Valve Inks Deal With Lionsgate Adding Over 100 Movie Titles To Steam Platform (hothardware.com) 117
MojoKid quotes a report from HotHardware: Valve took a major step in growing its Steam digital distribution platform today by adding movie rentals to the mix. The addition of movies to Steam's catalog is a first, and it was made possible through a deal with Lionsgate Entertainment that immediately fleshes out the service with more than 100 flicks. Steam is currently the biggest digital distribution platform for games, and while it has a long way to go before it can claim the same for movies, there's little doubt Valve wants to take it there. In a press release announcing the deal, Valve said Lionsgate was "one of the first major studios to license films" for streaming on Steam, which hints that it's attempting to lure other studios as well. You can view the entire catalog here.
The Twilight Series on Steam!? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
I can see 11 movies there, 5 of which are called "Leprechaun", and none that I've ever heard of.
Re: (Score:1)
You are too young then. They're all campy by todays standards, but they are supposed to be scary. A Leprechaun owes you a wish, but will twist it in very bad ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Same goes for his godamn cereals. You're asking for an easy and tasty breakfast and all you get in return is diabetes and cavities.
Re: (Score:2)
commenting to remove wrong moderation...this was funny, but I mis-clicked.
Insane (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would I pay $5 for a rental?
Re:Insane (Score:5, Insightful)
i dunno. i feel the same but isnt it funny? My family ran video stores in the 90s and 3 dollars was the usual rental fee for new releases.
look at how much our value perception has changed because of technology.
also whats changed is our ability to afford minor entertainments.
Price goes up after a movie expires out of Redbox (Score:2)
The trouble is that Redbox has new releases for $1.50 but has nothing but new releases. Unlike before, the price to rent a movie goes up after it's been out on DVD for a year.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember in the 1990s and perhaps late 1980s when it seemed that video rentals was a side job of all kinds of businesses. I had to wonder if there wasn't some sort of background infrastructure to support these video rental side jobs. There had to be since I doubt that these stores went through the effort and expense of buying a pile of VHS tapes at retail prices hoping that someone picking up a pack of smokes would on impulse rent a video for the evening.
When I say all kinds of businesses did video ren
Re: (Score:2)
Saying that no one would pay for something when a free option exists is a bit hyperbolic since, as you point out, there are reasons that people would do such a thing. What is undeniable is that Blockbuster exists only in name right now. The only property they have of value right now is their name and some sundry office supplies. That name only exists because at one time they had a successful business model and some people recognize it enough from a decade ago that they will keep going back.
The point is t
Re: (Score:2)
> No one? I'm pretty sure there were quite a few people who gladly paid a couple of bucks to rent a video from Blockbuster on the day of their choosing rather than waiting days or weeks for one of the library's copies to become available
Except Blockbuster had the same exact problem.
Re: (Score:2)
They need to do better than Twilight and Hunger, both embarrassingly derivative, repetitious, shallowly acted and content-free.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they're targeting the 13-year-old girl demographic.
Re: (Score:2)
Adjusting for inflation $5 isn't too bad for 1080p, assuming there are no adverts etc. But only for new releases, otherwise people are going to expect Netflix level pricing ($10/month for all you can watch).
In any case, the DRM kills it. I don't want to watch movies on my computer monitor, I want to watch them on my TV. Kodi doesn't support their DRM, and there is no app for my smart TV. As usual, the DRM version is inferior to the pirate version.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to watch movies on my computer monitor, I want to watch them on my TV. Kodi doesn't support their DRM, and there is no app for my smart TV.
So? Then use Amazon, Vudu or PSN/SEN. They have more movies anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Then use Amazon, Vudu or PSN/SEN.
Kodi and my smart TV don't support any of those things either. Just sell me a damn .mkv file with H.264 video and DTS audio. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Piracy will do it faster and easier.
Re: (Score:2)
...except modern piracy methods paint a big fat target on your back. You're better off just waiting on Netflix to mail you the physical media.
Same net effect, perfectly legal, doesn't advertise you as a pirate to the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Kodi
One of the drawbacks of using an XBMC/Kodi centric setup is you don't have the "mainstream video store" options.
[quote]and my smart TV don't support any of those things either.
Older model? Most "smart" TV's these days have Amazon or Vudu....or both. Some even have PSN/SEN. Can it do DLNA? And even if your TV doesn't have Amazon, Vudu or even DLNA, many blu-ray players do, not even taking into account game consoles.
