Roku Screensaver suggestion
This aquarium hasn’t changed since it was first made. If you don’t want to add any other screensavers at least update this one. The aquarium is beautiful but I have heard so many people say the exact...
Forum Discussion
Hi Kimbaroars Newbie,
I love the idea of the eel making an occasional appearance—it's a great touch of personality. That said, Roku tends to prioritize updates that drive engagement or monetization. Since screensavers like the "Aquatic Life" don't generate revenue directly, enhancements like this—while fun and creative—probably aren't high on Roku's roadmap. It's not about the quality of the idea, just the business logic behind what gets approved. Roku is already using billboard-style ads in the "Roku City" screensaver. Now, if that eel could sell ad space or recommend a show holding a branded sign, we might see the eel pop out now and again.
Happy streaming, ThisishT
ThisishT , Kimbaroars , Mehrab3497 , Roku didn't develop the aquarium screensaver - I'm guessing they licensed it. How it was adapted for Roku devices I couldn't say. You can find an interesting history of the screensaver here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PprsZgA-kxs
It's been around for decades and it's not likely that it will ever change from what it is unless the original developer makes a change.
Thanks for the update. renojim
Thanks for the clarification, renojim. I'm not trying to be combative with my reply—just genuinely curious about how Roku handles screensaver content and, more broadly, how Roku approaches all UI content. That makes sense—if Roku licensed it, that would explain the limited animation options and why feature request might not go anywhere. Still, it's interesting to compare that with Roku City, which Roku developed in-house uses billboard-style ads, while creative touches in licensed ones seem to get less attention. That contrast says a lot about what gets prioritized.
On a side note, on my device I notice similar logic in how Roku handles UI content—like how the "Explore Recommendations" and "Your Apps" rows consistently override "Continue Watching" in the What to Watch section. It's subtle, but it reinforces how Roku favors engagement and monetization over user continuity, even in passive or convenience-driven areas.
I would think that most companies are looking to make money and prioritize features that sell their products or services versus things that do not mainly because that is what they are in business to do.
If Roku doesn't own the right to modify the animation, then there is nothing they can do but pay for the license and utilize it as it is.
