Support NeoGAF

[Ignatz Mouse]

Why would people that already own one or both of the players stop buying discs for their collection on that format?

Because 10 years from now they don't want a stack of discs for a format nobody makes players for anymore?

I don't know about you, but I have CDs from 20+ years ago. If I had to keep something like an old game console hooked up to play them I'd be annoyed. Now, 10 years from now HD players might by default support both formats-- or, they might not.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Here's another argument. Once BD failed at getting to the market on time, they should have folded for the better of the future of High-def Disc. We could have had one format if those idiots hadn't created the format war.

Is this what I believe? Not exactly. But it's as valid of a crybaby whine as some of the others in this thread.

 

[HyperionX]

i wouldn't agree. i don't mean to downplay the significance of this announcement -- i think it's huge -- but really it's just made blu ray less viable. the only way either format was going to emerge from this morass was by uniting all the major studios. blu ray had a shot. and now it doesn't -- not in the foreseeable future.

Well said. This was an announcement that only hurt the who concept of HD media, and somebody was willing to lose money in order to accomplish that. Moneyhats are suspected all around. While the affect is probably not as big as you think (Blu-ray will still blow away HD-DVD in sales for the foreseeable future), it still makes the future less bright.

 

[Snah]

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sales are shit. 60% of shit is just larger shit. No studio with a brain is making any decision based on current sales.

Blu-Ray sales are already exceeding DVD sales when you compare them relative to their introduction to the market.

Paramount is definitely not losing out here, If anything they are making out like bandits. They get a $150 million dollar moneyhat to hop on the HD DVD wagon to try and help them win the war. If it doesn't happen after a certain amount of time they can switch to Blu-Ray. I mean it's not like it's a lifetime exclusivity agreement or their movies wont sell on Blu-Ray in a year or two.

This is apparently a multi-year exclusivity deal...not just 1 or 2 years...

 

[Bebpo]

People saying that digital downloads are going to trump disc based media are a little out of touch I think. Most of us are probably quite tech savvy, the general market is not. Additionally, by the time networks get fast enough to make DD seamless (no 2 hour downloads / large compression), HDM will be more reasonably priced.

I don't really get your posts. You don't believe digital will take over, yet there's no way Blu-ray will go away against HD-DVD (at HD-DVDs best there will be a 50/50 market for the next 5-10 years), so if you don't want HD-DVD to go away and only a single format to remain for HD discs, what do you want to happen?

Are a lot of people here suggesting it'd be awesome to have to own 2 movie "systems" for the entire 1080 disc-based film generation and have films split across each like gaming consoles? What happens when in the next generation after 1080, some 3rd party says "hey, we got 3 groups in videogames, and HD movies did fine with 2, let's jump in!" and then we have to buy 3 players and have a split film collection across three?


If the format war never dies, it'll set a terrible precedent.

 

[DarkJediKnight]

Yah, I think FOX was caught with their pants down. paramount's announcement was a lot more relevant than FOX promised support.

Here's my reaction today:

Paramount: HOLY FUCKING SHIT!

Fox: meh.

This is apparently a multi-year exclusivity deal...not just 1 or 2 years...

It's until Dec 2008. Multi-year includes 2007. It's press release talk.

 

[thaivo]

No one is 'excited' about this press released but HD-DVD enthusiasts. For the vast majority, this news sucks. I'm not saying it's not a slight blow, but I don't think it's going to matter AT ALL in terms of what decides this format war.

Being "excited" does not = being happy about things. Also, it is interesting that you have spent so much time arguing the point, and writing extended responses to this thing that doesn't "matter AT ALL."

The only one losing out is Paramount, and like I said, I hope those money hats offset potential sales losses.

Well, most HDM sells pretty low numbers at the present time. Of course big sellers like 300 sold around 150,000 copies. That probably represents around $3,000,000 in profits. So the incentives are quite significant considering the present volume that even big titles sell for.

Like I said, having such huge titles being HD-DVD exclusive is nothing to snuff at. Most people do not know that Warner will supposedly bring those titles over. They only know what they see on the shelves. And that's HD-DVD having Batman and Blu-Ray not having it.

I see where you are coming from, and I agree that the titles have not come out, but what you're saying is that there is little difference between the stance of the likes of Universal and Paramount vs. Warner. I'd like your perception to be the reality, because then HD-DVD would basically have the lion share of the content that I like.

I'd wager that Batman Begins on Blu-Ray would outsell Transformers on HD-DVD.

Well considering the installed base, you might be right... but what you were saying was that Transformers being an exclusive means less than Transformers. Therefore the comparison should be Transformers sales on BD vs. Batman Begins on BD.... There is little doubt that Transformers would win.

 

[VictimOfGrief]

Well, its specifications (HDDVD vs Blu-ray) is inferior. Sure, HDi is a long way ahead of BD-J. But HDi is not part of the HDDVD medium. As a medium, HDDVD is inferior spec wise to Blu-ray.

In capacity sure. I swear though a while ago though I was reading that Toshiba had found a way to double the capacity to around 60-70GB. Could be smoking the herb but beyond that, the difference in quality from say.... 300 on Blu-ray and HD DVD is minimal on the same TV, same 5.1 sound system - PS3 and a 360 w/ the HD DVD drive both outputing @ 1080p over HDMI.

Only reason why I chuckle at the fact that HD DVD gets "dissed" due to drive space is picture/sound/feature wise.... it's doing more for less. Seems like the arguement could be disc size "matters" but again, no one has said anything about BR's being used to their full capacity and/or leaving empty space on the disc. Sure it might have a higher bit rate sampling and be uncompressed and take up an extra 10GB of space, but at the end of the day, if the consumer (such as myself) can't tell the difference.... then why even make that a staple of Blu-ray's ability to "outperform" HD DVD?

If HD DVD's are using the full 30GB and Blu-Rays are using say... 35-45GB of space, and the normal "joe" consumer buys an off the shelf player, or a PS3/360 w/ HD DVD drive, they're not going to care about disc space, they're going to care if it looks and sounds fuck awesome.

 

[Piper Az]

A 360 HD-DVD add-on with a pack-in Transformers would be a nice deal for the holidays

 

[DarkJediKnight]

If anything, this means that if Blu-ray wants to win, they need to get their ass in gear. No more teasing about their titles, etc..

They need big guns like Aliens, Bond, X-Men out.

And try to get Lucas to release Star Wars.

 

[HyperionX]

Paramount is definitely not losing out here, If anything they are making out like bandits. They get a $150 million dollar moneyhat to hop on the HD DVD wagon to try and help them win the war. If it doesn't happen after a certain amount of time they can switch to Blu-Ray. I mean it's not like it's a lifetime exclusivity agreement or their movies wont sell on Blu-Ray in a year or two.

That's how it will end up, hopefully, but it makes a mess in the meanwhile, and hurting the industry as a whole (including the consumer). And not to mention who's paying that money? Will they pay it again to delay the conclusion of the format war again? It definitely smells like a Microsoft underhanded tactic.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Blu-Ray sales are already exceeding DVD sales when you compare them relative to their introduction to the market.

2007 is not 1997. Things change. Expectations change. DVD sell-through is bigger than VHS sell-through was then, making high-def disc relatively smaller, not to mention stuff like VoD that wasn't even on the scene then. The whole market is different.

 

[Snah]

It's until Dec 2008. Multi-year includes 2007. It's press release talk.

Thanks for the clarification. That's good news.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Because 10 years from now they don't want a stack of discs for a format nobody makes players for anymore?

I don't know about you, but I have CDs from 20+ years ago. If I had to keep something like an old game console hooked up to play them I'd be annoyed. Now, 10 years from now HD players might by default support both formats-- or, they might not.

Interesting you say that.

My brother works at JB Hifi (a major Australian retailer), and has spoken with reps from companies invloved in the format war and pretty much ALL of them (including a Pioneer rep) say we WILL have 2 formats.

They say combo players will become the norm and it wont matter then.

When you think about it, if ALL companies involved make combo players, the whole war means jack shit, and it will simply come down to buying the movie you want to buy. The difference? One movie will have a blue cover, the other a red one.

 

[thaivo]

If the format war never dies, it'll set a terrible precedent.

My point is that most people don't know how to program their VCR's, much less set up a HTPC or home server for movies, and at present download speeds do not make watching HD films very convenient. Simple as that.

My stance on the HDM war? I like HD-DVD, would like it to succeed. Simple as that.

 

[VictimOfGrief]

Interesting you say that.

My brother works at JB Hifi (a major Australian retailer), and has spoken with reps from companies invloved in the format war and pretty much ALL of them (including a Pioneer rep) say we WILL have 2 formats.

They say combo players will become the norm and it wont matter then.

When you think about it, if ALL companies involved make combo players, the whole war means jack shit, and it will simply come down to buying the movie you want to buy. The difference? One movie will have a blue cover, the other a red one.

I'm all for combo players. Blame Sony. Blame Toshiba. Blame the industry for not getting their shit together fast enough.

If there was a Hybrid Blu-Ray/HD DVD player on the market for sub $300 bucks, this thread would not exist. Unfortunately, the companies are taking their sweet f'ning time in pushing the product.

 

[DCharlie]

Hot Fuzz superiority in what? Because it has a 30 GB disc when both pirates films have 50 GBs and have bit rates that exceed HD-DVDs potential?

.... do you actually watch the films or just stare at the spec rating of the films ?
.... can you perceive the extra bitrate so easily?

*sigh* anyways...

My BIG issue with all this is i`m firmly in the BR camp because i have my PS3 (an all in one unit) hooked up to my receiver via HDMI that then gives me lovely 5.1/7.1 through my set up.

BUT!

As much as i love BR and the way it looks etc (though i`ve seen HDDVD on a good set up and it certainly looks very nice too) the big issue is the following films are on HD-DVD and i want them :

Children of Men
Batman Begins
The Matrix Trilogy
Hot Fuzz
Shawn of the Dead
V for Vendetta
... plus a few more.

So yeah, i hate the format split with a passion

 

[Doctor_No]

Yah, I think FOX was caught with their pants down. paramount's announcement was a lot more relevant than FOX promised support.

I think that we can all agree that Fox up to this point was a joke. Overpriced no-releases; based off of ridiculous DRM issues.

 

[Snah]

2007 is not 1997. Things change. Expectations change. DVD sell-through is bigger than VHS sell-through was then, making high-def disc relatively smaller, not to mention stuff like VoD that wasn't even on the scene then. The whole market is different.

You're right - 2007 is not 1997. Last I checked, in 1997 the TV market could significantly benefit from DVD without any changes to their television sets.

In 2007, HDTV adoption still isn't quite as widespread as it could be to stimulate as much interest in HD media.

Given these differences, Blu-Rays sales are promising. The funny thing is you make it sound like these new formats are supposed to absolutely dominate right out of the gate, and that's simply not true. It'll take a few years.

 

[plagiarize]

Yes, it is. That's why DVD is inferior to HD-DVD and Blu-Ray and why we even have these new formats to begin with.

A 20 GB gap is not negligible.



No one is 'excited' about this press released but HD-DVD enthusiasts. For the vast majority, this news sucks. I'm not saying it's not a slight blow, but I don't think it's going to matter AT ALL in terms of what decides this format war.

The only one losing out is Paramount, and like I said, I hope those money hats offset potential sales losses.



Promising and delivering are two different things. Warner has only been "neutral" in press releases. They've yet to deliver on any of their promises, and frankly, it's been almost a year. It's getting ridiculous. Like I said, having such huge titles being HD-DVD exclusive is nothing to snuff at. Most people do not know that Warner will supposedly bring those titles over. They only know what they see on the shelves. And that's HD-DVD having Batman and Blu-Ray not having it.



I'd wager that Batman Begins on Blu-Ray would outsell Transformers on HD-DVD.

Batman Begins, while not a new release, is still a huge title and as a Blu-Ray supporter it's one that I'm waiting on.



I do, as do most blu-ray owners.

your first post was fine.

but when you started inferring that picture quality and sound quality was worse on hd-dvd was when you crossed the line. no one neutral would agree with you.

30 gigabytes is more than enough for a film. how come some hd-dvds have equal sound and picture quality to 50 gigabyte blu-rays according to neutral review sites? how come most blu-rays are 25 gigabyte?

could blu-ray fit more hours of an hdtv show on a disc? yes. but that doesn't change the fact that 30 gigabytes is more than enough for a 1080p movie with lossless sound at the quality it was filmed at.

and then you started talking about bitrates like you had any idea what the hell you were talking about. the bit rate of losslessly compressed audio on the disc is much more than the bit rate of dolby true hd soundtracks yes... but they are mathematically identical in the end.

 

[djkimothy]

In capacity sure. I swear though a while ago though I was reading that Toshiba had found a way to double the capacity to around 60-70GB. Could be smoking the herb but beyond that, the difference in quality from say.... 300 on Blu-ray and HD DVD is minimal on the same TV, same 5.1 sound system - PS3 and a 360 w/ the HD DVD drive both outputing @ 1080p over HDMI.

Only reason why I chuckle at the fact that HD DVD gets "dissed" due to drive space is picture/sound/feature wise.... it's doing more for less. Seems like the arguement could be disc size "matters" but again, no one has said anything about BR's being used to their full capacity and/or leaving empty space on the disc. Sure it might have a higher bit rate sampling and be uncompressed and take up an extra 10GB of space, but at the end of the day, if the consumer (such as myself) can't tell the difference.... then why even make that a staple of Blu-ray's ability to "outperform" HD DVD?

If HD DVD's are using the full 30GB and Blu-Rays are using say... 35-45GB of space, and the normal "joe" consumer buys an off the shelf player, or a PS3/360 w/ HD DVD drive, they're not going to care about disc space, they're going to care if it looks and sounds fuck awesome.

Well, the capacity advantage extends to the computer backup space. I rather like the idea of burning single layer 25 GB discs instead of 15 GB single layer HDDVD discs.

Again, I'm not saying HDDVD movies are inferior (the opposite is true actually), but spec wise, Blu-ray has it beat, which makes it more of a flexible medium.

I think that we can all agree that Fox up to this point was a joke. Overpriced no-releases; based off of ridiculous DRM issues.

I agree. They need to get their act together. Disney so far has done a fantastic job promoting the format and I think is head and shoulders the best studio so far in terms of high def releases.

 

[Mifune]

Because 10 years from now they don't want a stack of discs for a format nobody makes players for anymore?

I don't know about you, but I have CDs from 20+ years ago. If I had to keep something like an old game console hooked up to play them I'd be annoyed. Now, 10 years from now HD players might by default support both formats-- or, they might not.

Yeah, I have a stack of laserdiscs in my closet that agree with you completely.

I'm definitely wary about buying a bunch of Bluray movies. It's gonna be all rentals for me from here on out.

 

[XMonkey]

In capacity sure. I swear though a while ago though I was reading that Toshiba had found a way to double the capacity to around 60-70GB. Could be smoking the herb but beyond that, the difference in quality from say.... 300 on Blu-ray and HD DVD is minimal on the same TV, same 5.1 sound system - PS3 and a 360 w/ the HD DVD drive both outputing @ 1080p over HDMI.[/quote[

Only reason why I chuckle at the fact that HD DVD gets "dissed" due to drive space is picture/sound/feature wise.... it's doing more for less. Seems like the arguement could be disc size "matters" but again, no one has said anything about BR's being used to their full capacity and/or leaving empty space on the disc. Sure it might have a higher bit rate sampling and be uncompressed and take up an extra 10GB of space, but at the end of the day, if the consumer (such as myself) can't tell the difference.... then why even make that a staple of Blu-ray's ability to "outperform" HD DVD?

If you're thinking of the 51GB triple-layer discs, well they're as good as vaporware. I believe the concensus was that it would require new hardware and older players couldn't simply upgrade firmware to play them.

The one area I can see 30GB being too small is in the long epic movies like LoTR. You could run into problems with an insufficient bitrate + appropriate lossless audio. This all remains to be seen of course, but I know LoTR has been a concern for many people on HD-DVD.

 

[mashoutposse]

Paramount/Dreamworks did the right thing for them. There was no way that the lost BR sales will come close to the $150 million cash payment plus other considerations, so they took the money and ran. The market will still decide a winner and they can still hop on that train when this deal expires. I think it's a no-brainer.

 

[plagiarize]

If you're thinking of the 51GB triple-layer discs, well they're as good as vaporware. I believe the concensus was that it would require new hardware and older players couldn't simply upgrade firmware to play them.

The one area I can see 30GB being too small is in the long epic movies like LoTR. You could run into problems with an insufficient bitrate + appropriate lossless audio. This all remains to be seen of course, but I know LoTR has been a concern for many people on HD-DVD.

the extended versions might have to be split as they were on DVD, but the regular versions will fit just fine on an HD-DVD i'm sure.

 

[XMonkey]

Paramount/Dreamworks did the right thing for them. There was no way that the lost BR sales will come close to the $150 million cash payment plus other considerations, so they took the money and ran. The market will still decide a winner and they can still hop on that train when this deal expires. I think it's a no-brainer.

The market deciding a winner is no longer clear anymore (and certainly not happening any time soon) thanks to Paramount.

 

[Snah]

your first post was fine.

but when you started inferring that picture quality and sound quality was worse on hd-dvd was when you crossed the line. no one neutral would agree with you.

30 gigabytes is more than enough for a film. how come some hd-dvds have equal sound and picture quality to 50 gigabyte blu-rays according to neutral review sites? how come most blu-rays are 25 gigabyte?

could blu-ray fit more hours of an hdtv show on a disc? yes. but that doesn't change the fact that 30 gigabytes is more than enough for a 1080p movie with lossless sound at the quality it was filmed at.

and then you started talking about bitrates like you had any idea what the hell you were talking about. the bit rate of losslessly compressed audio on the disc is much more than the bit rate of dolby true hd soundtracks yes... but they are mathematically identical in the end.

Look, the facts are there: The bit rate is higher for Blu-Ray releases that take advantage of this capability such as Pirates. This probably doesn't amount to significant differences in quality, but there is a difference. 30 GB may be more than enough for a film, but not for films with lots of extras and with high bit rates. Like I said, Pirates already includes 1 50 GB disc and 1 25 GB disc. They're using that space. For those features, you'd have to cut back considerably on either the quality or the content of the HD-DVD disc.

That's a clear advantage.

I'm definitely wary about buying a bunch of Bluray movies. It's gonna be all rentals for me from here on out.

Why?

Are you ever going to get rid of your PS3?

The fact that the PS3 has blu-ray being standard makes the argument "well, even though I own a PS3, I'm going to wait" make NO SENSE.

 

[djkimothy]

the extended versions might have to be split as they were on DVD, but the regular versions will fit just fine on an HD-DVD i'm sure.

I hope they don't split the blu-ray release. :/

 

[plagiarize]

The market deciding a winner is no longer clear anymore (and certainly not happening any time soon) thanks to Paramount.

why is Paramount any more to blame for not letting the market decide a winner than MGM, Universal, Disney, Fox or any other studio exclusively supporting one format over the other? oh wait. they aren't.

 

[HyperionX]

your first post was fine.

but when you started inferring that picture quality and sound quality was worse on hd-dvd was when you crossed the line. no one neutral would agree with you.

Which is BS. Blu-ray has consistently taken a lead on sound and video quality in later releases. This is entirely due to the larger disk size (50GB vs 30GB) and the extra bandwidth of Blu-ray (54 Mbps vs. 36 Mbps).

30 gigabytes is more than enough for a film. how come some hd-dvds have equal sound and picture quality to 50 gigabyte blu-rays according to neutral review sites? how come most blu-rays are 25 gigabyte?

And 640k is enough for anyone. Oh wait...

Just because some Blu-ray are bad transfers doesn't indict the whole format. And BD50 has been the norm for some time now.

could blu-ray fit more hours of an hdtv show on a disc? yes. but that doesn't change the fact that 30 gigabytes is more than enough for a 1080p movie with lossless sound at the quality it was filmed at.

Again, BS. It's not just a matter of 720p or 1080p, it's a matter of the quality of the image at 1080p. In that case, Blu-ray's transfers are better in the best case. This is just FUD you're spreading. BD clearly is the superior format from a technical standpoint, and no amount of unfounded assertions will change that.

and then you started talking about bitrates like you had any idea what the hell you were talking about. the bit rate of losslessly compressed audio on the disc is much more than the bit rate of dolby true hd soundtracks yes... but they are mathematically identical in the end.

It's not enough to make up the difference in disk space and bandwidth. It's a fact that a BD disk has approx. 40 Mbps of bandwidth solely dedicated to visual data opposed to about 28 Mbps (IIRC) for HD-DVD.

 

[XMonkey]

why is Paramount any more to blame for not letting the market decide a winner than MGM, Universal, Disney, Fox or any other studio exclusively supporting one format over the other? oh wait. they aren't.

Because HD-DVD had one exclusive studio while Bluray didn't? It's easier for one to go neutral than 3.

But hey, let's beat more old topics to death.

 

[purnoman3000]

After coming upon this news I took a look at my HD collection (I have both a PS3 and a standalone HD-DVD player), I just realized I have a single Paramount release (one of the freebies) out of 27 releases. Even if I only had a PS3 as an HD format, this news would be no sweat off my back. Only a couple recent releases from Paramount I would want and they have already been released for both (Flags/Letters which were both actually reviewed better on bluray and MI:III). I was buying everything but exclusives for Bluray in the hopes that it would become the sole dominant format and this will do nothing but annoy me ever so slightly and make this rat race last longer. I do not believe we will see Spielberg titles anytime soon on either format, therefore rendering this announcement with far less impact than conceived.

 

[Bebpo]

Paramount/Dreamworks did the right thing for them. There was no way that the lost BR sales will come close to the $150 million cash payment plus other considerations, so they took the money and ran. The market will still decide a winner and they can still hop on that train when this deal expires. I think it's a no-brainer.

This is 100% true.

But on the other hand, sometimes it's best to think beyond just how you stand today. If Paramount didn't take the money, maybe one format would've one and maybe sales would have increased dramatically with only one format on the market and the effects from that they made have made more in sales difference over the next couple of years then that 150 million.

 

[MechDX]

Because HD-DVD had one exclusive studio while Bluray didn't? It's easier for one to go neutral than 3.

But hey, let's beat more old topics to death.

Si why didnt Sony just team up with Toshiba and include HD DVD in the PS3? Problem readily solved.

Some of you people are just ready to push the blame on anyone to justify your purchase. If you were stupid enough to pick a side in this war the first year you deserve this mess.

I chose both because I just wanted all the HD content I could get.

 

[Kintaro]

Interesting you say that.

My brother works at JB Hifi (a major Australian retailer), and has spoken with reps from companies invloved in the format war and pretty much ALL of them (including a Pioneer rep) say we WILL have 2 formats.

They say combo players will become the norm and it wont matter then.

When you think about it, if ALL companies involved make combo players, the whole war means jack shit, and it will simply come down to buying the movie you want to buy. The difference? One movie will have a blue cover, the other a red one.

If this happens, might as well go back to the drawing board and call it all a big failure. Consumers won't take to this sort of shit, nor should they. Combo players won't matter in this scenerio.

 

[Alcibiades]

About a year ago, when HD DVD had a clear lead over Blu-ray (before the PS3), many were saying it was HD DVD's battle to lose and that Blu-ray should give up, despite the fact that HD sales were .01% of DVD sales.

Now that Blu-ray has 60% of the marketshare of HD media, people are saying HD DVD should give up and that a Blu-ray win is imminent, despite the fact that the HD marketshare is less than 1% of DVD.

It's silly to think that the current lead by Blu-ray mattered much in the long scheme to things to big corporations who have a long-term view of this. Even if the marketshare of HD media hit's 5% this year (it won't) and HD DVD only captures 40% of that, one has to be crazy to call the war all but over.

The Paramount decision was a HUGE surprise to many people (I wasn't expecting anything like that), but to say they shouldn't do it because Blu-ray has a 60% share in a 1% market is ridiculous.

With this announcement though, expect Warner to solidify their neutral stance even more, and make a big deal when all top 10 sellers on high-definition come from their studio.

 

[Petrarca]

Yo guys!!! what the fuck happened? why was the title changed?

I've been on vacation for the last 10 days, and still have another 2 weeks. I'm in Jakarta, the connection is shit! 32K modem. Your avatars are fucking killing me. I can't go thru the pages, so again.....So what the fuck happened?!?!?!?

 

[Doctor_No]

Paramount/Dreamworks did the right thing for them. There was no way that the lost BR sales will come close to the $150 million cash payment plus other considerations, so they took the money and ran. The market will still decide a winner and they can still hop on that train when this deal expires. I think it's a no-brainer.

From a entirely superficial, selfish aspect, Paramount/Dreamcast did the correct decision. However, from the overall health of the HD media market; no-one has. And Warner Bros should do the same (get as much money as they can). However, its a failure on all ends of the equations.

 

[DCharlie]

30 GB may be more than enough for a film, but not for films with lots of extras and with high bit rates.

.... don`t the extras on Pirates come on a second disk? They do in my copies anyways (of 1 and 2)

 

[mashoutposse]

The market deciding a winner is no longer clear anymore (and certainly not happening any time soon) thanks to Paramount.

Even so, BR has sold approximately 2.5 million discs LTD and who knows what percentage of those Paramount/Dreamworks productions. From their perspective, this is the perfect time to walk away for a big payout. The game is way too small to say no to so much cash.

It certainly sucks for us consumers, though. I guess that's business.

 

[HyperionX]

why is Paramount any more to blame for not letting the market decide a winner than MGM, Universal, Disney, Fox or any other studio exclusively supporting one format over the other? oh wait. they aren't.

Because MGM, Disney, Fox, etc., have already spent billions of dollars in order to propel Blu-ray into success, and they were very close to doing so, until Paramount decided to lengthen the format war at the very last minute.

Look, if HD-DVD was that close to success, many of us including me would want Fox/Sony/Disney or whoever's left on the Blu-ray side to jump over and end the war early. Doing the exact opposite is stupid and aggravating.

 

[chubigans]

Stop the presses! Fox and Disney both weigh in on the Paramount decision.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s..._Respond_to_Paramount_HD_DVD_Announcement/877

Referring to Fox's announcement earlier today that it would release 29 new Blu-ray titles before the end of 2007, Mike Dunn, President Worldwide, Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, said, "Given that Blu-ray has consistently outsold HD DVD all year, and this is the case for any titles released by any studio in both formats, we believe that the time is right for us to accelerate our activities and help convert the nearly 60 million high definition households worldwide into Blu-ray households."

"By the end of this calendar year there will be expansive availability of technically vibrant releases featuring never-before-seen, advanced BD-J interactivity as well as a broad offering of playback devices at attractive prices that will prove to any doubting consumers once and for all that Blu-ray is the only way."

Similarly, a statement from Bob Chapek, President of Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment references the studio's commitment late last week to release four key tentpole titles in 2008: "The proven Blu-ray technology has allowed us to take our films to new heights, fully utilizing the larger capacity and interactive capabilities for an incredible all-new consumer experience. The strides that we've made with this format are just the tip of the iceberg and we are confident that consumers will be astounded by the level of entertainment that can only be achieved by using the maximum capacity of the Blu-ray Disc format."

"The decision seems oddly timed given Blu-ray's tremendous momentum both with consumers and with retail," said Andy Parsons, Chairman, Blu-ray Disc Association US Promotions Committee. "Blu-ray title sales continue to outpaceHD-DVD sales by nearly a 2 to 1 margin, and major retailers have expressed a strong preference for Blu-ray.

"Moreover, the price delta between HD DVD and Blu-ray players has been greatly reduced in the past few months, a trend that is on its way to eliminating any perceived cost advantage the HD DVD format has claimed to have. Under these circumstances, we can only imagine what could have enticed Paramount to walk away from a format that is clearly selling significantly more software than the HD-DVD format."

The BDA statement appears to make thinly-veiled reference to rumors that the HD DVD camp paid Paramount/DreamWorks up to $150 million in exchange for its exclusive support, an accusation that was similarly leveled at the BDA following its widely-reported exclusivity announcements with Blockbuster and Target.

 

[thaivo]

http://hddvd-blog.com/

"Blades of Glory" HD DVD Shoots Up 1114% on Amazon.com
And rising!

Hot on the announcement that Paramount has gone HD DVD exclusive, we're seeing the first change in high-def buying, with "Blades of Glory" moving up 1114% on Amazon's sales rankings. Originally announced for both HD DVD and Blu-ray, the high definition version of the Will Ferrell comedy will only be available on HD DVD.

Toshiba HD DVD players and the Xbox HD DVD add-on are also seeing a sales spike as a result of the Paramount & DreamWorks announcement.

Kind of surprising. Are HD DVD supporters suddenly feeling generous towards Paramount? I know I just ordered 10 copies... :lol

 

[Crayon Shinchan]

Paramount is definitely not losing out here, If anything they are making out like bandits. They get a $150 million dollar moneyhat to hop on the HD DVD wagon to try and help them win the war. If it doesn't happen after a certain amount of time they can switch to Blu-Ray. I mean it's not like it's a lifetime exclusivity agreement or their movies wont sell on Blu-Ray in a year or two.

Only problem is they risk tanking the market.

If BD/HD-DVD turns into DVDA/SACD, you'll know who in part to thank for it.

A successful unified market is far more valuable to any single company, much less the entire industry then a once of 150mil payment.

 

[gkryhewy]

Yes it was since no one would be able to respond to me in the other thread dumb dumb

Also my old 1080i RCA probably does have a shit scaler and since I own a PS3, I'll be making full use of it.

Whoops, didn't realize the other thread was locked. Sorry for being a dumb dumb.

 

[StoOgE]

i wish the brd camp would stop pretending that they are worried about the future of hdtv media and just admit they are mad cuz they thought their format of choice was about to win, and now they have to wait another year to 'win'.

im not going to pretend hddvd getting new legs doesnt make me happy for purely selfish reasons

edit.. told you i read brd moneyhatted bb

 

[djkimothy]

Yo guys!!! what the fuck happened? why was the title changed?

I've been on vacation for the last 10 days, and still have another 2 weeks. I'm in Jakarta, the connection is shit! 32K modem. Your avatars are fucking killing me. I can't go thru the pages, so again.....So what the fuck happened?!?!?!?

Hey! Welcome back. I'm actually going on holidays next week. So please! no big news till I get back too. K guys?

 

[plagiarize]

Look, the facts are there: The bit rate is higher for Blu-Ray releases that take advantage of this capability such as Pirates. This probably doesn't amount to significant differences in quality, but there is a difference. 30 GB may be more than enough for a film, but not for films with lots of extras and with high bit rates. Like I said, Pirates already includes 1 50 GB disc and 1 25 GB disc. They're using that space. For those features, you'd have to cut back considerably on either the quality or the content of the HD-DVD disc.

That's a clear advantage.

that bitrate hasn't been proven to be any observable difference. when you watch your 300 blu-ray would you honestly fault the picture and sound quality compared to the pirates movies? the 30 gigabyte HD-DVD had equally good picture quality and sound quality and *more* extras.

i just don't see how 30 gigabytes is a constraint on anything other than four hour plus long epics. extras can be thrown on a second disc (as they were on pirates) and it's a selling point, not a a negative.

 

[Doctor_No]

Yo guys!!! what the fuck happened? why was the title changed?

I've been on vacation for the last 10 days, and still have another 2 weeks. I'm in Jakarta, the connection is shit! 32K modem. Your avatars are fucking killing me. I can't go thru the pages, so again.....So what the fuck happened?!?!?!?

Shit, I miss Jakarta. The food especially. .. .

 

[MechDX]

Hey! Welcome back. I'm actually going on holidays next week. So please! no big news till I get back too. K guys?

Warner going HD DVD exclusive next week confirmed. lol:lol