The difference is who pays. There's no benefit for the content providers to provide this service as DSoup says - if a company goes under, woohoo you have to buy all your content again. It's the consumers who want this insurance, so it befalls the insurance industry to provide it.
Or, third possibility and IMO the best one if it works out economically for all parties, there are no content sales, only rentals/subscriptions. If Netflix goes under, I lose nothing other than access to the service. If every game, movie, TV programme and piece of music was on tap to play, like Spotify, and paid for as used, you'd lose nothing if one provider fails and could swap to another to view the same material. Of course that requires DRM and licensing policies.
I think realistically both options should be provided. Those who don't want the DRM concerns and value the (psychological sense of) permenance of physical have the choice of a platform that might die and they lose everything, while those who want less risk can put up with the occasional network license check as part of a subscription service that can be provided by any of a number of suppliers. MS, Sony, Amazon and Google all having subscription services for games on your device. And Nintendo. And then when Nintendo goes bust, you can still access every ever Nintendo game from Amazon Games Archive and play them on your Wii U emulator on your XBox Thingy or Samsung Lifebox in 2024. And in the future you can show your grandkids Halo 1 rented from The Googlazon Empire playing on your Huawei PlayStation (after the buyout) on their AR headsets.
Or, third possibility and IMO the best one if it works out economically for all parties, there are no content sales, only rentals/subscriptions. If Netflix goes under, I lose nothing other than access to the service. If every game, movie, TV programme and piece of music was on tap to play, like Spotify, and paid for as used, you'd lose nothing if one provider fails and could swap to another to view the same material. Of course that requires DRM and licensing policies.
I think realistically both options should be provided. Those who don't want the DRM concerns and value the (psychological sense of) permenance of physical have the choice of a platform that might die and they lose everything, while those who want less risk can put up with the occasional network license check as part of a subscription service that can be provided by any of a number of suppliers. MS, Sony, Amazon and Google all having subscription services for games on your device. And Nintendo. And then when Nintendo goes bust, you can still access every ever Nintendo game from Amazon Games Archive and play them on your Wii U emulator on your XBox Thingy or Samsung Lifebox in 2024. And in the future you can show your grandkids Halo 1 rented from The Googlazon Empire playing on your Huawei PlayStation (after the buyout) on their AR headsets.