- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
They give out free monthly subs all the time – works for new and existing subscribers.
Just remember to cancel immediately.
Which is probably why they have millions of subscribers but are still losing money.
Competition is good, but Paramount doesn’t have enough content to actually compete. I’m honestly shocked that they’ve kept their service running this long. I’m not going to subscribe to a dozen different platforms, and Paramount is never going to make the cut.
It’s startrek, twin peaks and copaganda.
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.
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
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.
A feature I’ve seen oft-discussed but never implemented is the ability to create your own personal channels or playlists on a streaming service. For Paramount specifically, I’d create a “Star Trek” playlist that would play an episode from a random Trek show, and at the end of each episode it could ask me whether I want to keep going with that show or “shuffle” to a new one on the channel.
For Netflix or other services with extensive catalogues of comedy (or other single genres, like police procedurals), I could see people using a similar feature.
The idea would be to find a middle ground between the choice paralysis of selecting a movie or show to stream, and the lack of control that came from traditional television.
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.
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.
I use a family log-in for paramount w/ Showtime.
I use it almost entirely for showtime. There’s definitely some decent things on paramount. But once you’ve seen them that’s it. They don’t really have a lot of new content.
And it seems to be an almost genre specific streaming service.
If I’m in the mood for a comedy or something light I don’t even bother looking through paramount.
In Australia Paramount+ has the A-League broadcast rights, so I subscribe purely for that. It is very cheap by streaming standards here ($7 for the base tier with ads) and has a pretty good collection of films too. TV series are really where it struggles.
Yeah, but Star Trek, though. That’s a “killer feature” for a lot of people.
Paramount+ doesn’t work for shit, though. They keep inventing new and different ways to break. Even if you’re really into the content they provide, they’re so hard to work with and keep working consistently. Not like Netflix or Prime Video or Disney+ or whatever. (Hulu is… pretty janky as well. But anyway.)
They have all those Taylor Sheridan programs people are hooked on as well.
Yep this is the only reason I have a subscription. The number and length of ads I get on it are ridiculous though.
Most people rotate.
I get whatever I can get a deal on.
Yarrr.
Yes we know. Good for you. Now you can stop spamming this everywhere.
