April 3, 2006, 4:11 a.m. CST
April 3, 2006, 4:13 a.m. CST
If Sony could barely affored to come in at double the price of the HD DVD player, how the heck are they putting Blu-Ray movie playback in the PS3 at a massmarket price? I guess: because they *have* to, to compete with the Revolution and 360. So why not just wait until November? For $400-$500 you'll get a free PS3 attached to your Blu-Ray player...
April 3, 2006, 4:14 a.m. CST
selling point for blu-ray which is Playstation 3. Seriously if it is capable of playing Blue-ray movies (Which I dont know if it is) why would you buy a HD-DVD system?
April 3, 2006, 4:14 a.m. CST
...using the name Blu-ray, when consumers have pretty much voted with their pockets on the "DVD" brand, I'll never know - going on their history, Beta, Mini-Disc, UMD, they've always tried to stamp their own format on the public and not follow a standard that everyone can use - the only reason Blu-ray has any chance of being their first successful format is because of the aforemonetioned movie catalog and the fact they're dumping it into the PS3.......... They're creating needless, totally unnecessary confusion....... muppets...
April 3, 2006, 4:21 a.m. CST
But I live in Australia, and these wonderful gismo's won't be out for a good while.
April 3, 2006, 4:26 a.m. CST
It's a lot cheaper to make HD-DVD discs as manufacturers could retro-fit current DVD manufacturing equipment to create HD-DVD discs. The same can't be said for blu-ray which required new equipment. HD-DVD has more than enough space to fit a whole movie on a one sided disc. Heck, you can fit an HD-DVD movie on a regular DVD-9 disc. Unlike DVD, HD-DVD uses an improved compression which can maintain better than DVD quality at about 40-60% of the size (of DVDs). Also, video resolution does not have a direct 1:1 size ratio. This means that if you have a DVD at 720x480 and an HD-DVD at 1920x1080, the HD-DVD may only take about 40-60% more space due to improved compression and how compression works (there is less movement in higher resolution and so motion estimation can compress more on slow moving scenes). Top that off with HD-DVD being about 30gb per side, compared to DVD being 9gb and you get a lot of space and in fact could put more of it into keeping more quality in the video (less compression artifacts). You would probably be able to put a 4 hour movie on one disc if you don't put a lot of extras.
April 3, 2006, 4:31 a.m. CST
by Tubbs Tattsyrup
Because HD-DVD has a superior video codec to Blu-Ray. Or maybe I'm wrong. But anyway, a format war is in NO WAY good for consumers. Regardless of whether it sparks a price war, there are still two opposing formats.
April 3, 2006, 4:41 a.m. CST
April 3, 2006, 4:43 a.m. CST
That is all you need there to know Blu-ray will win. 10s of millions of homes will have Blu-ray functionability out of the box with their PS3, they won't have to buy a standalone player. There lies the advantage. I am gonna wait a few years at least to see the outcome.
April 3, 2006, 4:48 a.m. CST
The continue push for point technology in this country continues to amaze me. Most of the rest of the world has had cell-phone technology that we are only getting now since 98 or 99. The US ranks way down on the list of countries with FAST internet access. Not to mention that our fire and police departments have a hard time figuring out how to use radios, that can carry both of their frequencies during an emergency. Yet, I am supposed, to give a damn about technology NO ONE GIVES A FUCK ABOUT OR ASKED FOR? I have to cap that and curse in that sentence, because HD and the strive to Hi-DEF remains absolutely pointless. HI-DEF will most likely cease to be discernable to most eyes after years of watching the signal. Not to mention, that to some, the picture does not even look any better. Not to mention, that Hi-DEF shows people CLOSE up in ways, that you will NEVER EVER SEE with your OWN EYES, but I am supposed to be fascinated by the pores of the Desperate Housewives? DVDS as a medium have yet to mature. If I have hundreds, dare I say a thousand +, DVDs that I would love to own. What would make me all of a sudden want to change to a new format, while backwards compatible, absolutely gives me no clearer picture; due to no technology being able to capture the clarity of a MOVIE SCREEN. These two formats remain pointless. There is no reason, what so ever, not to wait another 5 to 10 years to introduce these formats. Introducing them now, pretty much, imo, kills them off. Since how many people, outside of GEEKS and AUDIO/VIDEOphiles will buy this tech? Slim and none because we already have DVD. They tried this with laser discs, TWICE, during VHS' run, and look what happened there.
April 3, 2006, 5:02 a.m. CST
followed by the 5 stages of grief: denial ("there's no way format X will be the winner"),anger ("it's outrageous that more people seem to prefer format Y"), bargaining ("i heard a rumour that one of the big studios will be switching to format X any day now"), hopelessness ("i don't want to buy DVDs any more") and acceptance ("format X is the new betamax").
April 3, 2006, 5:33 a.m. CST
Bluray will ship with 50GB capacity discs. HD-DVD will ship with 30GB capacity. The max capcities are in theory 200GB for Bluray and 60GB for HD-DVD. Bluray has already demonstrated 100GB discs, HD-DVD has demoed 45GB. This basically means BluRay will have starting out, more space than HD-DVD may ever hit. What does that extra space mean to you, once again, in theory as there's definately potential for both camps to totally screw up, is disc reduction. Sure, both can fit 4 hour movies. BUT, imagine what you could do if one disc could fit 8 or more hours of HD video. Think about movie trilogies on ONE DISC in HD with a disc for extras or even the extras on that disc, no having to swap discs, maybe even a cheaper price. Imagine TV season sets on one or two discs. Imagine no more 2-disc releases of one movie and the price decreases that may go with that. The thought of being able to buy a 2-disc set of say, all the Star Wars movies or some other long running series in a small case on the cheap is AMAZING. Look at the price cuts studios are putting on slim case TV season sets. Right now, DVD will hold 4 episodes per side, requiring a double sided disc to get 8 hours on one disc which means no disc art and having to swap sides while watching stuff. I'm fairly sure BluRay has an 8 hour capacity on double layer discs in either VC1 or Mpeg4 AVC. HD-Dvd may be able to do the same on their higher capacity discs. However, the starting advantage plus the total max blu-ray might be able to use (but probably not on the same players) puts me in the blu-ray camp right now, unless HD-DVD has some killer feature or bluray screws up. If I can one day buy a whole season, 24 HOURS of TV on ONE DISC, for maybe $20 bucks, in HD, I'll be a damn happy man.
April 3, 2006, 6:13 a.m. CST
chances are they'll zoom up the original BetaSX/SP master tapes to HD but it'll only mean that the softness associated with those formats will be smeared across a few thousand more pixels (pixels that are interpolated - or guessed at - by the computer filling in the blanks). If you want friends or st:ng to look good watch it on the smallest screen you can find!
April 3, 2006, 6:46 a.m. CST
by Prof. Pop-Cult
I've heard the Hollywood studios want it to win, because they're simply not keen about the idea of supporting the format which Sony (which is also a competing movie studio) would fully profit from (through the PS3, most directly). Think about it, and this argument is the strongest: Why would Fox, Disney, Universal, and so on support the format which enriches Sony, a competitor to them? That makes the other studios uneasy, and I cannot blame them. Blu-Ray will become the proprietary format for which PlayStation 3 games are used.
April 3, 2006, 6:54 a.m. CST
by Prof. Pop-Cult
Beta was superior technically to VHS. VHS won. Second argument: The PS3. When the PS2 came out, the prices of DVD players was already coming down, and the DVD format was already establishing itself well on its own. (It's an absolute MYTH that the PS2 drove the acceptance of DVD in the marketplace.) Many gamers owned both a DVD player and PS2. And today there are many, many more households that own a DVD player than just a PS2. If anything, the PS2, because it included the capability to play DVDs, helped to make the DVD format more ubiquitous.
April 3, 2006, 6:57 a.m. CST
by Prof. Pop-Cult
Oh, yeah, and finally: The Hollywood studios were always reluctant to support Sony's UMD format (for the PSP). Now they are dropping the format. In a recent Variety article, a rep for on the major studios said that UMD is a failure -- just as Blu-Ray will be. The vibe is that the studios, other than for Sony, have no enthusiasm to support Blu-Ray, and, thus, Sony.
April 3, 2006, 7:08 a.m. CST
my bro was stunned that the xbox360 graphics looked so, as he put it, "plain" & was angered to hear that it's because we need to get a
April 3, 2006, 7:19 a.m. CST
by Jim Jam Bongs
Just as Prof stated, the other movie studios don't want to make Sony even more richer and powerful. Sony wants to control the Blu-Ray format, and the content delivered on it, like the way they deal with the PS2 format with its game developers. The non-Sony studios are VERY resentful toward Sony about this. The larger storage capacity and PS3 are irrelevant here. (The PS3 will probably need all that greater storage capacity in order to play all those damn cutscenes in fantasy RPGs that Japanese gamers seem to love to watch.) What you need to look at are three factors -- Price, movie title selection, and how fast the public is buying HDTV sets. HD-DVD already is ahead in the first two. (By the end of this year, you'll likely be able to pick up a generic HD-DVD player for $269 at Fry's during the holiday season.)
April 3, 2006, 7:23 a.m. CST
by Shawn F.
Has your brother seen "Fight Night Round 3", "Call of Duty 2" or "Ghost Recon" on the 360?
April 3, 2006, 7:34 a.m. CST
by Jim Jam Bongs
In order to encourage average consumer interest in HDTV sets, the HD-DVD consortium has made it easier for HDTV set manufacturers to build HD-DVD players into HDTV sets. LG is one such company; they will be releasing a flat-panel HDTV with built-in HD-DVD player. I predict within 18 months, Sony will have to concede defeat and will start releasing certain titles from its library on HD-DVD. (In order to save face, they will initially release a small selection of classic/cult films from its library, and license these titles to the Criterion Collection to master on HD-DVD and distribute.) Then they will pump up the argument that Blu-Ray is the "better" format for high-defintion console gaming.
April 3, 2006, 7:39 a.m. CST
For the simple reason of name familiarity. Non-techies know what HD is and what a DVD is. They don't know what a Blu-Ray is. Give them HD-DVD, and they say "Oh, like a DVD, only more gooder." Give them Blu-Ray and they think it's a new kind of sunglasses or something.
April 3, 2006, 7:59 a.m. CST
I'm definitely waiting to buy anything; that much is certain. I'm not buying either one until one of these two formats dies. I suspect I'm not alone in this.
April 3, 2006, 8 a.m. CST
by Jim Jam Bongs
1. Scratch resistance is probably not a huge selling point to most consumers. The CD and DVD formats remain successful despite this. 2. The decision to restrict output resolution ("down-convert") is left to the content provider. Blu-Ray has the same thing -- but Sony has elected to not down-convert for the initial selection of its movies being released. Basically, with HD-DVD, too, a studio can turn on or off this feature if they want. 3) HD-DVD has the support of most of the Hollywood studios. Blu-Ray does not, and especially more so now after negotiations between the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD camps collapsed a year ago. (Many movie studio executives refer to Blu-Ray as "Blu-Rape" -- as in, it's the format which Sony aims to use in order to profit from the movie libraries of other studios.) The other studios have essentially told Sony to fuck off.
April 3, 2006, 8:15 a.m. CST
I can't imagine a movie studio thinking..."hmmm...which format should we chose?" "If we choose the Blu-Ray, we could sell a whole TV show on one DVD and sell it for less and therefore , make less money" "YES, let's go for it and lose money!!!" They would never sell the Star Wars Trilogy for 20$!! The goal of any studios is to make money so, they will go with the format that they know people will be buying and with which, they'll make money. So, HD-DVD, the players are cheaper so that people will buy them more easily, less capacity so, more disks for the same content as a Blu-Ray!. Let's go for HD-DVD!!! Unless there are others reasons that I'm not aware of to go for Blu-Ray, there are more chances that they will go for HD-DVD...
April 3, 2006, 8:23 a.m. CST
by Jim Jam Bongs
This is a RUMOR that people have been talking about in the film industry, but it's been picking up steam a lot lately, after the studios all collectively trashed Sony's UMD format and announced last month pulling out of supporting it: The HD-DVD group and Nintendo have been in deep, highly secret negotiations. HD-DVD is willing to cut Nintendo a sweet discount so that Nintendo will use the HD-DVD format for its next gaming console -- the Revolution (or Go, as it may finally be called). Nintendo's concern is about piracy, which the HD-DVD group is trying to reassure them on, but Nintendo realizes that using the HD-DVD format could give them an advantage over the Xbox 360 and possibly the PS3 right away. (Yes, Nintendo has said that its next console will not support high-definition resolutions. What the HD-DVD group wants is for Nintendo to use the HD-DVD format as a storage/data medium. HD-DVD movie discs would probably still play on the Revolution, but the resolution would be down-converted in order to play on non-HDTV sets.) The HD-DVD group wants this in order to blunt the lingering perception still that PS3 will drive the adoption of Blu-Ray. This is rumored to be the big shocker that Nintendo might announce at E3 next month, when they finally debut the Revolution/Go. If this actually happens, then Blu-Ray is dead as a high-def movie format. (And the console gaming business, another issue in itself, will take a significant turn.)
April 3, 2006, 8:33 a.m. CST
and keep on feeding money to those corporate types. me? i'll wait till i get a mega braodband account, wait for the hackers to crack the formats and download what i want when i want. hard media is a mugs game. how many stacks of cds will you have laying around the house, after you've done the right thing and burnt them as mp3s? whats gonna happen to all those dvd dude? hell whats happened to all those videos that you spent your allowance on? hd-dvd, blue ray, who gives a monkeys honestly. seriously dont believe the hype, download the movie, watch it and catch it the next time it comes on tv. save your money ! // first rule of fight club.. dont talk about fight club
April 3, 2006, 8:46 a.m. CST
The upgrade from VHS to DVD was an easy, long-awaited jump. Another upgrade from DVD to HD-DVD/Blu-Ray? Not so easy, especially with the lack of decisive, widepsread HD format. Eventually, things will be sorted out, one way or the other, but don't expect the masses to eagerly jump on board for at least five years or so.
April 3, 2006, 8:48 a.m. CST
Re-buy my entire DVD collection? I think I'll pass for now. For now.
April 3, 2006, 8:50 a.m. CST
by Larry Jay
Listening to all of this reminds me of the original format war VHS vs Beta. I was one of the first to jump on the BETA bandwagon. And was just absolutely horrified to find out after the dust settled that my prefered format was the loser. I distinctly remember having to go out and REPLACE all of my beta content with VHS versions of the same titles. Since then, I've had to replace my aging VHS library with DVD. Please don't tell me I'm going to have to do it again with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD just to get true high-def from my 50" plasma. But I do agree with one thing, with Blu-Ray being a standard on the PS3, people are going to go with the Blu-Ray format to accomodate thier game machine. XBox be damned. Sure its pretty, but it's got NO legs. And I already have a dead Sega Genesis in my basement to reinforce my understanding of what a powerhouse SONY is in the marketplace. Sony has buried every other competitor. They will bury Xbox.
April 3, 2006, 9 a.m. CST
Everything below is from this link: http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,119665,00.asp So which format has the advantage? As its name implies, HD-DVD is more closely related to its predecessor--but only in that the disc's physical structure is virtually identical to that of current DVD media. Proponents of the HD-DVD format point to that trait as an asset that makes ramping up production more seamless than doing so with Blu-ray Discs. By contrast, Blu-ray requires an entirely different manufacturing and replication process, one that will require some infrastructure investment up front for manufacturers. Surely this will make a difference--but only in the early days. I've yet to hear anything that makes me think HD-DVD holds an insurmountable advantage. The question is, how long will it take for the technologies needed to produce Blu-ray Discs to ramp up and get the manufacturing costs down? Because the transition to HD-DVD involves less up-front expense, that format has an early edge. When it comes to capacity, though, the point advantage goes hands-down to Blu-ray. Never mind the various rewritable and recordable specs; read-only specs are the only ones that matter for prerecorded Hollywood content. A Blu-ray Disc holds a whopping 25GB on a single-layer disc and 50GB on a dual-layer disc. By contrast, HD-DVD holds only 15GB on a single-layer disc and 30GB on a dual-layer disc. And here's a reality check, folks: A standard 135-minute movie, encoded at 12 megabits per second, will require about 12GB to 13GB of storage, just for the video of the film alone. Factor in up to 5GB more for a high-end, DVD-Audio-level soundtrack, plus space for additional audio tracks (to support the requisite Dolby Digital and DTS), multiple language tracks and extras, and suddenly those 30GB dual-layer HD-DVD discs sound like they're going have a tough time handling all that content. Before Hollywood commits to a format, it needs to remember that this next content-delivery format choice is for the long haul. What works in the context of today's standards for "roomy" won't necessarily work three years from now. And no one has ever regretted having too much storage.
April 3, 2006, 9:15 a.m. CST
by Led Gopher
I have a TV that is about 6 years old and works okay for the most part. Yeah the image is not at all crystal clear, the top-left corner has some discoloration going on, and whenever I watch a show that has high detail effects - well they look like shit. Also, I have basic cable and a DVD player that is about 4 years old. Luckily, I only own about 5 DVDs so I won't have to replace a lot of those. Still, I assume one day I will need to replace my TV, DVD players, PC, DVDs, CDs, and so on just so I can actually watch, work, and play the current media of the day. Anyone out there have about $15,000 to help get me started? I sure as Hell have nothing right now. True story.
April 3, 2006, 9:45 a.m. CST
...and HD had that. I understand Blu-Ray is better and makes a lot of the industry cream their pants but I'm gonna be pissed and so are a heck of a lot of other people when we have to complete re-start our movie collection. I don't give a flying shit if movies can't fit all on one disc; hell, I have the 12-set extended edition of Lotr and I friggin love it, 12 discs and all. The whole thing just annoys me.
April 3, 2006, 9:59 a.m. CST
I am not what you would call an "early adopter". Games are my religion. So, I guess I'll be stuck with Blu-ray. Didn't Nintendo try this with cartridges (giving Sony an advantage with the PS) and mini-discs? (Gamecube is what? Third?)
April 3, 2006, 10 a.m. CST
admittdly no, he only got to see it when i had Perfect Dark Zero (i live 200 miles away from him but bought it when staying round) which is NOT the game to try & impress peeps with. All it has is shinier textures but looks/plays exactly like it's N64 predecessor with a fancy roll technique. He's scoffed at GRAW for being yet another game who's TV adverts have "not actual game footage" but I'm hoping to impress him with the Fight Night Demo on my newly acquired Hard Drive & the speed of which DOA4 plays at. I can't afford HDTV for a long time so by november with the PS3 coming out, I have the fear i'm going to be truly screwed when it comes to graphics. I haven't yet got the GRAW demo but playing the Battlefield 2 demo on my normal (widescreen) telly looked a mess & i can't play NFS:MW round my mate's because his normal telly is so small you can only see about 5 feet in front of your car unless you stay on the highway.
April 3, 2006, 10:07 a.m. CST
Most of the observations on PS3 are dead-on. HD-DVD won't be adapted quickly by mass market consumers because of it's limited focus - but the PS3 is going to be huge. Also, HD-DVD and BRD players are expensive because those companies expect to turn a profit on the hardware. The PS3, on the other hand, is going to be sold at an exorbitant loss making it the cheapest BR-Player on the market (to make it affordable, knowing the money will be made back in royalties).
April 3, 2006, 10:08 a.m. CST
This war stuff is pretty tedious. But I think HD-DVD will end up winning out because Blu-Ray is just... you know... tedious and silly on part of Sony. That's pretty typical of Sony anyway. It's not like they really care about "costs" and "bankruptcy", so let 'em try and fail. At least we'll get a good chuckle out of it fifteen years from now when some schmuck posts "Woo, baby, bring back Blu-Ray!" when we're sticking dvd mini-discs into our mechanized heads.
