Printable View
So, like, if you want an HD-DVD drive, and for some reason you want to have it stuck to the outside of your 360, your dream has come true!
Linkola
No idea if it streams game data, but even if it does, since they launched it seperately how many developers would actually use it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Microsoft PR
I'm not sure why, but reading this makes me want a PS3.
BWAHAHAHAHA.
HAHA.
Ha.
Damn that's funny, and sad. It was sad when Sega was trying to do something similar with the Dreamcast and DVD, but damn, they were Sega, not the billions in the bank company that Microsoft is.
They're better off not releasing it, for serious.
But....it lets you enjoy high definition entertainment in physical form! That just sounds hot & dirty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammadeau
The pricepoint is the deciding factor if this is good or not... external or not.
Well, no...the format itself still has to stand on its own merits. Blu ray by any standard I can figure is still better, and looks to have more studio support coming out of the gate. And unless the player costs $100 (highly unlikely, since Toshiba stand alone HD-DVD players are $500), it + 360 will cost more than a PS3 which has built in Blu ray support. And the kicker is apparently it's just a movie player, not for games.Quote:
Originally Posted by TobalRox
Look at the announcements today out of the two camps. HD-DVD came out of the gate today and made the Blu-ray camp look stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by StriderKyo
What announcements?Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
Toshiba HD-DVD players aren't $500 anymore. They are closer to $250 and less. Here in Canada they are ever below $200.Quote:
Originally Posted by StriderKyo
Doesn't true HD require the DVDs to be mastered in a higher def format? Like this thing will do true 1080i and 1080p, not upscanned right? But the media needs to formatted for such first, no?
EDIT: NM, read up on it at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-DVD). Damn I too am looking forward to PS3, that will handle my next gen video for me...I don't want to have to buy yet another DVD player.
ssb
so, everyone has retard packs now?
That Blu-Ray players are going to be friggin expensive, the first titles are using MPEG-2 instead of h.264, the first titles are just upconverts and not remasters, and the first titles blow outside of maybe 1 or 2 films.Quote:
Originally Posted by StriderKyo
It's not crippling, but it certainly made them look stupid.
Well, that's completely pointless.
I wonder if MS will ever update the internal drive.
Me too, and I already have a 360. Seriously, Microsoft. Lame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammadeau
You know, I came in to this thread with maybe half an opinion ready to go and a slight bit of interest in the subject. I'm leaving it utterly indifferent, and just can't bring myself to care any more. Call me when the successor to HD-DVD/BluRay is ready to go.
James
Won't end up mattering. The early adopters are the ones that are willing to spend the money, and with (almost) all bets being on Blu-ray, those people will be willing to spend more on what will probably be the better format. DVD players initially were in the $1000 range, and yet here we are with DVD players in 100 million homes in the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
I'm not a fan of this, but as long as the bitrates are kept high enough, it won't be a huge downfall. A lot of current HD broadcasts are still MPEG2 at this point (from what I know), and Blu-ray will be able to provide far higher bitrates over digital cable and whatnot.Quote:
the first titles are using MPEG-2 instead of h.264
This is pretty bad, but you're silly if you think this is a Blu-ray only problem. With the exception of Universal, are you going to tell me that the same company is going to use an unconverted source for their Blu-ray version, but an actual remastered version for their HD-DVD version? Because if you aren't, then this isn't a point against Blu-ray itself.Quote:
the first titles are just upconverts and not remasters
Totally your opinion. The handful of titles announced was pretty small, but I already saw a handful of titles I would pick up.Quote:
and the first titles blow outside of maybe 1 or 2 films.
HD-DVD players... $250. I'm 99.9% sure you were meaning DVD players, not HD-DVD players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock17
Point is that Blu-ray didn't deliver any kind of death blow to HD-DVD like expected, and HD-DVD actually looks more impressive just going on the events of today. And about the movies, my opinion is the more popular one right now. Most reactions I've seen have said that the Blu-ray selection sucks, and I agree. I'd get Kung Fu Hustle and that's about it.
Regardless, the point is that Blu-ray didn't impress anyone today. This looks right now more like SACD vs. DVD-A than it does VHS vs. Betamax or DVD vs. DivX.
The hell? I don't know about any deathblow you were expecting, but in what way is HDDVD now looking more impressive? Seriously, there is still absolutely zero advantage of HDDVD over Blu-Ray, as far as I know, and Blu-Ray not only has far more support, but is technologically superior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
I have no idea where you're getting this.Quote:
And about the movies, my opinion is the more popular one right now. Most reactions I've seen have said that the Blu-ray selection sucks, and I agree. I'd get Kung Fu Hustle and that's about it.
Regardless, the point is that Blu-ray didn't impress anyone today. This looks right now more like SACD vs. DVD-A than it does VHS vs. Betamax or DVD vs. DivX.
Are you basically saying that HDDVD looks more impressive because it will have a better selection of launch titles? Because despite the incredible subjectivity of that by itself, is there any real, actual point that HDDVD has over Blu-Ray? I genuinely would like to know, if there is.
HD-DVD's can be manufactured by upgrading current pressing equipment. Blu-ray requires entirely new equipment. HD-DVD media is also cheaper. And yes, I would say the initial library for HD-DVD is more impressive.
Honestly I think we're looking at another SACD vs. DVD-A where no one makes any real strides. Most people don't even own HDTV's yet, and by the time they do, new tech will be replacing both of these.
You said that HD-DVD made Blu-ray look stupid - the above isn't the same thing. I don't think anybody has said that Blu-ray was going to kill HD-DVD right off of the bat - what has been said is that a lot of the benefits on the side of HD-DVD have evaporated over time, and when putting the two technologies and format support head to head, Blu-ray wins out in both of those categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
I will say that I give HD-DVD credit in the fact that I'm surprised that companies like Warner Bros. are holding off on big support for Blu-ray right out the gate, instead dropping most of their initial support onto HD-DVD.
