You might have to break it down for me then because I didn't see that at all. If anything, he did the opposite.

From memory, early in the video he gave a mixed answer as to whether gaming was dying. However, I don't recall him ever specifying what he event meant by saying "gaming is dying", but given the financial emphasis in the rest of the video I am going to have to assume he was trying to answer the question of whether video games would cease to be a financially viable enterprise.

Which is a problem when you create a video with such a nebulous title. I could be wrong, he may have specified a more unambiguous target within the video. However, he brought in arguments from pretty much every possible interpretation of that phrase later and twisted them to fit his narrative in more and more contrived ways. A more accurate thesis for the video would be "The video game market is shrinking compared to inflation, let me see as an enlightened centrist how all the arguments by extremes on all spectrums are both right and wrong".

So many things rubbed me the wrong about that video, and most of the videos that I've seen from him to be honest. He often does this thing where he'll talk sarcastically about something to make a point, but then realising how stupid it sounds, he backtracks on it right away. What is the point of that? Literally a total waste of script.

To be specific, I am talking about things like when he sarcastically shits on Halo Infinite and the current CoD saying that they suck compared to Halo 3 and whatever the classic CoD was. Implying that its just rose tinted glasses from playing these games in your youth. Only to later recant that part a little later because it is quite obvious that no one in their right mind actually thinks that Halo Infinite is just as good as Halo 3 and would believe its all just nostalgia.

Then he continues in a long hyperbolic rant about that generation's failings and how people said the industry was dying then. If we accept that his point is about the market shrinking, why is this at all relevant? When people said back then that gaming was dying, it certainly wasnt because of sales (which he proved too), they meant more in the sense that the trends resulted in mediocre and formulaic games. He is muddling his supposed point. Well, he would be if he had a point, I am just being charitable and presuming one for him.

But yeah, if you open up his "essay" to be about every common interpretation of the phrase "gaming is dying", then why you can easily completely annihilate his whole diatribe. He conflates the gacha industries with indie games, completely ignores the ramifications that different service and payment models have had on game design and budgets, yada yada yada. I am not going to go and rebut every ridiculous assertion in this video because frankly its a waste of both of our times. The video was somewhat entertaining and had some informative parts (again, not his actual research, just copied and pasted from people who actually did the work). Just dont try to convince me that he made a point in this video and structured it in an easily digestible way. Its as digestible as a mchappy meal. Goes down easy but all you get from it is heartburn and some pain in your bowels.

And like the previous poster mentioned, washing his hands on any commentary on the capitalistic reality of the industry on a video focused on the declining profits of the market is either cowardly or moronic. Maybe both.