> Piracy also threatens to damage our business, as its fundamental proposition to consumers is so compelling and difficult to compete against: virtually all content for free,” Netflix writes. People emphasize the "free" part, but it really is the "all content" part that makes piracy wins. Especially if you are not in the USA, often specific content isn't available at any price. Even if it is, its split across 5 billi…
Steam really did this for games for me and somehow hasn't stopped working for me yet. Maybe Netflix should ask themselves how Steam competes with bootlegs and what they might do like it.
Regardless of that, the model is just different: if I can pay Netflix $15/mo for unlimited access to their entire catalog -- and their catalog includes everything I want to watch -- then I'm not going to need to go elsewhere, and I'll be happy. If I do, those monthly subscription fees are going to start to add up and make me unhappy.
But Steam doesn't have a subscription service; you pay individually for each game, and there are pretty frequent sales and discounted bundles. If Steam doesn't have a game you want, you buy it from someone else that does have it, and your cost is essentially the same as it would have been if Steam did have it. (Some games do require a subscription, but that's also not really the same thing as Netflix.)
And the usage is just different, too: if you buy a game, you're probably going to play it for many tens or hundreds of hours, over months or maybe even years. For a movie or TV show, you're going to watch it once, most likely, and that's it. When you think about it, $60 (often less) for a game that you get years of enjoyment out of seems pretty reasonable. But then you look at Amazon Video, where you can rent or buy some titles, and the cost is going to be $3 for an hour or two of entertainment, if you're only renting. $3 bucks for two hours vs. $60 for hundreds of hours? No contest.