Just sell me a damn .mkv file with H.264 video and DTS audio.
MP4 containers have wider device support than MKV. Sure the XBMC/Kodi crowd who watches
Re: (Score:2)
My TV is a 2012 model, so not really very old. Amazon is available on the US model, but not the European model for some reason. It supports MKV containers, FWIW.
MP4 would fine fine too. Just something without DRM that plays on a majority of devices.
Re: (Score:2)
MP4 has inferior codec support. Something simple and obvious like "a re-compressed DVD" is not an option it's capable of handling.
MKV was created because Apple fanboys shriek at anyone the least bit creative and call them pirates.
Non-apple devices all seem to be remarkably less lame when it comes to format support. This even includes h264 options.
Re: (Score:1)
MP4 has inferior codec support.
What do you mean by that? MPEG4 IS a Codec, and it has the widest support.
Something simple and obvious like "a re-compressed DVD" is not an option it's capable of handling.
What do you mean by that? DVDs are ALREADY compressed MPEG2. If you want to recompress a DVD MPEG2 stream to MPEG4 you can do that. I've done it in Handbrake many many times.
MKV was created because Apple fanboys shriek at anyone the least bit creative and call them pirates.
MKV is a CONTAINER, not a Codec. In fact most MKV's are MPEG4 video And how is it "creative" for the Russian pirates who created MKV to use it for pirating US made media.
Non-apple devices all seem to be remarkably less lame when it comes to format support. This even includes h264 options.
MPEG4 has varying profile levels which describe the feature support. Baseline, Main, or
Thing is costs have gone down a lot (Score:2)
The cost of maintaining a physical store and all the logistics thereof are pretty significant. I mean think of all the overhead: How much actual profit did you turn on that $3 rental? Most of it got eaten by operation costs.
Digital delivery is next to nothing, pennies or less to stream a movie to you. As such it should be cheaper. Same deal why people get mad about e-books costing as much or more than physical books.
Re: (Score:3)
Well some people just want to watch a movie once, and that's pretty much the standard price across the various services.
http://store.steampowered.com/... [steampowered.com]
https://store.playstation.com/... [playstation.com]
http://smile.amazon.com/Hunger... [amazon.com]
http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!c... [vudu.com]
https://play.google.com/store/... [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you get *100* titles to choose from!
Re: (Score:1)
Smart gamble (Score:2)
but this is a respectfully calculated move by Steam to move where the market is headed.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Then and only then they could think about their own programming or rental service. But offering a seriously shitty selection of movies for streaming isn't going to convince a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They would be much better off encouraging the other streaming services to integrate with SteamOS. That might even have the nice side effect of benefiting XBMC and MythTV. HELL, the might as well just integrate XBMC into Steam and have the streaming services make XBMC plugins.
Don't re-invent the wheel or worry that a few enthusiasts will benefit from the work too.
Re: (Score:2)
The MPAA says no. But for $4.99 you can rent it for 48 hours.
Re: (Score:2)
The catalog includes Pi, the 1st full-length movie of Darren Aronofsky which I would like to recommend to the /. crowd. I still love this movie, even after I watched Tsukamoto's "Tetsuo, the iron man" which inspired Aranofsky a lot.
It also includes the Leapfrog educational series for toddlers. Thats probably what you are going to get on Steam.
Pi was terrible. (Score:5, Funny)
Not trolling. Honest opinion intended to save hapless Slashdot readers who might otherwise waste time and effort watching Pi, time that could be better spent by, for example, jerking off, sleeping, picking your nose, scratching your ass, or even watching paint dry, all better and more interesting activities than watching Pi.
It is a stupid fucking movie about how the constant Pi (~= 3.14) is magical somehow, and not just the sum of an infinite series, which is what it is.
Underlying concept of the film is complete bullshit. I'm waiting for the sequel, "e" about how God created a special magic number to be the base of the natural logarithm... I'm sure it'll be complete bullshit too.
All I'm saying is, I know opinions vary, but do yourself a GIANT favor, find "Pi" in a library, check it out along with 2 or 3 movies you KNOW are actually good and worth watching, so you won't feel like you wasted the whole trip, and watch it if you like shitty movies.
When you end up hating it passionately about 17 minutes in, (counting the warnings against illegally copying this turd of a film, and previews for better films like "Hot Tub Time Machine," "Poltergeist 3," and "Beverly Hills Chihuahua," (all better than Pi, and I fucking HATED those celluloid abortions,) you won't ALSO have wasted $5 that could go to something infinitely more worthwhile, such as wiping your ass with it, after taking a runny, flaming shit!
Do yourself one more favor, and resist the temptation to rip the DVD out of the player and set it on FIRE, because the library WILL charge you more than $5, and they won't believe your DVD player did it to protect you from watching that godawful film, sacrificing itself heroically, destroying itself AND the DVD of Pi in the process.
Good luck, and happy movieing!
Re: (Score:1)
What this guy said.
It reeks of "student film" and tries to make up for what it lacks in substance with mysticism and style but falls flat on its face.
Requiem For A Dream has entertainment value. Pi... I don't know, maybe you just have to be really wasted or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Bah. I like it for many of the same reasons you guys hate it. It absolutely is weird indie no-budget art-house hoopla, and that's what I find refreshing about it. It's like someone deconstructed the video feed from my own waking nightmares. I mean, I kind of related with the character. Obsessing over patterns, crazies pestering me with numerology nonsense, migraine-triggered freakouts and irrational behaviour... pretty much how my twenties played out.
Beyond that, the technical merits of the production
Re: (Score:2)
Smoking Man (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish Valve would ink a fucking deal to make Half-Life 3. I don't need their movies.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously. I'm 33 and HL2 came out when I was 21. I've got a nearly two-year-old daughter now, and I'm hoping that I'll be able to play HL3 sometime before she's old enough to play HL2.
Don't get me wrong: I love all the other Valve-produced games like the Portal series, Left 4 Dead, Team Fortress, etc., but there's a special place in my heart for the HL series.
Re: (Score:2)
I could go for Portal 3 right about now.
Re:Smoking Man (Score:4, Interesting)
Half-Life 3 will never happen. It's not in Valve's commercial interest any more.
Valve isn't really a games developer any more; it's a platform holder. Remember that, while the precise arrangements sometimes vary per customer, it generally takes around 30% of the value of each sale on Steam. It's putting very little money into the development of those games (hosting/bandwidth costs for the store and some multiplayer/social backend for the majority of games), but is taking a huge amount of revenue from them. By contrast, when it develops and sells its own games, it needs to front up the costs and take a lot more of the commercial risk.
This is broadly similar to how things work on the consoles. Sony and MS take the costs of hardware development and fund first and third-party exclusive titles to grow the installed base, but their real income comes from the licensing fees. Nintendo still tries to make the first-party model work, but has been struggling with it since the launch of the 3DS.
Valve has a further advantage over Sony and MS in that its platform is an evolutionary one, rather than one with major hardware shifts once or twice a decade. Once the installed base for Steam was there, Valve didn't really need to put much effort into growing it through first-party development. It therefore focusses its first-party development on new markets; see its recent investment in VR via the HTC Vive and its software suite.
But even if Valve doesn't need to make Half-Life 3, is there a reason why it shouldn't do so anyway, given the game would almost certainly be profitable?
Actually, yes...
Steam's success is predicated on wide participation by developers and publishers. The one thing that could really hurt Steam would be for a critical mass of major publishers to withdraw. EA have already taken their ball and gone home to Origin. Ubisoft has tried to draw people over to uPlay, but has had less success so far and still tends to depend on Steam for the backend of some of its games. But if Valve wants to keep the major publishers on board, then it can't afford to compete with them directly. Most of Valve's output since HL2 has taken the form of experimental or niche titles, like Portal or Left 4 Dead. For Valve to put out a major AAA shooter would send worrying signals to a lot of its major parties. So it won't.
At this point, the only real prospect for seeing HL3 would be if Valve sold the rights to the series to a third party, which is itself vanishingly unlikely.
Re: Smoking Man (Score:2)
Well some of this logic circles back; see, Steam took off because of Half Life 2. And that userbase attracted more content. Which attracted more users. So there is this positive loop in the userbase-content relationship, but with a damping factor; content is the prime mover and users follow good content more than good content follows users.
I think Steam need to play market-maker again.
Re: (Score:2)
I addressed this in my post. Valve needed Half-Life 2 to get Steam off the ground and give it an initial user-base. But it has that user-base now. Half-Life 3 would not persuade anybody who does not currently use Steam to start using it.
For console-manufacturers, the best part of the cycle is typically the mid-late part. The installed base is significant and games sales are strong. The money is rolling in without them having to do very much (although if they're smart, they will be beginning development on a
Re: (Score:2)
You make an interesting point saying that it's in valve's interest to not compete with other developers and publishers. I hadn't thought of that point.
I think that one other thing which would potentially see a HL3 would be if the users started abandoning steam. This falls into the "undermine their business model" category you listed above. If steam were to start losing market share (say to GOG's galaxy platform or something else) then I think we'd be likely to see a HL3 as a desperation "we need money" move
Re: (Score:2)
That's why I said "ink a deal". They need to sell the property to someone who will make the game. The game won't make them any money as long as it's unmade.
They aren't interested (Score:2)
One of the bad things about Valve "no management" flat structure (there are many) is that projects live and die based on if enough people think they are interesting. There isn't any kind of project management saying "This is something our consumers want, so let's devote time and resources to make it happen," instead it is whatever toys a group of geeks feel like playing with for a time, until they are bored and move elsewhere.
You see it the most in customer service. They have no CS division, since the compa
The New Email (Score:4, Funny)
It used to be said that all applications expand until they contain an email client...
It seems these days that all applications expand until they form video licensing arrangements with some facet of Hollywood.
Just Me? (Score:2)
Re:Just Me? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm in Brazil, "11 tiles" as well.
Leprechaun 4 movie collection
Leprechaun 3
Leprechaun
Natural Born Pranksters
Two Family House
Deck the Halls
Return of the Living Dead 3
Russkies
Leprechaun 2
Leprechaun 4: Lost in Space
Blue Mountain State: The Rise of Thadland
Re: (Score:2)
11 movies here too (Romania). Feels like the Netflix launch, except Netflix was priced reasonably. Or would have been priced reasonably if it had the full US movie selection...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Smart Move (Score:1)
No benefit? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless they're planning on renting movies for 50 cents a pop on here, I don't really see what they can bring to the table. You can already stream movies elsewhere for flat subscription fees and they have an integrated UI that works with most smart TVs and playback devices. From the screenshot of this I saw earlier today they want to charge you $4 to rent Kill Bill 2 for 48 hours and you'll have to watch it on a computer unless you've already got a Steam Box, Steam Link, or other PC with Steam installed already hooked to your TV. That's not value for money. The reason Steam is so liked with PC gamers is because of 2 things:
1. Easy game and save management where it didn't exist before, with excellent social/community integration
2. Steam SALES where you get games that are a couple of years old at rock bottom prices.
Neither of these things will apply to movies on Steam from what I see so far, so there's just no benefit to renting one there.
Re: (Score:2)
Consider this in the context of SteamOS and steamboxes.
Re: (Score:2)
...as opposed to $35 Chromecasts, or the functionality built into every smart TV and damn near every modern Blu-Ray player (whether "smart" or not), as if people are lining up to rent movies on yet-another-device.
It's akin to when Sony started offering movie rentals on the PS3 almost a decade ago. Except back then, it was expensive and novel.
Now, it's just expensive. The novelty wore off eons ago.
Meanwhile, I make enough Play Store credit with Google Opinion Rewards, mostly just telling them about my regu
Re: (Score:2)
I have. It still doesn't make any sense. I have a Steam link hooked up to my TV, which also has a Chromecast on it. Why would I pay $4 to rent a movie there when I already pay $9 a month for all I can eat Netflix that I can see on the same TV?
Re: (Score:2)
From the screenshot of this I saw earlier today they want to charge you $4 to rent Kill Bill 2 for 48 hours and you'll have to watch it on a computer...
Kill Bill 2 is a bad example. Lionsgate didn't make that movie, nor does it have the right to distribute it. Miramax does.
A better example would be Compadres - Sort of Armed. Kind of Dangerous [rottentomatoes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Rentals are dead anyway. People are used to scheduling entertainment around their lives, and don't want to go back to scheduling their lives around entertainment. Also, there had better be refunds for crap movies, just like there are refunds for crap games. Like say you have watched less than 75% of the movie, you can return it for a full refund.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically Steam movie rentals give you a 30 day period to begin your 48 hour watching window.
That said, I still think its kinda silly/stupid. How about this, for $15 I can buy the movie. For $4 I can watch it 2 times in total (counted as a greater than 75% viewing)
Re: (Score:1)
How about an upsell. For $4 I can rent it, and if I like it I can buy it for only the $9 difference between rental cost and purchase cost.
So much money left on the table.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Easy game and save management where it didn't exist before, with excellent social/community integration
2. Steam SALES where you get games that are a couple of years old at rock bottom prices.
Neither of these things will apply to movies on Steam from what I see so far, so there's just no benefit to renting one there.
There is probably a significan number of Steam subscribers (such as my "tweenage" kids) who do not have any other (or few other) online funded accounts to watch movies. Steam gift cards being usable for movie rentals doesn't seem totally stupid. If it does not cost Valve much to provide this content, it might bring in a few bucks now and possibly more in the future. Bring in the young ones now and you might have them long-term.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I am sure it doesn't cost Valve anything other than some developer time to explore the idea so it's no skin off their back, but even the tweenage argument doesn't make a lot of sense in the age of shared Netflix and Prime accounts. My kid's had their own Netflix profile on my account for years, works great.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I am sure it doesn't cost Valve anything other than some developer time to explore the idea so it's no skin off their back, but even the tweenage argument doesn't make a lot of sense in the age of shared Netflix and Prime accounts. My kid's had their own Netflix profile on my account for years, works great.
Sure, my kids can watch Netflix, but if they want to rent "Leprechaun 3" they can use their Steam money (or maybe it is available on Netflix?) and get used to doing that and maybe never bother getting an iTunes account or whatever other options are out there.
(I tried very hard not to mention that "kid's" is either a contraction of "kid is" as in "My kid's a credit to his school" or is the possessive form of the singular "kid", as in "I hate my kid's friends". I just couldn't let it go. I guess I am a jerk.
Just...Why? (Score:1)
And before you say "Money" let's talk about brand. There was a time that this could have been a thing, like a decade ago, but now there are a zillion services that do it well, have the content, and work everywhere. I get it, the SteamBox didn't pan out, the Vive is a guaranteed dud at $800, and you're desperate to have a service work, but this seems kinda pathetic given how much you COULD be doing with the platform. How about resurrecting the OnLive concept? How about streaming to devices? How about so
License PlayStation patents from Sony? (Score:2)
How about resurrecting the OnLive concept?
Sony bought the patents for its PlayStation Now service, and PlayStation competes with Steam.
Where are all these films then? (Score:4, Insightful)
I only see 10 films (none of which I would watch even if they were free) when I look at the list of Lionsgate stuff on Steam.
No doubt Lionsgate is being its usual stupid self and denying Australians access to most of the films they have added to Steam (if people cant buy the films they want, they will pirate which hurts studio)
Re:Where are all these films then? (Score:4, Insightful)
You are not an American, you are not important to the studios.
Europeans in the same boat. Well, everyone not USA.
Also the prices are hilarious. I might consider that for a DRM free high resolution downloadable file, but for a time-limited streaming rental? LOL
Re: (Score:2)
3.99/4.99 is a fairly standard price amongst the services for a 48 hour rental. Go on, check PSN and Amazon and you'll see.
Please just stop (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Then you didn't see Zombie Movie. It was the first released on steam as a movie... about 11 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
You can probably find it on youtube.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you didn't see Zombie Movie. It was the first released on steam as a movie... about 11 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
You can probably find it on youtube.
Oh yes, that one was good. :)
Also, Kung Fury, another free one, also pretty hilarious if their particular brand of stupid humour appeals to you.
Visual Novels!! (Score:2)
So now as well as having to check for a 'visual novel' tag so I know to avoid it, I also have to check for a 'movie' tag.
I've failed to find the setting to have steam not show me these non-game things.
Half Life 3 Confirmed. (Score:2)
I Wouldn't Watch Leprechaun 2 If They Paid Me 7.99 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Leprechauns are racists. I don't support racists.
Actually, if they paid you $7.99 to watch it, racists would support you.
How's the weather in Soviet Russia?
UK (Score:2)
UK I get 11 movies, none of which I've ever heard of.
I really don't understand what's so hard with someone making a movie and then releasing it for sale worldwide, giving local partners the relevant cut as necessary rather than holding it to random in each jurisdiction.