• 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.

Is the Blu-ray format dying?

Status
Not open for further replies.

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
TheHeretic said:
If you think the difference between a VHS tape and a DVD in terms of quality was resolution you never watched a VHS tape, period.
actually it was "resolution". but resolution for VHS was kind of a weird thing as VHS knew nothing about pixels. It simply scanned information from the magnetic tape and onto a scanline on the TV. The frequency and signal-to-noise ratio in SP mode came out to around 320 pixels vertically. Thus buying a new movie recorded in SP looked really freaking good. The problem was that most SP tapes were sold as rental only, meaning they cost anywhere from $90-120. By the time they hit retail pricing they were usually recorded at LP or EP to reduce manufacturing costs (less tape used). I still remember buying Hellraiser on VHS for $12.99 and the tape on the reel couldn't have been more 1/4 inch from the plastic. :lol

So yeah, 95% of what the average joe saw on VHS was either rental SP that had already been watched at least 5-10 times if not more or LP or EP retail copies. Still, on a new SP VHS release, resolution wise there wasn't as gigantic a quality increase with a DVD player on the same display, especially in the early days with movies right around 2 hours or more encoded to a single DVD5 side. and if the single movie was recorded as a DVD10 flipper.... lol... back to laserdisc all over again, except that we never got auto-side changing DVD players. I actually had to wait for Goodfellas for almost 5 years because of my refusal to buy the original flipper.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
DrXym said:
I don't expect it will be the end of the "blu ray is dying" comments. Some of the HD DVD zealots will use the entirely predictable January - May sales slump to recycle the same old tired arguments all over.


I don't think they exist anymore.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Onix said:
Why do many people continue to say this ... that the the jump to BD is relatively a smaller upgrade in quality?

It isn't. The quality upgrade is much more than it was from VHS to DVD. I'll enterain other points in the arguments, but the quality thing just boggles my mind.

No shit. DVD has slightly more horizontal resolution, but the jump was not that big at all.

350×240 (250 lines): Video CD
330×480 (250 lines): Umatic, Betamax, VHS, Video8
400×480 (300 lines): Super Betamax, Betacam (professional)
440×480 (330 lines): Analog Broadcast
560×480 (420 lines): LaserDisc, Super VHS, Hi8
670×480 (500 lines): Enhanced Definition Betamax
720×480 (520 lines): NTSC DVD, NTSC MiniDV, Digital8, Digital Betacam (professional)
720×480 (400 lines): Widescreen DVD (anamorphic)
720×576 (576 lines): PAL DVD, PAL MiniDV
1280×720 (720 lines): AVCHD, Blu-ray Disc, D-VHS, HD DVD, HDV
1440×1080 (810 lines): AVCHD, HDCAM (professional), HDV
1920×1080 (1080 lines): AVCHD, Blu-ray Disc, D-VHS, HDCAM SR (professional), HD DVD, XDCAM (professional)
 
The difference between SD and HD is extremely obvious on a 42" screen or larger. I think it's tough to explain it to people unless you actually show them content in SD and HD running side by side on the same size TV.

To people that give a rat's ass, yeah.

When my fiance saw Serenity on my brother-in-laws PS3 on a 1080p 50in screen she just shrugged as said it was a bit brighter. :lol

Similar to my whole argument with her on surround sound and many other things. As long as she can watch it, she doesn't care - in fact she gets pissed off with me moaning about how my blacks aren't black enough or things are a bit 'blocky' :lol
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Today's BD player is tomorrow's DVD player. That's the fundamental blind spot these tech pundits have about the high def format. There isn't a need to force a deceleration of the sales of DVD players and media in order to get more sales of BD players and media, because it's a seamless migration path that will naturally takes us there. As pricing comes down on the BD components, devices that primarily bill themselves as DVD players will simply subsume the BD components and featureset. The DVD players of today are not the same DVD players of 10 years ago, when even pro-scan was a luxury. Now they upscale, support various recordable formats, support various media file formats. In a couple of years, they'll also being offering BD playback regularly. At that point pricing will also be down on the software so going the HD path instead of the SD path will be a "Why Not?" situation, even if you don't yet have an HDTV.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
kaching said:
Today's BD player is tomorrow's DVD player. That's the fundamental blind spot these tech pundits have about the high def format. There isn't a need to force a deceleration of the sales of DVD players and media in order to get more sales of BD players and media, because it's a seamless migration path that will naturally takes us there. As pricing comes down on the BD components, devices that primarily bill themselves as DVD players will simply subsume the BD components and featureset. The DVD players of today are not the same DVD players of 10 years ago, when even pro-scan was a luxury. Now they upscale, support various recordable formats, support various media file formats. In a couple of years, they'll also being offering BD playback regularly. At that point pricing will also be down on the software so going the HD path instead of the SD path will be a "Why Not?" situation, even if you don't yet have an HDTV.


I agree with this, although the "HQ VHS" cautionary tale a few posts earlier shows the respect IP holders have for mainstream quality.
 

DrXym

Member
OuterWorldVoice said:
I don't think they exist anymore.

Heheh, you should visit engadgethd.com some time. Virtually every single Blu Ray thread is infested by them. The funny part is even though HD DVD and Blu Ray are the proverbial ugly sisters with more in common than not, these folks still hate on Blu. One format had to die and unfortunately for them it was HD DVD.

I really don't get it. I'm pro-blu but at the end of the day its just a lousy video format and certainly not worth arguing about if it flops. If you you're on the losing side, get over it. I actually bought a HD DVD / Blu Ray combo drive for my PC so I could buy firesale HD DVDs and rip them. There is nothing per se wrong with HD DVD, except Toshiba screwed up their marketing and pissed off the rest of the industry in their zeal to win. I'm sure if events had gone the other way I would have picked up firesale Blu Ray discs instead but otherwise life would have gone on.

Not so for these people.
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
OuterWorldVoice said:
I agree with this, although the "HQ VHS" cautionary tale a few posts earlier shows the respect IP holders have for mainstream quality.
I'm not sure what you're trying say here.
 

dallow_bg

nods at old men
Second, the advent of low cost up-sampling DVD players dramatically cut the video quality advantage of Blu-ray DVDs. Suddenly, for $100, your average consumer can put good video on their HDTV using standard DVDs. When Blu-ray got started no one dreamed this would happen.

Upscaling is such BS.

VictimOfGrief said:
As an owner of HD DVD and a upscaling DVD player--- I'm waiting on $3 HD DVD's to round out my collection and then sticking with DVD until the next format is out. Blu Ray doesn't need me as a consumer nor do I see the value in it. They really have screwed themselves out of market share by not dropping the prices. I've argued that back in the Format Wars days and it still holds true now.

They will continue to see lackluster adoption rates with $200-$300+ dollar Blu-Ray players and $30+ dollar Blu-Ray movies.

The consumers are speaking, but it's falling on deaf ears apparently.
Haha, still so bitter. I remember you.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
kaching said:
I'm not sure what you're trying say here.


That VHS tape manufacturers made shortcuts to speed up reproduction at the cost of picture quality. The method of manufacture for Blu Ray probably means that's almost impractical for the format, but never underestimate a corporation's willingness to fuck you for a couple of cents or a few man hours.
 

Drensch

Member
Like a few people have said before Blue-ray seems pretty analgous to laserdisc. It will pull in the audio/videophile market. There just isn't alot of reason to upgrade from dvd for most people. The cost vs advantages are too steep. Does blu-ray have a better pic and sound? Yes. Is it worth buying for most people? No.

To really get the advantages of Blue ray, you need a new tv and sound system. Most can't or don't care. And upscaled dvds do look great. The Hd movie format war was an unnatural and forced transition, and won't make the impact that dvd did.
 

tak

Member
Onix said:
Why do many people continue to say this ... that the the jump to BD is relatively a smaller upgrade in quality?

It isn't. The quality upgrade is much more than it was from VHS to DVD. I'll enterain other points in the arguments, but the quality thing just boggles my mind.
A format that didn't degrade with time, easily accessed chapters, bonus features? VHS had none of these things; Blu-ray just looks better, which is a big deal for some but not a big deal for others.

The jump from VHS to DVD was more then just jumping to a new format that looked better; however, DVD did upgrade the resolution and had the first widely accepted 5.1 soundtrack format on top of all the other upgrades it provided. Plus, the fact that the format was digital was a huge improvement on image quality; tapes started looking like crap after multiple plays.
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
OuterWorldVoice said:
That VHS tape manufacturers made shortcuts to speed up reproduction at the cost of picture quality. The method of manufacture for Blu Ray probably means that's almost impractical for the format, but never underestimate a corporation's willingness to fuck you for a couple of cents or a few man hours.
Ah, ok, I'm not sure why that would be any more relevant to BD than it is to DVD, wrt to the point I'm making. In any case, I wasn't suggesting there's a need for shortcuts, just let the technology follow it's natural progression and we'll get there soon enough.
 

Oni Jazar

Member
I don't own a lot of movies, but when I buy one, I would like to own the highest quality version of that movie available. That's Blu-ray. Tech will improve, prices will drop, the format will continue to thrive. Not survive, but thrive.

DD people take note: There is no major digital distribution service that lets you purchase HD movies.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
Drensch said:
There just isn't alot of reason to upgrade from dvd for most people. The cost vs advantages are too steep.
but again these costs will come down, eventually causing manufacturers to save money by just including blu-ray chipsets in DVD players and selling them as "blu-ray capable DVD players" vs actual manufacturing separate blu-ray and DVD lines. Customers WILL upgrade, not because they feel forced or compelled to, but because eventually that is all that will be available. Customers didn't see the need to spend extra for progressive scan or upconverting DVD players either.... how many customers are still out there buying players that don't upconvert or have progressive scan? how many such players are even available on store shelves anymore?

Oni Jazar said:
DD people take note: There is no major digital distribution service that lets you purchase HD movies.
and likely never will be. We've known since Divx players (as in the DVD format, not the codec) that Hollywood wants to charge you pay per view on ALL movies. At this point in the game physical format buyers and SD viewers will never go for that. Hollywood is hoping to make that in road with HD DD. I would be shocked if you will actually be able to own an HD DD within the next 5 years.
 

SUPREME1

Banned
Blu-ray is amazing if you have all the hardware... but the cost has become ridiculous, I saw Meet the Spartans at BB for $35.

Not that I would by it, but I was shocked that even sh*t movies are asking for full price.


I miss the format war, BRDs and HD DVDs for $15 ~ $25.


:(
 

Threi

notag
oh cmon people the 1.595 was a number i pulled out of my head. That wasn't what i was trying to get across. :lol



Onix said:
Obviously degredation is an issue. I believe nearly everyone discussing it has stated that ... but when comparing actual A/V, we're talking about a 'fresh' tape.

That's not all.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
tak said:
A format that didn't degrade with time, easily accessed chapters, bonus features? VHS had none of these things; Blu-ray just looks better, which is a big deal for some but not a big deal for others.

Thanks for reading my post.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Onix said:
Explain that to the haterz then :p

You can't. They are nuts :p

I am content to just sit back and enjoy bluray. At the same time I still enjoy all my old DVDs, watch ondemand HD content, and broadcast HD & SD. I just can't think of any logical reason at this point to not pay a few extra bucks for the bluray version of a movie when I want to add one to my collection. If a movie is good enough for me to want to own, why the hell would I want to settle for an inferior copy?
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
tak said:
A format that didn't degrade with time, easily accessed chapters, bonus features? VHS had none of these things; Blu-ray just looks better, which is a big deal for some but not a big deal for others.
not entirely true:

more storage = more room for important things. LOTR:EEs were two discs. I am guessing they will be one disc here. and I know Blu-ray+SD = nononono... BUT, if companies were so inclined, they could put old SD shows, entire series, on like 1 disc per season. not to mention the abundance of discs we've seen with 6+ language tracks, 20+ subtitle tracks, etc.

Profile 1.1 - I've seen a lot of articles talk about things with 1.1 that we've only barely begun to see. Sleeping Beauty is the first example IMHO of a PiP track that isn't just talking heads in a window. The presentation of the BonusView track is beautifully done and really enhances that quality of that feature. But that's STILL not even what I'm talking about. One of the most common desires for 1.1 movies is 3D, where it will be possible to essentially run the alternating perspective view on the 1.1 decoder and flip between the two perspectives with IR driven LCD glasses thus avoiding problems like encoding alternating perspective frames on a single video file.

BD-J is also another technology that has been largely unused. As the standards continue to mature I expect to see various BD-J applications allowing you to recut movies, rescore movies, self-censor movies down to hit ratings (aka crop a scene to hit PG-13 instead of seamless branching or angles), or games or whatever other applications can be thought of.

Bookmarks - this is such an unsung feature of Blu-ray it's practically criminal. The fact that I can setup bookmarks for essentially an unlimited number of discs using the same standard controls. Getting too tired to finish a movie? Green button. Resume the movie the next day? hit the yellow button and select the bookmark.

hardcoat - this is minor but does need to be addressed. We've gotten movies from netflix that would just lock up in the player due to wear. Likewise we've gotten some utterly awful looking blu-rays that have performed beautifully. It's only anecdotal, but by most accounts the hardcoat finish does work to at least some degree over the standard plastic platters of DVD/CD.

I mean I am not trying to say any of these are necessarily as big as just the inherent nature of an optical format over a magnetic one or chapter skipping (bonus features ARE minor though, as evidenced by the massive difference between movie only versions and 2-disc SEs), but there are clearly a number of advantages that this format has over DVD beyond just better picture and sound.
 

tak

Member
borghe said:
not entirely true:

more storage = more room for important things. LOTR:EEs were two discs. I am guessing they will be one disc here. and I know Blu-ray+SD = nononono... BUT, if companies were so inclined, they could put old SD shows, entire series, on like 1 disc per season. not to mention the abundance of discs we've seen with 6+ language tracks, 20+ subtitle tracks, etc.

Profile 1.1 - I've seen a lot of articles talk about things with 1.1 that we've only barely begun to see. Sleeping Beauty is the first example IMHO of a PiP track that isn't just talking heads in a window. The presentation of the BonusView track is beautifully done and really enhances that quality of that feature. But that's STILL not even what I'm talking about. One of the most common desires for 1.1 movies is 3D, where it will be possible to essentially run the alternating perspective view on the 1.1 decoder and flip between the two perspectives with IR driven LCD glasses thus avoiding problems like encoding alternating perspective frames on a single video file.

BD-J is also another technology that has been largely unused. As the standards continue to mature I expect to see various BD-J applications allowing you to recut movies, rescore movies, self-censor movies down to hit ratings (aka crop a scene to hit PG-13 instead of seamless branching or angles), or games or whatever other applications can be thought of.

Bookmarks - this is such an unsung feature of Blu-ray it's practically criminal. The fact that I can setup bookmarks for essentially an unlimited number of discs using the same standard controls. Getting too tired to finish a movie? Green button. Resume the movie the next day? hit the yellow button and select the bookmark.

hardcoat - this is minor but does need to be addressed. We've gotten movies from netflix that would just lock up in the player due to wear. Likewise we've gotten some utterly awful looking blu-rays that have performed beautifully. It's only anecdotal, but by most accounts the hardcoat finish does work to at least some degree over the standard plastic platters of DVD/CD.

I mean I am not trying to say any of these are necessarily as big as just the inherent nature of an optical format over a magnetic one or chapter skipping (bonus features ARE minor though, as evidenced by the massive difference between movie only versions and 2-disc SEs), but there are clearly a number of advantages that this format has over DVD beyond just better picture and sound.
Yeah, my point was not entirely true, but to the average Joe that is the main difference they're going to notice. Most of the improvements are just tweaks to what DVD was already offering to make the features better. I'm not saying that the improvements are bad or improvements that don't add additional value to the experience, just to that average Joe they wont be telling them self this is a night and day difference like VHS to DVD.
 

tak

Member
Onix said:
Personally, I think the durability adds a lot to the delta and you're pushing it aside. I used to watch a few VHS movies a lot (Jurassic Park, Nightmare Before Christmas, etc..), after a few months of owning them the sound a picture had taken a significant hit from all those rewatchs.

Plus, I think you're forgetting the jump to 5.1 audio was a pretty big one. It was the first time surround sound was available in the home.

EDIT: I just want to add, I'm not saying the Blu-ray jump is a small one, but I am saying that the DVD jump was a pretty big one.
 

Sibylus

Banned
A couple of questions for ye knowledgeable folks:

  • Is the PS3 still the best Blu-ray player on the market?
  • Gladiator on Blu-ray? If yes, when?
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
tak said:
Plus, I think you're forgetting the jump to 5.1 audio was a pretty big one. It was the first time digital discrete surround sound was available in the mainstream consumer's home.
I fixed this up for you. Tapes had been encoded with Dolby Surround tracks (4.0 matrixed) since the late 80s and laserdisc had Dolby Digital and DTS tracks since 1994. And while you are correct that it brought digital discrete 5.1 audio to the general consumer, up until 2001-2002 (when HTIAB packages started taking off) 90%+ of consumers getting into DVD were still hooking the DVD player up through Yellow/White or Yellow/White/Red directly to their TVs. By the time mainstream adoption hit DVD, the vast majority of it's users still didn't care about 5.1 audio, the same as they didn't care about Pro-Logic audio before that, which IMHO was a bigger jump from stereo than 5.1 was from that.

Botolf said:
A couple of questions for ye knowledgeable folks:
Is the PS3 still the best Blu-ray player on the market?
Sort of. It's still usually the most stable, still the fastest to load, and still the best value overall, but there are plenty of good players out for much less money (Sony S350, Samsung P1500).

Gladiator on Blu-ray? If yes, when?
oft mentioned rumor from people in the know is that it's pretty much a lock for next year from dreamworks/paramount along with braveheart.
 

Spasm

Member
OuterWorldVoice said:
I don't think they exist anymore.
<raises hand> Still here!

Although, I did buy BOTH formats during the war. Mostly cause BD had a BOGO sale every other week. That's with titles down near $15 a pop too. I haven't bought many BDs since their victory, but not for sour grapes. After their victory, prices shot right back up to $25 minimum, and the best sale you can find is a B2G1 now and then.

I haven't read the whole thread, but if that 4% market share is true, then wow. That's pathetic. Bill Hunt argued that even DVD didn't have a million seller till 3 years into its life, but he forgot to mention one thing. Playstation. Everyone claims the PS2 was the boon to DVD, right? Well the Matrix achieved selling a million DVD copies without the PS2, or at least, very few of them. There are how many million PS3s around the world now? 11? 12?

Bring down the prices, BD Group, and people will care more.
 

Sibylus

Banned
borghe said:
Sort of. It's still usually the most stable, still the fastest to load, and still the best value overall, but there are plenty of good players out for much less money (Sony S350, Samsung P1500).
Kk, gotcha. I'd like to catch up on some good PS games (ICO, Shadow of The Colossus as well as current ones) while watching HD movies, so it sounds like the PS3 would be the best option.

oft mentioned rumor from people in the know is that it's pretty much a lock for next year from dreamworks/paramount along with braveheart.
:awesome:

Movie of the forever!
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Spasm said:
I haven't bought many BDs since their victory, but not for sour grapes. After their victory, prices shot right back up to $25 minimum, and the best sale you can find is a B2G1 now and then.
You're wrong. the prices have not risen, at all. period.

And holy shit i just got extreme deja vu.
 

pxleyes

Banned
Flo_Evans said:
No shit. DVD has slightly more horizontal resolution, but the jump was not that big at all.
The jump in format from VHS to DVD had less to do with resolution (though the emphasis on widescreen releases and 480p video help) but more with the other features DVD offered. The disc format in general is what made it so popular, not the resolution. That is why Blu-Ray is seen in such a negative light. To most "average" consumers an increase in resolution on videos like that doesn't do a lot to force their hand on purchasing a player, especially with all the content available through on demand.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
tak said:
Personally, I think the durability adds a lot to the delta and you're pushing it aside. I used to watch a few VHS movies a lot (Jurassic Park, Nightmare Before Christmas, etc..), after a few months of owning them the sound a picture had taken a significant hit from all those rewatchs.

Plus, I think you're forgetting the jump to 5.1 audio was a pretty big one. It was the first time surround sound was available in the home.

EDIT: I just want to add, I'm not saying the Blu-ray jump is a small one, but I am saying that the DVD jump was a pretty big one.

I'm not sure how to make it any clearer ... I was specifically talking about the people who claim the A/V delta is not as significant.
 

Spasm

Member
captive said:
You're wrong. the prices have not risen, at all. period.

And holy shit i just got extreme deja vu.
During the war, I never paid more than $20 for a single title. Since then, I've not paid UNDER $25. I have about 20 titles. So anecdotally, the prices may not have technically risen, but the deals have surely dried up.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
Spasm said:
During the war, I never paid more than $20 for a single title. Since then, I've not paid UNDER $25. I have about 20 titles. So anecdotally, the prices may not have technically risen, but the deals have surely dried up.

True, though that is to be blamed on stores, not the BDA.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
Spasm said:
I haven't read the whole thread, but if that 4% market share is true, then wow. That's pathetic. Bill Hunt argued that even DVD didn't have a million seller till 3 years into its life, but he forgot to mention one thing. Playstation. Everyone claims the PS2 was the boon to DVD, right? Well the Matrix achieved selling a million DVD copies without the PS2, or at least, very few of them. There are how many million PS3s around the world now? 11? 12?
a clarification and correction. The 4% number thrown around AFAIK was pre-Iron Man. Iron Man is pretty much admitted even by the most pessimistic to hitting 10% of total sales and at many large retailers almost 20% of total sales. Overall market numbers are EXTREMELY hard to compare though, as DVD has around 10,000 titles on store shelves whereas Blu-ray doesn't even yet have 1,000. Still, the top 10 is reported to still be around 8% on a given week with the newer blockbuster results rising a little above that. The most bullish reasonable predictions have new releases going close to 15% by the end of the year. and again we are talking total sales here, so it would be 15/85. This is over double year over year market share.

And the only "boon" anyone claims the PS2 was for DVD was adoption in japan, which prior to the PS2 was abysmal. By the end of 1999 America already had 5M DVD players installed and had over 10 million players installed before the PS2 even hit these shores. The Matrix was a phenomenon, plain and simple. Practically 1:5 DVD owners at the time purchased it. Comparing that to current Blu-ray figures is like comparing Titanic's gross to even Dark Knight's gross.

Also, the 5M PS3s installed in the US are a non-point as it is impossible to determine how many of those were bought solely for watching movies, how many were bought solely for playing games, and of the users using them for both what the percentages are. I mean I really wish either way we could offer a debate on this but the fact is that no one has any way of knowing.
 

dallow_bg

nods at old men
Frys still has good deals on a number of titles.
Good for people new to the format.

Weren't there like 30+ titles last week at 13.99?
 
They haven't done a good job of explaining why people should upgrade to Blu-Ray. Right now it just appears like something for people obsessed with picture quality. The price of everything Blu-Ray is a huge turnoff as well (I'm a PS3 owner). Most people with HD sets probably don't even have the right cables for it, you think they're going to go out of their way to spend $30 on a movie that they could get for $15? Blu-Ray is simply a much harder sale to the consumer than DVD was.

I think if prices go down, Blu-Ray will do fine and slowly become the standard format. Until then, DVD wins hard.
 

MechDX

Member
Onix said:
True, though that is to be blamed on stores, not the BDA.


Yeah cause the stores just gave away all those movies without any kind of kickback from BDA memebers who were fighting a bloody format war.......
 

Spasm

Member
borghe said:
a clarification and correction. The 4% number thrown around AFAIK was pre-Iron Man. Iron Man is pretty much admitted even by the most pessimistic to hitting 10% of total sales and at many large retailers almost 20% of total sales. Overall market numbers are EXTREMELY hard to compare though, as DVD has around 10,000 titles on store shelves whereas Blu-ray doesn't even yet have 1,000. Still, the top 10 is reported to still be around 8% on a given week with the newer blockbuster results rising a little above that. The most bullish reasonable predictions have new releases going close to 15% by the end of the year. and again we are talking total sales here, so it would be 15/85. This is over double year over year market share.

And the only "boon" anyone claims the PS2 was for DVD was adoption in japan, which prior to the PS2 was abysmal. By the end of 1999 America already had 5M DVD players installed and had over 10 million players installed before the PS2 even hit these shores. The Matrix was a phenomenon, plain and simple. Practically 1:5 DVD owners at the time purchased it.

Also, the 5M PS3s installed in the US are a non-point as it is impossible to determine how many of those were bought solely for watching movies, how many were bought solely for playing games, and of the users using them for both what the percentages are. I mean I really wish either way we could offer a debate on this but the fact is that no one has any way of knowing.
Very good arguments, and thanks for clearing up those numbers. Another thing I realize is, DVD didn't have such stiff competition that Blu-ray does. VHS was long overdue in being put out the pasture. DVD on the other hand, is still incredibly viable. It almost mirrors the PS3 having to compete with the PS2 on the games front, even still.

Anyhow, don't get me wrong, I love my BDs, and I'll never go back to DVD. In fact, I haven't bought one since sic months before I got my PS3. But right now, I only buy movies that I really want.

All those, 'it would be nice to have, but I'm not dying for' movies that I did purchase during the war, sometimes as low as $10, have not been cheap enough since to justify buying. I'll check out Frye's though.

Maybe my problem is I already have all the 1-off movies I want :D
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
IsntChrisL said:
They haven't done a good job of explaining why people should upgrade to Blu-Ray. Right now it just appears like something for people obsessed with picture quality. The price of everything Blu-Ray is a huge turnoff as well (I'm a PS3 owner). Most people with HD sets probably don't even have the right cables for it, you think they're going to go out of their way to spend $30 on a movie that they could get for $15? Blu-Ray is simply a much harder sale to the consumer than DVD was.
I showed up for the PQ (Meet the Robinsons and Ratatouille to be exact). I stayed for the new releases. This is how most people will get in. The price will be right and that one movie will be enough to get them in. I'm guessing for over a million this holiday season that movie will be Dark Knight. Once they get the player and their starter drugmovie, there will be little incentive for them to buy new releases on DVD, even if it means spending $3-5 more per movie.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
MechDX said:
Yeah cause the stores just gave away all those movies without any kind of kickback from BDA memebers who were fighting a bloody format war.......

True, that is a possibility. But I'm not sure there is evidence for that (or is there?).
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
The Bookerman said:
32 $ a movie is just too much for me.

talk to me when it hits 22-24$
unless you are shopping b&m exclusively, there is NO movie that's $32. typical new pricing on amazon is $23-26 ($28 for Fox) on new releases and $18-22 for catalog releases ($22-24 for Fox).
 

Flo_Evans

Member
pxleyes said:
The jump in format from VHS to DVD had less to do with resolution (though the emphasis on widescreen releases and 480p video help) but more with the other features DVD offered. The disc format in general is what made it so popular, not the resolution. That is why Blu-Ray is seen in such a negative light. To most "average" consumers an increase in resolution on videos like that doesn't do a lot to force their hand on purchasing a player, especially with all the content available through on demand.

Yes, the switch from tape to disc was a huge improvement in form factor and usability. No one is disputing that. The fact is that the actual PQ improvements where minimal. Bluray is a huge leap over NTSC.

Ondemand rental service is not the same thing as buying a movie. There is no way to "own" a HD copy of a movie other than bluray (and HD-DVD) at this point. I can DVR off HBO HD, but really the cable company owns that box. I can only store about 5 2-hour HD movies on my DVR while I own 30 some odd bluray discs. I think HD ondemand is great, its perfect for me for rentals and movies I just want to watch. Like I said I pretty much use everything :lol
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
borghe said:
unless you are shopping b&m exclusively, there is NO movie that's $32. typical new pricing on amazon is $23-26 ($28 for Fox) on new releases and $18-22 for catalog releases ($22-24 for Fox).


You can't have it both ways - it cant be bursting into the mainstream AND be online exclusive for deals.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
OuterWorldVoice said:
You can't have it both ways - it cant be bursting into the mainstream AND be online exclusive for deals.
huh? since when the hell is amazon not mainstream?

edit - and I never used the pricing to insist that it's mainstream ready. I was simply countering his complaint about price. People will still gladly pay $26/movie at Best Buy the same way they pay $20 for movie-only DVDs at best buy. that's not mainstream, just lazy. even still, the week of release big name movies are rarely much over $25 (IM and Indy were $26 and Hulk was $27)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom