OokieSpookie said:
I love how back and forth that statement goes.
I mean, I thought the PS3 didn't matter right?
STAND ALONES are what people want, PS3 owners do not watch movies on it after all.
Wait, not stand alones but dedicated players...that is what people want and the PS3 is a gaming system and people do not want a format backed by a gaming system.
Eh. I don't think either side can be singled out in terms of flip flopping on this point. When HD people touted winning standalone sales, it was all "PS3 owners aren't buying many discs, but the sheer number of them out there outweigh it." Now that BD has beaten HDDVD and needs to gain mainstream legitimacy, it's all about the content.
Here's the truth. If content was king, major HDDVD exclusive releases would have done better than they did. Every time an exclusive release failed to gain traction on HDDVD was a nail in the coffin of the idea that it was content, not the PS3, that was killing HDDVD. There's also the fact that the effect was an almost instantaneous turnaround in software sales when the PS3 was released, and not a slow rise.
This is really simple scientific process here. Make a theory, make a prediction, and judge the success of the theory on the accuracy of the prediction.
BD won because it got in the hands of third-tier buyers faster. HD tried to do it with lower prices, BD tried to do it with PS3. One succeeded, the other did not. Simplest explanation wins. End of story.
DarkJediKnight said:
BD will always have 2 profiles and pricepoints: 1.1 for the casual watcher, and 2.0live for the enthusiasts.
I though the real enthusiasts didn't want online features? Seriously, if 2.0 doesn't take over completely, expect absolutely nothing to use it. May as well have expected games to use the memory pack on the N64.