Kung Fu Hustle, House of Flying Daggers, Fifth Element, T2... a few off of the top of my head. I'd also say RE: Apocalypse, but I'm not going to claim that that is a movie for everyone.Quote:
And about the movies, my opinion is the more popular one right now. Most reactions I've seen have said that the Blu-ray selection sucks, and I agree. I'd get Kung Fu Hustle and that's about it.
Even still, 99% of the content will end up coming out on both formats until a winner is decided, more than likely. This isn't the early days of DVD - most companies are going to drop their titles on both formats, so that they aren't on the losing side.
And if you're going to judge either format based on the initial batch of titles... that would be silly. Want to go back and see what the launch titles for DVD was? I was there from the start, and I can tell you, the selection of titles on DVD in the early days sucked ass. For Christ's sakes, this is a video game forum - everybody here should know damn well how much launch titles mean nothing when it comes to the quality of a piece of video game hardware.
Didn't impress you, you mean. I still argue that most people didn't think Blu-ray was going to kill HD-DVD today, or hell, were expecting much of anything about either beyond price and some initial title launches.Quote:
Regardless, the point is that Blu-ray didn't impress anyone today. This looks right now more like SACD vs. DVD-A than it does VHS vs. Betamax or DVD vs. DivX.
Didn't impress anyone in the home theater community. HD-DVD made Blu-ray look stupid because everything was all packaged up with a bow for the Blu-ray group, and they didn't take it today, so now it's back to confusion.
It's entirely possible that the PS3 could make every person in the world adopt Blu-ray DVD and this is moot. My opinion, though, is that neither of these techs will ever reach the level of regular DVD. We'll see if I'm right ca. 2012.
I trust the "home theater community" to give an accurate account of events relating to this in the same way I trust TNL (or any online game forum) to give an accurate account on any sort of game announcement. Meaning, when you have a bunch of fanboys about something, they let their personal opinions get in the way of facts far too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
I agree that Blu-ray COULD have done just that, because yes, it was shaping up to be Blu-ray's victory to lose. But I only see one big slip-up - the difference in initial hardware pricing - yet we've only seen a small fraction of the players, and again, I'm not sure the price is going to make that big of a difference, unless HD-DVD really, really gains more momentum. And, again, I think if people looked at things realistically, Blu-ray wasn't going to come out with some magic deathblow today no matter what.Quote:
HD-DVD made Blu-ray look stupid because everything was all packaged up with a bow for the Blu-ray group, and they didn't take it today, so now it's back to confusion.
I have nothing but utter confidence that the PS3 is going to be what makes Blu-ray succeed over HD-DVD. All other things being equal, HD-DVD has no "catch" like Blu-ray has, and that alone is going to be a huge difference.Quote:
It's entirely possible that the PS3 could make every person in the world adopt Blu-ray DVD and this is moot.
And people said that same thing about DVD, CD, MP3, and so on. Especially with DVD, people gave the same argument against it that people are giving against Blu-ray and HD-DVD: nobody will be able to tell the difference. Granted, DVD brought a host of benefits above VHS that just can't exist here. However, HDTV is going to do nothing but rise in popularity, and people are going to want a video format to go along with that.Quote:
My opinion, though, is that neither of these techs will ever reach the level of regular DVD. We'll see if I'm right ca. 2012.
I'm not totally disagreeing with you, however - there's a very serious possibility that by the time HDTV is in enough homes that you could see the same penetration rate as current DVD, a new and "better" standard could come along; digital downloads being one of the biggest possibilties. I mean, we saw that happen to audio - instead of SACD or DVD-A kill off the CD, MP3 (and other similar stuff) is doing the job. Audio and video are different markets, though, so I can see Blu-ray and HD-DVD thrive where SACD and DVD-A have, so far, failed.
Technology typically does nothing but progress, though, and once you move part of your life up a step in technology, it is hard to go back. HDTV is reaching "average Joe" price levels, and people that own an HDTV aren't going to live with regular DVD. And once you're at your friend's house and watch his HDTV, you're going to want one.
These are my expectations as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
Even though PS2 is a shitty DVD player, I know many people who use it exclusively to watch movies. The same will be true of PS3. Hell, I doubt I'll own a Blu-ray player before PS3. I still don't own a CD player that can handle SACD (or DVD Audio, for that matter), so PS3 will be first player for that format too. I'm sure I'm not alone on that.
The argument isn't that people can't tell the difference. The argument is that many people just recently finished rebuilding their libraries on DVD, and that HD-DVD/Blu-ray are coming along too soon.
DVD is only a 9 year old technology, and a huge majority of people don't even yet own HDTV's. VHS sales are just now waning after over 25 years of sales. As you said with mp3's, there's a good chance that Apple or some other company could release a knockout of a digital content delivery system. That throws a whole other wrench in the works.
I can guarantee that even if I had the money, I wouldn't be rushing out to buy any Blu-rays or HD-DVDs right now. I've seen demos, and it is better, but it's not the quantum leap in technology that DVDs were. The video is sharper, but that's about all that people are going to notice. There's no added surround systems like DVD brought, or special features, or more compact media. Most people have yet to even experience progressive DVDs on an HDTV.
Is it possible that one of these two will be the new standard? Sure. Is it probable? Not really. The only way I could see it happening is if the technology got so cheap that they made blu-ray/hd-dvd standard on all DVD players. I don't think it will take off on its own merits.
Oh and to counter Shidoshi's list...
8 track
Betamax
DAT
Laserdisc
Mini disc
DivX
SACD
DVD-A
And I'm sure I missed some. Especially if you count in crap like CD-i and Voom.
Microsoft is pulling of a Sega CD, HA!
this is the most retarded idea ever! they would be better off swaping the DVD in the 360 for an HD-DVD.
This is being way overblown; it's not a hardware expansion like Sega CD, it's just for watching movies. Games don't need more than 9 GB's of disc space so it's not like they're responding to a gaming demand, it's like the DVD remote kit for the original Xbox. And bluray/HDdvd are both going to fail anyway, people aren't ready to upgrade from DVD's.
I think it could work if they somehow managed to make it work with the design of the system and look 'cool'. Frankly, I don't see how its possible. I think it'll look clunky and like an afterthought.
It's just an attempt to deter stupid people from choosing PS3 over Xbox 360 just because it plays a hi-def movie format. It doesn't matter. DVD is only now becoming universally embraced, the mainstream is not even close to ready to move onto another format. DVD's won't be dethroned by another disc format, it'll take some sort of alternate delivery system to dethrone DVD the way Mp3's are dethroning CD's.
Now dumbass core system buyers can purchase a HDD and a HD-DVD attachment! Oh, and they need a separate Wi-Fi peripheral as well. Given the lack of a HDD for the PS3, it could still be $500 and be a better deal than the 360, since it includes its next-gen DVD drive and Wi-Fi out of the box. Oh, and its game lineup can't be weaker than the 360s right now.
im still in the camp that having both HD DVD and Blu-Ray launch and actally try to be viable is dumb. wonder which one wal-mart is supporting.
So its just the remote and a dongle or something? Golly. I thought it was an external drive...Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
If you didn't need a new DVD player to play HD-DVD's the switch would be no problem, but as it stands right now the makers of HD-DVD and Bluray are pushing their technology on a market place that has only just settled on a standard in the last 2 or 3 years. If new DVD players out there all came equiped with HD-DVD drives and movies were also released in the same format then I could see it happening, but then again you'd also need a high-def TV.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
There are just too many expectations out there. DVD works because it works with almost every existing television in the past twenty or thirty years. It's apparent they're just trying to facilitate the birth of a market most aren't ready for yet.
I don't see how offering more options could be a bad thing, but they may just be wasting their time. PS3 will have bluray, will it not? That's what bothers me the most about the new Xbox. Microsoft's big claim to fame in the console market was that it was technologically superior to Gamecube and PS2 with its original Xbox. By pushing up the release of Xbox 360 therefor making it stunningly weak compared to the PS3 (alledgedly) they've lost their market appeal to me. I would normally buy ports on the Xbox because they looked better (and I loved the old Xbox controller very much). They've basically sold their identity for a chance at competing with Sony.
Atleast Nintendo's weaker stance was bolstered by an innovative looking controller more on par with their successful portable system, the Nintendo DS. What's the point of making your games in hi-definition (and not the highest definition either) if Sony is going to come along in a year or so and release something A) More powerful and B) With more support (if Killzone 2 turns out to be anything near the quality everyone thinks it will, I'm sold). 360's best game, Call of Duty, isn't even an exclusive and PGR 3 will never move me to actually buy a system (racing never does).
I loved the Xbox, but I am not a consumer whore. I do not have loyalty to brands and every time you release something new on to the marketplace I am going to scrutinize the hell out of it before getting behind it.
But through all of this the one thing that makes me want a PS3 the most was how quickly Microsoft went from being a company that listened to fans and fed their needs to a company gouging people on software and accessories and plugging their ears when critics (and developers, more importantly) pointed out the flaws in releasing two packaged deals. I'll probably eventually own both, (maybe not, I'm not as big in to gaming as I used to be) but where last generation I was pumped to see Microsoft shake up the market now I see cocky over-confidence and little meat with the potatoes. it kind of startles me away from their product.
The 360 doesn't even have a better lineup than the PS2 does from what we know of the next 2 years. The PS3 is going to smoke this thing.
I honestly feel bad for my friend Steve who bought the system for over six-hundred dollars and is now using it to play an upgraded port of a PC shooter. It softens the blow, however, that he only paid 50 bucks for the thing with his own money.
I didn't mean to write all of that. Don't read all of it.
It doesn't matter. DVD is going nowhere for the forseeable future, it only became the market leader 4 years ago. You name me a media format that was dethroned in less than 10 years after coming to power, I'll give you a cookie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne
Best case scenario, one sticks around like CDs did against cassettes, slowly gaining ground on the prevailing format over 4 or 5 years, then takes over when it finally has a majority share. It certainly won't be a quick transition.
well HD games would require more disk space, afterall some game on the PS2 are already using the dual layer DVDs.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
and no HD-DVD and BlueRay wont fail cuz you say so. i have a feeling that HD DVD will eventually fail cuz people(like me) would opt for the more advanced BD instead of a DVD upgrade. Plus BD is backward compatible with DVD disks, which should be the transition from DVD to BD alot smoother than from VHS to DVD.
DVD is not mainstrem? then what is? VHS? production on VHS movies stopped a long time ago, the only way to watch movies now is on DVDs(or downloaded from the net)
the whole thought of the 360 getting an external HD DVD drive is laughable.
MS would be better off in slapping an HD-DVD drive in the newer 360s for movie watching only(keep all games on DVD), instead of adding an external drive
Don't forget the ill fated D-VHS...Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
That's stupid
It may not fail, but it will be a while before it seeps in to the mainstream, which I'm sure the main players are well aware of. But if PS3 is going to be doing blu-ray out of the box then I guarantee if the prices for the movies are decent people will be making the jump, since they don't have to do anything extra to make use of this new format.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
All this is a really a waste of time, at some point, as many have argued, we won't deal with physical media anymore. I don't see why we can't have downloadable games now, but I guess there are too many issues with it. Give me PS3 with a HD and let me download the games I want, just like iTunes. Someone else posted an article here that said something like this: A manufacturer makes a game, seals it up, ships it to retail, you buy it from retail, unpack it and put it in your machine. What a waste of time. Instead we could be directly downloading from the source, no going to the store, none of that crap, but of course it would kill the retail industry, but oh well...
I'm perfectly happy with DVD, if something else comes along that is easy to use and affordable then I'm all for it, otherwise it's stuff for the videophiles to deal with.
I'm sure the manufacturer's are going to love that. You're going to kill off an entire economy for a bit more convenience?
lol, of course. What do I care about the economy ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
How much more extra crap do we need to buy to have the "real" 360?
