This is an interesting reaction. It could seemingly apply for the game creator or the "Let's Play" creator.
For the game creator, their work is being built upon without permission or license (other than, hopefully, a single game sale) to create something new and interesting, but their name and pedigree is bolstered by the exposure.
For the "Let's Play" creator, their work is produced without expectation of licensing payments but they gain the ability to grow their audience using another's work as raw material.
This comment put into words the weird, hand-wavey feeling I've had about the two being symbiotic. I'm still not sure that we've found a good example of the right balance between the two, but I like the Dragon team's tone when describing the tensions.
For the game creator, their work is being built upon without permission or license (other than, hopefully, a single game sale) to create something new and interesting, but their name and pedigree is bolstered by the exposure.
For the "Let's Play" creator, their work is produced without expectation of licensing payments but they gain the ability to grow their audience using another's work as raw material.
This comment put into words the weird, hand-wavey feeling I've had about the two being symbiotic. I'm still not sure that we've found a good example of the right balance between the two, but I like the Dragon team's tone when describing the tensions.