>>614313
what

>>614313
Explain please

You are teaching a program through the Internet by using video recordings. Why do you have to put your face on top of what you are teaching, dude?

>>614330
>>614313
>dude is making money with add revenue he gets from posting tutorials on YT
>statistics show that people rather flock to tutors that show personality and therefore also face instead of neckbeards typing out instructions in notepad, recording with hypercam
>a big part of his income relies on this add revenue
>tries to maximize and streamline his shit
>success keeps proving it works

Whoa, that was fucking hard to figure out!

>>614345
and by add revenue I mean ad revenue, of course

>>614345
The conclusion is clear, then: Youtube must be destroyed.

>>614313
Pretty funny OP

>>614356
>YouTube must be destroyed because people prefer a certain type of content
Makes sense. It's totally YT's fault. Btw, I also prefer to have some actually visible person speaking to me, him having a video of his face in the corner is fine as long as it doesn't hide an important part of the program (which sometimes happens).

Btw, he said that most of his income comes from Poliigon now.

>>614359
>he said that most of his income comes from Poliigon now.
And it's getting really obvious now since he barely posts new videos on YT anymore compared to his almost regular updates not that long ago.

>>614330
Because it's more comfortable and during the downtime when nothing is happening on the screen you can look at the face. Tutorials without facecam are like talking on a phone instead of talking in person.

>>614380
I would understand it if it were Shrek on the video, but, come on, it’s just some random guy making weird jokes every once and then. Quite unnecessary.

I can't understand why people would actually prefer to have someone waste screen-space on stroking their own ego by trying to sell themselves like a fucking brand or something... Like sure, in the beginning or end of a tutorial, fine, but why the fuck do you need someone's face during the tutorial? It's pointless.

>>614384
>but why the fuck do you need someone's face during the tutorial? It's pointless.
use your brain for once and see >>614345

>>614391
That doesn’t prove that having someone’s face on the video helps with learning, only with maximizing profit for the video producer.

>>614380
>Tutorials without facecam are like talking on a phone instead of talking in person
No they aren't, this isn't fucking Japan where if there isn't a PiP reaction face people get hurt and confused

>>614391
I meant why you, the viewer would want to see someone's face during a tutorial.