The problem with the arguement for downloading games like music is that music is much, much shorter than games, length wise. Where you can get five or six minutes of entertainment out of a good song on its first play-through you get five or six hours out of a game. The incentive to actually buy a new game when you already have two that will last you four days is very low.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssbomberman
The fee for buying a game online would have to then be raised considerably to account for this large time difference. The problem is greedy corporations, but then again without them there wouldn't be enough money to produce this material in the first place. Catch 22.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Microsoft isn't just pushing it on the console front though. They're doing it with PC's as well.
http://hdbeat.com/2005/12/29/microso...e-hd-dvd-fate/
Quote:
Microsoft considers full HD-DVD support in Microsoft Vista, the next operating system due out in late 2006. Blu-Ray would likely be unsupported in the new OS in order to further persuade the market (and OEMs) towards HD-DVD. Add to the fact that Media Center functionality will be included into Vista and you've got a recipe for a struggling Blu-Ray format.
Er, manufacturing, packaging, and shipping costs are a huge part of companies' expense on games. With online distribution, all that is gone. They could charge half of what they currently do for games and make as much or more profit than they are with physical products.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssbomberman
i dont mind downloading games either, it'll also benefit the manufacturers since they wont have to pay to ship or package games like you said. but if i had to download a Blu-Ray game, which i'm guessing would be in the 9GB and above range, it would take an awfuly long time to download unless you have a super connection! ...afterall, i dont think everyone has broadband....not yet atleast, and the industry doesn't want to miss out on them.
do you happen to work for infinium labs? :lol:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssbomberman
is that the same as HD-VHS?
I've never heard of HD-VHS. Maybe you're thinking of S-VHS (S-Video), or what was originally called Super-VHS?Quote:
Originally Posted by marwan
Yeah, I used S-VHS when I was a "Media Duplication Specialist" for Anne Arundel Community College.
Basically I copied tapes all day.
You were missing something:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zerodash
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...id=18213&stc=1
NO NO NO NO NO and NO! I do not want all of my expensive media content on a harddrive that will die, will become outdated as larger HDs are made, is a pain to move to a new PC as the PC becomes outdated, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssbomberman
I want physical disks that I can rip to whatever HD I'm currently using and put into storage. When I need to rip again, I can. No worries. I want to actually own what I paid for.
Yeah. For fucking real. Discs for life, imo.
I love this line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
i disagree with the people who say we don't need a new movie format yet. We most certainly do need a new movie format. The weakness of DVD is apparent to anyone with a high def screen. You can cry that not many people have them yet but it's catching on fast. Every Best Buy/CC/Fry's is loaded with HD screens, while the SDs sit lonely in the back corner. They need to start the market penetration now so that in 3-4 years there will be a nice movie catalog available, prices will have leveled, and i won't have to stare at my shitty dvds on a nice HD set. This is not like audio at all. Standard consumer level equipment cannot reflect the difference in cd/sacd/dvda/mp3. Anyone (which will be everyone) with an HDTV will be able to tell 480P from 1080P.
Just as an interesting segway, Master made me aware of this a few days ago:
"News of the video bizarre: According to a just-released survey by Scientific-Atlanta, millions of people who have HDTV sets apparently think they are watching high definition television, but aren’t. The survey was spurred by an earlier Forrester Research projection that by the end of the year some 16 million U.S. households will have HDTV sets, but only seven million wll have HDTV reception. The Scientific Atlanta survey found that, yes, some 49 percent of households were not taking advantage of their HD equipment. About a quarter found that their HD set itself provided better reception, without taking the additional steps necessary to view HD. Eighteen percent said they didn’t even know needed additional equipment, such as a set-top box or antenna. A quarter admitted they thought they were watching HD video because, after all, the programs said at the beginning that they were broadcast in HDTV."
Having said (quoted) that, I know that I can tell. It's just kind of funny, is all
Consumer whores.
As mentioned, the benefit is that HD-DVD uses current pressing plants, so there is no need to spend all this money building new ones. Sure, they need to be upgraded, but that's a much cheaper price to pay. Not that it's much of a reason, Blu-Ray is still WAY better, but I'm just saying that's why there has been such a fight over which format.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy
It'll reach the level, since DVD is not HD, and if you have an HDTV, you notice a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
Also, movies being upconverted I'm not too sure about, since so many movies have already been remastered in High Definition.
Hate to tell you, but the world is changing at a much faster pace right now. Look at how often people upgrade computers now... heck, look at how much sooner the "next generation" of consoles came out. Sure, that's not the same as a format people use casually, but the point is that things change at a faster pace than ever before, and therefore formats cannot last as long anymore because people will demand something better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon McShig
Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
no i'm refering to High Definition movies on VHS, it was a very limited release, only few movies were released on it.
here are a few links...
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/reviewsdvhs/u571dvhs.html
http://www.dvhsmovie.com/hardware/hardware.asp
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/review...dvhsnotes.html
Not very often. GAMERS upgrade their PCs a lot, but don't you dare think that they're anywhere near the number of casual users.Quote:
Originally Posted by TobalRox
Er, 5 years is about the norm. It just seemed faster because one of the last companies to get in on the last gen was the first to enter the new one.Quote:
heck, look at how much sooner the "next generation" of consoles came out.
I guarantee you if you ask people if they want a new format over DVD most will give you an emphatic "no" or "not so soon". There's only a very small cadre of very particular people demanding anything, the only way a new format will see a speedy transition is if it's a) priced the same and b) DVD is actively phased out. I'm not saying it won't be successful, as there will be a lot of PS3 owners to help it along... but it will still likely be pretty drawn out.Quote:
Sure, that's not the same as a format people use casually, but the point is that things change at a faster pace than ever before, and therefore formats cannot last as long anymore because people will demand something better.
A lot of game developers seem to disagree with you. Everything I've heard has had game developers complaining that regular DVD isn't enough for what they are wanted to do, because you have to now take into account things like high-res textures to make use of these new high-res abilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I keep hearing people say this, yet they can never tell me what it means. I use my PS2 as my main DVD player, and so far I've seen nothing "shitty" about it. Is it a high-class DVD player? No. Can it do progressive scan upscaling or whatever the hell it's called? No. But otherwise, what makes it shitty exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Grave
Quote:
Originally Posted by marwan
That's the dumbest idea I've ever seen. The only reason anyone would buy something like that, was to record HD programming, but they have DVD players that do that now.
