voice sounds dejected, but even her model slumps downward, her eyes closed. For a vtuber (virtual YouTuber) who streams every week as a cheery shark-girl, the moment is oddly revealing of the person behind the avatar.
Gawr Gura is just one of over 60 anime-faced streamers under Hololive, the virtual talent agency wing of the Japanese tech company Cover Corporation. With its animated roster of characters, all with backstories and unique designs, Hololive is Disney; if Disney hired Mickey Mouse to stream Minecraft for several hours a day.
Cover and Ichikara’s method operates at scale: build a relatively comfortable stable of proprietary characters, and hire the performers to make them come to life on stream through a combination of auditions and private hiring. Through vtubing, these companies have harnessed the entertainment value of both streaming and J-pop idol groups. And harnessed they have, as streaming monetization and even advertising sales can earn up to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. However, all of this money comes along with all of the weird parasocial engagement and labor issues that those two industries regularly deal with.
Although it glosses over the potential benefits. As opposed to being independent, you get regular pay (in addition to shared revenue from things like donations), institutional knowledge (do's and...
or at least the potential problems that the people behind these characters could be/are facing
Although it glosses over the potential benefits. As opposed to being independent, you get regular pay (in addition to shared revenue from things like donations), institutional knowledge (do's and don'ts as a streamer), and benefit from cross-exposure by the other talents at the companies.
A good thing that "vtubers" bring to the streaming scene is that of diversity - especially if you're a girl but also for the guys, you really need to be a certain type of person with a thick skin to survive.
The anonymity as well as safety net brings in a lot of people that wouldn't normally be streamers.
Except the anonymity is a) not really a thing, given the harassment specific vtubers have suffered and b) degrading the very thing that makes a given artist valuable. It's regular pay, but it's...
Except the anonymity is a) not really a thing, given the harassment specific vtubers have suffered and b) degrading the very thing that makes a given artist valuable. It's regular pay, but it's for being a corporate mascot who can only speak inside the lines. Given that it's not standard for the vtuber to own or control "their" image, it'll be easy enough to just replace people who don't maintain the proper triggers to inspire parasocial relationships in as many customers as possible.
That doesn't mean the anonymity isn't a thing. For one, it's just a very different mental state to be streaming with your face in the camera. It's like the difference between youtubers who...
That doesn't mean the anonymity isn't a thing. For one, it's just a very different mental state to be streaming with your face in the camera. It's like the difference between youtubers who actually speak in the video vs ones who just narrate. Some people just aren't comfortable broadcasting their image like that, which is fine.
Additionally, the replaceability angle is overstated imo. For one, these days few vtubers are really that in character. Of course, it is harder to become independent when you can't take your avatar, but it's also not really a thing now for people to just swap the voice actor. The avatar dies when the actor leaves.
Of course, you can replace them like you'd "replace" an employee or a movie replaces one of their actors. But that's nothing new to hiding behind a virtual avatar.
Not to mention that regular pay is a pretty good perk - normally employees don't have any fame that transfers. Being independent is taking the financial risk with the financial gain - being an employee is being taking limited financial risk with limited financial gain. That's the risk, it's the same as always.
It's definitely a thing to swap the voice actor in other contexts. Most of the major Disney characters have had 6-8 voice actors. My belief is that vtubing is just too new to have settled on the...
It's definitely a thing to swap the voice actor in other contexts. Most of the major Disney characters have had 6-8 voice actors. My belief is that vtubing is just too new to have settled on the "right" characters to get the long term draw, so they're willing to kill off avatars while they iterate. Once the in-demand characters are more defined, no company will drop a profitable avatar just because the current actor isn't interested in playing anymore.
Well, yeah, I meant specifically in this case. You could maybe try swapping them if the vtuber is heavily in character, but most of them stop giving a shit and their character is just a persona of...
Well, yeah, I meant specifically in this case. You could maybe try swapping them if the vtuber is heavily in character, but most of them stop giving a shit and their character is just a persona of theirselves (like all streamers). It'd be pretty hard to do with most of the popular ones today.
Like even if you could get a perfect DeepFake visual replica of PewDiePie, it'd be pretty hard to convince people that the new guy is the same person.
In addition, again, they are paid as employees. The artist who drew the pictures for Facebook's setting page has no attribution. They exchanged labor for pay. I do not think that attribution is "the most important" part of being an artist.
An interesting article about the corporations that produce Vtubers, or at least the potential problems that the people behind these characters could be/are facing. (Although not all Vtubers are produced by corporations, some are just regular, standalone streamers, not that they are any more stable than your average streamer.)
Although it glosses over the potential benefits. As opposed to being independent, you get regular pay (in addition to shared revenue from things like donations), institutional knowledge (do's and don'ts as a streamer), and benefit from cross-exposure by the other talents at the companies.
A good thing that "vtubers" bring to the streaming scene is that of diversity - especially if you're a girl but also for the guys, you really need to be a certain type of person with a thick skin to survive.
The anonymity as well as safety net brings in a lot of people that wouldn't normally be streamers.
Except the anonymity is a) not really a thing, given the harassment specific vtubers have suffered and b) degrading the very thing that makes a given artist valuable. It's regular pay, but it's for being a corporate mascot who can only speak inside the lines. Given that it's not standard for the vtuber to own or control "their" image, it'll be easy enough to just replace people who don't maintain the proper triggers to inspire parasocial relationships in as many customers as possible.
That doesn't mean the anonymity isn't a thing. For one, it's just a very different mental state to be streaming with your face in the camera. It's like the difference between youtubers who actually speak in the video vs ones who just narrate. Some people just aren't comfortable broadcasting their image like that, which is fine.
Additionally, the replaceability angle is overstated imo. For one, these days few vtubers are really that in character. Of course, it is harder to become independent when you can't take your avatar, but it's also not really a thing now for people to just swap the voice actor. The avatar dies when the actor leaves.
Of course, you can replace them like you'd "replace" an employee or a movie replaces one of their actors. But that's nothing new to hiding behind a virtual avatar.
Not to mention that regular pay is a pretty good perk - normally employees don't have any fame that transfers. Being independent is taking the financial risk with the financial gain - being an employee is being taking limited financial risk with limited financial gain. That's the risk, it's the same as always.
It's definitely a thing to swap the voice actor in other contexts. Most of the major Disney characters have had 6-8 voice actors. My belief is that vtubing is just too new to have settled on the "right" characters to get the long term draw, so they're willing to kill off avatars while they iterate. Once the in-demand characters are more defined, no company will drop a profitable avatar just because the current actor isn't interested in playing anymore.
Well, yeah, I meant specifically in this case. You could maybe try swapping them if the vtuber is heavily in character, but most of them stop giving a shit and their character is just a persona of theirselves (like all streamers). It'd be pretty hard to do with most of the popular ones today.
Like even if you could get a perfect DeepFake visual replica of PewDiePie, it'd be pretty hard to convince people that the new guy is the same person.
In addition, again, they are paid as employees. The artist who drew the pictures for Facebook's setting page has no attribution. They exchanged labor for pay. I do not think that attribution is "the most important" part of being an artist.