devwild

The thing is, Netflix in particular had a system that worked WAY better than their current system. The old star rating system worked really, really well at helping me find new content through weighted ratings that, if not always perfect, were at least predictable and after a couple years of viewing I had no problem finding new and interesting content across multiple genres.

Their switch to the like system was not only worse on its own by taking any nuance out of it, but they changed the recommendation system to weight towards things you just watched rather than your overall profile. This was all about quick, constant binging, but it’s backfired hard in terms of quality of recommendations. You also can’t filter searches based on rating or release date, common factors in finding something to watch. They make it more cumbersome to find shows you may have stopped a few months ago but wanted to pick up on, because they pushed people away from using "My List" by deprioritizing it (they’ve backtracked on that slightly but it still doesn’t get the use it did in the past), but also delist things from "Continue Watching" if you don’t pick it right back up – instead of, you know, giving you control over what stays there, or letting you immediately remove something you don’t like.

Basically, they’ve devalued all the core functionality of Netflix that would actually give the viewer control over their recommendations and what they want to watch.

And the primary reason for all of this? So that their system constantly pushes you to Netflix Originals and high margin shows (like licensed content out of China), regardless of their quality, as long as they fit even remotely into a genre you’ve watched recently. They don’t want you to find the good stuff easily, because if you do you might binge what you want in a month and, then pause your membership for a few months until more piles up.

Sustained income is key, they care very little about customer satisfaction beyond the bare minimum. They want you on their system more, which means finding exactly what you want is not the top priority. Them claiming it’s our fault for not giving them enough data is pure BS.

Trek Culture mentioned in their review/easter eggs that the core idea of the episode is actually based on an old unused Roddenberry script. Appropriate in this case.

Yes, Discovery has been plagued by some truly awful writing of late that does zero credit to it’s characters and actors. The body of the last season made me so angry with how they treated Book/David Ajala – fantastic actor, fantastic character, but because they tried to use his trauma as an excuse to make him a completely engaged yet unaware moron for most of the season. It made no sense, especially considering he’s a street smart empath. And it was painfully obvious that the only reason they did so is because they had a beginning and an end of the series, but had no idea how to connect it all in between.

This is the problem with producers being so focused on having a season long story arc that they outright refuse to tell a story in the time it needs to be told to feel natural. The main story of the last season could have easily been handled in 4 episodes, while the side stories and character development in the middle could have been episodic and more impactful on their own (or… left out to make room for better stories).

Strange New Worlds only serves to emphasize how bad this issue has gotten with not only Disco and Picard, but a host of streaming-era shows.