I know plenty of people that play ZERO games on their PC (ok, maybe solitaire and snood), yet they are buying computers every few years because things just start running slow with advances in the internet, MP3, digital cameras, etc. My mom is on her 4th or 5th PC in a little over 10 years. She checks Hotmail and uses quicken. Now she can watch DVDs and she loves it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon McShig
People will say "no" now because they don't have HDTVs... if they had them, they'd want it. Well, except for the people that buy it just to say they have it.
Sounds like your mom wastes money. ;)
You just answered your own question. The fact that it didn't do progressive scan, when even a $30 DVD player can do it, that makes it shitty. Granted, that has since been resolved, but until the slim came out, it was inexcusable. It also sucks because it would always pause for the layer change, which NONE of my DVD players do. And to round it all off, I consider it personally a shitty DVD player since I had DVDs that would work just fine on my 2 PCs, my DVD player, my mom's DVD player, the TiVo DVD player, my friend's, etc, etc, etc... and yet you put it in a PS2 and it would get disc read errors, skip, etc. Games worked fine, and yet on MULTIPLE PS2s (so you can't say mine was dusty/dirty or whatever) it would have issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
DVD players don't display in HD.. hence a need for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. The reason why it came out was it was in true hi-def with DTS surround sound at a time (which still includes now) where there was no home format that did that.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
What does this have to do with anything? People will do the same with HD-DVD/Blu-ray that they did with DVD - initially, they'll buy one or two here or there, picking up their favorite movies. As they watch those, they'll start to see how shit their old copies are, and want to upgrade more of their library. Nobody is asking them to repurchase everything day one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
But as I said, HDTVs aren't going to go down in sales, they're going to go up. And once you get an HDTV, and you see your first tastes of a movie in HD, you aren't going to be satisfied with watching your old DVDs on your HDTV anymore.Quote:
DVD is only a 9 year old technology, and a huge majority of people don't even yet own HDTV's.
As well, nobody (I don't think) is saying that these new formats are going to kill off DVD anytime soon. DVD is still goign to exist just fine, especially since both new generations of players will be able to play them. HD-DVD/Blu-ray will be for the people who want the better format, DVD will be there for the people who haven't moved on to HDTV yet or for that programming that just doesn't need HD.
The video is "sharper?" Come on. I'm attaching a graphics that I put together before to show the differences in image resolution between the formats - you're going to sit here and tell me that the only difference between DVD and an HDTV-supporting new disc format is a bit of sharpness?Quote:
I've seen demos, and it is better, but it's not the quantum leap in technology that DVDs were. The video is sharper, but that's about all that people are going to notice.
There are also other added benefits. As somebody who watches a lot of subtitled movies, I'm glad that (from what I understand) subtitles are now text instead of images, so that font face, size, placement, etc. can all be modified by the end user.
So you think that everybody who owns an HDTV is going to be perfectly happy watching regular old DVDs on them, and aren't going to want something better?Quote:
Is it possible that one of these two will be the new standard? Sure. Is it probable? Not really. The only way I could see it happening is if the technology got so cheap that they made blu-ray/hd-dvd standard on all DVD players. I don't think it will take off on its own merits.
Killed because of Sony's stupidity over liscencing.Quote:
Betamax
Successful for what it was, and was limited by the fact that technology at that point simply wasn't ready for that kind of format.Quote:
Laserdisc
Was very popular in Japan, and some other countries, and still is.Quote:
Mini disc
Video and audio are totally different things, and people want different things out of each. As well, audio improvements are far harder to tell than video ones. And to be fair, the verdict is still out on these - they haven't taken off, but they aren't "failed" yet. With the PS3 also being an SACD player, you never know, the format could get more popular.Quote:
SACD, DVD-A
I was referring less to the high-end features and more the disc reading problems of earlier PS2s and how pretty much everyone uses the controller as a remote, which I still find clunky. Small complaint, but I really wish it'd play VCDs too. <$50 DVD players can do that. I still find the whole experience better than watching DVDs on my laptop, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
To Sony's credit, though, at least they didn't make you buy the $30 remote before you could watch movies at all.
Ha, well, this is true.. but she also likes to keep her web browser updated since she does look at videos people send her, pics, her mail (which is Hotmail, aka, Microsoft, so she's told to upgrade). Plus now she can watch DVDs, so she saw it as a worthwhile upgrade. It's not uncommon either, I know other people's parents that do the same. I'm not saying it's widespread... just that there ARE people out there that upgrade a lot. I see people come into work all the time looking for new PCs, or something to upgrade... also, since they are so cheap (compared to how they were before), people are constantly coming in to get one "for their son/daughter" so they can each have their own.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
At the time, there weren't $30 DVD players, and you weren't going to get a progessive scan DVD player for what the PS2 cost, that I know of. So it isn't fair to knock it for something that wasn't common anyhow. As well, TVs that could even handle a progressive scan output weren't all that common.Quote:
Originally Posted by TobalRox
I'm not sure how long you've owned DVD players, but I got my first one a few months after they were released in the US, and pretty much ALL DVD players did this for quite some time. So, I guess to me, this was never that big of a deal, because it was always the case with all DVD players I owned up until the PS2. And being that I was an LD owner before that, a quick little pause which the laser changes direction is a silly thing to complain about after being used to LDs.Quote:
It also sucks because it would always pause for the layer change, which NONE of my DVD players do.
I dunno, I've only ever had one DVD that didn't work for me, and that was a HK DVD of questionable legality. Otherwise, I've had issues with DVD-R and DVD-RW discs, but that's about it.Quote:
And to round it all off, I consider it personally a shitty DVD player since I had DVDs that would work just fine on my 2 PCs, my DVD player, my mom's DVD player, the TiVo DVD player, my friend's, etc, etc, etc... and yet you put it in a PS2 and it would get disc read errors, skip, etc. Games worked fine, and yet on MULTIPLE PS2s (so you can't say mine was dusty/dirty or whatever) it would have issues.
DVD players don't display in HD.. hence a need for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. The reason why it came out was it was in true hi-def with DTS surround sound at a time (which still includes now) where there was no home format that did that.[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
yes it's dumb, but it's interesting nontheless.
i can imagine those tapes loosing quality a few years down the line. also picture the dust that would accumilate on the videotape head and crap.
EDIT:you guys make it like Blu-Ray is not backward compatible with your older DVDs. sheesh, all they have to do is replace their old DVD with a BD player and you're all set(considering you have an HDTV to unlock it's full potential)
PS2 hardware quality complaints in general are totally valid. As for the controller thing, I never minded all that much, but I then went out and spent $15 for a used remote at EB. If the remote hadn't been available, I'd agree with you on that one, but it was, and people could just go out and pick one up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grave
Absolutely - I really wish it could have played VCDs as well. But, as I was saying in another reply, you have to look at what was out at the time. VCD-playing DVD players were not at all common at that point.Quote:
Small complaint, but I really wish it'd play VCDs too. <$50 DVD players can do that. I still find the whole experience better than watching DVDs on my laptop, though.
lol @ this thread!!!
DVD brought in sharper video, 5.1 surround, optional subtitles, smaller media, no rewinding, special features, and rent by mail. I'm sure some of this was available on Laserdisc too, but no one cared.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
What do these new formats bring? Sharper video. Is that going to cause the majority of people to rebuild their libraries? Probably not. Like I said, I'm a HT enthusiast, and I won't even be repurchasing my stuff on either of those formats anytime soon.
I think they're coming out way too soon. I think there's too much infighting over control of the format; hell, DVD recorders still aren't commonplace because of all the fighting over DVD-R and DVD+R. They're just now starting to come down in price and show up on shelves at reasonable prices.
Anyway. One of these could end up as the next Laserdisc, but not the next DVD. The only way one would do that is if the tech got so cheap it were built into all DVD players, in my opinion. You're not going to change my opinion on this.
I forgot to add that the only reason most HDTV's are even sold is because there's no other alternative for 32" and above anymore. There isn't some mass hunger for sharper video and better sound on that front. If something is forced down people's throat by not having another choice, it'll succeed by default.
Where is your Master System convertor. hm?Quote:
Originally Posted by soundwave
Uneducated consumers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
Mortal Kombat.Quote:
Originally Posted by marwan
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobalRox
Yeah, but they upscale the picture.
I guess what I don't get is, that they can do this with a videotape, yet they can't do it with a traditional DVD. I guess it needs the additional decoders and new laser to do such things.
I've never tried to argue that HD-DVD/Blu-ray bring the same amount of features over DVD that DVD brought over VHS. But writing them off as simply "being sharper" is ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
You were the one saying how much the "home video community" were talking about how disappointing Blu-ray is, so you obviously take stock in their opinions. I'll tell you with no hesitation that they certainly cared about LD.Quote:
I'm sure some of this was available on Laserdisc too, but no one cared.
You're going to at least double the resolution over DVD with 720p, which is the lower of the two resolutions - with 1080p, you're getting far, far more than that. That isn't simply "sharper video," come on... that's a huge increase in availble detail present. If you're going to watch HD-DVD/Blu-ray on a regular SDTV, then yes, that might be the only noticable thing. But get those formats hooked up to a proper HDTV display, and there's a huge amount of difference. It makes me laugh that you're calling yourself a "HT enthusiast" yet you're writing off how big of a difference in image qualite we're talking about here.Quote:
What do these new formats bring? Sharper video.
Are you really going to tell me the only difference between this image and this image is sharpness?
Even beyond that argument, you're getting a better video codec that can encode video at far higher quality than DVD can. That means less artifacts, less color blending problems, less mess in scenes with high amounts of fast-moving action. And even if initial titles still only use MPEG2, as I said before, they're going to be able to encode at far higher bitrates until they get moved over to H.264.
There will also be smaller differences, like improved subtitling as I mentioned before.
Again, I question your "HT enthusiast" status when you say things like this. I'm NOT an enthusiast, and I'll be replacing my DVDs (or more likely just getting second copies in HD) once I've got an HDTV. I have no doubt in my mind that most "HT enthusiasts" will be rebuying their collections. They did it with LD from VHS, they did it with DVD from LD, and they'll do it again. There is NO LOGIC to the idea that you would spend thousands of dollars on a home theater setup, have a nice HDTV, and then watch DVD on it which look like crap compared to what you could have.Quote:
Is that going to cause the majority of people to rebuild their libraries? Probably not. Like I said, I'm a HT enthusiast, and I won't even be repurchasing my stuff on either of those formats anytime soon.
You're more than welcome to your opinion, and I'm not giving you crap for having an opinion about this. All I'm saying is that I think your conclusions about the situation are wrong, and why I think that.Quote:
Anyway. One of these could end up as the next Laserdisc, but not the next DVD. The only way one would do that is if the tech got so cheap it were built into all DVD players, in my opinion. You're not going to change my opinion on this.
So then, too, the only reason PS2s are selling so well is that people really want a PSOne but they aren't available much anymore, right? That's a silly statement.Quote:
I forgot to add that the only reason most HDTV's are even sold is because there's no other alternative for 32" and above anymore.
Nearly EVERY person I know, or have run across online, that owns an HDTV has said, "DVDs look like crap, even upscaled, and I can't wait for a better format." DVDs aren't being taken off of the market, so HD-DVD and Blu-ray are not being shoved down anybody's throats. They are coming out alongside DVD because there is no solution currently for HD video media to display HD content on our shiny new HDTVs, and (most) people aren't buying a nice HDTV just to watch crap non-HD content on it. That's like buying a PS2 only to play PSOne games on it.Quote:
There isn't some mass hunger for sharper video and better sound on that front. If something is forced down people's throat by not having another choice, it'll succeed by default.
A friend of mine at school just got an HDTV. I've watched all of two DVD movies on it, and they both looked like shit and we both initially thought something was wrong. Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
These new formats definitely exist for a reason. HDTVs are becoming more and more widespread very quickly, and it's not like this problem is going to magically go away. We need at least one of them.
Your PSOne comparison is stupid. It is impossible to buy a new TV larger than 32" that isn't an HDTV. That means that if you want a large TV, it has to be an HDTV. What PSOne and PS2 has to do with it, I have no idea.
You're basing everything you say on whether or not I can see the difference. I can see the difference, and I'm sure others can too. That's not the point. The point is that people, for the most part, are more than happy with DVD right now the same way people are more than happy with CDs. All these two new techs offer to the average Joe is a picture that looks a little better to them, and that's assuming average Joe owns an HDTV, which most don't and won't for quite a while.
Your average doofus that shops at Walmart won't see enough of a reason to upgrade. If either tech eventually takes over DVD, the timeline will be much longer than the speed at which DVD overtook VHS. I guess this only seems obvious to me.
Josh....i love you!
Was it a progressive player hooked up via component? 480p DVD obviously doesn't look as good as HDTV, but still looks pretty good, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grave
dont forget the dvd itself has a lot to do with it too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
the quality of the transfer
the age of the original media
anamorphic widescreen
are all major factors in on screen appearance
Predator 2 looks like shit on dvd via HD
Episode 3 WS looks amazing
thats because episode 3 was shot digitally and takes up pretty much all of those 9 gigs without any bonus stuff (thats on another disc). im sure i can pop predator 2 in dvd shrink and it would have a hard time topping 3 gigs. and its an old ass movie. unless companies take their time with the conversion to disc, the quality really suffers.Quote:
Originally Posted by D_N_G
And you think they'll take the time and effort for the BR/HD-DVD version if they didn't do so with the DVD?
those were an example of my entire post, i wasnt stating a comparisonQuote:
Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne
you pretty much restated my point
the media being used to generate the image has a direct impact on the quality of the presentation
the dude could have watched predator and predator 2 on that hd, and wrote off the quality as shite
i wasn't arguing against you ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by D_N_G
probably not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon McShig
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne
thats why i changed my second line you got me before the edit :)
I think it's going to be awhile before most people even care about HD DVD and Blu Ray. When the majority of people think that by having an HDTV means that everything they watch on it is HD when it isn't, there is a long way to go. I mean if anything, the image these people are watching looks worse than the last TV they had and they think they are watching HD!
The price is still a huge barrier for HD. With the cost of the tv, the new satalite/cable bill, a new movie player. People aren't going to be too happy when they see their movie library isn't what it used to be and they need to rebuy it. Movie sales were nothing on VHS compaired to what they are today with DVD. I only knew 1 person who had something I'd even call a movie library with VHS. Now just about everyone I know has a DVD library. Lots of money has been sunk into DVD.
That said, it's just a matter of time. There hasn't been a major tech shift in television in decades (just like with radio) so it's not like any of this is going to settle anytime soon.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/05/te.../05videos.htmlQuote:
Toshiba Pricing HD-DVD Unit Under $500
By KEN BELSON
Published: January 5, 2006
The fight for control of the market for new high-definition DVD players intensified yesterday when Toshiba, a leader of an industry group backing the HD-DVD format, said it would release a machine in March for less than $500.
New York Times technology reviewer David Pogue is at the 2006 Consumer Electronics Show, posting blog entries and daily video updates.
The announcement, made at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, staked out Toshiba's position as the leader of the low-cost alternative to the Blu-ray format being promoted by a rival group dominated by Sony, Panasonic and others.
Three more Blu-ray supporters, Samsung, Pioneer and Sharp, said at the show that they planned to release machines this year costing $1,000 to $1,800.
Both camps have been working for years to create high-definition DVD's, which have better video and audio quality and more storage space than standard-definition discs. But the two sides have taken different approaches.
The Blu-ray group says its technology offers higher-quality programming and more features than Toshiba's discs. Though the Blu-ray players will be more expensive initially, the companies maintain that consumers will be willing to spend more for groundbreaking technology.
Toshiba, by contrast, has essentially upgraded existing DVD technology for its new discs to cut production costs and bring cheaper machines to market quickly. The company says high-definition DVD players will sell faster if prices are lower.
Jodi Sally, vice president for marketing in the Toshiba group that oversees these DVD products, said the sleek brushed-metal player it would sell for $499 was "a model to accelerate adoption, adding, "It's at a price point consumers expect."
Toshiba will also sell a second machine for $800 with more features. The Blu-ray group companies insist that their machines and discs will come down in price. The Sony PlayStation 3, to be released this spring, will also play Blu-ray discs and could invigorate sales, the companies say.
Everyone saying HD media will fail is just flat out wrong. The players will still play people's old DVDs, they don't have to throw them away or anything. By the end of the decade, HD will be the standard, and people won't want to watch movies on their home theatre that look worse than TV broadcasts.
So then, in your professional opinion, high def DVDs will overtake standard DVDs faster than any medium has ever overtaken another medium?
My point was, people aren't buying HDTVs simply because there aren't regular models in those sizes available anymore. Are some people doing that? Sure. But here was my point. My point is, I'm willing to bet a majority of people going out today would prefer their TV to by an HDTV, because it makes NO SENSE to buy an SDTV at this point. And if you buy an HDTV, it would be silly to expect that you would then do nothing but watch SD content on it, just like it would be silly to go out today, buy a PS2, and only play PSOne games on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
No, I'm not. I'm basing what I say on the factual differences between SDTV and HDTV, the specifications for HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and the fact that everywhere you look, the opinion of HDTV owners is that they want HD content, and are not happy with how DVDs come across on HDTV.Quote:
You're basing everything you say on whether or not I can see the difference.
I can also turn this around, you know - you based your comments on Blu-ray being made to "look silly" on opinions posted on an internet message forum.
You've consistently made statements that make no sense. The difference between SD and HD isn't just "sharpness." HT folk typically ARE the type who go out and re-purchase their libraries in a better format. HDTV owners ARE asking for these formats, the sooner the better - the argument has always, always been in wanting one format instead of two, not in that they're coming too soon.
HDTV owners ARE NOT. How many times must that be said? HD-DVD and Blu-ray are - for now - primarily for HDTV owners. But that number is going to increase, and at some point, a majority of TVs will by HDTV. At that point, one of the two has a very good shot at being the main optical video disc, unless something else comes along to disrupt that.Quote:
The point is that people, for the most part, are more than happy with DVD right now the same way people are more than happy with CDs.
According to sales projections issued yesterday by CEA, HDTV sets will outsell analog sets by 89 percent in 2006, reaching total unit sales of 15.9 million and contributing to over $23 billion in total DTV revenue.Quote:
All these two new techs offer to the average Joe is a picture that looks a little better to them, and that's assuming average Joe owns an HDTV, which most don't and won't for quite a while.
And by that thinking, there's no reason for the PS3 and the Xbox 360, and certainly no reason for them to support hi-def gaming.
Nobody that I see is saying otherwise - you're just saying that we are. DVD is going to be here for a long time, but that doesn't mean that HD-DVD or Blu-ray won't become the next "major" format.Quote:
If either tech eventually takes over DVD, the timeline will be much longer than the speed at which DVD overtook VHS. I guess this only seems obvious to me.
Why does it have to set some kind of record for it not to fail? If broadcast standard is HD, the media will definitely follow over time. It would make absolutely no sense for it not to. The studios themselves will push the new format once a winner in the Blu next gen format wars Ray is decided.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
Well, you said it would be the standard by the end of the decade, and I disagree. That would mean the format would be adopted even faster than DVD was, and that was the quickest media transition in history.
My point is I don't think either technology, as it stands right now, offers enough to supplant DVD as the standard. Shidoshi posted some link to something that said about 16 million tv's would be HD by the end of the year. That really isn't shit compared to how many tv's are actually out there.
For either of these to replace DVD, the majority of TVs (150+ million) need to be HD, and/or these players need to be as cheap as picking up a cyberhome or whatever other crap for $50.
There's nothing to say that blu-ray or whatever might not be completely bypassed as far as movies go either. SACD/DVD-A failed against MP3/AAC/WMA. S-VHS/D-VHS/DVD recorders failed against TiVo-like devices. It's entirely possible that someone like Apple could release a terminal that downloads HD movies off of the internet using h.264 and becomes the new standard for watching movies. There's no telling what could happen.
To me, simply upgrading the video isn't compelling at all, and adding the format wars on top of it, it's completely possible that some other technology will sweep both away like MP3's did with 5.1 channel audio.
uhm...does the Xbox 360 have HDMI or DVI cables? If it doesn't have a digital video output then it'll make a pretty crappy HD-DVD player (with having to convert the video to analog just to send it over component then convert it back to digital again on the tv/projector).
To be fair, I think it's saying there will be around 16 million HDTVs sold next year, not LTD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
And in response to myself some posts back, here's an image that shows a number of the titles that Warner officially announced for HD-DVD but not yet for Blu-ray, on Blu-ray.
Edit: Double nevermind. And here HD-DVD was starting to worry me a bit.
It has a VGA out for playing 720p at a max resolution of 1330 x 748 at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by galvatron
You better.Quote:
Originally Posted by marwan
Didn't know that...might be my connector of choice. Still gotta go D/A then A/D with the signal...Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh
I'm not sure you are going to be able to output a digital signal from HD-DVD via VGA. I could be wrong, though, with the recent changes. The rule was going to be only outputs with HDCP - and I think that was going to be pretty much HDMI, with maybe some DVI - could output the full resolution signal, and all others would be downsampled to 480p I think.
From what I read recently, though, that rule is having trouble going through in some countries - Japan for one - so devices at least for a while will be able to come out that can output the full resolution signal via other means. I'm pretty certain that Component will be one of those given an exception, but I'm not sure about VGA.
*Looks at his PC monitor running at 1600 X 1200*
Ummmm.... I'm pretty sure an analog VGA cable can do higher than 480p. :D
I said HD would be the standard, not Blu Ray or HD-DVD. I certainly believe over the next half decade you'll see the price of HD sets come down and SD manufacturing phased out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlep
Not just Apple - Sony and Microsoft have already announced digital media streaming for their systems, and they're not alone. But that would be an even more radical shift, and I'm not sure it's ready to wholly replace solid state media just yet, though I do believe it's the future.Quote:
There's nothing to say that blu-ray or whatever might not be completely bypassed as far as movies go either. SACD/DVD-A failed against MP3/AAC/WMA. S-VHS/D-VHS/DVD recorders failed against TiVo-like devices. It's entirely possible that someone like Apple could release a terminal that downloads HD movies off of the internet using h.264 and becomes the new standard for watching movies. There's no telling what could happen.
I've gotta believe the HD-DVD attachment will have some kind of additional HDMI out, or they'll have a hard sell to the videophiles who are their initial target. And then they can make another Turbo-booster type 1080p attachment to complete the 360 Voltron...Quote:
Originally Posted by galvatron
http://www.vidgame.net/NEC/NEC/TG_16/tg_systotal.jpg
I'm going to agree with the others, who say that the next generation of video is going to be a slow process. Like previously mentioned, DVD added so many features like better image, no rewinding, subtitles, extra features, smaller size, they didn't wear out like VHS, no fucking tracking, etc.
I honestly think that theres a good chance that Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will just be the next lazer disc. It's been said time and time again, people are not going to rebuy their damn libraries for a new experimental format. Obviously the posters are this board do not count, as you guys represent a more "hardcore" consumer than Joe Schmoe, supported by the fact you're posting on a video game message board.
If one of these formats does indeed catch on, the change will be slow, especially when you're looking at everyone upgrading to HDTVs. Most people are content with their SDTVs and will not upgrade until they need to. Additionally, these people make the majority of consumers, and a few high definition buffs are far from pushing these new HD-DVDs to become the standard.
HDCP also works with analog signals.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the companies want to restrict the resolution output allowed depending on what kind of cable and connection you're using. The reason being is that they don't want you to hijack the HD stream to make pirated copies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheebs