Warner Exclusive Blu-ray= More PS3 sold?

[-tkf-]

I'm personally a big skeptic of digital distribution replacing optical media anytime soon. I don't know about y'all, but I like to trade movies with friends, resell them, play them in the car, etc, all things that are made much more difficult if not impossible in a digital distribution only world. Same with games. I like to sell my games when I'm bored with them, something which is impossible with downloaded content. Hence why I buy the bare minimum online.

You are so right.

Hi-Def movies via Digital Distribution is Blockbusters problem just like it used to be with SD.
Those that want to own the movies will still prefer a disc and a box.
There has been Video on demand services for a long time and they didn´t kill DVD. I don´t see why all of a sudden this should be a problem.

Yes in 20 years who knows what will be the standard (if there is any). Will we have Jigaconnections that allow us to stream 2xHiDef in realtime? Chances are that a console will be connected to such a service anyway Who knows and right now i couldn´t care less.

What i do know is that the Blu-Ray format matches HDTV perfectly. And i think that during the HDTV generation we wont really see any new broad launch of a new media standard. Maybe some niece market will turn up for 4k home devices but as i said it wont be mass market stuff

 

[NavNucST3]

There is a certain irony in the digital distribution arguments being put forward here. All of the advocates seemingly accept that is impossible to download 1080p movies with 6 channel audio on todays cable connections. They then say "well it doesn't have to just be online, you could use stores or kiosks", and introduce a media format at that point.

This is no different to walking into a rental/retail store and walking out with a BluRay/HD DVD disc! What's more, the arguments make it more complicated by introducing 'authentication' (along with some secure device which can be authenticated) instead of just handing over your rental card and paying $5.

I do not believe I posited any such argument. The thread is supposed to be about this increasing the number of PS3s sold, in my house this decision does not cause sell-through.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't see this as causing more PS3s to be sold.

Within my circle of techies, friends, coworkers, former coworkers, I'm the only one to even "toy around" with HD Media. I'm also the only one who does not own an XBox 360. All of them already had an XBox 360 or got one for Christmas. We're talking close to 40 families here...They indicated they have no intent to purchase the PS3.

Seems to me your sample is very unrepresentative! You've asked from 40 XB360 owners whether they'll get a PS3? PS3 will ultimately be selling to non-HD-console-owners and not existing XB360 owners. $400 for an HD player when you already have an HD console is very steep if you're not seriously in the market for HD movies. The strength of BluRay will be an added incentive to choose PS3 over XB360, which will be reflected (if it has impacted) in improved sales. IMO though the improvement of 1080p over DVD is too small, having now seen it myself on a 40" 1080p display. HD will take off when it's cheap enough just because people will replace old gear, but I can't imagine a huge rush of people to buy new expensive gear just to get the HD experience - at least not if they've seen it in action and aren't just buying new gear as an upgrade.

I can't see this news affecting PS3 sales to any notable amount. It'll be very interesting if it does, as that'll show media choice affecting console sales as a Media Hub choice, showing the importance some customers place on extra-gaming functions.

 

[liolio]

I have no time now to read the whole topic, but this is by far the best news for Sony since the ps3 launch.
That it's BRD has mostly won, but it's also a great new to consumers, this stupid war is finished, even if I prefer hd-dvd mostly because it's cheaper.

 

[deepbrown]

deepbrown:
Looks like you mistakenly posted in the wrong thread. This is the PS3 sales thread. You're looking for http://forum.beyond3d.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=36

Well I did quote a part about the PS3...surely. But fair do's

 

[BRiT]

Seems to me your sample is very unrepresentative! You've asked from 40 XB360 owners whether they'll get a PS3?
...
HD will take off when it's cheap enough just because people will replace old gear, but I can't imagine a huge rush of people to buy new expensive gear just to get the HD experience - at least not if they've seen it in action and aren't just buying new gear as an upgrade.

I can't see this news affecting PS3 sales to any notable amount.

My group is certainly not representative of the average joe, as they're all techies. Even then, I'm the only one that stepped into the HD Media realm. They loved the image quality improvement. Many were considering and thinking of picking up a cheap HD DVD player. The cost of going BluRay is too expensive.

We were talking about the technology of HD Media, including BluRay format winning and the various BluRay players available. The only reasonable BluRay player right now is the PS3. They say "It's too expensive." I tried pitching the "But it plays games too." Their response was "Not interested in PS3 games, just got a [Wii / XBox 360] for Christmas ... " Those that were thinking of stepping into the HD Media market have decided to wait until the BluRay players hit the magic price of $100.

We'll see how long it takes BR to hit that magic price. Our guess was Summer 2009.

 

[NavNucST3]

Here's a few pitfalls with this:

- Anything based on digital distribution depends on a valid internet connection to ultimately authenticate it. Hence why I wasn't able to play Robotron a week or so ago when XBLive was down Or, what happens if your internet connection goes down? People won't be too happy when they can't play their games due to drm failure.

[snip]

This is good and bad. Good because it will making pirating their games very difficult as Shifty alluded to earlier. Bad because it will be unable to play all those cool hd blu-ray movies that my neighbors are enjoying.

In the end Microsoft isn't interested in just being in the games space. They want to control your tv and all media thats delivered to it, preferably with recurring fees. This will force them into being flexible. They can't just turn their back on a tech that requires them paying royalties to Sony if the big picture demands that they support it. Look at the recent addition of Divx support. Three years ago if you told me MS and Sony would be supporting Divx on their consoles I'd have said you are insane. Well, Divx of all things now works. Looking 3 years ahead, does Microsoft want to be shut out of the optical hd movies market completely? I personally don't think so. Then again I was wrong about them supporting Divx so who knows!

I'm personally a big skeptic of digital distribution replacing optical media anytime soon. I don't know about y'all, but I like to trade movies with friends, resell them, play them in the car, etc, all things that are made much more difficult if not impossible in a digital distribution only world. Same with games. I like to sell my games when I'm bored with them, something which is impossible with downloaded content. Hence why I buy the bare minimum online.

I can play any of my Live Arcade games that I bought on the specific console I have now with no internet connection, I have not tried any of my older shows to see if they need a connection at all, they usually only yell at me that my sons profile is logged in and they wont play on the ones I re-downloaded on his 120GB with his profile signed on.

I only have 2GB remaining on my 120GB drive at the moment so I passed the "bare minimum online" a long time ago, there is no coming back for me :smile: I believe over 80GB is TV shows the rest is DLC I believe, I'll have to take a look.

I do more giving away than trading or selling so nothing much would change for me although I am going to need more hdd space...

 

[wco81]

Both BR and HD-DVD share a problem for next generation consoles (PS4, Xbox3) - if the system memory is increased to 2GB, the data transfer rate won't be able to keep up and we'll be forced to have several minutes of load times. This is unacceptable, even the current 10-20 second load times are far too much.
An integrated HDD drive, or a few GBs of flash memory to install/cache data might help, but I don't think it'd be enough. Consoles should be about simplicity and quickness, and this means that the hardware engineers will have to find a better solution than stuffing in an even larger capacity optical drive.

By the same token, with all that RAM, the quality of the art assets should increase, no?

That will require more storage?

You figure HDDs over 100 GB should be standard, so installation may become common (the "first load" will make subsequent loads of the game tolerable).

 

[AlNom]

Both BR and HD-DVD share a problem for next generation consoles (PS4, Xbox3) - if the system memory is increased to 2GB, the data transfer rate won't be able to keep up and we'll be forced to have several minutes of load times. This is unacceptable, even the current 10-20 second load times are far too much.
An integrated HDD drive, or a few GBs of flash memory to install/cache data might help, but I don't think it'd be enough. Consoles should be about simplicity and quickness, and this means that the hardware engineers will have to find a better solution than stuffing in an even larger capacity optical drive.

Perhaps we will see an evolution of Kenwood's diffracted laser design for their TrueX drives: http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Reviews/Specific.aspx?ArticleId=6084

The design would seem to be fairly expensive relatively, but... they can achieve a higher throughput at a slower spin.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

By the same token, with all that RAM, the quality of the art assets should increase, no?
That will require more storage?

Not neccessarily. Even today's games, without any more assets, could easily benefit from more memory. And HDTV resolution will put a cap on maximum texture detail anyway, although it's safe to expect 1080p to become standard in the next generation - it requires just a 2x increase in pixel processing capacity.
One easy example of requiring more memory is to use deferred rendering at 1080p with 4xAA; that's over a 100MB for the G-buffer only, and for a relatively simple one.

You figure HDDs over 100 GB should be standard, so installation may become common (the "first load" will make subsequent loads of the game tolerable).

I dunno, I've bought a console so that I don't have to install games...

 

[AzBat]

There is a certain irony in the digital distribution arguments being put forward here. All of the advocates seemingly accept that is impossible to download 1080p movies with 6 channel audio on todays cable connections. They then say "well it doesn't have to just be online, you could use stores or kiosks", and introduce a media format at that point.

This is no different to walking into a rental/retail store and walking out with a BluRay/HD DVD disc! What's more, the arguments make it more complicated by introducing 'authentication' (along with some secure device which can be authenticated) instead of just handing over your rental card and paying $5.

Since you're picking apart my comments, I'll respond.

First, I don't think it's impossible to download 1080p movies now or in the future. In fact, I expect it. My suggestions about digital distribution was for games only. And yes, you could all this a lot simpler with optical media, but the point was to offer an alternative method, no?

You believe I'm suggesting that if the user can't or doesn't want to get the content online, then just "introduce a media format at that point". That's wasn't my suggestion. My suggestion is to have a reusable storage device that's not optical or part of the package, that can be used to get the digital content. If you use that device at a local retailer, there's no need for authentication. The authenticating idea, was just another method unlocking content without the need of Internet connection. For times where you might swap games with friends, they'll run in trial mode till you authenticate them.

Microsoft might go with this idea even if they decide to use optical media, but it wouldn't be necessary. It's similar to the Live Arcade model. Pickup the game at the store on a disc, like free AOL discs, play the free trial for as long as you like, then purchase the full game online or use an authenticating method by phone or smart card.

Again, my original suggestions were for finding a substitution for HD optical media. I gave a few other suggestions using other optical media too, but you looked past them evidently. I didn't say which one I preferred, if any. Personally, I don't care either way how Microsoft chooses to go next go round. Yes, I like the Live Arcade digital distribution model, but if they want to keep a optical drive, then that would be fine by me.

Tommy McClain

 

[joker454]

I can play any of my Live Arcade games that I bought on the specific console I have now with no internet connection

I think in my case its because I bought a second 360 to use as a dev kit, but the new unit had hdmi. So I took the hdd off the old 360 and plopped it on the new 360 in the tv room. Hence why now if it doesn't connect to XBLive, then my purchased games run in demo mode. Not a huge deal, it only affects Robotron and Paperboy But still, it irks me when I can't play content that I've legally purchased.

I can't see this news affecting PS3 sales to any notable amount.

Ironically, the only thing that could make it affect PS3 sales is if Microsoft released a blu-ray add on to the 360, since that would generate lots of press and validate blu-ray as a valuable asset. I don't expect them to do that though, so the impact on PS3 sales should be negligible. Still, Microsoft has a very tough decision to make for their next machine.

Ken Kutaragi FTW!!!

Was he really the driving force in getting blu-ray as part of the PS3 spec? As I understand it, the PS3 was seen more as a revenue generating device for the movie side than for the games side, so it's the movie side of Sony that forced blu-ray to be part of the spec.

 

[Arwin]

As I understand it, the PS3 was seen more as a revenue generating device for the movie side than for the games side, so it's the movie side of Sony that forced blu-ray to be part of the spec.

Oh come on, everyone expected the 360 to contain HD DVD (at least I did), and at the very least, most people were expecting something bigger than DVD. Almost every generation before had a large (avg 10x) increase in storage space. Microsoft's step not to include it was a bold one, and driven partly by wanting to get a unit out there before Sony, and wanting it to be cheaper. I don't think that there was a lot of disagreement internally at Sony about BluRay being a part of the PS3. It made sense on so many levels, that I don't think that the movie division needed to push that format, let alone that they were in a position to force that format, which I seriously doubt, considering how important Playstation is for Sony.

 

[Silent]

I'm personally a big skeptic of digital distribution replacing optical media anytime soon. I don't know about y'all, but I like to trade movies with friends, resell them, play them in the car, etc, all things that are made much more difficult if not impossible in a digital distribution only world. Same with games. I like to sell my games when I'm bored with them, something which is impossible with downloaded content. Hence why I buy the bare minimum online.

Not only that I'm not convinced that every market has te infrastructure or the possibilities for digital distribution.

For example in Belgium we have a "duopoly" on cable and the classic telephone line. The 2 companies are limiting traffic to 12 gigabytes per month. And believe me they will not change this in the near future. They rather want to sell expensive "volume packs". 10 years we had to wait for an upgrade from 10 gigabytes to 12 gigabytes.

Downloading demo's is already a pain today.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I tried pitching the "But it plays games too." Their response was "Not interested in PS3 games, just got a [Wii / XBox 360] for Christmas ... "

Right. Now if they didn't own one of the other consoles, would PS3 be a much stronger option due to BRD? Would some of those people who bought XB360 have got a PS3 instead if they knew it had the winning HD format? If not, that'd suggest BRD as a feature has little selling power, at least to your slice of market!

 

[AlphaWolf]

Oh come on, everyone expected the 360 to contain HD DVD (at least I did), and at the very least, most people were expecting something bigger than DVD. Almost every generation before had a large (avg 10x) increase in storage space. Microsoft's step not to include it was a bold one, and driven partly by wanting to get a unit out there before Sony, and wanting it to be cheaper. I don't think that there was a lot of disagreement internally at Sony about BluRay being a part of the PS3. It made sense on so many levels, that I don't think that the movie division needed to push that format, let alone that they were in a position to force that format, which I seriously doubt, considering how important Playstation is for Sony.

There is no way that any manufacturer could have launched with an HD DVD or Blu Ray drive in a console in 2005. If you expected MS to have one, its because you didn't think it through or understand where the technology was in development.

 

[joker454]

Oh come on, everyone expected the 360 to contain HD DVD (at least I did), and at the very least, most people were expecting something bigger than DVD. Almost every generation before had a large (avg 10x) increase in storage space. Microsoft's step not to include it was a bold one, and driven partly by wanting to get a unit out there before Sony, and wanting it to be cheaper.

Not me! I never expected MS to ship the 360 with anything other than a dvd drive. It was simply not in their interest at the time for reasons of cost, speed to market, etc. Plus, Microsoft is interested in setting defacto software standards, not hardware standards. The hardware can be whatever, they don't care, so long as it uses Microsoft software in some way shape or form. Incidentally they partly achieved that goal since their VC-1 codec is now one of the standard codecs in the blu-ray movie spec. I don't think a 360 with dvd drive is a bold move at all really, and given the very short lifespan of a typical console I don't think it will impact them much at all for this gen. Aside from high hardware failures, I'd say they achieved their goal 100% for this gen.

I don't think that there was a lot of disagreement internally at Sony about BluRay being a part of the PS3. It made sense on so many levels, that I don't think that the movie division needed to push that format, let alone that they were in a position to force that format, which I seriously doubt, considering how important Playstation is for Sony.

On the Sony movie side I agree 100%. And given recent events, their move to include blu-ray will probably be viewed as brilliant in the near future. On the games side though I disagree. You can imagine the nervousness in the Sony games side when they realized they were gonna be launching at $500+! I'd also imagine that Microsoft busted out in dance when they realized Sony was going blu-ray since they knew they would they beat them on price for this entire gen, which was part of their main goal. The way I see it, short term Sony sacrificed their games side (to an extent) to bolster their movie side. This isn't as crazy as it sounds because movies are every bit as important to Sony as games, if not more so. It was a huge risk though, but it paid off since blu-ray has now won. Now it's Sony's turn to dance

The simplified way to explain this gen:

- Microsoft bet on cheap, fast to market, and easy to dev. They won, the Xbox brand is no longer a joke but a viable platform.

- Sony bet on movies by going with a high priced blu-ray capable console, counting on the trojan horse effect to effectively flood the market long term with millions of blu-ray movie players. Given Warners recent announcement, they also won.

So, both Sony and Microsoft won this generation albeit for different reasons.

 

[-tkf-]

On the games side though I disagree. You can imagine the nervousness in the Sony games side when they realized they were gonna be launching at $500+! s.

I for one would really like to know if the pricetag was only bluray bound. We have been through this before, there are other things that made the PS3 cost what it does. Not just the Blu-Ray drive.

 

[Arwin]

Don't come with the obvious comments now ... Everyone (who looked) saw that launching the 360 with the HD DVD drive in 2005 was going to be almost impossible. So the question then was, was the 360 going to be delayed, or was HD DVD going to be dropped. The second happened.

 

[Acert93]

Don't come with the obvious comments now ... Everyone (who looked) saw that launching the 360 with the HD DVD drive in 2005 was going to be almost impossible. So the question then was, was the 360 going to be delayed, or was HD DVD going to be dropped. The second happened.

I don't know when you began reading B3D, but as a member from 2004 and lurking looong before that I can with a fair amount of clarity: a significant number of people, both pontificators and informant leakers clearly indicated before MTV unvieling before E3 2005 that the 360 wouldn't have a HiDef optical format.

All the signs pointed to such. 360 technical documents were openly leaked in the Summer of 2004 and it was well known the 360 would launch in 2005. It was also abundantly clear at the time that HD optical was behind schedule and expensive with a lot of issues (codec support, optical and output specs, possible consolidation between the two formats, etc) yet to be resolved.

When you say, "Oh come on, everyone expected the 360 to contain HD DVD" are are quite incorrect. There are valid technical arguements that pushed storage down the list of "most confining factors" that, in conjunction with timeframe and cost issues as well as "developer demand lists", didn't put HD DVD on the radar. System memory as well as a standard HDD were things much higher on the priority list.

While some fans may have desired, even anticipated, MS going toe-to-toe with Sony, that has never been MS's objective. There is very little incentive for MS to include an HD optical drive in their console.

As I posted a very long time ago in a thread, Sony is in a reverse position. There were many incentives to include HD optical in the PS3. But I also posted, from a game division standpoint, the consequences could be too high. Based on PS3 first year US sales lagging behind both the original Xbox and GCN in their first year in the US, the cost to marketshare was indeed substantial.