And in the current condition of streaming video, it’s a service problem AND a pricing problem. If there was a single service that had nearly every title available, that service could maybe be worth 30-40 ish a month. But instead now if you want access to all titles you have to subscribe to a ton of separate services, never know where to find what you’re looking for, and would have to pay around a hundred bucks a month. So instead i pirate, where the cost is zero dollars a month and everything is always located in the same place.
I’m in favor of being able to pay to access a library containing 99% of titles in existence, even though i don’t “own” permanent access to them. If i had to pay a higher price to “own” each individual title then i would have access to VASTLY less media. But for that monthly payment it must offer access to 99% of titles in existence, and the price must be reasonable for the amount of entertainment value i actually derive from it. Spotify is a perfect example of a 99% complete library at a reasonable price. And yeah as you point out, the service must be available on all devices, like Spotify is.
The proof is in the proverbial pudding. “Prior to entering the Russian market, we were told that Russia was a waste of time because everyone would pirate our products. Russia is now about to become [Steam’s] largest market in Europe,” Newell said.
Can anyone tell me how this aged in the last 12 years?
Streaming companies lower prices making pirating inconvenient
Streaming companies raise prices to make more money
Streaming companies raise prices making pirating an option again
“We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem”
And in the current condition of streaming video, it’s a service problem AND a pricing problem. If there was a single service that had nearly every title available, that service could maybe be worth 30-40 ish a month. But instead now if you want access to all titles you have to subscribe to a ton of separate services, never know where to find what you’re looking for, and would have to pay around a hundred bucks a month. So instead i pirate, where the cost is zero dollars a month and everything is always located in the same place.
Imagine paying to not own something and then being unable to watch because your device is unsupported. Whatever that means for a current web browser…
I’m in favor of being able to pay to access a library containing 99% of titles in existence, even though i don’t “own” permanent access to them. If i had to pay a higher price to “own” each individual title then i would have access to VASTLY less media. But for that monthly payment it must offer access to 99% of titles in existence, and the price must be reasonable for the amount of entertainment value i actually derive from it. Spotify is a perfect example of a 99% complete library at a reasonable price. And yeah as you point out, the service must be available on all devices, like Spotify is.
Can anyone tell me how this aged in the last 12 years?
Dinosaurs eat man…