Watched the whole video. I'm surprised he didn't deduce the biggest and primary reason why streaming and service bs are being forced to the point of propaganda, the biggest "pro" for the side of the seller:
If you buy a good, you own that copy of your good and can technically gain independence from the seller through usage of the good you now own. For a game, this means that when you buy the game, you can play the game forever and have no need to buy anything from the seller for the rest of your life if the game is good enough. You have no dependency on the publisher/developer at that point and can cut all ties with them. Making this good behave like a service insofar as the ability to terminate your ownership when desired creates an artificial dependency from you onto the seller, so now you have to come back and give them money if you want the value that good provided to you again. This allows the publisher/developer to make one low effort product, sell it until it gets stale after a few years, and then terminate access to ensure that even people who may have enjoyed it and could happily continue without buying a new game will not be able to access it, which takes care of loose ends that could interfere with the ability to make a new sale. Then they can create a new product to generate a fresh cash inflow and repeat the process, and since they have ensured the customers have no ability to gain independence via divorcing their copy of a product from the seller, a localized monopoly has been created. The entire point is to enslave the customer and force them to keep paying under the unspoken threat that if you leave in an attempt to gain independence, you will never have access to the thing you wanted again. Which is fine and dandy if your business is a brothel, but what is being sold in this instance are binary blobs of 1's and 0's that have no natural restriction on the ability to be replicated or even at the bare minimum, retained in a vacuum and fully usable after a sale has been made.
In my opinion, this is an escalation and even likely natural evolution of the practice of planned obsolescence, which is itself already a predatory and malicious practice. And if that malpractice is already legally protected, we're just on a slippery slope to the further destruction of private property rights.
tl;dr Goyim were created by G*d to be slaves for the Israelites
"Games as a service" is a response by an industry that's gone full digital, to bring back the market model that controlled the sales part of the industry before it went digital.
The biggest problem with digitial distributors is that they have infinite shelf space and an infinite amount of stock. A game in such a store will never stop being sold there due to fresh products coming in or running out of stock.
The old market model in retail stores is exactly what you just described: Old titles that haven't sold are removed from the shelves as new titles come in. Want the old title again? Tough luck, but maybe it'll be available on a budget label or a compilation a few years later.
It wasn't planned obsolence back then because every game came in a physical box on physical media with physical goods, and all of that needed physical space so some form of rotational system had to be in place. But in a digital environment all of those restrictions don't apply, but the beancounters realize that the rotational system had a positive impact on their bottom lines, so they're trying to sneak that back in.
ATCHUALLY "The Video" 
