18 months ago many arguments were started over whether putting a blu-ray player in the PS3 was a Huge Mistake or a Masterstroke.

18 months on, it would be interesting to know, do people think that Warner would have gone Blu exclusive even if there hadn't been a Blu-ray drive in the PS3?

IMHO the PS3 is Blu-ray.

Bottom line, without the PS3, there will be no Blu Ray.

Blu-ray hasn't won yet.

Even if only a small number of users use it as a Blu-ray player, the sheer number of PS3s have simply started to overwhelm HD DVD. Had there been no PS3, would HD DVD be winning? We could only speculate, but probably. Look at their stand-alone numbers. They've been fairly competitive despite the fact that there are so many more Blu-ray capable players (I'm talking PS3 included now) out there in people's hands.

Blu-ray has won, just like a person who jumps out of an airplane without a parachute has comitted suicide, even if he hasn't hit the ground yet.

And it likely would have won without the PS3. Of course the plan would have been very different, but the combined effort of so many CE manufacturers was not likely to have been thwarted by the two-man show of MSFToshiba.

IMHO the PS3 is Blu-ray.

+1

Blu-ray = PS3. No PS3, no Blu-ray.

but...the checks from Sony are what won this.

It's hard to say BD "won" in any conventional sense, because increased software sales do to the PS3 ultimately were not the deciding factor. I think one could say the PS3 kept them from loosing, and studio alliances kept HD DVD from winning.

Now they gotta start casting a much broader net, If SONY were smart, it would get a $300 or less standalone (full-spec) out there pronto.

Did it occur to any of you that a large number of people bought the PS3 in spite of it being a gaming machine... and that they would have bought a stand alone machine if the PS3 did not exist? I mean, it's obvious from so many posts that people buy the PS3 because it is the best Blu-Ray player available in their opinion. So, if it did not exist, those people would obviously buy another machine... so the numbers are reasonably consistent. It's not the number of blu-ray drives movie houses consider when making market decisions, they're looking at movies sold. That number doesn't even concern the PS3 because if people wanted to watch, they bought.

i think the fact people are staying home and watching and playing games with
the family and blu-ray having disney did not hurt.

PS3 was critical. Also important was lining up the vast majority of CE companies and most studios, including, particularly, Disney. Of course, owning Sony Pictures/Columbia helped, as Casino Royale and SM3 were big titles. And there's the technical virtues such as more storage and higher bitrates, regardless of whether people think those ultimately make much difference in movie quality. The poll question is too imprecise to be very insightful.

I would say that ps3 is "winning" it for blu-ray if there is such a thing.

My understanding of the player/owner breakdown is that 93% of all BR players on the market are ps3's. Before Christmas, my understanding of the BR attache rate was .6 movies, meaning that most BR owners didn't own anything other than the free movie which came with their ps3, if any at all. Due to the sheer number of players/ps3's on the market though, if even a small fraction went out and bought a movie or two it was enough to beat out HD-DVD *FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR*.

I would say that ps3 is "winning" it for blu-ray if there is such a thing.

My understanding of the player/owner breakdown is that 93% of all BR players on the market are ps3's. Before Christmas, my understanding of the BR attache rate was .6 movies, meaning that most BR owners didn't own anything other than the free movie which came with their ps3, if any at all. Due to the sheer number of players/ps3's on the market though, if even a small fraction went out and bought a movie or two it was enough to beat out HD-DVD *FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR*.

+1

The PS3 made it possible to ensure a software sales lead over HD DVD for at least the short term, even if there was no sales growth over that same period of time.

With 2.5 million PS3 owners starving for games to play constant BOGOs on movies the console can play to quench their thrist was a far stronger strategy than I assumed.

Of course, as the PS3 constitutes almost 90% of Blu-ray support and represents a small demographic (gamers/early adopters/AV enthusiasts) compared to the larger movie watching public, the question now becomes can Blu-ray succeed DVD on the back of the PS3 alone?

How could that be, certain pundits here were convinced that gamers don't buy movies?



IMO, it merely would have taken longer for blu-ray to come ahead (they already are selling more stand alones). Of course HD DVD isn't technically dead yet.

How could that be, certain pundits here were convinced that gamers don't buy movies?



IMO, it merely would have taken longer for blu-ray to come ahead (they already are selling more stand alones). Of course HD DVD isn't technically dead yet.


Well frankly man, you're right. Most gamers/ps3 owners *DIDN'T* buy movies. Again, if you look at the attache rate for BR (the numbers I saw before Christmas - so they could have risen), most BR player owners don't own any BR movies. But a fraction of them did go out and buy a movie or two, and that small fraction (a small fraction of several million) alone was able to keep BR sales figures ahead of HD-DVD.

Of course the PS3 did it.

It was and always has been the key piece of the BDA strategy.

How could that be, certain pundits here were convinced that gamers don't buy movies?



IMO, it merely would have taken longer for blu-ray to come ahead (they already are selling more stand alones). Of course HD DVD isn't technically dead yet.

The attach rate proves that an overwhelming number don't play movies on a console and that's what was frequently argued, not that gamers don't buy movies.

What was overlooked was the fact that given the amount of PS3 in the home, even a small number of PS3 owners buying discs overall could outperform HD DVD software sales.

Without a Blu-ray player in the PS3, I don't think anyone can argue Blu-ray would be in the place it is now.

However, if it's to continue to grow, standalone sales growth is needed.

Oh crap, I read the topic wrong and voted Yes... Let record show I meant "NO". :P

Buying movies is the biggest waste of money. Coming from a guy that has 300+ dvds. Sure buying was okay back in the days when renting was expensive and hassle of returning on time. Now with online rentals and getting 6 movies a week, whats the point of buying?? I barely have time to watch new movies. My 300+ dvds are just collecting dust, sure they had a couple of viewings and some more but not worth it. I do buy one or two movies a month but I'm very selective now, they have to be something great and worth watching multiple times. Unless some of you guys that buy everything that comes out.

If Toshiba was motivated to sell their HD players at the prices they are now and the PS3 did not include BD I think that HD would have won.

But in reality Toshiba discounted there players to compete directly with the PS3. No PS3 no price drops. No price drops no mass appeal or adoption. I think both formats would have been more niche than they already are if the PS3 did not include BD playback.

How could that be, certain pundits here were convinced that gamers don't buy movies?

Yes, but think about this for a moment.

The PS3 was, for a while, the most affordable bluray player available. I imagine a lot of early adopters bought it to be their bluray payer, and they are buying discs in similar volumes to those that own 'stand alone' players. Other consumers bought PS3 as a gaming platform with no particular interest (or awareness) in its bluray capability and buy no discs.

That's why you have to be careful throwing out hardware numbers. In addition to the 'stand alone' bluray players sold, you also have some percentage of PS3 owners who are using their player as if it were 'stand alone'. How many of the 2.5 million sold are doing this I do not know, but if it is say 500,000, then that becomes a big contribution.

The other thing to consider is that the remaining 2 million or so players have a potential 'trojan horse' impact as their owners begin to realize that they have bluray capability.

So I think to date PS3 has been important to the limited sucess of bluray only to the extent that for many people it is their 'stand alone' player.

poll question worded completely different from thread title; therefore I voted wrong. shows what happens when I don't read :D

Blu-ray has won, just like a person who jumps out of an airplane without a parachute has comitted suicide, even if he hasn't hit the ground yet.
Wrong - there have been survivors.................same as this, the odds are low but there is no definitive answer.

PS3 is THE reason. Blu Ray was consistently behind in player and software sales until the PS3 was released. Then the war entered into a different category. Catchup for HD DVD.

I decided not to vote in this poll because the thread title is misleading and the poll asks a different question than the thread title. Do I think that the PS3 helped, or even was the deciding factor in having secured what seems like a now certain victory in this format war? Unquestionably yes. Would Blu-Ray have won without the PS3? Not yet, most likely. But that doesn't mean the war would be over yet.

In the future please be more careful about titling your threads and questions. This is the kind of practice that gives polling a bad reputation.

Yes, but think about this for a moment.

The PS3 was, for a while, the most affordable bluray player available. I imagine a lot of early adopters bought it to be their bluray payer, and they are buying discs in similar volumes to those that own 'stand alone' players. Other consumers bought PS3 as a gaming platform with no particular interest (or awareness) in its bluray capability and buy no discs.

That's why you have to be careful throwing out hardware numbers. In addition to the 'stand alone' bluray players sold, you also have some percentage of PS3 owners who are using their player as if it were 'stand alone'. How many of the 2.5 million sold are doing this I do not know, but if it is say 500,000, then that becomes a big contribution.

The other thing to consider is that the remaining 2 million or so players have a potential 'trojan horse' impact as their owners begin to realize that they have bluray capability.

So I think to date PS3 has been important to the limited sucess of bluray only to the extent that for many people it is their 'stand alone' player.

+1
but....
To add to this: potential market is *HUGE*. Sony was able to illustrate that the potential market for already existing customers was significantly larger than that of the HD-DVD player install base, and they had the sales figures in hand to legitimately say "we are outselling HD-DVD." At what cost? A huge loss on every ps3 sold. It did get them their foot in the door though.

The trojan horse impact of its sales I believe were most important in the early stages of this "format war." As BR players get cheaper and cheaper less people will buy them with the intention of owning a standalone (no one that I know of bought the old ps2 to use as a dvd player).

Assuming Blu-ray wins, the initial excitement for the PS3, probably combined with the lack of good games (as well as people who DID purchase it to watch movies), then PS3 is a big part of that victory.

I did go purple a few weeks ago, even though at the time things were looking better for HD-DVD (Paramount announcement), because of the other major factor I saw: Sony owns movie studios, and even if HD-DVD wins, it'd be a loooooong time before those movies would make their way to the red format.

I have no problem with Blu-ray winning, even though I bought my A1 when they first came out for $500... It will be a cold day in hell, however, before I purchase any hardware made by Sony.

Did it occur to any of you that a large number of people bought the PS3 in spite of it being a gaming machine... and that they would have bought a stand alone machine if the PS3 did not exist? I mean, it's obvious from so many posts that people buy the PS3 because it is the best Blu-Ray player available in their opinion. So, if it did not exist, those people would obviously buy another machine... so the numbers are reasonably consistent. It's not the number of blu-ray drives movie houses consider when making market decisions, they're looking at movies sold. That number doesn't even concern the PS3 because if people wanted to watch, they bought.

PS3 is the best Blur ray player in the market, without it people may go to HD DVD or simply wait for a better BR player. I believe PS3 make a big impact in this format war. It give BDA sth to spin like "couple millions Blu ray users" intead of 1 million. Also many may not consider blu ray like myself who dont like to spend money to get PS3 and a HD player(HD DVD or BR). without PS3 with BR, i will not watching HDM now. my first DVD player is PS2, now my first HiDef player is PS3. Dont underestimate the impact of putting BR in a game console. If MS include HD DVD in 360, HD DVD may have won this.

Unfortunately, or should i say fortunately? MS is not committd to HDM, they just want to win console war not format war.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2008/01/06/financial/f175021S51.DTL

(01-07) 11:05 PST TOKYO, Japan (AP) --

Sales of Sony's PlayStation 3 game machine sales totaled 1.2 million in North America during the key holiday season, the electronics and entertainment company said Monday. The performance gave a lift to its Blu-ray video format because the console also works as a Blu-ray player.

I voted incorrectly. Blu ray would be dead without the PS3.

It is one of those things that anybody can make a case for yes and no. I think overall what won the war is exclusive deals. If Warner doesnt seal the deal and lets HD-DVD linger with lower cost units. I think HD-DVD closes the software sales ratios by the end of 08.

Now you can say Warner made their decision based on PS3 sales. But the market never really got to play out due to exclusivity.

I think studio support helped greatly as well.

The PS3 has been huge for the Blu-Ray. The problems authoring/porting games left people little to do but buy movies for quite some time. I believe that as more games are available, fewer Blu-Rays per machine will be sold, but it certainly has helped the BDA to have several million PS3's capable of playing Blu-Rays out there.

And I don't believe Blu-Ray has won, by any stretch. There's still player issues, authoring issues, content to provide, and prices to consider. Not to mention two relativley large studios that have yet to commit. We can hypothesize all we want, but I still don't believe Toshiba and the DVD forum will just sit and accept the "war is over."

I don't think the Ps3 won for BluRay but I do think it kept them alive until the SA sales could catch up. I believe Warner would reason that BD was getting traction and HDDVD was not in that area which was of key importance to them.

The PS3 got Blu-ray into the game, and Sony's checks won it for them.

The PS3 has been huge for the Blu-Ray. The problems authoring/porting games left people little to do but buy movies for quite some time. I believe that as more games are available, fewer Blu-Rays per machine will be sold, but it certainly has helped the BDA to have several million PS3's capable of playing Blu-Rays out there.

And I don't believe Blu-Ray has won, by any stretch. There's still player issues, authoring issues, content to provide, and prices to consider. Not to mention two relativley large studios that have yet to commit. We can hypothesize all we want, but I still don't believe Toshiba and the DVD forum will just sit and accept the "war is over."

It isn't over officially, but no one will have confident to buy a HD DVD player no matter how cheap they are. Unless HD DVD camp can convert some studio to their side, Paramont of Universal will soon swith side or go neutral. They just cant missed the sales to BR base. It is a business, i dont see what is the point for them to stay HD DVD when the gap btw BR and HD DVD base get wider and wider.
Let just assume 15 million BR user(PS3 and standalone) vs 2 million by end of 2008, do you think Universal and paramont can ignore the 10+ million BR users?

poll question worded completely different from thread title; therefore I voted wrong. shows what happens when I don't read :DDitto

thread title and poll dont fit well.

mehh thread.

I voted incorrectly. Blu ray would be dead without the PS3.

Same here, I voted wrong...BD has no chance without PS3...

The thread title is the exact opposite of the question, which is dumb...

Same here, I voted wrong...BD has no chance without PS3...

The thread title is the exact opposite of the question, which is dumb...
I've got to agree it is a little confusing. An oversite on my part.

For what it's worth, like the majority, I think the PS3 did win it for Blu-ray. Interesting as a lot of people at the time said Sony were making a huge mistake. I never really understood that point of view.

Anyway, it's all history now.... :)

Yep without PS3 I think Blu-Ray would've sanked beneath the waves like the Yamato or the Bismarck. I am one of those people who initially wasn't interested in the format battle until I bought a PS3 back in april of last year. I hadn't bought any consoles for about 10 years (was mostly a PC gamer and only played on friends' consoles). The fact that I could install Linux on the PS3 was what pushed me to go out and buy it. It turned out to be an awesome HD media machine now.

Sony would have aped Toshiba and had a $499 BDP-S100 at launch, a $399 BDP-S200 at CES 07' had a $99 firesale on Black Friday for the S200's when the S300's came out.

Meanwhile the other CE's would have still been doing their thing. It would have been much closer, though.

Bottom line, without the PS3, there will be no Blu Ray.

Agreed. If the PS3 didn't exist this thing would probably have been over already and HD DVD would have won.

Thus one can only conclude that Sony was very wise to include a Blu-ray drive in the PS3! :D

History will show that PS3+MEI backing won the day for BD.

That stinks, I voted wrong too. I meant Yes if the questions stands as stated, PS3 did not cause the sales of Blu-Ray... Blu-Ray caused the sales of some PS3's.

Yes, no question PS3 made Blu-ray. In fact Warner and Paramount would never have went neutral at the start of the war w/o blu-ray and they've stated as much.

Props to Sony for paying cost to be the boss in HDM arena. At the end of the day, they wanted it more, now let's see what they do with it.

I would say about a billion dollars won it for Blu ray.. Nothing more, nothing less.

I would say about a billion dollars won it for Blu ray.. Nothing more, nothing less.

It actually seems to be 500 million total and at this point BD hasn't won anything.

When you say "win" shouldn't this mean wining the homes of Sd DVD owners as well?
The HDM market is pathetic right now..
I hope another format comes in to play to wipe out the thought of Blu-Ray.
Blu-Ray just sounds like what it is .. a game machine movie format.

Oh crap, I read the topic wrong and voted Yes... Let record show I meant "NO". :P

Same here. That was pretty piss poor wording.

Sony would have aped Toshiba and had a $499 BDP-S100 at launch, a $399 BDP-S200 at CES 07' had a $99 firesale on Black Friday for the S200's when the S300's came out.

Meanwhile the other CE's would have still been doing their thing. It would have been much closer, though.
I think this is the most correct answer to the question. Sony was going to make Blu-ray successful one way or the other. The PS3 strategy was the one they went with.

The poll title and thread title are completely different questions.

100% totally decided by PS3. Kutaragi must be smiling now.
So much for gamers not deciding the format war.

I too voted incorrectly - The PS3 won it for BD.

BD would have won without the PS3, but the PS3 moved the winning process ahead a few years. My original prediction was the end of HD DVD in spring '08. I then thought HD DVD would last indefinitely with Paramount, Universal and Warner after the Paramount move. Now Warner is gone and my original prediction still holds true. What a long strange trip it's been. ;)

For me it was a combination of the PS3 and Disney.

I've got to agree it is a little confusing. An oversite on my part.

For what it's worth, like the majority, I think the PS3 did win it for Blu-ray. Interesting as a lot of people at the time said Sony were making a huge mistake. I never really understood that point of view.

Anyway, it's all history now.... :)

It was luck that made things pan out like they did. Had Warner gone HD DVD exclusive Sony would have some serious issues getting the PS3 back to the viable status the PS1 and PS2 enjoyed and we would all be talking about how the PS3 was a mistake.

I think the best approach is that the PS3 kept BD alive during its infancy and Sony checks were the deathblow.

I am currently format neutral... and I can honestly say it is ONLY because of the PS3. I bought my Xbox 360 HD-DVD Add-On in November of 2006, and then a Toshiba HD-A2 in May of 2007... I got my PS3 as a Christmas present (only because it came with 15 Blu-ray discs).

18 months ago many arguments were started over whether putting a blu-ray player in the PS3 was a Huge Mistake or a Masterstroke.

18 months on, it would be interesting to know, do people think that Warner would have gone Blu exclusive even if there hadn't been a Blu-ray drive in the PS3?

It's both a huge mistake and a masterstroke. It got Sony the currently tiny highdef movie market at the expense of the massive gaming market they used to be kings of. Overall, I think that it was a big goof by Sony - there is much more money on the table for games than HDM.

I think the PS3 was an extremely smart move for Sony and probably had a lot to do with Blu-ray adoption. Many mainstream people were on the fence about HDM because of the multi-formats and the PS3 allowed them to rationalize a purchase because they were not just buying a player but a gaming system as well.

As for the PS3 increasing Blu-ray sales that I doubt. Gamers don't have a ton of cash and they are more likely to spend it on a new game than a movie, but that does not mean they won't rent and won't tell their friends about HDM or impress their friends with HDM which leads to more sales.

MS made the player optional which meant additional funds had to be spent and rationalized to get the HD-DVD. Easier for those folks to hold off.

i certainly think it helped i am no gamer but i have a lot of friends that are.

It's both a huge mistake and a masterstroke. It got Sony the currently tiny highdef movie market at the expense of the massive gaming market they used to be kings of. Overall, I think that it was a big goof by Sony - there is much more money on the table for games than HDM.

I think that sums it up. It worked out perfectly for their movie business (barely),
but is has really hurt their game business.

Maybe if they catch up on the game business they can say..." See I told ya so."
However, considering the difficult development of games for the system, I dont think they ever will.

It's both a huge mistake and a masterstroke. It got Sony the currently tiny highdef movie market at the expense of the massive gaming market they used to be kings of. Overall, I think that it was a big goof by Sony - there is much more money on the table for games than HDM.

Exactly. They have sacrificed one of their best divisions to help them win a marginal victory in another.

The royalties from BD will never bring Sony what DVD has brought Toshiba and unfortunately, they mortgaged the gaming division to do so.

Well I'm not really sure it hurt them that much considering they actually sold over a million PS2 over the holidays and still going strong. They probably have a chance to work on getting games out on the PS3 now while blu-ray players and discs will only be getting cheaper.

But yes I think PS3 is the weapon sony banked on as for ending this format war.

Yep without PS3 I think Blu-Ray would've sanked beneath the waves like the Yamato or the Bismarck. I am one of those people who initially wasn't interested in the format battle until I bought a PS3 back in april of last year. I hadn't bought any consoles for about 10 years (was mostly a PC gamer and only played on friends' consoles). The fact that I could install Linux on the PS3 was what pushed me to go out and buy it. It turned out to be an awesome HD media machine now.

This is exactly my situation as well. Last console I owned was honestly Pong. Warcraft ruined gaming for me, then the PS3 and its media functionality sneaked itself into my equipment closet.

I use it everyday, for listening to music, as a streaming DVD client, and of course, for Blu-ray and even some games (GH3, OMG!).

Well I'm not really sure it hurt them that much considering they actually sold over a million PS2 over the holidays and still going strong. They probably have a chance to work on getting games out on the PS3 now while blu-ray players and discs will only be getting cheaper.

But yes I think PS3 is the weapon sony banked on as for ending this format war.

3rd place wordwide.
Wii beats them everywhere, even in Japan.
360 destroys it in the US.

And software sales is where console manufacturers make profit and that is another category where they are doing horrible. The 360 leads in attach rate and overall sales volume for software, with the Wii behind in 2nd and the PS3 in a distant 3rd.

Don't get me wrong, I love my PS3, but to say its doing well in the gaming sector is not true. Its staying alive until FFXIII comes out and it sells a milion consoles in a week worldwide...

I think Blu-ray overall was the better format. Granted the PS3 allowed Blu-ray to quickly erase HD-DVDs head start.

However, the better tech specs, company support and movies were there with or without the PS3.

3rd place wordwide.
Wii beats them everywhere, even in Japan.
360 destroys it in the US.

And software sales is where console manufacturers make profit and that is another category where they are doing horrible. The 360 leads in attach rate and overall sales volume for software, with the Wii behind in 2nd and the PS3 in a distant 3rd.

Don't get me wrong, I love my PS3, but to say its doing well in the gaming sector is not true. Its staying alive until FFXIII comes out and it sells a milion consoles in a week worldwide...

Actually I was referring to PS"2" and how well they are still selling 6+ years and then mentioned ps3 could get more focus on games with this format war ending soon if you reread what I said.

It's both a huge mistake and a masterstroke. It got Sony the currently tiny highdef movie market at the expense of the massive gaming market they used to be kings of. Overall, I think that it was a big goof by Sony - there is much more money on the table for games than HDM.

Microsoft is not doing a whole lot better in the game market. If you compare both in their first year.

Overall Sony is still pretty much the king once you factor in that they are still selling the PS2 like hotcakes.

Microsoft is not doing a whole lot better in the game market. If you compare both in their first year.

Overall Sony is still pretty much the king once you factor in that they are still selling the PS2 like hotcakes.

Actually, MS is making money off every 360 sold and their software sales are PS2 legendary like.

Sony are far from King. Just like Nintendo went from being King all the way back to the Nes days to playing second fiddle the day FF7 came out for the PS1.

I said No because I am actually not sure anything has been won yet.

It is possible that all the BS on both sides with the Warner move being the latest has fuddled enough people that the consumers are going to take a time out.

We shall see. By not aligning earlier they have all (BDA/HD DVD groups, CE's and Studio) pretty much guaranteed to piss a lot of people off. In September it was BR that got slapped by Paramount (and Toshiba) and now it is the HD DVD folks getting slapped hard by Warner and BDA (or Sony if you prefer).

An example of the complete stupidity of both sides is HOW in the heck could Paramount have gone HD DVD without making 100% sure Warner was following? Unbelievable. As it turns out now the Paramount move was more of a slap to HD DVD than BR lol.

Clearly we the consumer are their last priority. What is best for them first and they will then tell US what is best for us.

I worry that those speculating that this move has created another SACD/DVD-A scenario are correct. I have no doubt that Paramount and Uni will follow if Warner stays the course. Maybe they go neutral for a while in good concience or maybe they don't.

I for one find my I am suddenly indifferent. I really have little appitite for BR ATM and worry that prices will not be doing us any favors for a while. I will at the least be waiting until I can get a BR player (Stand alone Pany 50 99.99% sure) once it offers the same value as current HD-DVD players (So around $500 or less retail).

Even then I may just rent in protest, everything but the very highest must have movies from now on. No more buying anything else on either side as both sides could go format next at any time as far as I know now. I kinda wish I had rented most of what I have no so fool me once... And with Zip.ca I can keep anything I want for months anyway if I want until I get bored of it. If I find myself watching again and again I will buy. That goes for both formats.

Whatever,

Richard

Blu ray is on the cusp of winning, and everyone knows the PS3 had a lot to do with that. The Ps3 has sold about 6 million units, and although not all of them are buying BD movies, many of them are.

That's exactly why this whole time BD has been selling more movies than HD DVD, even though HD DVd always had more dedicated players in homes apparently. No other explanation for BD winning outside of the PS3 effect.

And since the PS3 finally has some great games like Uncharted, Ratchet, Ninja Gaiden, etc., seems like everything is finally working out how they planned.