Rumor: Xbox 360 Japanese launch may slip to Q1 2006
- Thread starter Wunderchu
- Start date
Powderkeg said:
Actually thats not right.
They are using the 23" widescreen samsung.
http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/...ct_detail.jsp?eUser=&prod_id=LNR238WX/XAA
We already went through this discussion back in april/may.
prices range at retail:
http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Samsung_LN_R238W_23_LCD_TV,__7676891/prsrt=1
http://www.mysimon.com/4014-6482_8-31292237.html
Iron Tiger
Regular
The PS2 was an inexpensive DVD player in a market where most standalone DVD players were outrageously expensive. Sales of DVDs took off in Japan when the PS2 hit, while a lot of the games stayed on the shelf. This again is the biggest advantage the PS3 will have, as it can play a new type of media.jvd said:
Save that, where everyone had a TV to play DVDs on and watch without the fuzz of VHS, few people have an HDTV to play BRDs on and watch without the blurry lowres images. Far less reason for the masses to buy PS3 for BRD than PS2 for DVD.
Iron Tiger
Regular
Isn't the HD market bigger in Japan than in the U.S.? It's practically non-existent in Europe, so the X360 and PS3 may end up with equal footing, there.Shifty Geezer said:
Save that dvd was already 3 years old and had a slew of titles by the time the ps2 came out .
Ps2 and ps3 are much diffrent . In japan I don't believe the price of a dvd player was that much more expensive in 1999 than it was in the states and you could get them for 200$ at that point in the states .
It still doesn't matter as my point stands .
Ms can release less units in japan than in the other teritorys as they will sell less there . Unless at tgs they announce some big timed / exclusives .
Ps2 and ps3 are much diffrent . In japan I don't believe the price of a dvd player was that much more expensive in 1999 than it was in the states and you could get them for 200$ at that point in the states .
It still doesn't matter as my point stands .
Ms can release less units in japan than in the other teritorys as they will sell less there . Unless at tgs they announce some big timed / exclusives .
MechanizedDeath
Regular
Compare like territories. In March 1999, the PS2 was one of the, if not the cheapest DVD player on the Japanese market (even at $380). And has been pointed out a number of times, it comprised a considerable percentage of worldwide DVD player sales (not ROM drives like shipped with PCs) for the first couple of years. The PS3 will represent an even larger percentage of BR player sales. There'll be less media available, and fewer dedicated rigs (ie. HDTV sets), but it'll work with SDTV just fine, and I think it's more of a trojan horse than the catalyst for a new market. It can't be a catalyst unless the HDTV market explodes worldwide. I see it more along the lines of the PSP in that regard. The PSP is trying to establich the UMD market for Sony. PEACE.jvd said:
Okay
That isn't true . Unless your telling me that dvd drives in japan sold for more than a 150 more in japan dispite being out longer .
The reason why alot of people picked up the ps3 was because for a 100-150$ more you also got a psone and the new ps2 unit .
However as one of them pointed out by the time the ps2 launch sales of dvd players were already in the low 20 million world wide and i believe 6-7 in japan . This is far more than the few hundred thousand units sony had at launch and through out 1999 . Not to mention almost nothing compared to dvd-rom sales
correct. However this is just the point . Bluray is not the new must have thing . Dvd hype was already going for 3 years with movie titles in the market. Must have tittles and lots of them . The image quality diffrence was there right out of the box even on older sets .
This time bluray will hit with ps3 . There will be some must have titles but the other format coming out will also have must have titles . Bluray has not been hyped much if at all outside of ps3 hype and for a large majority of the world there will be no image quality improvement out of the gate .
Except the titles will cost more and offer no benfit for anyone on sdtv . Also they will only be able to use the bluray version on the ps3 . The dvd players wont play the movies .
I admit it is a trojan . But it can also cause disaster for the ps3 and bring about its fall if bluray falls to hd-dvd
its trying and to a large extent is doing well . However once again your paying dvd prices for media that can only be played on your psp . Which again will keep adoption rates low
Bluray is vastly diffrent than dvd . The reasons are
1) it will be new to market and not established
2) it is not the defacto sucesser to dvd . It will have a rival for that position
3) there will not be a great deal of content
4) The content will only work on bluray drives . None of the dvd drives people own will play it and now with dvd drives in the 20$ range most people have them on every tv .
5) The price will cost more than dvd media and will offer no visual improvements for the majority of users for the next few years over dvd . This also ties in with point 4 .
That is really it . These are all valid points nad conerns which clearly show the diffrences between dvd and bluray and thier respective systems
mckmas8808
Legend
jvd said:
I read that Blu-ray can hold both HD content and regular DVD content.
MechanizedDeath
Regular
Powderkeg said:
If that was from back in December, then why'd no one ever notice this? I guess this means you can make hybrid movies for BR players too then, huh? Hmmm....how about that?
I still think it's a silly idea, but I guess it's one less reason for studios to ignore BR then. PEACE.mckmas8808
Legend
I've known it for months, hence why I said Blu-ray can play both a few post earlier. I always thought it was crazy when jvd, PC-Engine, and others to say that HD-DVD had this advantage in there pocket.
Link to the press release
http://www.jvc-victor.co.jp/english/press/2004/bd-dvd.html
Link to the press release
http://www.jvc-victor.co.jp/english/press/2004/bd-dvd.html
Iron Tiger
Regular
jvd said:
Source
UMDs make even less sense than BRDs, yet they are selling well, with studios constantly jumping on board with new titles. And these discs ONLY play on PSPs, which is a pretty small market, even compared to HDTV owners. If people are so dumb as to buy UMD movies, they're gonna buy BRDs. And if they have no interest in the BRD format, why would they be interested in HD-DVD? Not that it really matters, because if HD-DVD turned out to be the decided victor of the format war (which is highly unlikely), the PS3 won't be hurt by it, as it'll still have a perfectly viable high capacity disc drive, which is what game devs care about.jvd said:
And I think it's too early to say that BR (or even HD-DVD) won't be of value to people that don't have HDTVs. When I got my first DVD player, I had a crappy TV with just coax RF input. The DVD player made me want something more, so I upgraded to one with composite. Then I upgraded again to one with S-video and component. And eventually I got an HDTV to get the most out of my DVDs. For somebody with a crappy RF only TV, DVD doesn't look much better than VHS, but there's STILL people that have such TVs and own DVD players, so some of the other features of DVDs have to be of value to those people. One advantage I'd expect BR (and HD-DVD) to have over DVD is less or no compression artifacting visible on SD/EDTVs. I have plenty of DVDs that look like crap on my SDTVs because of compression. If people can be assured of flawless pictures, they may decide it's worth the expense. There's also the better audio formats. People are going to be upgrading their TVs and their stereos for years to come to get the most out of the next gen disc formats. Having the format included in a game console that will fly off the shelves means that the establishment of the format will be that much quicker.
randycat99
Veteran
So we can summarize as follows:
...a market that is reaching forward to embrace HD- a perfect time to enter the market, indeed.
...a weaker rival, that has also lost its trojan horse. It might as well not be a rival, at all, at this point. So yes, BR is well poised to be the defacto successor, at this point.
This is natural for the beginning of the process, and did not stop the adoption of DVD, either. Hence, "3" is an empty rationalization.
...now a nonissue, given certain news items.
The cost increase to the consumer may be negligible, so "5" is shakey. The visual improvement will be there regardless, just by the power of suggestion alone. Witness the opinions of SACD and broadcast DTV/HDTV users, at large. The former will swear they hear a difference and the difference is an improvement, even though doubleblind tests routinely cast serious doubt that there is really something there to note (and their existing sound system is often underspec'd to make the instance of a difference possible with SACD, in the first place). The latter is utterly oblivious to the presence of compression artifacts and poor bitrates that sour the whole digital video experience. They'll deny there has been any compromise whatsoever, and that DTV/HDTV has to be better simply because it is. This is not to say that improvements cannot be had by these "upgrades" in technology. They are just not particularly well correlated to typical human perception, i.e. the "difference" will be "experienced" whether there is really one to exist or not.
jvd said:
...a market that is reaching forward to embrace HD- a perfect time to enter the market, indeed.
...a weaker rival, that has also lost its trojan horse. It might as well not be a rival, at all, at this point. So yes, BR is well poised to be the defacto successor, at this point.
This is natural for the beginning of the process, and did not stop the adoption of DVD, either. Hence, "3" is an empty rationalization.
...now a nonissue, given certain news items.
The cost increase to the consumer may be negligible, so "5" is shakey. The visual improvement will be there regardless, just by the power of suggestion alone. Witness the opinions of SACD and broadcast DTV/HDTV users, at large. The former will swear they hear a difference and the difference is an improvement, even though doubleblind tests routinely cast serious doubt that there is really something there to note (and their existing sound system is often underspec'd to make the instance of a difference possible with SACD, in the first place). The latter is utterly oblivious to the presence of compression artifacts and poor bitrates that sour the whole digital video experience. They'll deny there has been any compromise whatsoever, and that DTV/HDTV has to be better simply because it is. This is not to say that improvements cannot be had by these "upgrades" in technology. They are just not particularly well correlated to typical human perception, i.e. the "difference" will be "experienced" whether there is really one to exist or not.
Same article
So it already hit below 300$ the year before . So what gives . Even by the part you posted they said there were already cheaper dvd players .
NOt to mention that once again it was out from 96 and had 4 years to build up a library and hype
Umds are selling now . We don't know if sales will continue to increase . As good games actually land on the system the trend for buying movies will decrease . As it is only a few movies are selling very well. Some tittles still aren't moving .
As for brd and hd-dvd who siad they would buy it ? Those with out a hdtv set will most likely buy a 20$ dvd player and have acess to a huge library of titles that are cheaper than a hd-dvd or bluray movie .
I never claimed other wise .
As for the ps3 being hurt buy it , of course they will .
1) It will now be a proprietery (sp? ) drive , it will only be made for the ps3 which will cause the price to drop slower
2) there will be less plants to press bluray discs driving up the price of the media .
This is of course if it fails .
That is you . For every person who upgrades that often there is a person who has had the same tv for 18 years and is trying to get through another year for it . Not to mention people who spent thousands a few years ago for big projection tvs that aren't going to spend thousands to replace them right now .
Once again for someone with a sd set bluray only adds cost and nothing else . Saying it will future proof your purchase doesn't help as it could be years before they go hd-tv and thus years to recoup thier money .
It depends on how many see these artifacts . Alot most likely don't or don't care or want to spend the money on the bluray or hd-dvd disc .
Of course once again we come to the point where many don't have more than 5.1 dds which is on the dvd discs . Once again this requires people to upgrade who simply don't want to or are unable .
Once again according to your link dvds were out in japan 4 years before the ps2 meaning there was a huge library of content out there . Bluray will just be launching and even if they put out a 100 titles that still is nothing compared to dvd . It will also carry a price premium and can't be played on other tvs . Discs may sell decently to the hardcore who buy it at launch (like umds are doing ) but going foward it may simply not ramp up. Esp with hd-dvd out there and people willing to wait till they see whats what .
It could , however either one failing will increase the others chance of failing .
If bluray falls to hd-dvd then the ps3 will have a failed disc format in it , which does not help public percption and if on the off chance the ps3 fails then bluray will be seen as part of a failed console
Once again my point is that dvds in 2000 are a diffrent ball game than bluray in 2006 .
randy
a low percentage of a market that has adopted it dispite being out for a good 4 or 5 years now ?
A small sum that will still take the rest of the decade to over take the sd installed base ?
Weaker says who ? Hd-dvd is set to launch this year with a ton of titles and has some big movie franchises from the past few years . The only weakness it has is not being in a console . However that may not even matter depending on prices of the hd-dvd drives and the media released for it .
You may think its well poised but others don't believe so .
No however it took dvds a long time to become mainstream. If others are to be believed and it was ps2 that brought it to the main stream (which i don't believe ) then it was 4 years from its introduction .
Bluray will be in the same boat or worse and it will take at least as long to drive adoption
1) Dual layer discs in other news has said to have problems (pc engine posted links in another thread ) since this is a dl also will it have similar problems
2) are all titles going to be released with both versions ? if not the point stands
Your saying sony will release hd content at the same price as sd content ?
Remember dvds came out at 30-35$ for a dvd . You can now get new titles for 10-15$ We will most likely see them hit 10$ when these hd options come out . So even if sony puts it out for 20-25$ your still going to have a 10-15$ price diffrence . Which is the cost of a dvd . To many thats alot .
As for your next point that is shakey . Few people will claim something looks bette rwhen it doesn't . If they are told it should then they will be at the store asking why its not looking better and returning it .
I don't know who your talking about that will fool themselves into thinking something is alright when it isn't
My point stands . Dvds in 2000 were in a diffrent position than blurays will be in 2006 .
I'm enjoying the good debate with u though
mckmas8808
Legend
Sounds like to me jvd you are arguing against any HD movie media. 95% of the stuff that you said goes against both HD-DVD and Blu-ray. Somebody has to win right? And please don't bring up HVD, please don't.
Are all titles going to be released with both versions on HD-DVD? Who knows right now its too early. The fact remains both can do it so its a wash.
jvd said:
Are all titles going to be released with both versions on HD-DVD? Who knows right now its too early. The fact remains both can do it so its a wash.
No because in the future it will be important . You miss my point which is that dvd was in a diffrent position in 2000 than bluray will be in 2006 . Dvd was established , was the only player in town , had 4 years of hype , had a slew of titles released at that point .
Bluray wlil be brand new , will hae a rival , will have only a few months of mainstream hype and will have few titles .
I don't think you understand . I am not comparing hd-dvd to bluray . It shouldn't evne be in your thoughts for my arguements except that it will be a rival .
The point is that unless bluray movies are all both dvd and bluray versions on one disc then the fact that some of the titles can not play on dvd players will affect the buying choices of consumers. The average consumer in a house who has 4 tvs each with a dvd player who then gets a ps3 aren't going to buy a bluray only disc and unless we have an announcement that each disc will have both formats on it this point will still stand .
Similar threads