April 3, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST
everyone forgets 90% of CE companies are backing Blu-Ray and 80% of content owners back Blue-ray. The reason the first Blue-ray players are more expensive is because of the PS3, they are high end players. Sony is going to sell the PS3 cheap so none of the others want to compete at the low end. Toshiba Is cutting the price to the bone up front now, with almost no profit left. no other CE companies want to make HD-DVD players. the only other HD-DVD players you will see are made by Toshiba with a RCA name plate on them.
April 3, 2006, 10:10 a.m. CST
FYI. Not HD-DVD, but it will still play regular DVDs.
April 3, 2006, 10:12 a.m. CST
April 3, 2006, 10:19 a.m. CST
it's BLUE! what idiot decided to make nearly the whole thing blue? oh i get it... Blu-Ray... the player is BLU... very cute... and ugly.
April 3, 2006, 10:22 a.m. CST
The problem with your theory is that the HD-DVD drive itself costs more than the MSRP of the Revolution (which will debut at around $200), which is already being sold at a slight profit. Also, since there is no HD support in the Revolution, adding an expensive HDDVD drive just wouldn't make any sense.
April 3, 2006, 10:29 a.m. CST
Alright, no one knows how this war will end - so everyone has their own opinions on the matter including myself, so this is just my own predictions. If you look into the matter a bit more closely with the PS3, I don't think it's all that it's cranked up to be. Firstly, when Sony introduced the PS3 at E3 last year, they claimed to have lots of hardware that they have since dropped due to it's price - the only thing that it has as an advantage to the XBox 360 is a better processor and Blu-Ray. Now before I even begin to continue, please don't even argue that they claim it'll handle 1080p graphics to the 360's 720p/1080i. Because for one, Sony makes a lot of these broken promises and two, I don't care how technologically advanced most of you consider yourself but chances are you wouldn't even notice the difference let alone afford the few HDTVs that actually handle 1080p (mine does, but it cost me $3,500). The only reason why Sony is held on to the processor is because it allows them to make games more advanced than Microsoft, and the only reason they are holding onto Blu-Ray is because it's their main strategy in the HD-DVD war. The one problem, the estimates in the PS3's price. Now I know, these are just rumors right now but this first Blu-Ray model is telling you enough - do you think Sony will be able to sell the PS3 for 300-400 dollars and take that significant of a loss when standalone Blu-Ray players cost $1,000???????? Hell no! Microsoft is losing around $150 for every XBox they sell, and if you think a competitor is thinking of, not doubling, but triple that loss you're out of your damn mind. So no matter how big the PS3 actually is, it will have a serious problem with the XBox 360 due to the fact that Microsoft has already made it public that they plan on dropping the price of the 360 when the PS3 is released in the fall. So hey, if you really got that much faith in Sony than good for you, but I really doubt they'll be able to pull this one off.
April 3, 2006, 10:41 a.m. CST
give you a peace of mind.
April 3, 2006, 10:42 a.m. CST
wouldn't that mean Blu-Ray is also BC with normal DVD? & yes, if HD-DVD can guarantee an end to piracy only then will Nintendo go with the format. The other rumour i hear for the Revolution is that it'll go back to cartridges & make itself BC with NES/SNES/N64. If anyone remembers, Final Fantasy 7 was developed for the N64 until they decided that 4 cd's beats 12 cartridges & went with the PSX/1. So while Cartridges guarantee no piracy it also guarantees less 3rd-party developers for the system.
April 3, 2006, 10:44 a.m. CST
From the picks, it looks like we have a new size for the clamshell cases. WHY?!!!!
April 3, 2006, 11:16 a.m. CST
by Banky the Hack
I wish that studios would spend their money on coming up with interesting plots for their goddamned movies, instead of making the unmitigated shit that constitutes most movies presently higher-definition so we can see all the hairs and corn in these turds. But don't listen to me, go get a hundred monkeys and a hundred typewriters and go squeeze out the movie version of "Scarecrow and Mrs. King"
April 3, 2006, 11:30 a.m. CST
by Doom II
FACT: Your average Wal Mart customer waits until a new technology is 89.99 or less before they buy it. And the American market is made up of millions of Wal Mart customers. Sony failed with Beta (a superior product to VHS) and they will fail with Blu-Ray. Even the Blu-Ray equipped Playstation 3 is expected to have a 500.00+ price tag. Only obsessed techno-geeks with a ton of cash will buy this stuff. The general public WILL NOT and that will seal its fate. Watch how right I am......
April 3, 2006, 11:53 a.m. CST
Are you all monkeys? Why do you worry about such things? First of all, I'm pretty sure both HD-DVD players and Blu-Ray players will play old DVDs. Second of all, owning a new tech player doesn't mean you have to throw away your old DVD player! It will still work. DVD wasn't "backwards compatible" with VHS. Finally, why must you re-buy all your movies? Your DVDs will still work. They will still look great. Only buy the HD movies you WANT to buy. Free will, ladies.
April 3, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST
by Doom II
to 299 for the deluxe version before Christmas, which system will Joe Dirt/average shopper with an annual household income of 30-40,000 a year buy? A bare bones 500+ dollar PS3 or an Xbox 360 bundle with a hard drive,extra controller and game for 299 or less? Fuck Sony. I could honestly live without their films if I had to. Spider-Man 3 ONLY ON BLU-RAY! Keep it. Sony would never cut their own throats like that. Blockbuster Video and Net Flix will not rent Blu-Ray shit and that would cost Sony MILLIONS of dollars in lost revenue. Sony will release stuff on BOTH regular dvd and Blu-Ray until Blu-Ray ultimately fails.....
April 3, 2006, 12:04 p.m. CST
I love how so many folks have blind faith in what Sony will do with blue Ray/PS3. You are all so confident that you will be able to pick up a PS3 for $500 with Blue Ray equipped. Perhaps this will be the case but I doubt it, Sony has been very quiet about there plans. Do not be surprised if there is a $500 unit that won't play movies & a $900+ unit that does. After E3 in may we may know a bit more.
April 3, 2006, 12:21 p.m. CST
please tell me that broken english "tvGo" thingie this site is advertising is a joke.
April 3, 2006, 12:29 p.m. CST
The HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs are for suckers. There is no point in investing in this technology when you will be able to legally download HD movies and store them on your tivo/360/pc/etc. Microsoft has already made this a possibility with the 360 by providing HD music videos and movie trailers. It is only a matter of time before actual movies will be available.
April 3, 2006, 12:31 p.m. CST
Betamax was a Sony technology. You may continue your pointless discussion now.
April 3, 2006, 12:31 p.m. CST
is that it was announced about 6 weeks ago that it won't be out until 2007. That's a long time in gadget-world.
April 3, 2006, 12:44 p.m. CST
My collection is safe. It's up to me if I wanna upgrade. I'm not forced into anything. Like was said before PS3 = Blueray. Right there they have a huge boost. Then again HD-DVD says HD and that's what the industry is pushing on the mainstream public. So the average consumer is more likely to flock towards a product with HD in the title. Blueray will confuse them.
April 3, 2006, 12:45 p.m. CST
Despite some of you assuming the contrary. So as for Dannychico's suggestion just to not get the new equipment -- that's the whole point. I'm not going to. It's completely not worth it if the format which has just in the last three years become the standard suddenly becomes worthless.
April 3, 2006, 12:46 p.m. CST
PS3 should be released late October, early November. Hopefully we'll hear the price of it soon enough. I'm guessing closer to 600.
April 3, 2006, 12:48 p.m. CST
They can't sell it at that price. PS2 was gonna be $600, remember?I've been gaming since 77 and that rumor about a new console being overly expensive. Has never come true. Knock on wood. It's just industry talk, mostly spread by the haters.
April 3, 2006, 12:49 p.m. CST
Why did VHS conquer Beta? Because you can put more content on a VHS tape. No one cares about quality. To the masses all that's important is which is "bigger". Size matters.
April 3, 2006, 12:50 p.m. CST
Which is also a blueray player. That's been confirmed as a fact by Sony. WTF are you talking about feakmovie?
April 3, 2006, 12:53 p.m. CST
The most exciting week of the year IMO!
April 3, 2006, 12:54 p.m. CST
difference between the qualities of vhs and dvd. Also dvd players werent that expensive. But who on earths going out to buy a $1800 player and another $1000 tv set just to see a small difference in quality. And then rebuy their whole dvd collection? Vhs was hugely popular but ultimtely its time had come, dvd still has huge life in it. I hope these companies piss their money against the wall because 99 percent of the world wont buy these
April 3, 2006, 12:59 p.m. CST
I'm REALLY hoping BluRay wins this war, but I'm frustrated in advance because the Sony execs are MORONS CLEARLY HOPING TO BANKRUPT THE COMPANY! Have you SEEN these articles? The stupidity of Sony's various decisions? I swear, these people don't even WANT BluRay to win! I didn't give two shits about MiniDisc or UMD, but this one is actually BETTER than the competition (those two weren't even close) - SONY PEOPLE, for the first time in 20 YEARS you have a good content format, DON'T FUCK IT UP! But you WILL, won't you? You'll be as greedy and selfish as you always were, and we'll all suffer for it.
April 3, 2006, 1:16 p.m. CST
when Sony and Toshiba compete to offer you the latest neural implant. except, in 3006, the format wars will be actual wars fought with giant robots. sure there's less consumer choice, but also, less pointless bickering.
April 3, 2006, 1:17 p.m. CST
The difference in quality between DVD and HDDVD/BluRay will not matter to consumers as it mattered with VHS and DVD. With DVD prices going down, the regular DVD format will remain the winner for quite a long time; that is, until BluRay/HD DVD drop their player prices so low that the average consumer will be able to afford it without breaking their wallets.
April 3, 2006, 1:20 p.m. CST
The reason VHS never took off as a sell-through format was because the tapes and the output were rubbish. DVD changed all that. The reason DV hasn't yet superceded film in theatres is because it doesn't look as good to the naked eye, or perhaps too good in some cases. Will the same people who prefer the softness of film prefer the precision of HD in their homes? And what's the point of pushing HD for home cinema when movies are still being shot on film and digitally graded to look worse than their raw footage? It only makes sense to push HD when it becomes the standard for movie production, otherwise the TiVo thing is still the way to go for storing broadcast HD content. As for DVD collectors being left in the shithouse...VINYL, PEOPLE! There are still those who prefer the "warmth" of vinyl to cd, and a healthy market exists for those collectors. Likewise there will forever be a massive parade of dvd enthusiasts, esp. when the disks are sold at Sally Ann for $1 a pop. Besides, how do you take a movie that was shot in Panavision several decades ago and upgrade it to HD? I don't believe the market will buy this crap. Blu-ray is definitely the new laserdisc, and HD-DVD the next 8-trak.
April 3, 2006, 1:20 p.m. CST
I'm not kidding. Holographic storage is around the corner (as in, they have prototypes and are going to market within the next year or so), and it holds WAY WAY more than either BD or HD-DVD. Why does Sony want to push Blu-Ray? Because they can slip more copy protection into it, they can charge publishers an outrageous amount for the recorders and discs, and because they've been trying for more than 25 years to develop a proprietary Sony-controlled format that will become the industry standard, and they'll keep trying until something sticks and they can then jack up prices, and have control over what you watch. HD-DVD is a lame attempt to stop Sony, but it won't be worth it, either because the holo storage will soundly trounce it. Only real idiots will jump on the Blu-Ray or HD-DVD wagons and buy all their DVDs again. Smart consumers will wait for holo storage, or the inevitable HD downloads, which are already starting with companies like MovieBeam.
April 3, 2006, 1:44 p.m. CST
by Doom II
Just enjoy what you have and don't buy the new stuff. As far as Sony spending MILLIONS in research and development for Blu-Ray and copy protection, some hacker will have the new copy protection system beat BEFORE it even hits the market. Ya gotta love hackers!
April 3, 2006, 1:52 p.m. CST
Besides, who's gonna sit around watching movies when there's celebrity sex-bots in every home?! I want my Lucy Liu NOW!
April 3, 2006, 2:14 p.m. CST
April 3, 2006, 2:38 p.m. CST
Some of you should atleast get the facts straight, since Sony has stated that: - Worldwide PS3 Launch in November - There will be only one model. So no Xbox360 deals regarding a "core" set. Regarding price..even if its $600, not to expensive for the technology you're getting.
April 3, 2006, 3:10 p.m. CST
Exactly what I was saying in Mori's TB's on the subject. If there's a real future format that can be ID'd right now, it's Holographic Versatile Discs. Unlike the stair-stepping up from DVD, it's a quantum leap as far as capacity. I'm sitting this Blu-Ray/HD DVD thing out, and I'd be willing to bet that many others will too. By the time HVD becomes a practical format, cost-effective and all, displays and those who invest in them will have had time and a real reason to upgrade. (Raise your hand if you've got a gorgeous plasma on the wall that, alas, only goes to 1080i anyway.)
April 3, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST
Oh the format war! Don't know how this'll turn out, but I get the feeling that HD-DVD may win out. Simply due to the fact that that the letters "DVD" are in the name. Something Joe Blow consumer will recognize compared to BluRay. Remember, Sony was the maker of BetaMax as well. We know how that little battle ended.
April 3, 2006, 3:55 p.m. CST
by Real Deal
Well the way the transition to HDTV has been handled is appalling. Just stupid. I as many others have bought a 53" widescreen HD ready set in 2002 for $2699.00 ( there are many people out there who did this ). A few years ago Comcast finally got on the ball and offered HD programing and it loks great. However being as a big collector of movies and a gear nut I've been waiting for the last pieces of the puzzle to fall into place. An HD capable DVD player. Well now thanks to pressure from hollywood the only way either of these players will deliver a picture complimentory to my set is through HDMI connectors. The signal through the component out puts is down converted to 480 lines. The resolution of an ordinary DVD. 2002 sets only have component inputs. So they've basically screwed any early adopters that bought sets in preparation for this. These formats need early adopters ( like myself ) to survive. This and also the format war puts the future of these players in a questionable stance for being adopted by the mainstream consumer. I'll be damned if I'm going to shell out another couple of thousand ( or more ) for a new set this early. Plus the price of one of these players. As far as I'm concerned they just shot themselves in the foot. There are many of us who feel this way. Just check the Home theater forums.
April 3, 2006, 4:41 p.m. CST
April 3, 2006, 5:02 p.m. CST
by I Dunno
The vast majority of game systems are purchased for kids. Others by adults with higher priorities. I don't care if it's a freaking holodeck, the percentage of consumers that are going to shell out $600 for a game system that will be obsolete in 3 years is minute. They've tried it in the past. Little Timmy's not going to get anywhere explaining the long term benefits of the technology to his parents.
April 3, 2006, 5:23 p.m. CST
by Han Solomente
Just a couple of quick points. First off this is a moot point for most people as this stuff will be too expensive to upgrade across the board. On the gaming front I know everyone is convinced that the PS3 is going to be the winner, but its too early to tell. The PS3 is going to be really expensive. If a Blu-Ray stand alone player is going to be $900 and up what's the PS3 going to cost with blu-ray, plus the cell chip technology, plus memory, and so on... It's going to be at least $500 or $600 bucks at launch which the average consumer cant afford yet, and thats with Sony losing at least $300 per console. Also for any people out there bitching about the XBox 360's graphics, they're really good, but they have barely scratched the surface of what that machine can do. It's not until the 2nd and 3rd generation of games until you truly see how well the hardware performs. Anyone remember those amazing visuals of the PS2 launch with games like Fantavision? Finally the big thing is not going to be HD-DVD or Blu-Ray when it comes to movies in the next 5-10 years, it's going to be digital distrbution (VOD). If you talk about the stidios wanting to make money how does this sound. The can re-release their entire libaries with out having to manufacture any phyical materials. No discs, no packaging, no nothing. And you can just order it at home and poof there it is. And also I can currently fit a full TV season of any TV series on 2 single layer regular DVD's with DIVX no problem. A DIVX player is about 50 bucks, and it plays all your regular DVD's too. One last thing, if anyone has tried out the XBox Media Center (XBMC) that has your XBox 1 running Linux based homebrew software then you already know what the future of digiatl entertainment is. It's the black box that controls everything in your living room that we have been promised for 10 years. And it exists already on my 5 year old XBox. It streams any kind of media you can throw at it. Divx, Avi, Quicktime, you name it, plus music, streams everything content wise, plays game emulators, it streams movie trailers, presents all of your personal digital picturs, it gives you the weather and it can even control your lights and appliances if your house is set up for it. The thing can do everything. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are just temp holders until the US catchs up with the rest of the world when it comes to internet bandwith. Thats why it might work for a year or two here at best but the rest of the world is already primed for digital distubution and is going to be moving away from physical media. Just my 2 cents. If any one is interested by the way here is a link to the XBox Media Center. I truly cant recomend this to people enough. http://www.xboxmediacenter.com/info_project.htm
April 3, 2006, 5:25 p.m. CST
As of March 2006, Sony has not announced a price for the PS3. Sony Computer Entertainment president and "father of the PlayStation" Ken Kutaragi has been quoted as saying "It'll be expensive" and "I'm aware that with all these technologies, the PS3 can't be offered at a price that's targeted towards households. I think everyone can still buy it if they wanted to" and "but we're aiming for consumers throughout the world. So we're going to have to do our best [in containing the price]". Ken Kutaragi believes that customers would be willing to pay extra for a superior product, as they had in the past for the original PlayStation (
April 3, 2006, 5:37 p.m. CST
Nothing captures the analog warmth of film like a movie played back with a needle. Anyway, the first format to release "Snakes on a Plane" gets my money.
April 3, 2006, 5:41 p.m. CST
by Mickey The Idiot
There's an MPEG chip already out there from Broadcom for both formats and a controller from Atmel that does the same. So, give it a few months and the likes of Cyberhome will have dual format players on sale for $200. The heavy hitters can warble on all they want, but the difference will ultimately be a much as between + and - on a DVD.
April 3, 2006, 5:42 p.m. CST
by Han Solomente
I realized that not everyone wants to read my long ass rambling misspelled post so here is just the link to the XBox Media Center for the orignal XBox. http://www.xboxmediacenter.com/info_project.htm It's the best Multimedia Component that I have and I didn't even have to pay for it. Just upgraded my XBox when I got my 360. And by the way you do need to mod your XBox to do this, but not with a chip or anything just software. It's really easy.
April 3, 2006, 5:48 p.m. CST
by Logo Lou
Where's the content? The picture and sound will be great on either I'm sure (for newer titles), but the rest of all that storage space goes to extra content, but where is it? Most DVD extra are piss poor as it is, and not because of space limitations. The picture and sound quality will only be up to snuff on older titles if the money is spent to clean them up, but home many lame tv and movie transfers are simply slapped on DVD right now? Tons.
April 3, 2006, 5:53 p.m. CST
by Mickey The Idiot
How very true. Half the time the stduios can't even be bothered to do an anamorphic transfer for the trailers that spam up the front of a DVD, never mind the 16:9 extras. The launch content for both formats looks shit - nothing new there... move along. And wait. Incidentally, kudos to cig burns here. 16:9 interviews anamorphically transferred.
April 3, 2006, 6:38 p.m. CST
by Cotton McKnight
So this means little to me. In a few years, sure. But I really couldn't care less now. I will wait for the dust to settle, then go with whatever format is prevalent. And pay 99 dollars for my dvd player, just like I do now.
April 3, 2006, 6:47 p.m. CST
I can definitely remember reading somewhere that Sony and Toshiba had agreed to develop the technology togeather and make HD-DVD and Blu-Ray into one singular new format under the Blu-Ray name. What happened?
April 3, 2006, 6:49 p.m. CST
by Han Solomente
They couldn't come to an agreement, and thus we have two formats.
April 3, 2006, 6:54 p.m. CST
The difference is like night and day. American Idol on HD. I can see every wrinkle under paula's eyes. Randy's sweaty face. Simon's grey roots. I mean you catch your eyes wandering looking at things in the background because it's so in focus. When you switch back to nonHD fox and see American Idol. The colors are bleeding. the picture is fuzzy. people look yellow skinned. All your life you've been watching TV like this. Since you didn't know any better. it seemed normal, but like i said. once you watch HD you want everything to be in HD. It's like getting a new pair of glasses. everything is in focus now.
April 3, 2006, 6:58 p.m. CST
April 3, 2006, 6:58 p.m. CST
Looking down the tech highway a few years ... I can't help but think about the new 4K Super High Definition Format ... Doubt that HD-DVD will be able to support that ... so Blu-Ray has the advantage there. Then I think about being able to back up my entire HD on my computer ... think I will invest in the Blu Ray tech for home entertainment and computer technology.
April 3, 2006, 6:58 p.m. CST
Holographic storage (HVD) is around the corner. No, it doesn't display holographs. It stores data that way. Look it up.
April 3, 2006, 7:02 p.m. CST
Why do all that when I can just connect my Mac mini to the TV and it does all of that and more? I don't get the point of specially configuring an Xbox to do something when there are computers that are somewhat dedicated to that purpose anyway.
April 3, 2006, 7:13 p.m. CST
What's wrong with you Herc? PS3 will be a defining factor on whether Blueray succeeds or not. Everyone is going to have a PS3 in their homes. Sony eventually sold more than 100million PS2s. Why would the PS3 be any different? Think people. Sony cannot fail with PS3. Too many exclusivities on popular game franchises coupled with incredibly loyal followers. If I have a PS3 I'm going to buy a movie on Blueray, duh. Anytime Blueray is mention PLAYSTATION3 should be mentioned. Ignoring PS3 is ignorant. Herc, you should a better know better.
April 3, 2006, 7:25 p.m. CST
Don't know if it was mentioned up above, but there are manufacturers who are making hybrid players that will play both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. Samsung is one of the leaders in this. They might actually have their player out before Sony or Pioneer do. Have to see if it comes to fruition and truly works.
April 3, 2006, 7:28 p.m. CST
Big Jim: Granted I was pretty young when VHS vs. Betamax happened but I don't recall that being the case. Take this quote from Wikipedia, "The VHS format's defeat of the Betamax format became a classic marketing case study, now identified with the verbal phrase "to Betamax", wherein a proprietary technology format is overwhelmed in the market by a format allowing multiple, competing, licensed manufacturers, as in: "Apple Betamaxed themselves out of the PC market." --That being the case, this new battle is set up for the exact same result, Sony screwing itself over due to proprietary licencing. I remember as a kid when we bought our first VCR, we went with VHS because it was cheaper than Beta, THAT is what the general masses care about. The fact that it held more was icing on the cake...
April 3, 2006, 7:29 p.m. CST
Clarity of a movie screen??? TV actually has sharper clarity than a movie screen does. Movies in theaters are set with a softer focus to be seen at a larger size and not wear out the viewers eyes. Thank goodness VHS and DVD don't capture the "clarity" of a movie screen.
April 3, 2006, 7:37 p.m. CST
by Han Solomente
Well, it all depends. The first issue is because this is cheaper for most people, especially because it works on your existing XBox with no additional cost. A new Mac Mini is, I believe about $500. XBox Media Center is also open source so it works with pretty much everything including ITunes, DivX, Quicktime, MP3, you name it. It can stream everything off my computer lightning fast right to my TV/Reciever. It uprez movies/images. Hell, it will even allow me to asjust the audio delay if the audio and video arent synced in some divx movie I'm watching. Also because its open source there is a huge community of people making new functions for it all the time. Finally I wasnt a believer until I went to my friends house and saw his set up. It's ease of use, functionality, really good looking interface and every feature I could ever want kinda blew me away. Plus it has every game emulator you could possibly imagine and so much more. It just works incredibly well, for almost no cost and truly makes accessing music, movies, pictures, and games a treat. It's just an incredibly well thought out system because it was designed by consumers not a company. That said if your happy with your mac mini and you already bought one, then enjoy what you have, but not everyone is going to buy a Mac Mini, and lots of people have a regular XBox. But I should tell you this thing impressed the shit out of me. Check it out, it's free. http://www.xboxmediacenter.com/info_project.htm
April 3, 2006, 8:08 p.m. CST
Simple problem: Sony told the porn industry not to use Beta for their stuff, so they embraced VHS. Strangely, people migrated to VHS like ants to a picnic. The same will happen with Blu-Ray, and DID happen to UMD. Sony locks out porn (wouldn't let porn UMDs be made) and they end up losing the format war. I hear a few pornos will be on Blu-Ray, but I know that more are going to HD-DVD than Blu-Ray by far, because the Adult Film Industry doesn't like being told what to do by Sony or anybody else. This is why Sony fails. The do not respect the power watching people fuck has in the format wars.
April 3, 2006, 8:24 p.m. CST
and others agree with this too. HDDVD and Bluray are going to be exactly like laserdisc. There will be a group of people who get them but over time the technology will fade away because no one wants to buy their film collection all over again this soon. Sometime down the road, a different format will debut that will take just like DVDs did. Shit, if you get a nice HDTV and a great quality Progressive Scan DVD Player, than the difference in quality between DVDs and these two new formats is exceptionally minimal. Don't buy HDDVD or Bluray, period.
April 3, 2006, 9:01 p.m. CST
"Everyone is going to have a PS3 in their homes." Think again. Nobody but kids and gamers will have have PS3s in their homes. I'm a thirty-two year old professional, and neither myself nor anyone I know has bought a gaming system since N64 came out years ago. However, we all have DVD players and many of us have HDTVs. While PS3 is certainly a multimillion dollar industry, it's a drop in the bucket compared to general home entertainment.
April 3, 2006, 9:05 p.m. CST
I agree with the first part of your post (it's too soon for a major format change), but that last sentence is nonsense. There's an huge difference between HD and DVD played on a progressive scan player. Huge.
April 3, 2006, 9:23 p.m. CST
Yeah, I said Bluray's higher capacity may be better in theory. I don't think they're gonna make cheap trilogy discs to start with, but they are certainly going to put TV shows on less discs to start with. I'm think maybe 3 discs per season for a lot of shows. They may or may not reduce the prices, it depends on the studios not to screw up. And yah, if the 4K projectors take off in theaters, Bluray is probably the only way to support that in the home market. As far as Bluray being a Sony format, that's not 100% true. Sony wants you to think that because they've been in deep trouble lately and a new high def format looks really good to the shareholders. As far as I know, probably half the work on Bluray was done by Phillips, and the Bluray consortium has a WHOLE LOT of other companies on it, including Apple, Dell, Samsung, LG. HP was on it but I think is format neutral. Together, those companies probably control a MASSIVE share of the PC market. Apple and Dell pushing it is HUGE. Of course, Intel and Microsoft are on the HD-DVD side, but I don't think they count as much since they don't necessarily build anything. They're in HD-DVD's camp for two reasons, mandatory managed copy, and the interactivity stuff. Mandatory managed copy doesn't seem to matter that much to be because they can still CHARGE for that mandatory copy, and it's an option on Blu-Ray discs, and the interactivity isn't that much different, Java vs Windows CE, big deal. Also, they probably have various other competitive reasons like screwing Sony or Apple or the Cell processor Sony and IBM are pushing.
April 3, 2006, 9:26 p.m. CST
I don't know about PS3. If they have the capacity for both more power to them. But normal Blu-Ray players are definitely not backwards-compatible. I'm positive.
April 3, 2006, 9:36 p.m. CST
Gaming is more popular than ever skippy! It's a bigger industry now than movies. Just because you're not into gaming doesn't lower it's importance or value. The world doesn't revolved around you Mr.thirty-two year old professional. Look at me. I'm 33 It never stopped me from gettin' busy. I'm a freak. I like the girls with the boom. I once got busy in a Burger King bathroom. I'm crazy. ah yeah. Anyway, the latest Entertainment Software Association survey shows that the average gamer is 29 and spends more time playing games than engaging in traditional forms of entertainment such as watching TV or going to the movies. We're the first gaming generation and we grew up and we still play video games. video games aren't just for kids anymore. It's BOOM time! for an industry now even bigger than Hollywood. The $10 billion video game industry, which generates more revenue than Hollywood. Last November, sales of video games rose to $849 million, an 11 percent increase from the same month last year and up 77 percent from October, according to the industry research firm NPD Funworld. The industry set a milestone last year when Microsoft's Halo 2. A sequel to a futuristic game with an elaborate plot that pits humans against invading aliens, surpassed Hollywood's opening-weekend movie box office record in just one day of sales. You think you know, but you have no idea. We know people are definitely going to buy a PS3. So millions will own a blueray player. What guarantee do we have that anyone will buy an HD-DVD player? What the hell was that!? did you hear that sound? That was the sound of me owning your ass!!! NEXT!
April 3, 2006, 9:43 p.m. CST
lack of porn support is what has doomed every SONY format
April 3, 2006, 9:49 p.m. CST
I do believe that the PS3 is going to be very popular and will probably sell the millions of units that it is expected to. But how many of those households will have an HD-TV? A fraction, I'd guess. That means that a ton of homes will have the players, but no reason to buy the content. Doesn't sound like a winning situation to me.
April 3, 2006, 10:01 p.m. CST
by half vader
Don't get upset because the salesdude pulled the wool over your eyes and you bought the thing even though the resolution is lower than your little computer screen. The government and the HDTV standards association completely fucked up and you guys bought 'em anyway. If you bought an HDTV before this year you deserve to be downrezzed. I'm an early adopter myself but I ain't THAT stupid. BTW All those who go on about VOD need to think about bandwidth an ask yourself why cable and satelite quality has gotten WORSE even as compression technology has improved. The rest of you moaning about the two formats (with a couple of level-headed exceptions) need to think about the elephant in the room - computer use. More storage is always better and yes Blu Ray (for the blue laser as opposed to the red in current dvds. I really hope you were joking Baxter) 'holographic' discs will be great. As for those fools kidding themselves into believing that 1080p looks no better than 480p on a decent screen obbviously own a lo-rez plasma shitbox. I'm waiting for Toshiba's SED. Even if they lose out on HD DVD they'll make all their money back on tellies. Yes HD-DVD and Blu-Ray ARE like Laserdisc in one respect. Even if we have video on demand, Laser & DVD proved that people want something to show for their money and it will take a while yet before we go all iTunes with our movies and learn to let go of the packaging. The idea of teaching the record companies a lesson isn't quite the same here either. End of boring rant.
April 3, 2006, 10:02 p.m. CST
by Jon E Cin
Cause the DVD I have is full screen...apparantly thats how Kubrick wanted it or some bs...
April 3, 2006, 10:03 p.m. CST
by half vader
Show us the link then.
April 3, 2006, 10:09 p.m. CST
by half vader
Everyone else was up on their technological high horses so I thought why not me?
April 3, 2006, 10:16 p.m. CST
by Jon E Cin
They should at least try and make them look cooler...cmon its 2006 THE FUTURE!
April 3, 2006, 10:34 p.m. CST
The sony executives don't get their news from tv guide. They probably don't care much about the pricing right now, because the Play Station 3 will be out this year (or next year, I lost count), and at that point every home will have a blu-ray player on their living room. I just hope they learn their lesson from the sthittastic UMD format, which is already dead, and make it as open as they can. As for me, I have $100 for the first person who can sell me a device that can play both formats on my computer, and another $100 for the first person who can sell me a device that can record both formats on my computer. And why are we calling the movies "software"?
April 3, 2006, 10:44 p.m. CST
Even though we know consumers don't give a damn about quality over price, here's a funny thing: my folks invested in Betamax back in the early 80s, including that first consumer Beta video camera (you carried it on your shoulder, not in a sling like the VHS equivalents). The player died back around 1990, and the camera shortly thereafter... but they just got the player fixed and dug up all these old recordings and home videos. 24 years on and the quality of those tapes is amazing--I'm not going to say they're comparable to DV, but they come close to the really cheap DV cameras I've used from time to time. All my uni project videos recorded on SVHS in the early 90s look like fuzzy crap now. What a great format! Sony sucks so bad for how they proprietize their technology.
April 3, 2006, 10:47 p.m. CST
by The Pusher
Once HDDVD and Blu-Ray are released, will production of standard DVDs come to a halt? I mean, VHS didn't drop away as soon as DVD hit the market, but stranger things have happened.
April 3, 2006, 11:42 p.m. CST
by Hung-Wei Lo
I call it "the half frame". Instead of widescreen, or full frame TV, I'm going to film my debut movie in half-frame...because that's how I, the director, envisioned it to be viewed in all its glory. But if you buy it on dvd/hddvd/blueray, you will not only get black bars on the sides, but also on top and bottom. That is, until you buy the new HFTV's (Half Frame TVs) that I'm manufacturing to view my movies. I'll OWN this market, bitches!
April 3, 2006, 11:46 p.m. CST
HD-DVD: Warner (WB and New Line), Universal (includes Focus Features & Rogue), Paramount (includes DreamWorks) Blu-Ray: Sony (TriStar, Columbia & Screen Gems), Warner (WB and New Line), Fox, Buena Vista (Touchstone, Dimension, Miramax, Disney), Lionsgate, Paramount (Dreamworks) and a few porn studios. All Sony need is Universal and it really is over.
MGM is using Blu-Ray as well.
April 4, 2006, 12:15 a.m. CST
...but when it comes to formats, utter crap. Betamax. Failed. Minidisc. Try MP3. UMD. Dead. Anyone here remember when they made that camcorder that recorded directly to DVDs the size of GameCube games? Yeah, not a lot of people do. HD-DVD will win because of familiarity. Ask 10 people who know nothing about what "HD-DVD" is on what they think "HD-DVD" might be, and I'd bet that at least 9 would guess correcly. Ask them about "Blu-Ray" and they'd all probably guess it was some kind of sunglasses or new drink over at the club bars. HD-DVD will win because more and more studios are dropping Blu-Ray in favor of HD-DVD. HD-DVD will win because it will come to market sooner. The first Blu-Ray player will come with the PS3, and there's no way Sony is going to meet the Holiday 06 deadline. Not in America at least. HD-DVD will win because of the price. The discs will be cheaper, the player will be cheaper. And don't give me that PS3 crap either. Last time I needed a DVD player I went out and bought a DVD player, not a PS2.
April 4, 2006, 12:52 a.m. CST
by half vader
It's called 'Pan and Scan' and has been around forever. If you watch a cinemascope format movie 'full frame' - what a joke designed to fool Disney-buying mums - then you're getting roughly half the picture! Half frame! Ever tried to watch Close Encounters in 4:3? It's ridiculous. I realise you're joking and all but it's beyond me why so many morons think "they put black bars over the top of the picture and I can't see the whole thing!"________________Won't they be completely confused when everything goes widescreen in the next coupla years and all their favourite shows somehow have black (or grey) bars on the sides?! BTW, if you do have black bars all round (resulting from a letterbox not anamorphic transfer played back on a 16:9 tv), hit the magical zoom button!___________There. Did I suck all the life out of your joke? Am I the stuffiest kid on the talkback? Hooray!
April 4, 2006, 1:02 a.m. CST
by half vader
Obviously Toshiba got to and registered the name first. What should Sony have called it? "The BETTER HD-DVD"??? The new players use blue shorter wavelength lasers so they used that for their lame-arse name. What other brilliant names could they have chosen? Still a better format. And Animus, you forget about professional formats. Not a Sony nut, but they've got a pretty GOOD record. What is your undersanding of 'format'? Marketing success and industry wars? Jeez. To all you HD-DVD will WIN 'cause it's cheaper and the discs and players are coming out a WHOLE MONTH ahead of Blu-Ray - ever heard of the term myopia? I wish the war would end either way right now just to stop all the whinging.
April 4, 2006, 1:36 a.m. CST
by Hung-Wei Lo
You and your...damn knowledge! Fuck you! (j/k) That's it, I'm going to develop the 1x1 pixel movie. I have the possibility of making an infinite amount of colors -- er, I mean movies. And anyone who dares to copy, or embed my movie into one of their own movies, must pay a licensing fee of .00001 euros for every 10 seconds that are sampled. I'll OWN this market, bitches!
April 4, 2006, 3:37 a.m. CST
by half vader
1x1 pixels eh? Genius! Fuck higher resolutions! Old school baby. Yeah!!!
April 4, 2006, 5:49 a.m. CST
by Napoleon Park
I'm 53. My first 'record player' had four speeds: 16, 33.3, 45 and 78. I remember 8-track tapes and the 'quadrophonic' revolution. I had a dual-8 movie projector capable of showing both 8mm and super-8 movies. I once held a beta tape in my hands. I know peoplw who own laser-discs. I remember one year when all the new cassette decks were advertised as "metal tape capable" in an attempt to get everyone to upgrade. I remember predictions that the 8mm video tape format would make VHS obsolete. I dragged my feet on buying a VCR until 1986 - now most of my "movie collection" investemnt is unplayable from age. Somehow I've acquired a half dozen DVDs and two players, neither of which work, because they push new technology out on the market before they're finished inventing it. I was just doing a technology survey and I realized that even though my dad died eleven years ago, I've still never bought a television set. The four I have work fine, and when they officially become obsolete in a few years I'll let the cable company worry about translating the picture for me or I'll just pull the plug. --- Sure, I thing six foot wide, one inch thick Jetsons TV's you hang on the wall are cool, but I'll never be that rich. --- Just give me one big box with a massive hard drive that will hold a million songs or a thousand movies I can download for cheap. And make them removable and replacable harddrives for when they fill up - and so I don't lose everything I own when the damn thing crashes. *** So what I'm saying is, Blu-Ray will be the 78 RPM Super-8 reel to reel Laserdisc Betamax Metal-tape Dolby Pro-logic 5.1 Macintosh Delorean trivia answer of the future. Atari forever!
April 4, 2006, 6:05 a.m. CST
My god, you must all either be kids or trailer dwellers. A few hundred bucks for a player and few grand for a good HD set is not a fortune. It's a weeks pay in 2006. Same as it was in 1956 when your dad brough home the Zenith. If it's not, then you have more pressing concerns than buying video devices. Like where your next meal is coming from. Geesh, I'd love to see some of the hovels you guys exist in.
April 4, 2006, 7:41 a.m. CST
by Real Deal
Must be 16 and still living at home. A few hundred bucks and a couple of grand for this stuff isn't much when you don't have bills to pay and food to buy. Sheesh! If you have a family....well let's not even talk about that.
April 4, 2006, 8:03 a.m. CST
by Mickey The Idiot
Only Blu-ray currently has a porno studio signed up to produce content. Digital Playgroup (Virtual Sex with Jenna Jameson). So this ain't gonna be quite the same as VHS vs Betamax. But seriously, there are some issues with the pick-up, but the guts for a hybrid (they're calling them AF-DVD as in all format) has already been developed. Just give it time. Incidentally, wanna know the Xbox's dirty little secret - it's designed so it's just as easy to plug a Blu-ray drive into it as for the HD-DVD format Microshite supports. Everybody else is hedging - why shouldn't you.
April 4, 2006, 8:07 a.m. CST
by Mickey The Idiot
That should say Digital Playground - still proves I have better uses for my right hand than most of you.
April 4, 2006, 8:54 a.m. CST
Your ranting about how people can't see any improvement in the higher resolution of HD, what the hell are you talking about? According to some study I read about a couple of years ago, the average human eye is capable of discerning pixels at resolutions of around 4000 x 4000.
April 4, 2006, 9:36 a.m. CST
If you search on Google you can find articles saying Blu-Ray is and isn't backwards-compatible. According to their official website it will be, although it looks like this development only came about sometime since the beginning of 2006. I was getting my information that it wasn't compatible from (a) my film professor and (b) a lengthy article in Variety around last Nov-Dec. Originally it was thought that since the Blu-Ray uses a "blue laser" it wouldn't read the DVD, but just recently apparently in a new version of Blu-Ray players they use technology (presumably similar to the PS3's) that allows for both. So, there ya go. Sorry about the error.
April 4, 2006, 10:33 a.m. CST
Sony is on the other side now, Betamax died as a consumer product because you had one Sony recorder next to 5-6 VHS Recorders made by many different CE companies plus it was hard not to see that more content was out on VHS then Betamax. Still Betamax won but in the professional market , look at how Sony took over the studio hardware sales over the last 20 years. This time around Sony pulled as many different CE companies into Blue-Ray group as they could. So you will soon see 5-6 different Blue-ray players and recorders and only one Toshiba player. Same way VHS beet batamax Sony is planning to beet HD-DVD. Next Sony bought a Movie studio and has distribution rights all over the world for other studios movies these will be on Blue-ray only. last they got all but one movie studio to sign up to blue-ray, the biggest was FOX. Fox has its own movies but also owns a huge amount of distribution of other studios content around the world. Toshiba is very desperate, they needed to have 6 months lead time to even have a hope to win, they lost that after many delays. They now need to under price there first players and louse money like crazy so they can get good press before Blue-ray comes out. There cheap players is selling for just under 1000$ in Japan now, this is closer to the true cost of the player.They will sell it for 400$ in the USA and hope that they can afford to subsidize the cost long enough to get the other studios to sell movies for there player. With the PS3 coming in November they have a very small window to sell players even at that price level, not long enough to make other studios change sides. Come this Xmas you will see 5-6 Blue-Ray players and recorders a few computer blue-ray recorders and a huge shelf of movies. on the other side you will see the one cheap Toshiba player a higher end Toshiba player and maybe a RCA player that look just like the cheaper Toshiba player with a RCA name on it. HD-DVD movies will be 1/3 the number of Blue-ray ones. HD-DVD is dead they just need to flush more money before they figure this out.
April 4, 2006, 11:22 a.m. CST
And devour the wrold and the technology level is sent back to pre-industrial revolution levels and we hae to re-enact famous films as plays. The dark knight turned to the white knight and said: "Luke, I am your father!" GASP!
April 4, 2006, 11:59 a.m. CST
Let's face it: bears are SCARY. And they want our honey.
April 4, 2006, 12:09 p.m. CST
You know how angry consumers would be? All this time invested in building our DVD collections and we're supposed just to stop cold turkey now?, and bow to this new format? I don't think so. Not gonna happen, not right away anyway. The idea is to reel us in gradually. The way they do that is by making HD-DVD & Blue-rayplayers backwards-compatible. Then they have to push the new format on us by making it more appealing by showing us the advantages of HD or blueray. If we're impressed enough we gradually start abandoning DVD and begin to buy our movies on one of these new formats.
April 4, 2006, 12:10 p.m. CST
Thus one major studio is not backing Blu-Ray yet. The Weinstein Group is also not backing it but take that for whatever its worth.
April 4, 2006, 12:14 p.m. CST
I completely agree with what you're saying, but you forgot memory stick, another failed sony format. I honestly don't care who wins this format war as I'm not going to participate. Many years ago while traveling around the world I saw technology in Europe and Japan that we can only dream about here in the US, including true HD, not the crap you see at electronic stores here that you can't discern from regular TV. I'm talking TV that looks like you are looking through a window out into the real world. And TV and video conferencing on your cell phone, stuff we are starting to get now but this was the norm in other countries years ago. But as far as HD goes, I'm not buying a thing until the picture is good enough to stop me dead in my tracks, Sony and everyone else for that matter, can keep their slightly better resolution! I'm not buying.
April 4, 2006, 12:14 p.m. CST
Both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD support MPEG2, Windows Media 9, and MPEG4 H.264 codecs. Although since Blu-Ray has a larger storage capacity, Sony stated it intends to release their Blu-Ray titles in MPEG2 format. Perhaps they might try to extend their "SuperBit" line to Blu-Ray accordingly and argue that the tighter compression needs of HD-DVD (due to lack of capacity) actually distorts the HD picture. I'm not really a fan of that argument because a lot of people claim H.264 is better than MPEG2 even if it is compressed tighter/more efficiently. What I would bet on is that HD-DVD will encode more of the content using the inferior Windows Media 9 codec in exchange for the already announced native support for HD-DVD in Windows Vista if it ever arrives before Jesus returns.
April 4, 2006, 12:27 p.m. CST
1. Sony didn't license it out broadly like JVC's VHS...Sanyo was one of the few licensees. 2. Sony chased away porn from the Betamax format, unlike VHS. 3. Beta did not have the storage capacity that VHS had. Now, compare that to Sony Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray is widely licensed to manufacturers, and is supported by almost the entire computer industry (including Dell & Apple) with the exception of Intel, Microsoft, and iffy on HP. As for studio support, all but NBC Universal and the Weinsteins have committed to offering their wares, plus Sony owns Columbia/Tri-Star Pictures and also controls the MGM library. Finally, on the porn front, Sony isn't limiting anybody. The industry has yet to embrace either format, although there was initial talk of selecting HD-DVD due to the lower production cost.
April 4, 2006, 2:01 p.m. CST
When one can buy a 1080i Oppo DVD/DIVX player today for $190 delivered from Amazon (unit scored higher in image quality shootout over every $1500-$3,000 Denon DVD units currently on market). The law of deminishing returns hits hard in this area. 1080i (upgraded from 480p) dvd/divx player under $200 that scored a 98 versus a 1080p $1500 blue whatever that may score a 99 one day... http://www.oppodigital.com/images/DVD%20Benchmark%201-8.pdf
April 4, 2006, 2:07 p.m. CST
We'll see all the pimples, moles, growths, and scuzz on Jenna's business. Do you REALLY want to see some porn movies in high definition???
April 4, 2006, 2:20 p.m. CST
Take you 5 year-old Xbox console and have it modded (about $50), then have modder install Xbox Media Center(aka XBMC) onto Xbox's H-Drive. Presto, XBMC can port 1080i on all DVD video playback. Save the $50 by learning how to softmod the xbox yourself which equals 1080i for free...
April 4, 2006, 2:22 p.m. CST
Um, before you unloaded that impressive but erroneous and irrelevant diatribe, you may have wanted to actually read what I wrote. I said, "nobody but kids and gamers will have PS3s." You responded by telling me that gaming isn't just for kids anymore. Uh, right -- it's for kids and gamers. (As for your inexplicable elucidation of when and where you "get busy," am I supposed to give you a high five, or what?) Gamers represent a sub-culture. General home entertainment consumers do not -- but we'll get to that in a moment. ///// You apparently like to compare the gaming industry to "Hollywood" (you made the comparison 3 times). Gaming may generate $10 billion dollars per year compared to box office of $6.3 billion, but you're ignoring the fact that a movie ticket costs $9, whereas a video game costs anywhere from $30 to $60. Doesn't take a genius to do the math and figure out which form of entertainment is more popular. In addition, to make your point, you've evidently ignored DVD sales and rental revenue. That $23 billion (http://tinyurl.com/k8fcl). ///// Let's recap, shall we? Gaming generates $10 billion per year at an average of $40 per game. "Hollywood" (to use your all-encompassing term) generates $30 billion at $9 per ticket and $10-$20 per DVD. To which market would you rather be selling new units? Hey ... what the hell was that? Did you hear that sound?
April 4, 2006, 2:47 p.m. CST
I mean, let's face facts. Look at the PS2: a complete piece of shit hardware wise, and it becomes a complete cultural phenominon through brilliant marketing and a couple good exclusive games (And the reputation of the PS1, which wasn't exactly an engineering marvel either). And let there be no mistake that the PS2 machine was horribly put together (4 meg texture buffer, are you fucking kidding me? What is it, a fucking calculator?), extremely fragile (see the class action lawsuit over the lenses), and BARELY a half-step (technologically) from the "past gen" Dreamcast. Yet, despite all that, Sony took that shitty machine and proceeded to beat Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sega all about the head, face, and neck with it, sales-wise. Sony always wins, no matter what stumbles they make. Chalk it up to brilliant, brilliant marketing... no matter how much your product sucks, if you make the consumer want that shitty product, you win.
April 4, 2006, 2:52 p.m. CST
The PS3 looks amazing, hardware wise. It's as if Sony got so tired of the smart hardcore tech crowd who laughed at the PS2 so much and said "Oh yeah? Well check this shit out.....". While the PS2 was laughably underpowered as a machine, the PS3 is RIDICULOUSLY over the top spec wise.
April 4, 2006, 3:31 p.m. CST
The Motorola DCT6412 DVR, that is. If you have this box, a $30 cable may be the only piece of hardware missing from the HDTV setup you didn't know you had! Word is the Firewire ports output a 1080i signal; if your machine has Firewire, and you're running Win XP sp2 -or- MCE, you can use some hobbyist's driver to get yourself a WDM capture device usable for live viewing or high-res cappin' in a program like VLC Media Player. Too bad I'm still running Win2k; didn't quite work, as gurus warned; I might finally move to XP over this. Starting point for the curious: http://replayguide.sourceforge.net/dct6412/
April 4, 2006, 3:40 p.m. CST
Word. But specs don't necessarily make the machine. The cell processor wasn't developed specifically to take advantage of gaming, and thus it's expensive and impressive spec-wise, but maybe not as powerful as a slower processor designed with gaming in mind. Yes, the hardware is fast and expensive, but if it doesn't do much better with games than the Xbox 360 does, I find it very hard to believe that with its high price it'll end up finishing as far ahead of Microsoft this time as it did with the PS2. That said, time will tell, maybe the system really is a beast. But what most developers are saying right now implies that they're fairly well matched games-wise. Also, your statement that "Sony always wins" is a bit off. Sony won the last two TV console wars, but don't underestimate the importance of portable gaming. The DS wiped its ass with Sony's PSP (and the PSP is a very, very well put together system), and I won't be surprised to see satisfied DS owners jumping on Nintendo's Revolution, especially with the much lower price point (it's rumored to be around $200, but won't be higher than $300). Right now, I'd probably still put my money on the PS3 because of the huge number of fans the PS2 already has, but I wouldn't say this console war is as clear-cut as the last.
April 4, 2006, 3:52 p.m. CST
If the dragons look as cool as they did in the movie, I won't complain... The movie - meh. The (few) dragons in it - FUCK YEAH!
April 4, 2006, 3:58 p.m. CST
The core of the original Playstation also wasn't a dedicated game processor - it was a (then already) old Silicon Graphics chip. That seems to have worked out pretty well. --- Anyway, after reading all the talkbacks, I have hope again. It almost seems as if Sony learned from their myriad mistakes, and the objectively better format may still win...
April 4, 2006, 5:23 p.m. CST
Aha! Flickerhead, look point is i'm right you're wrong. That's it.
April 4, 2006, 6:56 p.m. CST
by Han Solomente
Hate to point this out to you but you're just wrong. First of all while the cost of purchasing a game is more than a movie ticket, it's the cost of the games production that shows where the money is made. The fact is that game budgets used to be a million bucks then about 4 to 5 million now with next gen systems we're looking at 10 to 17 million and 25 million for the super blockbuster titles. So the biggest budget for a game is the cost of a high end independent movie. It's not about the cost to the consumer it's about margins and profit. The game industy is whooping Hollywod's ass when it comes to profits these days. As for the "kids and gamers' comment" thats just silly. Gaming has become very mainstream since the playstation was first released and becomes more so each year. Gaming revenues have increased over 10% every year since 1996. That's ten years of steady double digit growth and it gets better every year. Also the game industry is only about 30 years old compared to movies which have been around for much longer. And who can forget the constant news about reduced theater revenues and the fact that most of the DVD collectors have already bought the bulk of their DVD collections and are now just buying new releases. The fact is that the studios are make less and less money from just the movies these days and more and more from licensing, which gaming is a huge part of. It doesn't matter that more people watch movies than play games, it matters which industry is more profitable at the end of the day. That being said times are changing and games, movies, DVD's and licensing are all tied together in one industry now, and that's the "Entertainment Industry" I work in both gaming and movies and your elitest attitude towards movies just shows that you way behind the times. I hate to use a 90's dot com term, but the future is all about syneregy. Games, movies, DVD's, toys, licensing, they're all tied together now. And if you believe that games isn't a huge part of the industry that is helping shape where entertainment is going than your just ignorant.
April 4, 2006, 7:44 p.m. CST
Please, this is a format which has no winner. I'm willing to bet most people aren't going to shell out for something for enhanced image quality, when the image quality of DVD is already pretty good. Holographic Versatile Disc is the future baby! The entire library of congress on 6 disks!! 120Mb/s!! TETRABYTES of space!!
April 4, 2006, 8:46 p.m. CST
but neither of these formats will be THE format of the future - for all the reasons already mentioned... FIRSTLY they've come at the wrong time - nobody is interested right now. SECONDLY both formats are ultimately inferior to HVD (see http://tinyurl.com/9f4so) - forget a coupla hundred gigs - HVD will give you TERABTYES baby! THIRDLY - most importantly - SONY SUCKS ASS! They failed with Betamax, Minidisc, UMD, Memory Stick - and will fail with BluRay. People simply WILL NOT BUY INTO THIS - see point 1... FOURTHLY the home consumer is already dictating that the future will be VIDEO ON DEMAND so again, these formats are competing for a market that is slowly disappearing. The ONLY thing that will ultimately matter to consumers about these products is CAPACITY and HVD kicks both their asses (see point 2)
April 4, 2006, 8:53 p.m. CST
HVD is expected to be doing 1GIGABIT PER SECOND - but you already knew this from the URL - I'll shut up now
April 4, 2006, 11:15 p.m. CST
From what I have read of everybodys comments,nobody really needs to upgrade if we are honest,my dvd collection has films that have been upgraded to my staisfaction so any films I would buy will be from 2006 onwards anyway(and there aren't many of them are there?).As far as films go the whole Star Wars saga or the entire LOTR trilogy on 1 disc may be a selling point for a future format one day for some people,thats why I sold my LOTR trilogy,(xmas presents,you know the level where somebody buys it for you because they want to watch it themselves knowing you don't business sameway :),don't question me thats my story and I'm sticking to it,only got
April 5, 2006, 1:02 a.m. CST
However Sony have dvd distribution rights until 2008 of the MGM library which will include the new Weinstein productions. However this is North American rights only.
April 5, 2006, 1:20 a.m. CST
I'm just telling you what I heard.
April 5, 2006, 7:52 a.m. CST
by Real Deal
HD does look better than DVD. Really don't kid yourself. It's not just that a DVD looks soft by comparison. The color balance and everything else looks better. Film looks like film in the theater. Video looks like it's from a feed next door. That the reality. It' does look better. That being said it still doesn't kill the the way it's being handled. They tried to do some things right like these machines are backward compatible and will play your old DVDs just fine. It's just the way it's being handled ( driven by greed ) that has everybody in an uproar. I know that HDMI is to basically keep people from copying. I'm not interested in copying these discs. I do know however that someone out there will find a way around that. They always do. So this insistance on HDMI connectors being the only way to watch these discs in HD is all for nothing. That's what pisses me ( and my 4 year old 25 hundred dollar investment ) off.
April 5, 2006, 9:08 a.m. CST
Once a company such as Vivid commits to a format, that'll probably be an indication which format will win out...despite the grottiness, the porn industry has always been pretty forward thinking and innovative as far as utilising new media...ie, video then the internet... - heck wasn't Sony's reluctence to license Betamax to the grot companies part of it's downfall? Heck a lot of consumer internet security such as credit card payment was initially tested by grot companies...once we know wther Rocco will be coming Blu or getting HD will we know who'll win.
April 5, 2006, 6:33 p.m. CST
As many people have pointed out. The extra storage space isn't going to be that much more utilized by the movie industry, they simply aren't going to put the time into doing a gajillion hours of extras, and the extra room for better visual quality isn't going to be a vast improvement unless you have a very discerning eye. Video games are where these formats are going to have their greatest impacts.
April 5, 2006, 11:16 p.m. CST
I think you've missed my point, jackass. Orionsangels said that everyone will have a PS3 in their home. I believe that is an overestimation. I couldn't care less about whether gaming or Hollywood is making more money -- that was Orionsangels' thing (and yours, apparently). I mentioned the dollar numbers simply as way to demonstrate that gaming isn't as popular as general home entertainment, and the numbers support that position. I'm not sure how you got the idea that I have an "elitist" attitude. I didn't say that gaming is an unimportant facet of home entertainment. Gamers got some kind of inferiority complex or something? WTF?
April 6, 2006, 2:26 p.m. CST
Until cracked this will be the pain for all formats and for your PC... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCP
April 6, 2006, 5:13 p.m. CST
by Han Solomente
You say "I couldn't care less about whether gaming or Hollywood is making more money" yet I was responding to this in your post "Let's recap, shall we? Gaming generates $10 billion per year at an average of $40 per game. "Hollywood" (to use your all-encompassing term) generates $30 billion at $9 per ticket and $10-$20 per DVD. To which market would you rather be selling new units?" Now maybe it's me, but that sounds an awful lot like you talking about money not popularity. And it has nothing to do with your orgianl PS3 argument that I didn't even respond to. I agree that not everyone will buy a PS3 and that it wont be a make or break situation for Blu-Ray, but you just seem to relagate gaming to something that isn't at the same level as film in this country and your are just mistaken. Of course more people watch movies than games, movies have been around longer and are cheaper (although show me a movie that can provide you with 10-100 hours of entertainmet). Games popularity on the other hand has been growing at huge exponential rate for years now and shows no signs of slowing down. But the part you seem to continue to miss is that gaming, Movies, TV are all interrelated. And in your need to prove a completly different point you seperate the two in terms of popularity and money. Again, yes the PS3 isn't going to be the end all Blu=Ray product, but it will help as the PS2 helped the regular DVD. Not everyone bought a PS2 as a DVD player, but a lot of people used it in the beginning because DVD players were still expensive. It didn't make or break DVD either, but it helped create the perception that DVD as a format was a very viable technology that was better than CD's. It effected the consumers mindset and helped the DVD industry even if they didnt purchase a PS2. you said "Gamers represent a sub-culture. General home entertainment consumers do not" followed by a bunch of numbers that represent earnings, but not profits. First off your numbers are irrelevent, because if your talking financials, only margins and profits matter to these corporations. Secondly, why I and other's think your attiude is elitest is because of call gaming a sub-culture as opposed to movies. Well, they said that about movies when radio was big, then they said that about TV when Movies were big, then they said that about home video when TV was big, and so on. My point is that your perspective on how the enetertainment industry works is skewed. The studios are in this for the money, not popularity. It's a business. I dont think gaming is better than movies or vice versa, no inferority complex here. I actually work in both industries, I just felt the need to correct your comments as they were plainly wrong. And you seemed to miss the whole point about gaming being obviously mainstream entertianment on par with films/TV/DVD. As for calling me a Jackass, how very 10 year old of you. Sticks and Stones and all that I guess.
April 8, 2006, 1:20 p.m. CST
by Real Deal
Don't kid yourself. I put on a copy of " The Hulk " I have on DVD and compared with the HD version they were showing on one of the Comcast channels. It was no contest. When compared this way there was no doubt whatsoever about who had the better picture. The sharpness and detail was better , the color was more right on. Simply no contest. That's not really the issue here.