No Blu-ray for the Xbox - Page 4  

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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.

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.

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!

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.

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).

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

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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

Originally Posted by HeadRusch

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".

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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?

Originally Posted by mastermaybe


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

Originally Posted by Red Cell

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.

Originally Posted by HeadRusch

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.

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

Originally Posted by Red Cell

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.

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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

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.

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.

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.

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)

Originally Posted by mboojigga

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.

Originally Posted by HeadRusch

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.

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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 (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.

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!!!).

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

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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.

Originally Posted by briankmonkey

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

Originally Posted by mastermaybe

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.

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?!

Originally Posted by Shape

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

Originally Posted by tusloj

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

Originally Posted by superklye

wtf? was that english?

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

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.

"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."