Grandthefter Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 As some may know CES (consumer electronic show) is happening in Las Vegas and news has already started coming out so we'll be able to get rid of some rumours. Anyway, Blu-ray and HD-dvd have been put into more light and it seems as if blu-ray have the upper hand with a confirmed 50 titles this year from sony, 20th century fox and Lionsgate with sony saying 3-10 more each month. While HD-dvd have... none, apart from two annonced HD-dvd players ($799 and $599) Link More news about it there No flaming cos of sony/microsoft fanboys with the stupid 'ps3 owns cos of blu-ray' and such Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_-playero-_ Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 (edited) ps3 owns cos of blu-ray I heard about 4 Layered Blu-ray discs, thats about 100GB. According to ITmedia, Blu-ray discs will shuffle which countries are in which regions so that North and South American, Japan, Thailand, Malayasia, Korea, and India are all in Region 1, with Europe and Africa in Region 2, and China, Russia and others in Region 3. Lol, poor reds... Edited January 5, 2006 by _-playero-_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 ps3 owns cos of blu-ray Actually, the converse is also true. Blu-ray owns because of the PS3. Why? Because the PS3 will be an "affordable" Blu-ray player right from the start. Let's say the PS3 launches at $400 USD. When stand-alone Blu-ray players launch, they'll probably sell at $700-1000. So obviously, the PS3 will be piggy-backing the new format ahead of any competing formats. About the only good that can come out of a format war though is if the best of both formats end up converging into one final format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jersiq Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Saw this on EEtimes today: Stand alone Blue-Ray player which will sell for 1,800, although because of the resolution specs, this will be a higher end player. Source So as Xcomm said, it will probably be one of the lower priced players on the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CtrlAltSupr Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I don't quite get it. Who is being stupid: Sony launching a "cheap" blu-ray/lots-of- other-stuff-playing device or anyone else selling blu-ray playing devices at a high price? BTW, what other functions will those "blu-ray players" have? can't, just u know, play stuff and be SO damn expensive. And I mean, why would sony sell it at such low price compared to the others. It's not like they are that desperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew1g Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 ok ps3 will have a blu- ray player which will be cheaper than standalone players. but ever thought of this: how much will ps3 games cost? $100-160? that will force people to download more pirated data. why can't we just stay with the normal dvds??? or find a way to create games/films with a better quality than current dvds but in a smaller size? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter¥ Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 ps3 owns cos of blu-ray Actually, the converse is also true. Blu-ray owns because of the PS3. Why? Because the PS3 will be an "affordable" Blu-ray player right from the start. Let's say the PS3 launches at $400 USD. When stand-alone Blu-ray players launch, they'll probably sell at $700-1000. So obviously, the PS3 will be piggy-backing the new format ahead of any competing formats. About the only good that can come out of a format war though is if the best of both formats end up converging into one final format. If I remember correctly, didn't the PS2 really help the DVD get itself into the mainstream? When is CES starting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyzoot Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 So to play HD-DVD's you need an HD-DVD player? I have a high definition TV and a DVD/VCR Combo, that won't work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Neon~ Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 (edited) So to play HD-DVD's you need an HD-DVD player? I have a high definition TV and a DVD/VCR Combo, that won't work? Nope. You have as much chance as your DVD player reading a slice of toast. I cant understand why anybody at this stage will buy a HD-DVD player. I realy cant see it lasting as long as DVDs have with the competition they are getting from the PS3. At first, I thought that the 360 would counter BD-ROM with the ability to play HD-DVDs, but it turns out that they can only play them with an add-on HD-DVD player. Which means less people who will end up with one in their homes. Looks to me like BD has got it easy. Edited January 5, 2006 by ~Neon~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I don't quite get it. Who is being stupid: Sony launching a "cheap" blu-ray/lots-of- other-stuff-playing device or anyone else selling blu-ray playing devices at a high price? BTW, what other functions will those "blu-ray players" have? can't, just u know, play stuff and be SO damn expensive. And I mean, why would sony sell it at such low price compared to the others. It's not like they are that desperate. First of all, Sony is going to be selling the PS3 at a loss. The idea is to sell as many units as possible. This does two things; one, it spreads the new BD format, and two, it ensures greater software sales. Since Sony will sell the hardware at an initial loss, they intend to make the profit back on software and media sales and other BD royalties. So why would BD players cost so much more? For one, Sony's partners have no interest to sell at a loss. There is also that niche of consumers who want a high-quality BD player rather than a budget-level one found in a gaming console. Take the PS2 for example. When it launched in late 2000, one of its big selling points was DVD player functionality, but no one would dare want to use it as such in their high-end home theater setup. PS http://www.blu-ray.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandthefter Posted January 5, 2006 Author Share Posted January 5, 2006 Another thing to add here, can't be bothered to find the exact quote but check here for some more info somewhere but: Bill Gates has announced a HD-DVD external drive for the 360, no word on whether just for movies and/or games as of yet. I'm hoping it'll do games cos a DVD9 isn't really that good a medium for HD-gaming but it'll prob just be for playing movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlianAnt Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 So to play HD-DVD's you need an HD-DVD player? I have a high definition TV and a DVD/VCR Combo, that won't work? Nope. You have as much chance as your DVD player reading a slice of toast. I cant understand why anybody at this stage will buy a HD-DVD player. I realy cant see it lasting as long as DVDs have with the competition they are getting from the PS3. At first, I thought that the 360 would counter BD-ROM with the ability to play HD-DVDs, but it turns out that they can only play them with an add-on HD-DVD player. Which means less people who will end up with one in their homes. Looks to me like BD has got it easy. Iv got a feeling some games will be made for a HD-DVD drive add-on for the xbox and also come out on the normol disks. Dont dont go crazy over it. If you walk into a wal-mart (at least in the US) and look for BF2 you can find a 3-disk CD box and a 1-disk DVD box. Chances are on the 360 developers will make games for the HD drive with extra stuff like behind-the-scenes, more maps and possibly better graphics. Is it better then having it right of the box? No. Is it a bad move? Maby. Time will tell. Metal up your ass! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Neon~ Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 So to play HD-DVD's you need an HD-DVD player? I have a high definition TV and a DVD/VCR Combo, that won't work? Nope. You have as much chance as your DVD player reading a slice of toast. I cant understand why anybody at this stage will buy a HD-DVD player. I realy cant see it lasting as long as DVDs have with the competition they are getting from the PS3. At first, I thought that the 360 would counter BD-ROM with the ability to play HD-DVDs, but it turns out that they can only play them with an add-on HD-DVD player. Which means less people who will end up with one in their homes. Looks to me like BD has got it easy. Iv got a feeling some games will be made for a HD-DVD drive add-on for the xbox and also come out on the normol disks. Dont dont go crazy over it. If you walk into a wal-mart (at least in the US) and look for BF2 you can find a 3-disk CD box and a 1-disk DVD box. Chances are on the 360 developers will make games for the HD drive with extra stuff like behind-the-scenes, more maps and possibly better graphics. Is it better then having it right of the box? No. Is it a bad move? Maby. Time will tell. Thats if Microsoft decide to even allow the drive to play games. At this point in time, the extra drive is for movie playback only. The idea of it is to offer poeple who already have a 360 to be able to play HD-DVDs wihout shedding out craploads for a HD-DVD player. But who knows, in the future they may have no choice but to turn to HD-DVD for games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlianAnt Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 So to play HD-DVD's you need an HD-DVD player? I have a high definition TV and a DVD/VCR Combo, that won't work? Nope. You have as much chance as your DVD player reading a slice of toast. I cant understand why anybody at this stage will buy a HD-DVD player. I realy cant see it lasting as long as DVDs have with the competition they are getting from the PS3. At first, I thought that the 360 would counter BD-ROM with the ability to play HD-DVDs, but it turns out that they can only play them with an add-on HD-DVD player. Which means less people who will end up with one in their homes. Looks to me like BD has got it easy. Iv got a feeling some games will be made for a HD-DVD drive add-on for the xbox and also come out on the normol disks. Dont dont go crazy over it. If you walk into a wal-mart (at least in the US) and look for BF2 you can find a 3-disk CD box and a 1-disk DVD box. Chances are on the 360 developers will make games for the HD drive with extra stuff like behind-the-scenes, more maps and possibly better graphics. Is it better then having it right of the box? No. Is it a bad move? Maby. Time will tell. Thats if Microsoft decide to even allow the drive to play games. At this point in time, the extra drive is for movie playback only. The idea of it is to offer poeple who already have a 360 to be able to play HD-DVDs wihout shedding out craploads for a HD-DVD player. But who knows, in the future they may have no choice but to turn to HD-DVD for games. I think they confirmed 50 new games for it.... but i may have misread. Metal up your ass! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 So to play HD-DVD's you need an HD-DVD player? I have a high definition TV and a DVD/VCR Combo, that won't work? Nope. You have as much chance as your DVD player reading a slice of toast. I cant understand why anybody at this stage will buy a HD-DVD player. I realy cant see it lasting as long as DVDs have with the competition they are getting from the PS3. At first, I thought that the 360 would counter BD-ROM with the ability to play HD-DVDs, but it turns out that they can only play them with an add-on HD-DVD player. Which means less people who will end up with one in their homes. Looks to me like BD has got it easy. Iv got a feeling some games will be made for a HD-DVD drive add-on for the xbox and also come out on the normol disks. Dont dont go crazy over it. If you walk into a wal-mart (at least in the US) and look for BF2 you can find a 3-disk CD box and a 1-disk DVD box. Chances are on the 360 developers will make games for the HD drive with extra stuff like behind-the-scenes, more maps and possibly better graphics. Is it better then having it right of the box? No. Is it a bad move? Maby. Time will tell. Thats if Microsoft decide to even allow the drive to play games. At this point in time, the extra drive is for movie playback only. The idea of it is to offer poeple who already have a 360 to be able to play HD-DVDs wihout shedding out craploads for a HD-DVD player. But who knows, in the future they may have no choice but to turn to HD-DVD for games. I think they confirmed 50 new games for it.... but i may have misread. According to this article, it'll only ever support HD-DVD movies, not games. But I suppose that could still change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reticulatingsplines Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Neither HD-DVD or Blu-Ray will see major commercial success unless one totally destroys the other in the market, or they give up these stupid antics and merge formats. Splitting the home entertainment pie never works in the long run - and the people pushing these two formats should know better. DVD worked brilliantly, just like CD, because once you had a DVD player you could play anything released in that format. Until dual-format players come out (and won't they be hilariously expensive at first, ho ho) the vast majority of consumers aren't going to bother with it. That, and hardly anyone owns a HDMI-enabled TV, meaning most will just see the movie at standard definition anyway. Let's also consider that if you asked 90% of people who own DVD's, they aren't exactly complaining about the quality or sound. Many countries don't even have fully featured HD broadcasts yet (Australia is amongst them; almost all our digital TV is in SD because the costs of broadcasting and recieving are significantly lower) so until the 360 hits (haven't got that yet, either) not many people have any real idea what kind of quality HD provides. All in all, it's an expensive upgrade for little-to-no real value added. To see any real benefit, you have to go the whole hog (movies, player, tv, receiver) and hope the format you choose will actually function in a year's time. I can see why Sony is pushing Blu-Ray, but I think their enthusiasm could be better spent trying to end this pointless format war before it makes them all look really stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PimpPanda Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 ok ps3 will have a blu- ray player which will be cheaper than standalone players. but ever thought of this: how much will ps3 games cost? $100-160? that will force people to download more pirated data. why can't we just stay with the normal dvds??? or find a way to create games/films with a better quality than current dvds but in a smaller size? Your joking me right? 100-160$?? Blu-Ray barely costs more than normal DVD, and when all the development goes as planned, it actualy costs LESS because of how it is made. A PS3 game will probably cost the same as an Xbox 360 game. Also, blu rays are harder to get scratched. They also do the dishes and help with taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_-playero-_ Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 ps3 owns cos of blu-ray Actually, the converse is also true. Blu-ray owns because of the PS3. Why? Because the PS3 will be an "affordable" Blu-ray player right from the start. Let's say the PS3 launches at $400 USD. When stand-alone Blu-ray players launch, they'll probably sell at $700-1000. So obviously, the PS3 will be piggy-backing the new format ahead of any competing formats. About the only good that can come out of a format war though is if the best of both formats end up converging into one final format. Just as the ps2 did with DVD playback capability. Then the xbox came, and the modchips and that opened a new variety of geek sh*tness to do at nights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anus Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I was thinking about this too, HD-DVD is now released and fully compatible with the X360, but has no titles on it, but Blu-Ray is not even released yet and has so many titles on it. In short PS3>X360 imo from seeing all the stuff Microsoft failed doing on the X360. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cran. Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 ps3 owns cos of blu-ray Actually, the converse is also true. Blu-ray owns because of the PS3. Why? Because the PS3 will be an "affordable" Blu-ray player right from the start. Let's say the PS3 launches at $400 USD. When stand-alone Blu-ray players launch, they'll probably sell at $700-1000. So obviously, the PS3 will be piggy-backing the new format ahead of any competing formats. About the only good that can come out of a format war though is if the best of both formats end up converging into one final format. That's mainly the whole story behind the success of the PS2. At the time when it was released, DVD players were around $500-1000 US if i'm not mistaken. Shame the PS2 has a terrible quailty DVD player anyway Who's to say that Blu Ray is better than HD DVD? Remeber, Blu Ray is much more expensive than HD DVD. Really, I have to say one thing: WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? @Warlord errr, Xbox360 doesn't support HD DVD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_-playero-_ Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? Well, if you have an 16:9 HDTV, I'm guess you would like to have the best quality around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? Well, if you have an 16:9 HDTV, I'm guess you would like to have the best quality around. Yeah, two hours of HD video takes up ~25GB of space, so there's really no choice but to come up with a new medium and new codecs. As far as densities go, HD DVD -single layer - 15GB-dual layer - 30GB -triple layer - 45GBBlu-ray-single layer - 25GB-dual layer - 50GB -four layer - 100GBI'll have to say though, I don't really see what the advantage is of having HD movies over standard definition movies. Do we really need to see the pores of people's skin when watching video? Do we really need to be able to read fine print on a wall in the background? Then again, maybe HD will open up a whole new level of filming techinques that I'm not thinking about. I know that reducing the amount of motion blur used in films would be a good start, although that's more of a framerate issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cran. Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? Well, if you have an 16:9 HDTV, I'm guess you would like to have the best quality around. Yeah, two hours of HD video takes up ~25GB of space, so there's really no choice but to come up with a new medium and new codecs. As far as densities go, HD DVD -single layer - 15GB-dual layer - 30GB -triple layer - 45GBBlu-ray-single layer - 25GB-dual layer - 50GB -four layer - 100GBI'll have to say though, I don't really see what the advantage is of having HD movies over standard definition movies. Do we really need to see the pores of people's skin when watching video? Do we really need to be able to read fine print on a wall in the background? Then again, maybe HD will open up a whole new level of filming techinques that I'm not thinking about. I know that reducing the amount of motion blur used in films would be a good start, although that's more of a framerate issue. Still, I find nothing wrong with the DVD quailty movies. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CtrlAltSupr Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Still, I find nothing wrong with the DVD quailty movies. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Indeed, no need to better that. Altho, space is something completely different, more space is usable. Not quality, but uantity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaRotor Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? Well, if you have an 16:9 HDTV, I'm guess you would like to have the best quality around. Yeah, two hours of HD video takes up ~25GB of space, so there's really no choice but to come up with a new medium and new codecs. As far as densities go, HD DVD -single layer - 15GB-dual layer - 30GB -triple layer - 45GB Blu-ray-single layer - 25GB-dual layer - 50GB -four layer - 100GB I'll have to say though, I don't really see what the advantage is of having HD movies over standard definition movies. Do we really need to see the pores of people's skin when watching video? Do we really need to be able to read fine print on a wall in the background? Then again, maybe HD will open up a whole new level of filming techinques that I'm not thinking about. I know that reducing the amount of motion blur used in films would be a good start, although that's more of a framerate issue. Still, I find nothing wrong with the DVD quailty movies. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. That's stupid. If society lived by that maxim, we'd still be sitting in caves grinding wheat with rocks. People said the same thing about changing from tapes to DVD, cassettes to CD, "Whats the use. It does the exactly the same thing". No jackass it doesn't. It's technical innovation. If we don't roll out new format technologies like Blu-Ray, then we won't ever have better quality video. You might say now that you don't want the quality, but in ten years when Blu-ray becomes the established medium, you won't want to go back to watch a DVD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 That's stupid. If society lived by that maxim, we'd still be sitting in caves grinding wheat with rocks. People said the same thing about changing from tapes to DVD, cassettes to CD, "Whats the use. It does the exactly the same thing". No jackass it doesn't. It's technical innovation. If we don't roll out new format technologies like Blu-Ray, then we won't ever have better quality video. You might say now that you don't want the quality, but in ten years when Blu-ray becomes the established medium, you won't want to go back to watch a DVD. That's the way I look at it. The technological improvements may seem like subtle changes, but we really don't know what capabilities HD will bring in the coming years. Also, it'll be great when BD writers are out and affordable so that 100GB discs can be used for storage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anus Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 ps3 owns cos of blu-ray Actually, the converse is also true. Blu-ray owns because of the PS3. Why? Because the PS3 will be an "affordable" Blu-ray player right from the start. Let's say the PS3 launches at $400 USD. When stand-alone Blu-ray players launch, they'll probably sell at $700-1000. So obviously, the PS3 will be piggy-backing the new format ahead of any competing formats. About the only good that can come out of a format war though is if the best of both formats end up converging into one final format. That's mainly the whole story behind the success of the PS2. At the time when it was released, DVD players were around $500-1000 US if i'm not mistaken. Shame the PS2 has a terrible quailty DVD player anyway Who's to say that Blu Ray is better than HD DVD? Remeber, Blu Ray is much more expensive than HD DVD. Really, I have to say one thing: WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? @Warlord errr, Xbox360 doesn't support HD DVD Wtf? I remember reading somewhere that it did . I probably mixed it up with DVD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyzoot Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 ps3 owns cos of blu-ray Actually, the converse is also true. Blu-ray owns because of the PS3. Why? Because the PS3 will be an "affordable" Blu-ray player right from the start. Let's say the PS3 launches at $400 USD. When stand-alone Blu-ray players launch, they'll probably sell at $700-1000. So obviously, the PS3 will be piggy-backing the new format ahead of any competing formats. About the only good that can come out of a format war though is if the best of both formats end up converging into one final format. That's mainly the whole story behind the success of the PS2. At the time when it was released, DVD players were around $500-1000 US if i'm not mistaken. Shame the PS2 has a terrible quailty DVD player anyway Who's to say that Blu Ray is better than HD DVD? Remeber, Blu Ray is much more expensive than HD DVD. Really, I have to say one thing: WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DVD MOVIES ANYWAY?!?? @Warlord errr, Xbox360 doesn't support HD DVD agreed. It seems the current generation of Film Medium is dying too soon. Remember VHS lasted 15-20 years whereas it seems DVD is going last about 6-7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_-playero-_ Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 It IS innovation. Do you have an HDTV? Have you seen the sharpness and quality of HD video? It's way better than standard def is. Imagine watching your favorite movie, in a 40" 16:9 screen with such a great quality and sound you might even feel you are in there. That is the reason why people is upgrading to hdtv and why the HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CtrlAltSupr Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 It IS innovation. Do you have an HDTV? Have you seen the sharpness and quality of HD video? It's way better than standard def is. Imagine watching your favorite movie, in a 40" 16:9 screen with such a great quality and sound you might even feel you are in there. You bet ur ass I do, cuz I can't aford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now