Blu-ray will not matter...

[fallguy]

Right, the biggest plus for Sony is that they can market the PS3 as a blu-ray HD player. Most games will likely ship on DVD anyway because it will be a cost consideration.

This is true, but what about games several years downt he road? The addd space will be very nice, and using it as a Blu-Ray player will be also very nice. Saves you the cost of buying a player itself.

 

[BigGamer X]

Well, of course.. movie-playback is the other big thing Sony is pushing but the whole BD/HD-DVD war is far from over. Besides, HVD seems to be ready for consumer market bu late 2006 or at least around 2007. From a movie standpoint, BD could lose as well..

Blu-ray adds a cost to the PS3 that will make an impact for Sony financial-wise. If BD was a way to secure more exlcusive content from devs, then it was wrong because the higher cost-factor will make devs want to make more and more multiplatform-titles and the majority are dvd-based.

Actually, alot of people might not want to hop on BR or HD-DVD for quite awhile. I spent the last couple years building a nice collection of DVDs, as have many others. Alot of these DVDs were purchased for an average of ~10-15 dollars. (some more, some less.) Pretty much every movie I've ever wanted to own I now have on DVD. With these next gen. formats, not only will the movies probably be $29+, but there will be a pitifully small collection for quite sometime. Hasn't it only been recently that you could buy most any movie on DVD? I, and many others I assure you, are in no hurry to rebuild there collections at that cost, and really, they couldn't if they wanted to for many years due to the fact that only some movies will be available initially. (unlike games, movies are alot more, what you would call.........timeless.)

P.S. one of the big reasons DVDs are popular is that people know if they take care of them, they'll always be there. Tapes would wear out. Also, the fast forward, skip features ect. BR doesn't offer us anything more in this regard, just higher res. Out of the 100 or so DVDs I own, only a handfull have quality that dissappoints me. (and they're not my favorites anyways so I could care less spending $30 to replace them.)

 

[DemoCoder]

Most people won't "rebuild" their entire collections, they'll buy NEW movies on HD format, and then go back and perhaps buy a few of their #1 DVDs in HD format.

I own about 1,000 DVDs now. There is no way in hell I would even want to upgrade them to to HD format. But would I rebuy LOTR? Yep. Starwars? Yep? Spiderman series? yeah.

In fact, I've already rebought DVDs severaltimes. Special editions, superbits, collector sets, etc.

One big selling point of BR will be TV series. These take up huge space on people's shelves, and they are the largest growing category in DVD sales. But if you could fit old SD TV series on one or two discs instead of 4-6, it would be a huge savings.

 

[wco81]

One thing that helped DVD adoption was the dot com frenzy. A lot of people got DVDs dirt cheap. I remember 800.com. They had like 3 DVDs for $1. They are no longer in business.

Still, as more and more HDTVs get sold, people will want more and more content for those HDTVs.

The HDTV movies you see on HBO will pale in comparison to what you should get on packaged media.

Then no more claims that HDTV is barely better than DVDs.

 

[mckmas8808]

The HDTV movies you see on HBO will pale in comparison to what you should get on packaged media.

I have been wondering about that. I always wondered if Blu-ray and HD-DVD movies would look like HD-HBO movies. To anybody that's seen HD movies in real life how much better does a BD or HD-DVD look over HD-HBO movies?

 

[Ty]

Perhaps someone can explain why DVD-A and SACD are not taking the world by storm? (This is an honest question, as to me I see many parrallels between high def audio and high def video but perhaps I'm missing the bigger picture.)

.Sis

DC addressed this some but not enough for my tastes.

The noticable difference between SACD vs. CD is far smaller than HD vs. SD.

Even with multithousand dollar stereo systems, I bet most people will be hard pressed to tell the difference.

However, throw someone in front of a HD TV set and they'll easily pick it out as far far superior to an SD set.

In other words, if you have a "regular" stereo, there is little reason why you would want to upgrade to SACD. But if you have a regular SD TV set, I'm damn sure you will at least want to upgrade to an HD TV set. A BR playing PS3 at least caters to this goal.

 

[Sis]

DC addressed this some but not enough for my tastes.

The noticable difference between SACD vs. CD is far smaller than HD vs. SD.

Even with multithousand dollar stereo systems, I bet most people will be hard pressed to tell the difference.

However, throw someone in front of a HD TV set and they'll easily pick it out as far far superior to an SD set.

In other words, if you have a "regular" stereo, there is little reason why you would want to upgrade to SACD. But if you have a regular SD TV set, I'm damn sure you will at least want to upgrade to an HD TV set. A BR playing PS3 at least caters to this goal.

There is absolutely NO question in my mind that HDTV is far superior to a standard def. What is being debated is, given a well encoded DVD, will users notice enough of a difference on their HDTV to want to upgrade.

I say no. I have a few DVDs, particularly some older ones, that look bad, but many of the new ones look very good, to the extent that I'm not sure what the high def version would add to it. I'm sure a side by side test would show it.

.Sis

 

[DemoCoder]

Well, in the hi-def version you will notice details that you won't in the SD version. I have the HD versions of I, Robot and Bladerunner recorded on HD Tivo vs my DVD. Even given the poor bitrate used by OTA ATSC, they still look noticably better. But the real test is D-Theatre. Go find someone with an HDTV and a DVHS and compare it with DVD.

 

[Nicked]

The bottom line is that I was responding to Nicked's post that assumes the PS3 will equate to sales of blu-ray discs by virtue of "why wouldn't they". My response is that A) people will buy the PS3 for games and B) may or may not have a HD set. Those who buy a standalone player will have a HD set and will be using it for the explicit purpose of buying movies.

I said someone who had all both a HD set and a PS3 would. They sure won't be buying DVDs when they could watch HD content on their HDTVs, and I think the vast majority of people who have a HD set want content on it, they watch movies, they currently buy DVDs, and having a BRD player hooked up already, its going to be natural for them.

 

[Ty]

There is absolutely NO question in my mind that HDTV is far superior to a standard def. What is being debated is, given a well encoded DVD, will users notice enough of a difference on their HDTV to want to upgrade.

I say no. I have a few DVDs, particularly some older ones, that look bad, but many of the new ones look very good, to the extent that I'm not sure what the high def version would add to it. I'm sure a side by side test would show it.

.Sis

Well the worst case scenario is:

Good DVD vs Bad BR/HD-DVD.

I'll readily admit that the differences could range from not-so noticable to fairly noticable depending on the actual quality.

But if the case is:

Good DVD vs Good BR/HD-DVD, I'm going to say, yea, there's a decent amount of difference and you don't even need to see the sets side-by-side to notice it.

 

[wco81]

A snapshot of TV sales from the WSJ today.

Very telling is the number of flat panel LCDs and plasmas for last year. Now, they're not all HDTV-capable models but we're talking 25 million flat panel LCDs and plasmas in the US alone in 2005. This doesn't include the rear-projection DLP and LCD as well as direct-view CRTs and rear-project CRTs.

Most of the larger flat-panels are HDTV or at least 480p capable. Note at the bottom of the excerpt that smaller LCDs, like the 20-inch models, are not seeing such big price declines. They don't break out the volume by size but we could be talking about over 10 million HDTV LCD and plasma flat panels.

So all this worry about not enough HDTVs to make next-gen consoles or Blu-Ray and HD-DVD matter should be fast becoming moot.

Strong demand for big-screen plasma and liquid-crystal-display television sets has created shortages for some models and convinced set makers and retailers to hold the line on prices. As sleek flat-panel and high-definition television sets became more affordable, sales soared during the holidays. Sales of ultra-thin, wall-mountable LCD TVs rose nearly 122% last year to 19.6 million sets while plasma-TV sales rose at a similar pace, to 4.6 million units.

Still, certain sizes and types of TVs did not move as briskly. Bargain hunters can find the best savings in HDTV rear-projection televisions. Bigger, boxier rear-projection sets lost some appeal amid the holiday sales frenzy as high-definition plasmas fell below $3,000. A 62-inch Toshiba Ltd. rear-projection HDTV is now being discounted to $2,600, down from $3,200 before Christmas. RCA, a brand of TCL Corp. of China, this month showed a Scenium 50-inch HDTV that will sell for $1,700 beginning in June. The prior model was $2,000. Sharp Electronics Corp. recently quit the rear-projection TV business, leaving retailers holding discontinued models.

There are also likely to be model-closeout discounts in March and April, when most new TVs begin arriving and retailers look to unload remaining inventory. But for popular plasma screens, shortages are more common than post-holiday price cuts.

"I still have no 50-inch plasmas to speak of," says Chet Flynn, president of New Resource Inc., a Massachusetts distributor of high-end TVs and consumer electronics. Inventories of the sets were depleted in December and should remain tight through May, helping mute further price drops, he says.

Still, prices remain at historically low levels. The average price for plasma sets dropped 11% between June and December alone. LCD TVs also plummeted 18% in price during the same period, says NPD Group, a Port Washington, N.Y., retail watcher.

Selections are low for some 42- and 50-inch high-definition plasmas and 32- and 37-inch LCDs, but the reduced holiday prices will remain in effect at least through the Super Bowl on Feb. 5. A smattering of TVs also have rebates.

While manufacturers say they expect to slow price declines, sheer competition should keep prices falling at double-digit rates as the year advances. LCD and plasma supplies should catch up with demand by midyear and continued competition should keep prices declining overall.

Smaller LCD TVs are still plentiful and benefiting from the past year's declines. Prices for these kitchen- and bedroom-size sets aren't coming down as fast as their larger siblings, however, because they also can used as computer monitors. A Sharp 20-inch LCD TV-monitor sells for about $500 at a dozen online outlets.

 

[mckmas8808]

A snapshot of TV sales from the WSJ today.

Very telling is the number of flat panel LCDs and plasmas for last year. Now, they're not all HDTV-capable models but we're talking 25 million flat panel LCDs and plasmas in the US alone in 2005. This doesn't include the rear-projection DLP and LCD as well as direct-view CRTs and rear-project CRTs.

Most of the larger flat-panels are HDTV or at least 480p capable. Note at the bottom of the excerpt that smaller LCDs, like the 20-inch models, are not seeing such big price declines. They don't break out the volume by size but we could be talking about over 10 million HDTV LCD and plasma flat panels.

So all this worry about not enough HDTVs to make next-gen consoles or Blu-Ray and HD-DVD matter should be fast becoming moot.

Thanks for the report.

 

[Ben-Nice]

I think the easiest way to look at it is this. Due to the PS3 Blu-Ray will have an install base that HD-DVD has no chance of matching. That is how and why Blu-Ray was implemented in the PS3 and that is likely why it will at minimal take out HD-DVD. They will get royalties on every Blu-Ray movie pressed because they helped design the technology. That is the reason MS didn't incorporate an HD-DVD drive. They have nothing to gain by doing so. It comes down to risk and reward and they think they have much more to gain then to lose.

 

[Nicked]

www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=12735

Digital Playground announced today it will release its products on Blu-ray Disc, making it the first adult studio to take a firm stand on the issue.

“Companies selling PlayStation 3 will have Blu-ray built in, which will make it into homes faster,â€￾ Digital Playground co-founder Joone told XBiz. “The security features of Blu-ray also are really good for copyright protection.â€￾

“On the mainstream side of things, there are a lot of big players behind Blu-ray,â€￾ Joone told XBiz. “We see PlayStation 3 as the Trojan horse that will lead the way and Blu-ray as the format that will be around longer – and we can do more interesting things with it.â€￾

40% of the porn market = exclusive to Blu-ray. Blu-ray matters!

 

[Berak]

Game O V E R.

 

[mckmas8808]

The PS3 helps brings over the PORN company. Great! Ken Kutargi saw the future and giving it to us.

 

[EndR]

Well..
I believe that the p0rn industry isn´t that of a deciding factor like it was in the VHS/Betamax days..

Internet is the best way to distribute porn. You skip the middleman and go directly from production to distribution via online.

People download more and more and with higher bandwidth, more and more will download "HD-p0rn" via online...

 

[weaksauce]

Does a single-layer blu-ray really cost that much more than a dual-layer dvd? Does it even?

 

[Nicked]

Porn on phsyical medium is still a huge factor. Very significant for Blu-ray.

If its not alone the deciding factor, maybe the majority studio support and support from major game publishers like EA is?
Superior format?
Or 100M players in 5-years with PS3?

Blu-ray has won, the only thing HD-DVD has going for it is cheaper (initial, announced) players/production. That isn't enough.

Does a single-layer blu-ray really cost that much more than a dual-layer dvd? Does it even?

Its not significantly more expensive per disc, but you have to build new production lines unlike HD-DVD.

 

[<nu>faust]

i'm with the format that vivid video chooses