-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Boon to the PS3? Warner Bros goes Blu-Ray
- Thread starter sonycowboy
- Start date
- Status
supermackem
Banned
Snah said:
No it isnt it sounds like some sort of fish i shouldnt go near.:lol
Battersea Power Station
Member
I'm glad that Warner made a choice because I've been wanting to jump into high-def playback for a while, but I find it odd that you guys think this will have any significance in the long run.
The war was over not at the Warner announcement, but when Netflix/LG announced a set-top OnDemand box. Convenience will beat out cutting-edge technology any day of the week.
The war was over not at the Warner announcement, but when Netflix/LG announced a set-top OnDemand box. Convenience will beat out cutting-edge technology any day of the week.
Battersea Power Station
Member
That's true. Sony is trying really hard to corner the AVSforums and GAF markets.Snah said:
Battersea Power Station
Member
You really think this is a "HD war?"Snah said:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6224404.htmlAshhong said:
CrapSandwich
former Navy SEAL
Snah said:
Insofar as it's an emerging technology, it is still quite new. And yes, it will win sooner or later. Whether that happens before or after BRD achieves critical mass is debatable. I'd bet on BRD, but who the fuck am I?
CurlySaysX
Banned
Downloadable content stuff wont win until you are able to back up your video files and able to share/swap movies with friends/relatives and what not.
Ohh.. and the internet bandwidth and capped limits have to not suck as much as it currently does..
IMO.
Ohh.. and the internet bandwidth and capped limits have to not suck as much as it currently does..
IMO.
Spider_Jerusalem
Member
There's a sale of smiley faces or you find funny your own sentences?Snah said:
Battersea Power Station
Member
You're a little bit mistaken about Sony's intentions. Their goal is not to find "people that own HDTVs and want to keep their movies in HD." Their goal is to convert the mass video consuming market into "people that own HDTVs and want to keep their movies in HD."Snah said:
There's a huge difference there. The niche of people you describe is tiny, and it's Sony's job to expand such a market. Unfortunately for them, people rather pay for convenience and service than for physical objects. This is why Netflix boomed in popularity in the first place.
I will concede that when DVDs first took over the market, people loved forming collections. DVDs were just so different from VHS that it made them a joy to own. Over the years, however, buyers turned into renters and stopped amassing collections, outside of the same niche of geeks that you mentioned, of course.
Sony has definitely won the HD optical disk format war, but for BD to surpass DVD in marketshare, it would take an offer of convenience (or price). Within reason, formats or hardware DO NOT win wars and take over marketshare except for the reasons of convenience and price. It's why iPod won; it's why VHS won; it's why CDs took over; it's why McDonald's consistently wins; etc., etc., etc. Quality and technological advancements don't turn consumers.
The next step in convenience and service is Netflix's set-top box. For a set price that doesn't change from month to month, you'll be able to put on a movie or TV show at your will.
Cable companies don't offer the same technology or service. On Demand is messy: I pay for it on top of my cable bill? Am I subscribed to HBO On Demand? Is that separate from Showtime On Demand? How much am I paying if I want both? And each movie not on HBO or Showtime is $3.99 a pop?
It's terrible. If you want a huge package, it will probably run you $50 bucks in addition to whatever else you're paying.
And what you get is what the networks decide you get. I imagine that in time Netflix will want to offer their complete catalog, so that you can choose what you want.
As for the occasional crackling/freezing with On Demand? I used to get it with Cablevision. I don't with FiOS -- don't know what that means. I don't think it's a problem of bandwidth as much as of prioritization. The cable company has to broadcast 500 or so channels in addition to whatever you're getting On Demand. But we'll see. I can't imagine it will get in the way until the service is adopted at LARGE, and by then maybe we'll have some advances in server/bandwidth technology.
Thanks for the rational post. I think this is a highly realistic breakdown.Justin Dailey said:
Eteric Rice
Member
Kittonwy said:Blu-Ray is catchy, like Sugar Ray, like Jimmy Ray, like Sting Ray, who wants to know, who wants to know?
You have bad taste.
CD's, which sell to a younger/more computer literate crowd than movies do, outsold digi-tracks in 2007 by a margin of 6 to 1 despite:
1. Having MILLIONS OF CUSTOMERS who are forced to use iTunes every day
2. Having VERY LOW BARRIERS to entry to download pay music (cheap PC, credit card, and at least dial-up internet).
Then really, what chance do HD movies downloads have against DVD's/Blu-Rays in the next few years? The barriers to entry are way higher (1. You need a set top box or a PC hooked up to your entertainment system; 2. You need GOOD broadband internet) and there is no precedent...no momentum.
My predictions (pretty uniformed I admit):
1. Pirates on Blu-Ray being outsold on DVD by a factor of 45 to 1 in the first week makes me think that Blu-Ray sales will not pass DVD sales until at least 2012 or later.
2. Blu-Ray sales will be significant by mid to late 2010 (maybe half of DVD sales for simultaneous releases).
3. Right around the time Blu-Ray sales actually pass DVD sales, both formats will being to become irrelevant as digi-distro finally starts to hit full stride.
In other words, Blu-Ray will do alright for the next 4 - 6 years and will make everyone some money, but it will EVENTUALLY get passed by the inevitable streaming solution.
1. Having MILLIONS OF CUSTOMERS who are forced to use iTunes every day
2. Having VERY LOW BARRIERS to entry to download pay music (cheap PC, credit card, and at least dial-up internet).
Then really, what chance do HD movies downloads have against DVD's/Blu-Rays in the next few years? The barriers to entry are way higher (1. You need a set top box or a PC hooked up to your entertainment system; 2. You need GOOD broadband internet) and there is no precedent...no momentum.
My predictions (pretty uniformed I admit):
1. Pirates on Blu-Ray being outsold on DVD by a factor of 45 to 1 in the first week makes me think that Blu-Ray sales will not pass DVD sales until at least 2012 or later.
2. Blu-Ray sales will be significant by mid to late 2010 (maybe half of DVD sales for simultaneous releases).
3. Right around the time Blu-Ray sales actually pass DVD sales, both formats will being to become irrelevant as digi-distro finally starts to hit full stride.
In other words, Blu-Ray will do alright for the next 4 - 6 years and will make everyone some money, but it will EVENTUALLY get passed by the inevitable streaming solution.
Eteric Rice
Member
xaosslug said:
I don't really get it personally. I mean, the console wars I can see because some people grew up with the companies.
But the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray thing is weird...
Eteric Rice
Member
lupinko said:
I'm willing to bet that majority of the HD freaks at GAF post on AVS.
SolidSnakex
Member
Eteric Rice said:
What's weird about it? People took sides because they want 1 format to win because until that happens many of the big movie releases aren't going to happen. Now that its out the way, BR sales can increase to the point that the big releases like LoTR and Star Wars ect. start releasing.
Battersea Power Station
Member
Maybe it's a call to all parties to start looking at debates rationally. Maybe half of the people labeled as fanboys in console wars were not actually. Maybe some people labeled as pro-HD-DVD or anti-Sony (as I probably will be after my last few posts) are not really. Occam's razor and all that.Eteric Rice said:
Personally, a change to a different kind of physical medium is ridiculous. In the long run, renting is a better financial decision. If I buy 300 on Blu Ray or on whatever it's available in HD because it looks OMG SO AWESOME, I'm still only going to watch it twice. It's an average movie at best and I don't care about it that much. Note that I'm not picking on 300 but used it as an example of my buying/viewing habits.
On the occasion that I want to watch a movie more than 3 or 4 times, it will still come out cheaper to rent it each time as part of my Netflix or Blockbuster online queue than to buy it.
I think most consumers' habits are not too different, even if their tastes in movies are.
The only bad thing about renting is the hassle of juggling, receiving, and returning disks. Once we can get rid of that, it will be perfect FOR ME.
I don't hope to convince anyone of anything than that we can have a rational discussion without calling people anti- this or pro- that.
Eteric Rice
Member
Battersea Power Station said:
I'm the same. Hell, I hardly watch TV anymore. Most companies put their episodes online, so why bother?
Metal Messiah
Member
deepbrown said:
Where's my Harry Potter on HD-DVD???
FrozenCell
Member
what an adorable childMetal Messiah said:
Eteric Rice
Member
So whats the cheapest BR play out right now?
Eteric Rice
Member
xaosslug said:the mythical 20gig PS3.
I don't want a PS3, though.
Okay, when can I expect cheap stand alone BR players?
SealSqueal
Member
Snah said:
This post is spot on. It boggles my mind how people thought H-D-D-V-D was ever more marketable than "blu-ray". Having the suffix DVD in the name didn't mean jack.
SealSqueal
Member
^ And you know it will get consistent updates for the life of the machine...
Eteric Rice
Member
Defuser said:
Nah, my pride and disdain for Sony prevents me from doing so.
Good news is that there's already a standalone player for $299. A few more months and it'll probably go down more.
Philanthropist
Banned
supermackem said:
Like it or not, there are games that take advantage of Blu-ray, and some could have benefited greatly from an HD format and they didn't because of DVD constraints ;-)
Eteric Rice said:I don't want a PS3, though.
Okay, when can I expect cheap stand alone BR players?
I think buying a stand alone player is pretty risky. I'm not too much into this BD stuff but it is my understanding that future Profile "upgrades" (like the recent 1.1 which "added" PiP) might force you to buy a brand new player in order to use the added funcionalities on the disc.
With PS3, since almost everything BD-related is done vis software + Cell, firmware updates will keep the PS3 always up to date. So when Profile 2.0 movies will be around (Internet Connectivity Support) the PS3 will be made compatible with the Profile 2.0 functionalities via FW upgrade.
I don't think all the BD players out there work this way. But then again I'm not expert so correct me if I'm wrong.
Eteric Rice
Member
TTP said:
I'm pretty sure you'd be able to do firmware updates via USB.
At least TVs do that now adays. My Samsung HDTV did that.
Yeah the PS3 is definitely the best BR player out there. Not only for the added "extras" of being a games console, and the added media functionality that comes with a built in HDD for storing divx video and mp3s, but also because it's one of the fastest loading BluRay players.
Really no reason to get a standalone when any model PS3 outperforms for the same or lower price and also provides a lot more functionality.
Really no reason to get a standalone when any model PS3 outperforms for the same or lower price and also provides a lot more functionality.
Eteric Rice
Member
patsu said:What did Sony wrong you ? Just curious
I just didn't like their attitude much early on is all.
Though I suppose they have been put in their place, but still.
supermackem
Banned
Eteric Rice said:
Some players eimply wont do bd java stuff or internet interactive stuff as they have no ethernet port and simply wont ever support bdj.
Battersea Power Station said:
I definitely can see your point, i bet you are a light packer, on vacations too am I right? I would love a box that allowed be to D/L from a giant catalog of movies for a set fee a month(like Netflix, but without the discs coming and going) BUT I also want a movie that I can play at ANY time regardless if my IP is down.Maybe a combo Netflix/Tivo box, how does THAT sound? One big issue though with Hi Def D/L's is that due to the weak pipes and storage space we currently have, Optical media most likely will have better/less compressed Video and Audio
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Eteric Rice said:
Fanboy *shrugs*
The effect on PS3 sales, the relevance of HD in the mass market, the superior DD streaming methods, etc.
None of that is relevant, people. What is important is that between the two HD formats, one of them had to go. For the people who do want a physical medium for high definition movies, and these are the only people who any of this should concern, it would be nothing but good news if they were able to get every new release as they come out in HD without having to worry about format. Let's put aside "which side" for now; for both the consumers and the studios, nothing but good could come out of having one standard format.
This is not about whether or not Blu-Ray is going to overtake DVDs as the standard medium, or whether Netflix's new set top box will be the future of home entertainment. It's about the medium at hand finally getting unified, which can only be a good thing. Consumers previously unable commit to a side can finally jump in. Studios previously unable to commit to a side can finally jump in. It doesn't matter if it doesn't become the home entertainment distribution standard, all that matters is that it will get bigger than would be with a format war.
It's understandable that early HD-DVD adopters may feel bad about their "wasted investment," but...
1) Your HD-DVDs and players still work, so you didn't exactly waste your money.
2) You clearly are a fan of HD content, and in the long run a clear-cut format will result in a larger consumer base and as a result a lot more releases in HD. A small loss for a bigger win in the long run.
None of that is relevant, people. What is important is that between the two HD formats, one of them had to go. For the people who do want a physical medium for high definition movies, and these are the only people who any of this should concern, it would be nothing but good news if they were able to get every new release as they come out in HD without having to worry about format. Let's put aside "which side" for now; for both the consumers and the studios, nothing but good could come out of having one standard format.
This is not about whether or not Blu-Ray is going to overtake DVDs as the standard medium, or whether Netflix's new set top box will be the future of home entertainment. It's about the medium at hand finally getting unified, which can only be a good thing. Consumers previously unable commit to a side can finally jump in. Studios previously unable to commit to a side can finally jump in. It doesn't matter if it doesn't become the home entertainment distribution standard, all that matters is that it will get bigger than would be with a format war.
It's understandable that early HD-DVD adopters may feel bad about their "wasted investment," but...
1) Your HD-DVDs and players still work, so you didn't exactly waste your money.
2) You clearly are a fan of HD content, and in the long run a clear-cut format will result in a larger consumer base and as a result a lot more releases in HD. A small loss for a bigger win in the long run.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll