On the other hand, watching episode a week sux. By the end of a season, you don't remember what happened 3 months ago. The series got much better writing over time - but the consequence is that I actually want to see it as a whole instead of little by little with mandatory breaks.
and for you we have the likes of Naruto, which is 30-60% flashbacks to the prior episodes.
I am not sure it is for me, because I did not watched Naruto and being forced to rewatch same scenes does not exactly sound like fun to me. I do not remember stuff from three months ago, but also it is not complete amnesia.
I like a lot how modern series are written and done. I find it to be massive improvement over what movies and series used to be when I was young. I like the one long story aspect of it all. I just do not want to watch it in one episode a week schedule.
Yes, so annoying. Some shows just makes you interested, invested in the story, you learn the characters' names... Then the season ends, you look up when the next season comes out... And you see that the show has been canceled... Happened too many times, last one that really frustrated me was GLOW. I wonder if it has a vicious circle, spiral component to it, like how Google keeps killing their products because people…
> A new show launches, it doesn't perform too well, so Netflix cancels it after the second season. Now, the people who enjoyed the show will be more sceptical of new shows, and now a larger percentage of users will "boycott" new shows. This isn’t new, rarely is a cable tv show signed initially for more than 1-2 seasons and then if it does well it’s renewed. Netflix is literally following industry standard here so if…
If that's the case Netflix definition of success is very different from anyone else, cause no one cancels as much as Netflix does.
If you want to time gate your episodes with your friends you're still welcome to coordinate that with them. Lots of couples do this too ("Don't watch until we can do it together") but personally, no matter how excited I am for a show, if a streaming platform withholds episodes so that they can better manage social media and stretch out advertising I'll just wait until the whole thing is out before I even start watchi…
> If you want to time gate your episodes with your friends you're still welcome to coordinate that with them Forcing everyone to collectively sit with a single episode per week is fun. Watching all at once makes them all sort of meld together. Having to sit with an episode for a week changes the experience of watching the show. If you can convince your friend group to watch together, that's great, but things like dis…
I just cant enjoy good shows at that schedule. Crappy episodic shows, sure why not. But actually good engaging shows with coherent story and structure are massively better when episodes are watched closely to each other - so that you remember enough from the first episode when you are watching the last one.
I mean even if they drop subscribers their usage costs should drop as well so it might balance out in the end profit wise.
I doubt these two scale linearly, otherwise how would they make money? Also, I could imagine that the people that want their comfort show to be running in the background 24/7 are the ones that won't cancel their subscriptions. It's the occasional watcher that will most likely deem netflix worthless to them, so their subscriber to usage cost ratio might even worsen. I'm just guessing here though, obviously.
I definitely agree, it all depends on their profit margin correlation to their infra cost. For a normal SAAS I'm assuming it's not very strong, but for a video streaming business, I think the cost is much higher and therefore a lot more highly correlated. We also need to take into account the reasoning behind this decision. They're also removing multiples of users but losing only one membership so it's even more skewed towards being even. In the end, I'm assuming this is a calculated decision from their end, so they should have the numbers, if they're skewed in their favor they'll proceed, if not, they can always backtrack and not release this in the US, which I think is why they're releasing to smaller markets first.
> I want some way of telling them "I don't want to wade through crap..." Yarr matey, one way do be not parting ways with coin for said services, instead making a more... equitable re-appropriation
I genuinely don't understand this sentiment in 2023. Maybe in 2003 it was reasonable, but if you have the money, just spend it to buy the content you want. I get that there's a lot of "crap" that you don't want to see, but I appreciate some of that, and I'm sure you appreciate some of what I call "crap". I don't see how you go from that situation to justifying not paying for it. There's a price for the content and it…
> A new show launches, it doesn't perform too well, so Netflix cancels it after the second season. Now, the people who enjoyed the show will be more sceptical of new shows, and now a larger percentage of users will "boycott" new shows. This isn’t new, rarely is a cable tv show signed initially for more than 1-2 seasons and then if it does well it’s renewed. Netflix is literally following industry standard here so if…
If that's the case Netflix definition of success is very different from anyone else, cause no one cancels as much as Netflix does.
Netflix produces as much content as the rest of the streaming companies combined. It figures they would have more cancellations.
Of course. Around 10 euros that divided by 4 means 2.5 euros a month per user (or 2 divided by 5, it's unlikely that 4 people are watching at the same time) is a fair price, the cost of 2 coffee, you say screw it I pay so I can just take my remote and watch whatever I want. Reason why they made success. For more than that, for example you have to pay a full subscription of 10 euros, you consider going back to piratin…
I don't miss the days of torrenting. The thing that still stands out in my mind is having to slog my way through tons of pornographic advertising and popups to find a single actually working torrent link.
Ad blockers really improve the quality of the web in general.
Netflix: ”You get two parallel streams with your family. Family means trust and password sharing.“ Customers: “Farewell pirating. We pay a fair flat and it is automatically shared between Netflix and artists. Great!“ Netflix: “We increase the flat permanently. And we have now competitors and doesn’t over anymore all relevant content (e.g. Star Trek Picard, Expanse, Disney). How about ruining it and blocking family me…
> I wouldn’t be surprised if artists (filmmakers, musicians…) create a common fair streaming platform. Let us name it “United Artists“ ;) That falls under > And we have now competitors and doesn’t over anymore all relevant content The core problem is basically owners of IP all wanting to build walled gardens to distribute them (and get all of the cut), instead of just going "pay us X per view, regardless of who you a…
It's quite fun that this is essentially the pre-50s Hollywood vertical integration again. I expect this will eventually end with antitrust legislation and mandatory licencing to third parties.
> instead of just going "pay us X per view, regardless of who you are" Yeah and this is actually how the music industry is doing this and it works great. Spotify, Apple Music, Deezer etc all work fine alongside one another.
Sadly, I think you'll find the artists have a much less rosy view of that. "We'll cut the people creating that art's earnings down to millicent's per stream and even screw them over on that, and we'll share all the profits equitably between the rent seeking middle men" doesn't really count as "works great" for everybody...
Isn't that a problem of the respective companies taking too big of a cut, rather than method itself ?