2 ms·
At least the local rental store has (edit: had) the incentive to have things people want to watch, because they're pay per view. Streaming services seem to have
by jusssi 4y ago
At least the local rental store has (edit: had) the incentive to have things people want to watch, because they're pay per view. Streaming services seem to have a perverse incentive to be full of stuff you actually don't want to watch, because you pay per month and every time you watch something it's an expense to them.
- eslaught 4y agoI don't completely get this comment, to be honest. As a matter of empirical fact, many video rental stores sucked. Your sibling comment addresses the case of Block Buster, but I remember going to our one truly independent store and not being impressed by it either. So there's that. But addressing your second point, I think we must have different viewing habits. I figure out what I want to watch, then I subscribe to it and I watch that show. If that increases my total subscriptions beyond what I'm comfortable with, I cancel the least recently used service. At no point do I use the in-service search function, so it really doesn't matter to me what else they offer. If they have one great show and a bunch of mediocre fluff, I'll watch that one show and leave. Maybe this sounds crazy, but if I'm careful about it it's not even that much more expensive then video rentals were back in the day.
- sofixa 4y ago> Streaming services seem to have a perverse incentive to be full of stuff you actually don't want to watch, because you pay per month and every time you watch something it's an expense to them. On the contrary, their incentive is to have as much content as possible, to keep as many people subscribed as possible. Quantity instead of quality, because few really good shows/movies won't keep millions of people subscribed once they've watched them, there needs to be other content remaining.