It wouldn’t replace them, it’d exist alongside it.
Comment on Opinion: It's time for a proper Steam-type service for TV alongside streaming exists.
StrongHorseWeakNeigh@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
The main issue with this idea is that you would have to convince big television companies that it’s actually worth it for them to do something like this instead of pushing their own streaming service.
Skavau@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Lumidaub@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
Why would they do that if they can all have their own platforms instead?
memfree@beehaw.org 4 weeks ago
From Steam founder Gabe Newell, 2011:
We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy," Newell said. "Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem. For example, if a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24/7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country three months after the U.S. release and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate’s service is more valuable.
The same can be said of movies/tv – except Steam saw the issue before EA and everyone made their own streaming stores, whereas all the video distributors have splintered into their own services.
I’m not sure where/why Hulu failed to gain the sort of share Steam attained. It existed early on and had … at least 3 big networks (iirc, not cbs? but abc, nbc and fox – then nbc dropped out to just do peacock, I think). Perhaps hulu didn’t pay enough for rights or perhaps Apple, Netflix and Amazon represented too many other players to make the equivalent arguments as Steam made.
Skavau@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Yeah, I mean ultimately muh rights issues aren’t the consumers problem. If the networks and streamers don’t make a TV series accessible on day 1, the internet will.
Skavau@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
You would have two ways to watch a show.
- Get the streaming app and sub to it and watch it on there.
- Buy it on the steam store, and Apple/HBO/whoever takes a cut.
Lumidaub@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
You’re talking from the viewer’s perspective. Why should the company share their profits?
Madbrad200@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
Yeah unless something forces them into this they just aren’t going to do it. The movie/tv industry is just too different to the games/music industries for this to work.
And we know this because it’s already been tried: Netflix was replaced with 20+ streaming services.
musubibreakfast@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
It’s never been done, from the outside netflix looks different but it’s just another production house. And the worse part is that it’s run by tech people. At least studio heads you can somewhat predict and steer but with netflix it’s a total mystery. They’ll cancel your show and be under no obligation to tell you why. Their contracts are weird and they offer new creators shit deals.
A Steam for movies could work but the incentives would have to be for the creators. Like if the platform provided some huge benefit, like if I could just add a second season to my show the same way I’d add dlc to game. Or if I could release a tv series in a pre-order state and then directly get backing from people on the platform. It would basically be the same as steam but then for movies. With all the metrics and statistics that usually get hidden from you when you work for netflix.
The difference from a regular streaming service for consumers would be that all the reviews are visible on the platform, titles are directly paid for and not locked down by region and you can curate what’s presented to you.