Blue-Ray or HD DVD

[tomandshell]

I know what you are saying, and for myself, I am in complete agreement. But I still don't think even the target audience is as accepting of multiple formats as we are. Perusing the "discussions" over at avsforum.com, I see an overwhelming majority of posters who are firmly in one camp or the other, with no support or even tolerance of the other. And these are the people who should be the target audience, at least for now.

Also, while I think winning over the home theater enthusiast segment of the market would be a big win for now, I don't think any of the studios or hardware manufacturers will be happy with that level of market penetration long term. Their goal has to be the replacement of DVD, or else they will be bleeding red ink (from their HD divisions) for a long time to come.

I wonder how many of them are like George Lucas, who believes that downloading is the way of the future. I think that compared to the old days when a VHS player was your only option, the multiple methods of watching a movie these days--even in high def--means that HD discs are going to have a hard time becoming the standard. Looks at CDs--young people today don't buy them, they just download the songs they want. I can conceive of the home video industry going that way, even though that's not what I personally want to see happen.

 

[RoboDad]

If Sony had a monopoly, then we would all be paying $45-50 MSRP for all new releases.

I'm not sure I follow here. Blu-ray is not synonymous with Sony. Regardless of which format wins (if either ever does), there isn't going to be a single manufacturer or studio that has any kind of monopoly. Sony can't dictate Warner prices, any more than Toshiba can. And whether it is on Blu-ray or HD DVD, if Sony wants to charge that much for their properties, they can certainly try (and fail).

 

[bagelsncheesey]

I like that my pie chart brought all these fuzzy feelings from everybody back to life!

 

[darthviper107]

Personally, I think it's a different situation for movies than it is for video games or music.

For instance music, when a title is announced I can be sure that in whatever format it is released I will be able to play it. Whether online or on CD it's the studio's obligation to make it available for me to buy and listen to.

Video games however are quite different, we all know that there are different consoles and different games playable by each, it's been part of society since video games were first created, we don't require that a game should be on a particular system just because we want to play it (although a lot of whiners would say so) we mostly accept what games are available for each system.

For movies it's more like the situation with Music. They need to make it in a format that I can use, it's the studio's obligation to make it available for me to buy. Movies are quick entertainment so I shouldn't have to get confused over which disc format they're in (especially since both formats are very similar).

So personally, I'd really think that there should be only one, but I'm pretty sure that the advantages each format has over the other will mean that both formats survive. At least until Ultra High Definition DVD's.

 

[bagelsncheesey]

or until we are actually IN the movie haha.

 

[Radagaster]

I'm not sure I follow here. Blu-ray is not synonymous with Sony. Regardless of which format wins (if either ever does), there isn't going to be a single manufacturer or studio that has any kind of monopoly. Sony can't dictate Warner prices, any more than Toshiba can. And whether it is on Blu-ray or HD DVD, if Sony wants to charge that much for their properties, they can certainly try (and fail).

Even if Sony doesn't dictate the media prices, the word Blu-Ray is hard to divorce from Sony, just as HD-DVD is hard to divorce from Toshiba. I see the makeup of the studios as a makeshift camp, with Sony and Toshiba in the center. I'll face it: the top selling and probably safest bet to buy for a player is one of those brands. PS3 for the Blu-Ray side, and any of Toshiba's HD players. Sony still has some say over how much to charge to manufacture the BR media, in case they add some feature to it. Ditto with Toshiba. I liken it to Microsoft having the OS platform, even though they don't dictate the prices of the applications that run on them. They own the IP.

 

[Reinhardt]

you know, I talked to two people recently who thought HD DVD was high def, and bluray was not (because it didn't say HD)



one of the issues, that has been mentioned above is that everyone can watch stuff in HD with satellite and cable now. people who know nothing about HD can buy an HD TV for next to nothing, and watch football or any movie in HD. these are the same people that only think bigger is better. If it's these people that are in the majority (and are going to determine who wins), the only way I see it that one format will win is purely based on price.

i hope it's not them that decide though....

 

[Darth Loki]

Unfortunately, there are a lot more stupid people than intelligent people.

 

[Memnoch]

Realistically in a marketplace its price that wins out. Right now HD is offering a better price than most Blu Ray players. Also HD is relatively new when it comes to home electronics. Most consumers have no idea of the advantages or disadvantages of a format. In reality they dont care, money talks. I also heard thats the reason the PS3 is so much, just the Blu Ray player is a nice chunk of the machine. Is Sony still taking a hit on each unit they produce? (not bashing, just simply curious)

 

[bagelsncheesey]

Blu-ray STANDALONE players outselling HD DVD players?

We'll know soon enough.

 

[Memnoch]

The question still stands though, is Sony producing the PS3 at a loss still?

 

[bagelsncheesey]

Not sure.

 

[Memnoch]

Well see thats the thing, PS3's are super expensive and last I read Sony was selling the console cheap and hoping to make money back on the games which I dont think is happening. I'd wager to say that XBox 360 games are outselling PS3s which means for every PS3 sold Sony, and by some extension Blu Ray is taking a hit.

PS Not trying to stir the pot, just bad buisness practice from Sony to go out on a limb selling their system at a loss when they may not be making back money in game sales to justify the price.

 

[bagelsncheesey]

Well see thats the thing, PS3's are super expensive and last I read Sony was selling the console cheap and hoping to make money back on the games which I dont think is happening. I'd wager to say that XBox 360 games are outselling PS3s which means for every PS3 sold Sony, and by some extension Blu Ray is taking a hit.

PS Not trying to stir the pot, just bad buisness practice from Sony to go out on a limb selling their system at a loss when they may not be making back money in game sales to justify the price.

Hey it's cool man, i'm really not a Blu-ray or Sony fanboy (which is why I have a Samsung tv and worship my 360). I just stick up for Blu because I invested $600 of my hard earned cash into a PS3, so i'd like it to stick around

 

[Memnoch]

I can totally understand that. Like I said though I think Sony thought they had an XBox killer and after numerous delays and issues with the Blu Ray internal player they had their hands tied and HAD to sell the system at a loss which really sucks for them. I think should Disney decide to jump ship they would be pretty much SOL but as long as they have Disney (and in turn all their subsidiaries Im sure) they will be just as strong as HD.

 

[El Roranous]

I can totally understand that. Like I said though I think Sony thought they had an XBox killer and after numerous delays and issues with the Blu Ray internal player they had their hands tied and HAD to sell the system at a loss which really sucks for them. I think should Disney decide to jump ship they would be pretty much SOL but as long as they have Disney (and in turn all their subsidiaries Im sure) they will be just as strong as HD.

I believe that most to all systems are sold at a loss at the beginning. I know for a fact that both the xbox and the xbox 360 were sold at a loss. The 360 might even still be selling at a loss.

The way these companies make their money is through the games and in Microsoft's case through the ripoff items they sell for outrageous prices on live. I feel like I am at a Disney themepark thirsty as hell looking at that precious $6 bottle of water that I just can't seem to purchase because I won't give in.

 

[Memnoch]

Well I would say that XBox has the stronger titles at moment with PS3 lagging. Personally the only reason I would buy a PS3 is for Final Fantasy and even then the games have been lack luster of late. XBox has Bioshock and Halo as their headliners right now.

 

[bagelsncheesey]

Personally the only reason I would buy a PS3 is for Final Fantasy and even then the games have been lack luster of late.

Don't forget about MGS4! Well, it's on my list anyway

 

[El Roranous]

Honestly, and this is sad when said out loud but I bought a PS3 mainly to play God of War 2 (PS2 game) and to watch Blu Ray movies. Sony failed with the PSP and in my opinion they aren't doing too hot with the PS3 either.

 

[Darth Loki]

Honestly, and this is sad when said out loud but I bought a PS3 mainly to play God of War 2 (PS2 game) and to watch Blu Ray movies. Sony failed with the PSP and in my opinion they aren't doing to hot with the PS3 either.

I just bought a PS3 primarily for the BR player. I didn't pay anywhere near $500 though so I feel good about that but there isn't one game that I'm dying to own on that system.