or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › Xbox Area › No Blu-ray for the Xbox
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No Blu-ray for the Xbox - Page 4  

post #91 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

That said, to be quite honest, I just do not see anything but a PS3 takeover in the next 9 months if MS refuses to produce a blu-ray player.

That wont happen, M$ is definately behind its own digital download service, a BD drive wouldn't really be practical when you can expect to see $200 Korean set top BD players by Xmas of this year.

Quote:


No reasonable person would compare the quality of them to a blu-ray. This reality essentially requires consumers to purchase playback hardware and software that alleviates these issues. The ps3 fits the bill marvelously. The 360 does not.

Rest assured that digital downloads are alive and well, Comcast is adding hundreds if not thousands of HD movies available for download this year, Netflix is bringing out a streaming set top box (and thats not even HD as I understand it).

A second thing is that Joe Q. Public can barely tell the difference between HD and DVD, forget lossless sound on his $300 HTIB setup or 32" or 42" "Huge" widescreen set.


Quote:


playback, even after waiting an hour for the d-load to start. And I'm paying $5 to essentially RENT the movie for 24 hours. Let me tell you, I was in Target y-day, and they had at least 30 Blu-Ray titles for 19.99. My reaction: rent this!

My reaction would have been F-That $19.99? Hell no..talk to me when catalog titles are $9.99 and new releases debut at $14.99...then...maybe.

Quote:


ready for movie downloads...just look at how wildly unsuccessful movie pay-per views have been on national cable services, and that process is so simple and straight-forward its unbelievable.

Uh, not sure where you are getting your information, but digital pay per view continues to thrive...and wait until everyone goes to digital boxes in 2009.

Quote:


I really believe the drop in blu-ray movies prices (which we're already beginning to see) will be the death knell if MS doesn't get their head out of their a** quickly...and I mean quickly.

Uh, so you're saying that the movie-playing ability on the PS3 alone will bury the 360? how in the heck to do you relate that?

Maybe because the PS3 is a movie machine first and a game machine second? Or because nobody realizes that the 360 was built as a game machine first and a media hub second?

Quote:


It would be foolish to underestimate the amount of people who consider hi-def movie playback when comparing these 3-$500 consoles (my brothers buying a ps3 tomorrow, JUST for that reason).

We've already acknowledged that people buy the PS3 as a BD player first, thats not the arguement here. Those people don't matter much to Sony because the attach-rate of software sold to those people is so low they hardly show up on the radar. Its hard to compare those users to game-buyers on the 360.

Quote:


For whatever its worth, I would be willing to bet a HEFTY sum they will announce one within the next 6 months just for that reason, For their sake, I hope they're not too late.

Respectfully,

James

M$ has already gone on the record to state there will be no add-on BD drive for the 360. For one thing, the day they implement it Sony would probably start requiring studios to use the IPT flag to prevent watching the films in HD over Component, and you wouldn't get the lossless sound of BD......

But moreso....by this xmas the PS3 wont be the cheapest BD player on the market.....since you admitted you hardly play games, would you rather a $400 PS3/Game machine with no remote control, or a dedicated $200 or cheaper BD set top machine?

As a movie player you, and your brother, would likely choose the latter, no?
So now its back to apples and apples as the 360 and PS3 fight it out as "game machines".
post #92 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Hey guys-

I'm 31 years old and I bought a ps3, primarily for the blu-ray playback...I also picked up a phenomenal gaming machine that I rarely use to boot. That said, to be quite honest, I just do not see anything but a PS3 takeover in the next 9 months if MS refuses to produce a blu-ray player.

Why?

The idea that this country is on the verge of 20, 30, or 40 GIG HI-DEF (or 6 gig compressed version), digital movie download revolution is insane. I speak from experience. I own an appletv and the d-load times, quality and RENTAL factors in regards to HD content are a joke. No reasonable person would compare the quality of them to a blu-ray. This reality essentially requires consumers to purchase playback hardware and software that alleviates these issues. The ps3 fits the bill marvelously. The 360 does not.

Just to add: I have a 3-6mbps i-net connection and STILL get hiccups in playback, even after waiting an hour for the d-load to start. And I'm paying $5 to essentially RENT the movie for 24 hours. Let me tell you, I was in Target y-day, and they had at least 30 Blu-Ray titles for 19.99. My reaction: rent this!

I really believe the drop in blu-ray movies prices (which we're already beginning to see) will be the death knell if MS doesn't get their head out of their a** quickly...and I mean quickly.

It would be foolish to underestimate the amount of people who consider hi-def movie playback when comparing these 3-$500 consoles (my brothers buying a ps3 tomorrow, JUST for that reason).

By the way, I have no dog in this fight. The 360 is a fine machine and will likely be around for years regardless of the blu-ray outcome. That said however, I think people are being terribly naive if they think they can compete with ps3 in the near future without some type of blu-ray playback.

Respectfully,

James

As you point out right away, the PS3 is an excellent Blu-ray player. I was opposite you, I wanted the best "game" machine available so I went with the 360. I think the 360 will do just fine, they have the games and their online service is still unmatched. When I decide to get a Blu-Ray player I may consider the PS3, but it'll be in a few years or the the price will have to be lower. By that time there may be a better Blu-ray pl;ayer for cheaper than a PS3.
post #93 of 129
I'm not the best "re-quoter" in the world, so forgive my methodology below:




Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

That wont happen, M$ is definately behind its own digital download service, a BD drive wouldn't really be practical when you can expect to see $200 Korean set top BD players by Xmas of this year.

Hoping for a $200 BD 6-7 months is wishful thinking, to say the least. Also, you can almost rest assured that the PS3 will get another price hit in the next 6 months. Smartly, Sony will market the "duality" of the machine...it just makes sense.

Rest assured that digital downloads are alive and well, Comcast is adding hundreds if not thousands of HD movies available for download this year, Netflix is bringing out a streaming set top box (and thats not even HD as I understand it).

A second thing is that Joe Q. Public can barely tell the difference between HD and DVD, forget lossless sound on his $300 HTIB setup or 32" or 42" "Huge" widescreen set.

Sorry, but this is absurd. Because HD is not popularly "on fire" right now has nothing to do with people "not recognizing" the difference between 1080 HD and standard dvd's.
It is still the cost (one of the HUGE reasons the ps3 is the #1 BD player, btw).


My reaction would have been F-That $19.99? Hell no..talk to me when catalog titles are $9.99 and new releases debut at $14.99...then...maybe.


Huh? Take a look at the price points on newly released DVD's: $15-$20. Yes, $15-$20. BD's won't be anywhere near those price levels for SOME time. As others have noted, the "hard copy" public still wants physical discs in their collection...not one-time movie rentals. $15 titles are just around the corner.


Uh, not sure where you are getting your information, but digital pay per view continues to thrive...and wait until everyone goes to digital boxes in 2009.

This is debatable, as you can find info arguing ether side in a 60 sec google search.
Certainly, d-load and pay-per-view sales haven't destoryed DVD sales? As soon as BD reaches a price-point consumers find acceptable, it will take off.

Don't get me wrong, on demand "is" the future, just not the the future of 2008 and 09.


Uh, so you're saying that the movie-playing ability on the PS3 alone will bury the 360? how in the heck to do you relate that?

How do I "relate" that? It is the DUALITY of the machine, not inherently one aspect or the other.

Maybe because the PS3 is a movie machine first and a game machine second? Or because nobody realizes that the 360 was built as a game machine first and a media hub second?
15

Again, as I said in the original post, I never said the 360 would disappear, just that it would effectively be "beaten" by the ps3, and a large portion of that "beating" would be attributable to the ps3's BD playback. The lack of a BD player in the 360 is a senselessly "clever" omission that will hurt its marketability and many consumers will shop elsewhere.


We've already acknowledged that people buy the PS3 as a BD player first, thats not the arguement here. Those people don't matter much to Sony bethe cause the attach-rate of software sold to those people is so low they hardly show up on the radar. Its hard to compare those users to game-buyers on the 360.

ok, agreed...to a point, many people DO buy it primarily as a BD player. HOWEVER, plenty of people purchased the ps3 on the belief that it is a superior gaming machine and holds more promise than the 360 (that's what I've read anyway). Again, I could care less about this, but its clear that they are not ALL being bought merely as movie machines.



M$ has already gone on the record to state there will be no add-on BD drive for the 360. For one thing, the day they implement it Sony would probably start requiring studios to use the IPT flag to prevent watching the films in HD over Component, and you wouldn't get the lossless sound of BD......

MS can do whatever they want. They could create a player (and a new console for that matter) with 1.3 hdmi output and the problem is effectively evaporated- its hardly a "state of the art" endeavor at this point. Don't most 360's have hdmi output anyway at this point (I don't know)? Worst, the 360's inherent limitations matter not to the consumer, no BD is no BD, which is where my argument rests.

But moreso....by this xmas the PS3 wont be the cheapest BD player on the market.....since you admitted you hardly play games, would you rather a $400 PS3/Game machine with no remote control, or a dedicated $200 or cheaper BD set top machine?


Again, a $200 is hardly guaranteed...$249-$299 is more realistic..and a 2.0 profile player is a whole nother story. A $50 drop (at least) in the ps3 will force a lot (not ALL) of people to make a decison, and you can bet millions willl go with the DUALITY of the ps3.

As a movie player you, and your brother, would likely choose the latter, no?
So now its back to apples and apples as the 360 and PS3 fight it out as "game machines".

In a word, well, no. While neither of us are "gamers" it still cool for a game here or there, and more and more games like guitar hero are around that make for "party" options and the like. And, like I said, a price drop in the ps3 before christmas will only make it a more attactive option for those who want both....not to mention its other capabilities you'll never find in a standalone BD player.

It will never be an "apples to apples" comparison as long as the 360 lacks the BD playback, You simply cannot disregard a major attibute of a device and then compare it to another that lacks the capability. No prospective buyer (no matter how much of a game nut they may be) would say: "Ok, they are both exceptional gaming consoles...I'll take the one without the blu-ray player."


In the end, I'm sticking to my guns regarding the blu-ray playback playing a big part in the seperation between the ps3 and 360 in the coming months. It all really comes down to how you anticipate the public viewing HD content. If you believe digital d-loads are the "semi-immediate" future, then the ps3 will likely see no real direct benefits of it (BD) and this "war" between Sony and MS will continue.

If, however, you think the majority of the public will continue to seek out "hard copy" media, than you can rest asssured the ps3 will continue to attract swarms of them, whether BD player prices are 2, 250, or 300 dollars.

By the way, my fiance's 52 year-old father just bought one yesterday (a ps3). And he hasn't played a video game in 25 years. Just think about how many millions more will do the same in the next 6 months alone?

Only time will tell, but I believe MS is digging their own grave on this one. We'll probably know for sure in a matter of months....let's just watch the sales in the next 4?

Respectfully,

James
post #94 of 129
I disagree, one is an ok game machine with a blu ray player, and the other is an exceptional game machine without a blu ray player. In my own household, 360 for gaming, and ps3 for movies.
post #95 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

By the way, my fiance's 52 year-old father just bought one yesterday (a ps3). And he hasn't played a video game in 25 years. Just think about how many millions more will do the same in the next 6 months alone?

I don't mean any disrespect to you here, and I may be totally off the mark, but you are talking like one of those guys who is new to the Home Theatre thing and who automatically assumes that *everyone* is psyched about HD, rushing to 1080p, and lossless sound, and so on and so on.

Truth is, most people could care less about Home Theatre......and while in time BD will take over as DVD's start to fade away, it wont be happing in the next 4 months, that I can guarantee. In fact, it probably wont happen until DVD"s stop being pressed, like how DVD didn't take off until they actually stopped making movies on VHS...AND DVD players hit the sub-$200 mark.

Now DVD is a huge step up from VHS..but unless you have the right equipment, HD is not a huge step up from DVD. There is a law of diminishing returns with HD..the jump from VHS to DVD was paramount...the jump from DVD to HD on anything but the largest sets can be UNDERwhelming. And, you have to pick the right show.....if I want to impress someone with HD I dont show them movies, I show them PBS or Discovery HD.

And before you do that whole "lets compare 1 million pixels to..." thing, I'm talking real-world performance. Of the 30 or so people who have seen my home theatre setup, exactly 0 of them want them for their own. IN fact two of the guys I work with bought 480p projectors instead of 720p ones because to them the DVD's look so good they can't care less about HD, particuarly when the 480p machiens were half price. And they use them exclusively outdoors. And these are prime candidate consumers...good incomes, late 30's. For a vast majority of people who aren't "into" the hobby of HT, Money talks.

Quote:
Only time will tell, but I believe MS is digging their own grave on this one. We'll probably know for sure in a matter of months....let's just watch the sales in the next 4?

Yep, and respectfully I think you are completely off the mark. You're assuming that Microsoft is going to shrivel up and die and the PS3 is suddenly going to be the lead platform for everything? Just take a look at the software lineups for the next 12 months and your arguement is already standing on weakened knees.

The HD movie thing is nice to have, but it wont be sinking Microsoft anytime soon. The PS3 may continue to sell a bajillion hardware sales, just like the Wii, but if people are only using it for BD playback and not software (and the attach rate for PS3's and software is pretty weak right now) then Sony is in trouble on the gaming front.

OH yeah..just one thing to clarify, lets be careful when we use the word "BEAT" here. If the 360 sells 20 million and 18 million LIVE subscribers......and then is replaced, but the PS3 continues to sell and sells 80 million, does that mean the PS3 has "beaten" the 360? Or do we get into how much software was sold...how many LIVE subscriptions...hoiw much DLC.....in the end, how much money did company A make versus Company B. I think it ssafe to say that the 360 doesn't have the lifespan that the PS3 does, because the PS3 can be a BD player 10 years from now while the 360 will be that old game machine you have in your closet

So now its enjoy the systems we have and wait and see if the PS3 has any tricks up its sleeve, and wait to see how long microsoft is going to wait to release their "next" system...which, I do agree, is probably 3-4 years away at this point.
post #96 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post


I think people are being terribly naive if they think they can compete with ps3 in the near future without some type of blu-ray playback.

For whatever its worth, I would be willing to bet a HEFTY sum they will announce one within the next 6 months just for that reason, For their sake, I hope they're not too late.

Respectfully,

James


http://kotaku.com/381412/kojima-disa...l-gear-solid-4

that's not a good start ^

For a game machine I'll take a lower price and better graphics. And as of right now so would the majority of the market.

The future will be DL content.
post #97 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Cell View Post

http://kotaku.com/381412/kojima-disa...l-gear-solid-4

that's not a good start ^

For a game machine I'll take a lower price and better graphics. And as of right now so would the majority of the market.

The future will be DL content.

I disagree. The Wii has the lower price and the majority of the market but hardly the better graphics.
post #98 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

I don't mean any disrespect to you here, and I may be totally off the mark, but you are talking like one of those guys who is new to the Home Theatre thing and who automatically assumes that *everyone* is psyched about HD, rushing to 1080p, and lossless sound, and so on and so on.

Truth is, most people could care less about Home Theatre......and while in time BD will take over as DVD's start to fade away, it wont be happing in the next 4 months, that I can guarantee. In fact, it probably wont happen until DVD"s stop being pressed, like how DVD didn't take off until they actually stopped making movies on VHS...AND DVD players hit the sub-$200 mark.

Now DVD is a huge step up from VHS..but unless you have the right equipment, HD is not a huge step up from DVD. There is a law of diminishing returns with HD..the jump from VHS to DVD was paramount...the jump from DVD to HD on anything but the largest sets can be UNDERwhelming. And, you have to pick the right show.....if I want to impress someone with HD I dont show them movies, I show them PBS or Discovery HD.

And before you do that whole "lets compare 1 million pixels to..." thing, I'm talking real-world performance. Of the 30 or so people who have seen my home theatre setup, exactly 0 of them want them for their own. IN fact two of the guys I work with bought 480p projectors instead of 720p ones because to them the DVD's look so good they can't care less about HD, particuarly when the 480p machiens were half price. And they use them exclusively outdoors. And these are prime candidate consumers...good incomes, late 30's. For a vast majority of people who aren't "into" the hobby of HT, Money talks.



Yep, and respectfully I think you are completely off the mark. You're assuming that Microsoft is going to shrivel up and die and the PS3 is suddenly going to be the lead platform for everything? Just take a look at the software lineups for the next 12 months and your arguement is already standing on weakened knees.

The HD movie thing is nice to have, but it wont be sinking Microsoft anytime soon. The PS3 may continue to sell a bajillion hardware sales, just like the Wii, but if people are only using it for BD playback and not software (and the attach rate for PS3's and software is pretty weak right now) then Sony is in trouble on the gaming front.

OH yeah..just one thing to clarify, lets be careful when we use the word "BEAT" here. If the 360 sells 20 million and 18 million LIVE subscribers......and then is replaced, but the PS3 continues to sell and sells 80 million, does that mean the PS3 has "beaten" the 360? Or do we get into how much software was sold...how many LIVE subscriptions...hoiw much DLC.....in the end, how much money did company A make versus Company B. I think it ssafe to say that the 360 doesn't have the lifespan that the PS3 does, because the PS3 can be a BD player 10 years from now while the 360 will be that old game machine you have in your closet

So now its enjoy the systems we have and wait and see if the PS3 has any tricks up its sleeve, and wait to see how long microsoft is going to wait to release their "next" system...which, I do agree, is probably 3-4 years away at this point.



Man. For the third time, I do not think (nor ever said) the ps3 would "sink" either the 360 or MS (ha ha) for that matter.

hdtv link:

http://www.tvweek.com/news/2007/06/c..._hdtv_sets.php

Your hdtv rant is amusing: 17 MILLION hdtv's were sold in 2007 ALONE. Over 20 million households receive HD programming.

That is a shitload of households by ANY measure. There are an appreciable number who appreciate hi-def content....many who have purchased and many who simply could not afford it- but that's changing QUICKLY.

And no, I'm hardly new to home theater and fully realize that the majority of this country currently does not have a bonifide "home theater" in the their living space. That said, my contention reamains the same: people making the move to hi-def will buy ps3's by the MILLIONS over other available stand alone players. This accomplishes TWO items: 1. it significantly reduces the number of potential 360 buyers as MOST will not purchase both machines. and 2. it generates new "gamers" (kinda like me) who would have never purchased just a video game console alone.

These are imperative distinctions to understand.

The ps3 will do well:

Because of its cost (read the NEWEST post on this site's home page that asserts that a $299 BD player won't hit store shelves til LATE 2009!

Because of its gaming aspect. Yes, I believe there's millions of people who "ignorantly" believe the ps3 offers an exceptional gaming experience.

Because of the media center offerings.

And lastly; because of its ability to playback BD's.

There is no ONE reason why it will take over, but the BD surey will sway at least HUNDREDS of thousands of buyers in this country alone (3 in my family already). Watch the numbers.

As far as the definition of a "beating", you are correct in a respect, even if the ps3 outsells the 360 by a 2 to 1 margin over the summer you can bet EITHER side will slant/skew the statistics every which way to paint a victorious image, so it's senseless wasting any time on the issue.

It needs be made clear here (AGAIN) that I'm NOT maintaining that it is the "PS3's" blu-ray player alone is the crux of the issue here, it is (much more imperatively) the 360's lack of one.

You can dance around the issue any which way you want, but I will GUARANTEE you that one (or both) of the following scenarios will occur before the end of 2008:

1. MS will announce the production of either a blu ray capable console/seperate drive (or both).

2. the ps3 will begin to DEFINITIVELY outsell the 360 (what definitively means exactly, I do not know...let's jut say by margins that are pronounced and undeniable to a REASONABLE person)

Really, there's not much more to say here. You eiher believe one way or the other.

It is of course crucial to remember that the 360 had a 12 month head start on the ps3 and that has helped it immensely in the past year with the domino effect of "pattern purchasing" or friends buying what their friends have".

Now should be about the time when you see that effect taking hold with the ps3, so I would reason to guess that you should start seeing the ps3 pulling away in sales in he next 3-4 months. We'll see.

Again, the point is, that MS (and apparently, many here) feel that "fighting back" with a blu-ray player is the wrong move, and the logic behind such an assertion ceases to compute with me, but hey, I've been wrong before.


All I know is someone will be saying "I told you so" 6 months from now, and the other will likely be maintaining the same...it's just the way I've discovered this "game" works (keeping in mind, I could reallygive a **** less)!

take care,
James
post #99 of 129
Quote:


Your hdtv rant is amusing: 17 MILLION hdtv's were sold in 2007 ALONE. Over 20 million households receive HD programming

What makes you think that every single person out of that number of displays sold are hooking up any game system? It is well known that although 17 mil have bought HD displays it won't be suprising how many actually do use HD or are aware they are not watching HD when they think they are. Not everyone goes to Best Buy or Circuit City and gets the info and even when you do no gurantee they get the info on what they need. This includes going with surround also.

Now any ideas on how to resolve the housing crises and income that families are having in the U.S.? Maybe Blu-Ray will save them? They buy a PS3 and all their problems go away. It has already been predicted by new comers here saying the PS3 will outsell the 360 the rest of this year and after 2 months that isn't going to happen so yes I will remember this qoute

"so I would reason to guess that you shoud start seeing the ps3 pulling away in sales in he next 3-4 months. We'll see."

The world and industry has grown and showed 3 consoles can survive and sale and I don't see either of these by a huge gap from this point IMO. You seem to simply ignore movie downloads and simply right it off. You are aware Sony is planning to launch its movie service this summer right? Did you factor the possibility of how that affects Blu-Ray? Up to this point not one word from you mentioning about their plans of going this route. I am a dual owner of both consoles. So if they offer the same movies I can get on BR and just simply download a movie that doesn't cost me 30 bucks. That works for me. Why would I think that can't work for the very same millions of HD owners and PS3 owners you mention about? Regardless I have options from downloading from all these services and watching standard DVD to HD-DVD(what movies I actually have) to BR movies. Millions of others just simply go with one or the other and don't care. Alot just simply care about games and it shows with the 360.
post #100 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Cell View Post

http://kotaku.com/381412/kojima-disa...l-gear-solid-4

that's not a good start ^

For a game machine I'll take a lower price and better graphics. And as of right now so would the majority of the market.

The future will be DL content.

Where did Kojima say that the game would be better on a 360?

IMO, this is a part of his advertising. "BD50 is not enough for MSG4" "PS3 not powerful enough" IE we're so awesome that no machine can ever deliver our vision.

Either that, or he likes using the underpromise over deliver approach.

As far as BD for the 360 is concerned. I am not surprised. I am not sure why anyone would be.

1) It would remind people that they choose poorly if they let the HD-DVD add on sway them towards the 360

2) They would probably have quite a few people asking about trade in money for their HD-DVD add on

3) It would give the PS3 a clear price advantage, if the player+360 cost $100 or so more than a PS3 alone.

A standalone or the PS3 is the only way to go for a BD player, an add has too many limitations
post #101 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Your hdtv rant is amusing: 17 MILLION hdtv's were sold in 2007 ALONE. Over 20 million households receive HD programming.

17 Million HDTVs were sold in 2007 because they are the only type of TV you can buy Go try and find a 4:3 analog set...not so easy anymore.

Quote:


That said, my contention reamains the same: people making the move to hi-def will buy ps3's by the MILLIONS over other available stand alone players. This accomplishes TWO items: 1. it significantly reduces the number of potential 360 buyers as MOST will not purchase both machines. and 2. it generates new "gamers" (kinda like me) who would have never purchased just a video game console alone.

Sony always had that advantage....Microsoft adding a BD drive wouldn't make any difference, it would still be $$$ to buy a 360 and the BD add-on, and there will be cheaper BD drives in NO time (especially if we use your estimates about how BD is going to take off).

Again, if the PS3 sells 80 million units and the 360 sells 20 million, what does that mean? Nothihng, until you look at the attach rate of software to consoles. A videogame system is only as good as the software that runs on it, and the 360 has currently something like double the attach rate of the Wii or the PS3, which means developers know they are going to sell more software to a 360 owner than a Wii or PS3 owner, regardless of how many PS3's are in the market. That is what matters to a gamer. The PS3 as a BD player is only viable until cheaper BD players hit the market.

Quote:


Because of its cost (read the NEWEST post on this site's home page that asserts that a $299 BD player won't hit store shelves til LATE 2009!

Ok, lets say that the PS3 remains the best BD player out there until xmas of 2009 and the cheapest at $400. So?

Quote:


Because of its gaming aspect. Yes, I believe there's millions of people who "ignorantly" believe the ps3 offers an exceptional gaming experience.

Oh it does, but again...So? Microsoft already has millions upon millions of systems sold and an air-tight online presence, and developers lined up to make cash with them because, unlike the PS3, almost every 360 sold is sold to a gamer who buys software.

Quote:


Because of the media center offerings.

Honestly I've messed with the PS3 and the 360's media center stuff, and the 360 is far better at it than the PS3 is, at least so far that has been my experience. I can get stuff streaming much easier and playing back without incident on my 360. BUT....again, we're off on a tangent.

Quote:


There is no ONE reason why it will take over, but the BD surey will sway at least HUNDREDS of thousands of buyers in this country alone (3 in my family already). Watch the numbers.

Right..but....so? Because the 360 has already won its battles....its pulled a greater user base from the original xbox days and got a much higher number of those people as LIVE subscribers. So they've accomplished their goals.
They're making money for developers and that means more games in the future. Win.

Quote:


1. MS will announce the production of either a blu ray capable console/seperate drive (or both).

uh-huh.

Quote:


2. the ps3 will begin to DEFINITIVELY outsell the 360 (what definitively means exactly, I do not know...let's jut say by margins that are pronounced and undeniable to a REASONABLE person)

Yes...the PS3 SHOULD outsell the 360 on a dollar-for-dollar basis.....and yet even at nearly the same cost, and with no Blu Ray drive and with a $50-per-year fee for Live, the 360 continues to sell....I believe the "numbers" show it equally sold or beat the PS3 last month. Thats a telling arguement.

Another advantage is that M$ can cut the price of their system at their leisure...Sony's already shed $300 from the unit in its year and a half on Earth, and the $400 unit today has been stripped of some features to get it there.....we'll see.
post #102 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

What makes you think that every single person out of that number of displays sold are hooking up any game system? It is well known that although 17 mil have bought HD displays it won't be suprising how many actually do use HD or are aware they are not watching HD when they think they are. Not everyone goes to Best Buy or Circuit City and gets the info and even when you do no gurantee they get the info on what they need. This includes going with surround also.

Now any ideas on how to resolve the housing crises and income that families are having in the U.S.? Maybe Blu-Ray will save them? They buy a PS3 and all their problems go away. It has already been predicted by new comers here saying the PS3 will outsell the 360 the rest of this year and after 2 months that isn't going to happen so yes I will remember this qoute

"so I would reason to guess that you shoud start seeing the ps3 pulling away in sales in he next 3-4 months. We'll see."

The world and industry has grown and showed 3 consoles can survive and sale and I don't see either of these by a huge gap from this point IMO. You seem to simply ignore movie downloads and simply right it off. You are aware Sony is planning to launch its movie service this summer right? Did you factor the possibility of how that affects Blu-Ray? Up to this point not one word from you mentioning about their plans of going this route. I am a dual owner of both consoles. So if they offer the same movies I can get on BR and just simply download a movie that doesn't cost me 30 bucks. That works for me. Why would I think that can't work for the very same millions of HD owners and PS3 owners you mention about? Regardless I have options from downloading from all these services and watching standard DVD to HD-DVD(what movies I actually have) to BR movies. Millions of others just simply go with one or the other and don't care. Alot just simply care about games and it shows with the 360.

I'm not sure it can be any more OBVIOUS, but of course a lot of people purchasing hdtv's are not yet receiving hd programming (hence the 17 million units sold in 2007 ALONE and "only" 20+ million hd subscribers total).
This will take time. The important point is that HD is much morepopular than many would like you to believe. There's probably 50+ millions hdtvs out there, judging by the % of them (those who own hdtv's) who actually receive hd programming (somewhere around 30%).

Additionally, already there are DOZENS of blu-ray titles available for 19.99 and less...where do think these prices are going?
Oh an d by the way, lets not even bring up the qualtiy of 95% of avail d-loads...we all know no one cares about that anyway

That said, you (and others) are STILL missing the point...even SONY's d-load sevice will not out-pace the blu-rays sales!!! It's akin to stating that time-warners pay per view movies service has out sold warner bros dvd sales (I realize they are not the same, just making a comparison). keeping in mind that dvd's are at LEAST TWICE the cost of a one-time pay-per view. It (pay per view) has been around for years and people who said the same about dvd sales were wrong: It HASN'T happened and it is not going to happen anytime soon (a couple more years at least).

People don't want to "rent" their movies any more than they want to rent their music. If they make downloadable movies that u can legally keep on your HDD, THEN the game will change Til then, forget about it. And I honestly dont see that climate (just renting) changing real soon. Apple and friends (read HOLLYWOOD) will continue to just "lend" online video content. Even DTV just announced that they will not allow their on demand content to be saved to their own hard drive (thanks a**holes!!!).

People will continue to desire to buy "harp copy" media that they can playback on a device. The ps3 can do this, the 360 cannot. The ps3 will sell an appreciable amount of units based upon this fact (and many more due to other factors already exhausted here).

people savvy enough to get into hi-def are certainly savvy enough to know that there's plenty of content avail right on the i-net, right? why buy a 4, 5 or 600 dollar BD player when you can buy a $200 applet tv and dowload away!!!???

yeah, that's what I thought.

its not the end of the world, microsoft or the 360... just a certain reality.

I promise you. watch it happen. I suiggest people stop putting the cart before the horse and spend more time getting serious about how this country goes about business. Downloads "are" the future just not the future of the masses in the next 24months or so.

james
post #103 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

17 Million HDTVs were sold in 2007 because they are the only type of TV you can buy Go try and find a 4:3 analog set...not so easy anymore.



Sony always had that advantage....Microsoft adding a BD drive wouldn't make any difference, it would still be $$$ to buy a 360 and the BD add-on, and there will be cheaper BD drives in NO time (especially if we use your estimates about how BD is going to take off).

Again, if the PS3 sells 80 million units and the 360 sells 20 million, what does that mean? Nothihng, until you look at the attach rate of software to consoles. A videogame system is only as good as the software that runs on it, and the 360 has currently something like double the attach rate of the Wii or the PS3, which means developers know they are going to sell more software to a 360 owner than a Wii or PS3 owner, regardless of how many PS3's are in the market. That is what matters to a gamer. The PS3 as a BD player is only viable until cheaper BD players hit the market.



Ok, lets say that the PS3 remains the best BD player out there until xmas of 2009 and the cheapest at $400. So?



Oh it does, but again...So? Microsoft already has millions upon millions of systems sold and an air-tight online presence, and developers lined up to make cash with them because, unlike the PS3, almost every 360 sold is sold to a gamer who buys software.



Honestly I've messed with the PS3 and the 360's media center stuff, and the 360 is far better at it than the PS3 is, at least so far that has been my experience. I can get stuff streaming much easier and playing back without incident on my 360. BUT....again, we're off on a tangent.



Right..but....so? Because the 360 has already won its battles....its pulled a greater user base from the original xbox days and got a much higher number of those people as LIVE subscribers. So they've accomplished their goals.
They're making money for developers and that means more games in the future. Win.



uh-huh.



Yes...the PS3 SHOULD outsell the 360 on a dollar-for-dollar basis.....and yet even at nearly the same cost, and with no Blu Ray drive and with a $50-per-year fee for Live, the 360 continues to sell....I believe the "numbers" show it equally sold or beat the PS3 last month. Thats a telling arguement.

Another advantage is that M$ can cut the price of their system at their leisure...Sony's already shed $300 from the unit in its year and a half on Earth, and the $400 unit today has been stripped of some features to get it there.....we'll see.

It's funny, you say: "so" to salient points I bring up regarding what will ultimately account for the ps3 dramatically out-pacing the 360. Where can one begin to argue with such "benign-ness".

1. I countered with ps3 costs and stand alone costs becasue earlier (read the post) you were maintaining that the intro of $200 BD players would off set those JUST buying the ps3 for BD plyback, as they would avoid the machine to purchase the cheaper "movie-only" models. Clearly, you are LIKELY to be wrong, as there are no plans fro a $200 BD player anytime soon. Obviously, the lack of a low-ball player will greatly assist ps3 sales. And like me, it will "convert" many who would not ordinarily consider themselves"gamers". And yes...many more will NEVER buy a game..absolutely true. Many will....absolutely true...especially as they begin to widen the typical "gaming applications. It's embarrassing how many adults get n2 gutiar hero and wii...do you think they're going to ignore these markets? New software will be developed (and is being developed). That software will be purchased.

2. you don't sound like a dense person, but stop talking this nonsense that ps3 has no "gaming base" and their on-line capabilities are non-existent. Yeah, we get it, the xbox "live" experience (or whatever the hell its called) is superior. ok. Perhaps that is the reason the ps3 is not already destroying it...and while I may not know a lot about this stuff, logic dictates that the ps3 will get nothing but better in this regard...I've already heard about some supposed massive upgrade to their "store" and such real soon.

I guess if you're going to argue that a "4 to 1" console war win for the ps3 is somehow a great thing for ms, you should probably apply for a job in PR at microsoft, cause I can assure you that the "idiots" working there already would consider it a massive call for concern.

I know, I know...no one would buy any SOFTWARE for those PS'3s anyway!

james
post #104 of 129
you know, all this really proves to me (again, a person who really doesn't care) is that SOME people really into this stuff will rabidly...and I mean RABIDLY defend any decision these companies make, REGARDLESS of how it effects their own experience or the quality or versatiltiy of the machine.

I could guarantee you that if MS decided to manufacture a blu-ray player they would be attacked for "bowing down to sony", "not thinking forward", blah blah blah.

it just wouldn 't matter. In the end, I just feel bad for xbox 360 owners that will have to buy a 400 or 500 dollar box to get what ps3 owners get right out of the gate 9even though theyre getting an "average" gaming system).

I also know that if MS introduced a BD player, they would remain competitive with ps3, and they wouldn't be setting themselves up for an immediate "console slaughter" and a less immediate, but draining defeat in the software war.

As it won't be long before the gap between the systems becomes so pronounced that "my brother" (360 owner now ps3 owner) will be everywhere in addtion to those who have JUST purchased the ps3 alone from christmas of 07 til christmas of 08.

Time will certainly tell.

james
post #105 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Additionally, already there are DOZENS of blu-ray titles available for 19.99 and less...where do think these prices are going? Oh an d by the way, lets not even bring up the qualtiy of 95% of avail d-loads...we all know no one cares about that anyway

Couple of things that you aren't grasping here:

1) Unless your a technophile, you can't tell the difference between a BluRay or a Cable HDTV broadcast or a highly-compressed X264/WMVHD file. Alot of people wont be able to tell the difference between an upscaled DVD and a BD, or the above mentioned transportation solutions. Stop knocking "downloaded HD"....I dont know about AppleTV, but if it sucks, blame Apple.
The HD I can get from comcast or Microsoft looks sufficiently HD to my eyes.
I dont get nearly the kind of macroblocking I used to.

Again, we're talking REAL WORLD HD use...not this "Lets freeze the screen and blow up a section of it to see if that sign in the background can be read on both copies of this movie" crap.......like the review sites like to do. Real world "Press play and hand me the popcorn and oh can you pause it I have to pee" movie watching.

Quote:


That said, you (and others) are STILL missing the point...even SONY's d-load sevice will not out-pace the blu-rays sales!!!

And what you aren't acknowledging is that we are BARELY into DVD being 10 years old, and really DVD didn't catch fire until 2001/2002, so people who finally abandoned their VHS collections just a few years ago are now building up a DVD library. Do you HONESTLY expect people, who have just amassed whatever DVD collection they have over the past few years at Circuit City and Best Buy $9.99 or $7.99 sales, to suddenly start to pony up $19.99 to $35.00 for a High Def copy of the movie that ALREADY looks and sounds AWESOME on their existing sets?

Answer: Hell No. Its going to take time........and its also going to take:
1) $200 BD players
2) $9.99-$14.99 BD movies, none of this $27.50 crap at launch....

NOW IN THE MEAN TIME.....we've got Cable Companies offering more and more direct download PPV stuff in HD, I just checked and there were like 20 FREE Movies I could get in HD on Comcast yesterday, and if I wanted to pay? Well quite a few more. Then there are the on-demand ones in HD I can get out of Starz or HBO.....

People love to have a hard-copy, yes, but you DO understand that THAT PARADIGM IS SHIFTING right? Don't base your experience with Apple TV (an obscure device if I may be so bold) as some kind of litmus for all streaming technologies.

Quote:


It (pay per view) has been around for years and people who said the same about dvd sales were wrong: It HASN'T happened and it is not going to happen anytime soon (a couple more years at least).

Blockbuster is worried that rentals are down in their stores......NetFlix is teaming up to make their streaming service work on more than just PC's, soon to be able to stream to set-top boxes (and, rumor has it, to Xbox 360's and maybe even PS3's??)......whats that tell you?

Quote:


People don't want to "rent" their movies any more than they want to rent their music.

That is, quite frankly, the first time I've heard a person make that sweeping generalization in a long, long time. Today everything is disposable...and the more things are disposable, the less people feel they need to own something, so renting becomes just fine.

People LOVE to rent movies, rather than own.....they only own when its a movie they want to watch over and over, or when getting to the rental store is too inconvenient. Thanks to streaming and mail-services, those roadblocks have come down significantly.

Plus, with so many double, triple and quadruple dips in the DVD world, smarter consumers are out there saying "Why should I buy this disc at full price, there's gonna be a better special edition coming along soon anyhow, I'lljust rent it and wait for the GOOD ONE".

Quote:


Apple and friends (read HOLLYWOOD) will continue to just "lend" online video content. Even DTV just announced that they will not allow their on demand content to be saved to their own hard drive (thanks a**holes!!!).

You gotta get off this apple thing, clearly the service sucks according to you....but thats not the same with everything. I love Netflix's free streaming to my PC, I've used it in hotel rooms...I've used it sitting at my PC while doing work, etc. For a new movie that I dont want to own but might want to check out, why get in my car or wait for a netflix queue to become available when i can just pay $4 bucks and stream the movie right to my projector in HD?

If there was no value in that, or a huge demand for that, you wouldn't see companies investing so heavily in the technology.

Quote:


I promise you. watch it happen. I suiggest people stop putting the cart before the horse and spend more time getting serious about how this country goes about business. Downloads "are" the future just not the future of the masses in the next 24months or so.

james

I dunno dude, I think you're a little bit excitable about this whole BD thing.
Yeah its cool, and yeah its the only kid on the block, and yeah it will be the defacto standard...someday. But saying that is alot like saying "Water is Wet".

You make it sound like the world will be kicking and screaming and breaking down doors to get at BD's, and anything that doesnt play BD's will be left in the dust. Clearly, with BD's on the market for 2 years now....that ain't happening.

Even with BD now being the only game in town disc-wise....its still not happening.

Also remember, if the cable companies deploy DOCSIS 3.0 this year, an 8 gigabyte download will take just a few minutes....and you'd be amazed at what you can compress into 8 gigs at 720p (or even 1080p) using a modern codec like WMVHD (VC1) or X/H264 (MPEG4).
post #106 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

I could guarantee you that if MS decided to manufacture a blu-ray player they would be attacked for "bowing down to sony", "not thinking forward", blah blah blah.

No, its because people who own 360's bought it for gaming...if a 360 owner wants a BD player he'll get a PS3, or a BD player.

Quote:


it just wouldn 't matter. In the end, I just feel bad for xbox 360 owners that will have to buy a 400 or 500 dollar box to get what ps3 owners get right out of the gate 9even though theyre getting an "average" gaming system).

What 360 users get for their $400 or so is a whole library of A+ HD gaming titles and access to the best-implemented online gaming community currently available, with seamless integration. It doesn't play BD's. We'll get over it, or we'll buy a BD player.

Quote:


I also know that if MS introduced a BD player, they would remain competitive with ps3, and they wouldn't be setting themselves up for an immediate "console slaughter" and a less immediate, but draining defeat in the software war.



Quote:


As it won't be long before the gap between the systems becomes so pronounced that "my brother" (360 owner now ps3 owner) will be everywhere in addtion to those who have JUST purchased the ps3 alone from christmas of 07 til christmas of 08.

x2
post #107 of 129
I'm through here. it is obvious you view this "unexisting" demand for downloads as GREATER than the demand for hard copy HD media. Time will prove who is right...although I'm certain my prediction ill be proven correct: Blu-ray will win out for at least the next year (prob 2) and the 360 will contiune to lose market share to the ps3 because of that fact. The time after, will likely inlcude a transition over to the realiy you maintain is already occuring (which it isn') or WILL occur soon (which it won't).

Blu ray sales will soar in the next 6 months as more machines are sold, more titles become available, an prices come down. Digital movie downloads will CONTINUE to remain stagnant, and will not increase until a sea change in the industry occurs.

FAR LESS PEOPE ARE CONCERNED WITH MOVIE DOWNLOADS THAN BLU-RAYS.

talk to me in 4 months.
post #108 of 129
oh, and by the way...check out dvd sales for the last 5 years. Really looks like people aren't concerned with buying movies, heh? Certainly, it is unreasonable to assume that as prices fall for blu-rays that those trends will continue...right?!

Gee...why would this occur (hard movie purchases) when 90% of the public can already RENT THESE TITLES RIGHT ON THEIR CABLE AND SATELLITES SYSTEMS????!!!!

Friend, why can't you grasp this fact?

Ask the next ten people you run ito this very very, simple question:

"How many movies have you BOUGHT in the last 2 years, and how many movies have you "pay-per-viewed". You of course will quickly realize that even though they have had the "ability" to "rent" for 5+ YEARS ...virtually NONE of them use it!!!!

then ask yourself how "readied" these people are for the download revolution?

yep...that's what i thought..AGAIN.

Truth is, people will STILL choose to pay 15-$20 for a hi-def movie than 5-$7 to rent it. Yep...that's the truth. Pick a provider and look at HD pay-per-views and the same titles blu-ray sales. But I'm sure that's not a fair comparison, right? Even though the blu-ray is 4-6 times the price!!!- you'll still see people CHOOSING the more expensive option.

I looked for the specific link, but couldn't find it. Anyways, it was an article stating that "the Departed's" bluray sales had outpaced ALL of its pay-per-view options almost 3 to 1!!!!

JUST THINK ABOUT THAT: the blu-ray is has limited availability and is 30-$35 and the pay per view is available to virtually EVERYONE and is 5 bucks!!! WHAT WOULD EXPLAIN THIS?

(see above for the answer).

And I'm expecting this all to change why?

oh that's right, it isn't anytime soon.

james
post #109 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by briankmonkey View Post

I disagree. The Wii has the lower price and the majority of the market but hardly the better graphics.

I was talking about the 360 sorry.
post #110 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

I'm through here. it is obvious you view this "unexisting" demand for downloads as GREATER than the demand for hard copy HD media. Time will prove who is right...although I'm certain my prediction ill be proven correct: Blu-ray will win out for at least the next year (prob 2) and the 360 will contiune to lose market share to the ps3 because of that fact. The time after, will likely inlcude a transition over to the realiy you maintain is already occuring (which it isn') or WILL occur soon (which it won't).

Blu ray sales will soar in the next 6 months as more machines are sold, more titles become available, an prices come down. Digital movie downloads will CONTINUE to remain stagnant, and will not increase until a sea change in the industry occurs.

FAR LESS PEOPE ARE CONCERNED WITH MOVIE DOWNLOADS THAN BLU-RAYS.

talk to me in 4 months.


The problem with everything you keep saying is you seriously think it isn't possible for both to thrive and consumers would be happy with both options. You keep making claims that HD has now or will "for sure" skyrocket in the next couple of months. Crystal ball anyone? The debate has been okay but since that is your way of just saying kiss my a** I am right you are simply wrong attitude then okay, whatever. I will continue enjoying all my "options" I enjoyed before this conversation.
post #111 of 129
Quote:


oh, and by the way...check out dvd sales for the last 5 years. Really looks like people aren't concerned with buying movies, heh? Certainly, it is unreasonable to assume that as prices fall for blu-rays that those trends will continue...right?!

5 years ago movies were not in HD and so easily downloadable.
5 years ago I was able to by movies for $10.99
5 years ago I was playing the Xbox in 480p on every game I have on a new HD display.
5 years ago Voom sattelite was available with the most HD channels offered
5 years ago we didn't have HDMI and options for 1080i, 720p, and 1080p up-conversion to realize how much better my dvd's look in comparision to just connecting by component, s-video, and basic old composite. This includes consumers 5 years ago who didn't have HD displays and still want DVD only to hook it up with with a component to coaxial converter and didn't care about quality. THEY STILL DO THIS TODAY.

5 years later I am now choosing what movies I will actually buy on BD and what movies I will just simply rent off of marketplace because the movies cost too much and I game more I can watch the latest Lost episodes in HD even though it is free on Directv my signal for ABCHD goes in and out because I have to use an off-air antenna to recieve the local channel. What can I say I love Lost.
post #112 of 129
Holy cow, some seriously long posts in this thread. It's springtime fellas, get out and enjoy the weather

A few thoughts:
- A lot of people were predicting PS3 sales dominance upon the Bluray victory. The most recent sales figures show the 360 taking the lead again. So at least in the short term this has provided a modest boost for the PS3 at best.
- Something like half of all HDTV owners don't have any high def "content" at all. They just watch crummy stretched SD and regular DVDs. Flat panel TVs are often more of a fashion accessory or piece of furniture.
- Regular DVD players are a commodity and pretty much everyone has one. $400 PS3s as movie watchers aren't really compelling to most people - see the article on the site's main page to back this assertion up. When you're used to $50 players and $10 movies, high dollar Bluray players aren't very appealing. The positioning of the $400 PS3 as the lowest price BR player is really bad for BR adoption IMHO. It's forcing them to push BR on the market. What they really need are cheap BR players to create a pull.
- per the above item, it's more likely that the PS3 vs. 360 battle will continue along the same lines as it is now. Aside from the admittedly nice capability to play BR, the 360 pretty much has everything else going for it - price, game availability, online features, marketplace, etc. People aren't going to discount all that just because PS3 can play BR.
- By the time BR players are down to <$100 (which is the price I think they need to be at before people start buying them en masse) Xbox 3 could very well be out with built in BR.

jeff
post #113 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shape View Post

Actually, since HD-DVD left the building, the pricing is beginning to go up.

lol...bitter man u r bitter that bitter taste is still in ur mouth after all...
post #114 of 129
God this thread is still going on?? Why isnt it closed yet.

You want BR.. go buy a PS3.

IF a BR internal or external drive is ever announced for the 360.. then open this thread back up.



How simple is that?
post #115 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by tusloj View Post

lol...bitter man u r bitter that bitter taste is still in ur mouth after all...

wtf? was that english?
post #116 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by superklye View Post

wtf? was that english?

Probably a MySpace or AOL user.
post #117 of 129
Quote:


Holy cow, some seriously long posts in this thread. It's springtime fellas, get out and enjoy the weather

It rained this morning and I am at work. My job has me hop in my car to troubleshoot computers and accounts all over the base so I get to enjoy the weather when it is good
post #118 of 129
It could be that mastermaybe is just a little insecure about his PS3? For somebody who doesn't care or could care less he seems to be very opinionated.
post #119 of 129
In the meantime Mastermaybe you can tell us all why does this keep coming back up in conversation. The leap that Headrush pointed out isn't that big in comparison to the majority of consumers.

Quote:


Sony's New Headache: People Can’t Tell The Difference Between Blu-Ray, DVDs They Already Own
Vasanth Sridharan | April 24, 2008 1:52 PM
There’s a lot standing in the way of Blu-ray’s success. There's the price -- it costs $300 for a player and $30 for a movie. And there's technology -- the world is moving away from physical discs.

But Blu-ray's bigger problem may be even more basic -- people don't think the hi-def discs are better than the ones they already own. New research shows that people can’t really tell the difference between Blu-Ray discs and normal DVDs, especially people who use "upconverting" DVD players, or who don’t own the highest-end TVs.

Poor Sony (SNE). The company behind Blu-Ray barely has had time to put down the champagne from the format war victory celebration. There is a relatively easy solutions to their problems: A price drop. If the price of Blu-Ray players and discs comes close to that of their DVD counterparts -- next to nothing, for both the machines and the movies -- then people won’t care. But that won't be what Sony wants to hear.

http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/4/w...u_ray_and_dvds
post #120 of 129
Quote:


"But Blu-ray's bigger problem may be even more basic -- people don't think the hi-def discs are better than the ones they already own. New research shows that people can't really tell the difference between Blu-Ray discs and normal DVDs, especially people who use "upconverting" DVD players, or who don't own the highest-end TVs."

lol, and Atari 2600 games look just as good as 360 and PS3 games, right

I'd love to see who these people are.


This topic nees more staw
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Xbox Area
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › Xbox Area › No Blu-ray for the Xbox