Octopus Overlords

I've seen all the up and down news of the streaming wars this past year. I thought The Verge synthesized it all into an interesting take. I'm not sure I agree with all their points. I think they'll continue experimenting with niche shows to try to stumble upon the next big thing. I do find lesser performing exclusives being pulled from streaming to be a disturbing trend. It goes against all the convenience of streaming when I'm ready to watch something. If we only have time limited windows to catch steaming shows, good ideas can die on the vine.

Certainly, HBO Max/Discovery is in a unique position. They have a huge back collection HBO and DC titles. They also have a glut of cheap and near residual free reality programming from Discovery.

I also wasn't aware that:

The Verge wrote:In 2023, the Writers Guild of America, the Directors Guild of America, and the Screen Actors Guild will all negotiate new contracts with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, and streaming residuals are going to be a major point of discussion.

If future costs shoot up, that could drastically change the landscape. Thoughts?

HBO Max/Discovery are under new ownership who appear to be gutting the place to get to the copper wiring.

Netflix proved the model, and is only surviving because they have transitioned to acquiring or making their own content. Once they proved the model, everyone and their dog wanted their own service to vertically integrate.

There's a lot of competition, and maybe even too much, some companies with multiple services all vying for our money. There needs to be some consolidation, or at least some partnerships that make easier to get into without having to require so many monthly accounts. I think there's a bubble to be burst, and we're starting to see the strains of this model.

The thing about Streaming I thought we'd see facilitate are the archiving of old shows on demand, but in truth, there's actually very little of that as long as you're not a Hollywood show.

The thing about streaming for me is that instead of having older American movies and TV they'd rather make their own new or get new shows from Asia and Scandinavia. This does not make me want to watch more streaming.

Ironically, pirate/torrent sites will end up being the only place where you'll be able to find some of the shows that the likes of HBO pulled off their streaming service and made completely inaccessible for legal purchase.

But streaming is the future. As cable dies, doesn’t streaming have to flourish?

I don't really recall this supposed "golden age of streaming". The streaming landscape now is certainly much different. It's interesting (and a bit depressing) from a business and consumer perspective. But I'm glad that more studios have adopted the technology... it took them way, way too long.

But, the content of most services was always kind of shit. It's only in the last several years that we've begun to see really good first-party productions, and a lot of them. Sure, some stuff is crap and sometimes good stuff gets cancelled. But was that not always the case with traditional television? If anything, more niches are getting filled now that ever before. But back in the old days, Netflix et al. never had the most of the content you wanted anyway. Now, at least, you can rent a vast number of titles for under $5 just a few months after release. And new Disney releases are available for no added cost in almost no time!

I admit it's frustrating when stuff gets pulled and just isn't available anywhere (including physical media), or the only option is to buy a digital license that may be poor value or not be guaranteed to stick around forever. But yeah, that's what ahem those other avenues are for.

Is streaming more expensive and spread across more services now? Yes. Is advertising finally creeping its way into the industry beyond the likes of free platforms? Sure. And I hate it, but thankfully you can avoid it on some services by paying for a more expensive package. But I'd argue the range of content is better value than ever before. And if you subscribe to the Kraken school of thought, you don't have to subscribe to all services at once (at least if your family is small).

This gets a shrug from me.

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 8:35 pm The thing about streaming for me is that instead of having older American movies and TV they'd rather make their own new or get new shows from Asia and Scandinavia. This does not make me want to watch more streaming.

Well, there are a lot of foreign series that can be great, and one of the benefits I've liked about Streaming is having access to shows that I wouldn't otherwise have been able to watch. But there is quite a lot of dreck too, and we certainly seem to be exposed to more of it.

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 8:35 pm The thing about streaming for me is that instead of having older American movies and TV they'd rather make their own new or get new shows from Asia and Scandinavia. This does not make me want to watch more streaming.

If the shows out of Asia and Scandinavia weren’t usually better than their counterparts from the U.S., I might agree with you. But to be honest, I find myself watching more foreign shows these days.

Sometimes the foreign films leave me confused as the dubbing translation is different than the closed caption translation.

I get frustrated when reading movie and TV reviews/previews spread across half a dozen or more providers, especially when that info is buried several paragraphs into the review. I often get "sold" on something only to find out that it's on a service that I don't have. And I don't want any more services. The four that we already subscribe to provide far more content than I can watch. And they're sticky -- once you have a history and build a watch list, they're hard to quit.

Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV. The ideal marketplace (for me) would be having ONE provider that acts as a gateway that can offer ANY content a la carte. That is, I would subscribe to Prime (for example) and get all of their native content for a flat price. If I want to watch a Hulu show (for example), Prime would fetch that for me for maybe a dollar per month and add it to my subscription library. Hulu might get 90 cents and Prime would keep a dime for brokerage. In other words, we'd subscribe to shows rather than providers, and one company would handle all the billing. But you could choose any company as your gateway -- if you like Hulu's overall lineup, you'd subscribe to them and could buy individual Prime shows for a dollar. Each company is incentivized to produce the most and best content because it wants to be your gateway, but each gateway has access to everyone's content, and you don't need to pay attention to what originates where.

Needing a Netflix account to watch Netflix shows and a Hulu account to watch Hulu shows and so on and on is what frustrates me.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 9:54 pm

Truly some of my favorite 'endlessly applicable' quotes are from Lawrence of Arabia.

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm In other words, we'd subscribe to shows rather than providers, and one company would handle all the billing. But you could choose any company as your gateway -- if you like Hulu's overall lineup, you'd subscribe to them and could buy individual Prime shows for a dollar. Each company is incentivized to produce the most and best content because it wants to be your gateway, but each gateway has access to everyone's content, and you don't need to pay attention to what originates where.

God damn genius. Of course, now I will just be endlessly frustrated with you.

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV.

Yeah, the cable replacement streaming platforms are now as expensive as or even more expensive as traditional cable, and much worse quality due to streaming compression.

What seemed to be hope for the consumer being screwed by greedy cable has turned out to be no better.

The one thing it changed was that the no contract platforms forced cable to follow suit.

hepcat wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 10:57 pm

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 8:35 pm The thing about streaming for me is that instead of having older American movies and TV they'd rather make their own new or get new shows from Asia and Scandinavia. This does not make me want to watch more streaming.

If the shows out of Asia and Scandinavia weren’t usually better than their counterparts from the U.S., I might agree with you. But to be honest, I find myself watching more foreign shows these days.

Yep, the benefit of all these streaming services has been access to more foreign shows and movies than ever before. A german series like Dark simply wouldn't have been available internationally before streaming services. For that, we're richer. I find myself watching less and less network franchise TV these days.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 2:23 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV.

Yeah, the cable replacement streaming platforms are now as expensive as or even more expensive as traditional cable, and much worse quality due to streaming compression.

I didn't fire my cable company; my cable company fired me. My municipal service couldn't break even at that business, so they folded.

YouTube TV is my cable surrogate. For $65 a month I get what amounts to a basic cable package with virtual DVR. Like cable, it comes with maybe 10 channels that I watch and 100 that I don't. But the channels I watch are core -- local network affiliates, cable news, AMC, Comedy Central, BBC America, and the crown jewel TCM, which is hard to get anywhere else. I love me some 1940s movies. But you're right: $65 for YTTV is what I'd expect to pay for real cable and the quality is inferior.

Unagi wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:46 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 9:54 pm

Truly some of my favorite 'endlessly applicable' quotes are from Lawrence of Arabia.

Really? Love the movie but I don’t remember too many lines.

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm I get frustrated when reading movie and TV reviews/previews spread across half a dozen or more providers, especially when that info is buried several paragraphs into the review. I often get "sold" on something only to find out that it's on a service that I don't have. And I don't want any more services. The four that we already subscribe to provide far more content than I can watch. And they're sticky -- once you have a history and build a watch list, they're hard to quit.

Yes, this, a thousand times. It's even worse when something is hyped up and I have to dig through info to find out where it will air outside the U.S, as most outlets will not tell you this. And sometimes it ends up not even being available.

Also confusing is that due to licensing agreements, some shows (in Canada at least) are often not on the most obvious of places and are scattered on different networks and services.

To get to a consumer-oriented streaming model, we would need government standards and regulation. Zero chance of that under current politics.

Scuzz wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 3:40 am Really? Love the movie but I don’t remember too many lines.

Yeah, I probably overstated/exaggerated that a little. The above was one quote I always remembered...

But there were 2 others that I've always recalled as well

The line about holding the burning match as it gets to your finger tips: "The trick is not minding that it hurts."


And then I need to go look this one up to get it right, but it's probably my favorite:
"As long as the arab people fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people, greedy, barbarous and cruel."

I feel like there are one or two more that I'm not able to recall right now.

Much of the content being yanked off of HBO isn't disappearing. It's being licensed out to third-party ad-supported services. Apparently they've decided that they can get more money that way.

I used to love that anything DC I might want to watch was all in one place. It was a big part of the reason I had an HBO Max subscription.

Unagi wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 12:23 pm

Scuzz wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 3:40 am Really? Love the movie but I don’t remember too many lines.

Yeah, I probably overstated/exaggerated that a little. The above was one quote I always remembered...

But there were 2 others that I've always recalled as well

The line about holding the burning match as it gets to your finger tips: "The trick is not minding that it hurts."


And then I need to go look this one up to get it right, but it's probably my favorite:
"As long as the arab people fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people, greedy, barbarous and cruel."

I feel like there are one or two more that I'm not able to recall right now.

I do remember that second one.

When you're paying for a service, you expect the exclusive content to stay exclusive indefinitely and it could be easily argued that the service is being devalued by the removal of their own content, especially if it's being licensed out to another service you may not have access to.

Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 3:26 am

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 2:23 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV.

Yeah, the cable replacement streaming platforms are now as expensive as or even more expensive as traditional cable, and much worse quality due to streaming compression.

I didn't fire my cable company; my cable company fired me. My municipal service couldn't break even at that business, so they folded.

YouTube TV is my cable surrogate. For $65 a month I get what amounts to a basic cable package with virtual DVR. Like cable, it comes with maybe 10 channels that I watch and 100 that I don't. But the channels I watch are core -- local network affiliates, cable news, AMC, Comedy Central, BBC America, and the crown jewel TCM, which is hard to get anywhere else. I love me some 1940s movies. But you're right: $65 for YTTV is what I'd expect to pay for real cable and the quality is inferior.

We have talked about dumping our expensive cable and just streaming but my daughter works from home so we need quality internet and for some reason we are limited by that. We do have at least 5 streaming services paid for by us, my daughter living with us and my daughter in Portland. Most services let you have up to four users.

Seeing as we're discussing streaming services, I hate the recent trend of holiday specific series. Yeah, as if it's hard enough for getting everyone to agree on a Christmas movie, but now there are miniseries that require more time commitment of hours and even days, which is impossible for low attention spans. I prefer movies as it's over and done with and everyone can move on. This all seemed to have started last year. I had seen a Christmas miniseries on Netflix last year which was sweet enough, but by the end, we all agreed it had overstayed its welcome. Now we have the Home Alone series and the Santa Clause series. What next, a Trains Planes and Automobiles series leading up to Thanksgiving? No, just no. I think these types of series are a bad idea.

Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 3:26 am

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 2:23 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV.

Yeah, the cable replacement streaming platforms are now as expensive as or even more expensive as traditional cable, and much worse quality due to streaming compression.

$65 for YTTV is what I'd expect to pay for real cable and the quality is inferior.

Do you have a grandfathered rate? I pay $70+ for YTTV. If I didn't have fiber (to support the streaming quality and consistency), I would absolutely be back to the now cheaper cable.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Mon Jan 02, 2023 10:13 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 3:26 am

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 2:23 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV.

Yeah, the cable replacement streaming platforms are now as expensive as or even more expensive as traditional cable, and much worse quality due to streaming compression.

$65 for YTTV is what I'd expect to pay for real cable and the quality is inferior.

Do you have a grandfathered rate? I pay $70+ for YTTV. If I didn't have fiber (to support the streaming quality and consistency), I would absolutely be back to the now cheaper cable.

It was $50 when I signed up and went to $65 a month or two later, and it's still $65. We have FIOS so bandwidth isn't the problem; I suspect that my taste for old standard-def shows is.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 2:23 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 11:20 pm Sometimes I miss the one-stop shopping of cable TV.

Yeah, the cable replacement streaming platforms are now as expensive as or even more expensive as traditional cable, and much worse quality due to streaming compression.

What seemed to be hope for the consumer being screwed by greedy cable has turned out to be no better.

The one thing it changed was that the no contract platforms forced cable to follow suit.

I have Amazon Prime and YouTube TV. On NYE, I was at a friend's house who didn't have these services and the quality on his bigger-than-mine TV was really dreadful. I think he was just streaming free stuff.

It's ok if you're not going to spend for quality content, but that actually looks better on a smaller TV. His is at least 80" (I have a 75"), and poor quality is exaggerated.

Missed this yesterday - Showtime is being swallowed by Paramount+:

Speaking of stuff, this rebrand has also claimed a few casualties in addition to the Showtime name: Upcoming series Three Women, which has already completed production on its first season, has been dropped by P+WS (pronounced “paws” or maybe “pee-paws”?). Deadline says “there has been interest” from some other network/streamer, though, so it might find new life elsewhere. Also, P+WS has canceled both American Gigolo and Let The Right One In, with the former apparently being last-nail-in-the-coffin dead and the latter now being shopped around to other places as well.

Wow. My retro-brain still thinks of Showtime as the neck-and-neck competitor with HBO.

Just following the blueprints for the enshittification of everything.

Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die....

...This is enshittification: surpluses are first directed to users; then, once they're locked in, surpluses go to suppliers; then once they're locked in, the surplus is handed to shareholders and the platform becomes a useless pile of shit. From mobile app stores to Steam, from Facebook to Twitter, this is the enshittification lifecycle

I disagree that Steam belongs on that list.

Steam went from 'good to users' to 'neutral.' It has always been at 'abuse business partners.'

This one kinda surprised me:

A boatload of HBO series and other Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) shows and movies are now available to watch for free on Roku. The Roku Channel now includes 14 ad-supported channels that are streaming more than 2,000 hours of WBD content, including shows like Westworld, The Nevers and Raised by Wolves, all of which vanished from HBO Max a few months ago.

In January, WBD struck deals with Roku and Tubi for free, ad-supported streaming (aka FAST) channels. Three of the cable-style channels debuted on Tubi in early February, but it took a little longer for them all to land on Roku.

The channels are each focused on different areas. There's one for fan-favorite shows like the canceled Westworld and Nikita (WB TV Watchlist), another centered around docuseries such as How It’s Made and How the Earth Works (WB TV How To), a channel for classic movies (WB TV At The Movies) and even one for baking competition series (WB TV Sweet Escapes). Licensing out content for streaming on FAST channels will give WBD another revenue stream as it tries to improve its bottom line — WBD posted a net loss of $2.1 billion for the last three months of 2022.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2022 9:54 pm

Extreme nitpick... great quote, and it is from an exchange between those two characters, but it wasn't in that scene.

Disney is following HBO's lead and will be removing content from their platform. They will also start brining Hulu content into Disney Plus. They did not yet specify what content will disappear.

I guess this is a thing now:

Hasbro’s Entertainment One (eOne) is rolling the D&D dice — betting that Dungeons & Dragons fans will flock to a new free, ad-supported streaming television (FAST) channel dedicated to the fantasy franchise it’s prepping for a summer launch.

The Dungeons & Dragons Adventures FAST channel is expected to be available on “a number” of platforms but eOne has not cut any distribution deals as yet, according to the company.

The channel will feature a slate of original celebrity-focused unscripted series, including “Encounter Party,” “Faster, Purple Worm! Kill! Kill!” and “Heroes’ Feast,” as well as catalog content including the 1980s “Dungeons & Dragons” animated series. In addition, the FAST channel is to feature third-party content from top internet creators and influencers with a focus on live gameplay.

Some details:

The FAST channel will include episodes of the animated Dungeons & Dragons series that originally aired from 1983–85. With a voice cast including Frank Welker, Willie Aames, Don Most and Katie Leigh, the show follows a group of young friends who are transported to the world of Dungeons & Dragons and must find their way home, taking many detours to help others along the way.

“Encounter Party,” from the creators of the podcast of the same name, follows six returning professional actors and improv artists from the original podcast and welcomes new cast member Khary Payton (“The Walking Dead”), as they role-play an original D&D campaign with original characters set in the world of the Forgotten Realms.

“Faster, Purple Worm! Kill! Kill!” is described as an improv comedy spin on classic Dungeons & Dragons gameplay. Each episode features a party of first-level characters — replete with backstories, accents, theme songs and more — marching to their certain deaths as they face beasts against which they stand absolutely no chance. The series features a revolving cast of special guests and celebrities, including series co-creator Matthew Lillard.

“Heroes’ Feast,” based on the recipes in the bestselling cookbook, is part talk show, part cooking competition. Each episode features the show’s two hosts — culinary hero Mike Haracz and first-level cook Sujata Day — prepping dishes for a revolving pair of guest diners.

The words “improv” and “comedy” should never be used together.