• ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    13 hours ago

    While I do agree competition is healthy. I don’t think every company should have their own streaming service, it’s not sustainable and means that each company needs to be churning out consistent content. It would make more sense if they just let their content be accessible through the platforms that would dedicate themselves to streaming.

    • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 hours ago

      competition is healthy but fuck i wish they didn’t compete on catalogue - i wish they competed on features, or maybe “premium offerings” or something

      • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 minutes ago

        I guess the issue is what would they be competing on and what would these premium features be? The more features you add, the less it becomes a place to watch things. That’s why you have Netflix offering games with your sub as well now. You can add multi-viewing parties and more experiences like bander snatch again, but at a certain point it just becomes a platform for general content versus shows and movies.

    • reddig33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I’d argue studios shouldn’t own the channels at all. It’s hamstringing the industry, starving out movie theaters and preventing creatives from shopping their content to competitors.

      • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 minutes ago

        I think it’s slowly moving backwards again. For example, I am starting to see some parmount+ content popping up on Netflix, though it’s about 6 months behind of when it’s released.