Originally Posted by kucharsk
For example, if you've already got a DVD player connected to a second HDTV in a bedroom or in the kids' room, why not replace it with a 560 and stop yourself from having to either buy films the kids would watch in both formats or force yourself to view only the DVD version?
IMO, the movies kids would watch are not exactly films I would prioritize or be critical of. I couldn't care less if Barney, Dora the Explorer or Hannah Montana weren't HD discs. It's a bit overkill if you ask me. Little Johnny 8 year old isn't going to care if his show has 1080 lines of resolution, and Little Johnny 8 year old's dad I don't think would get too upset that the disc is upscaled rather than native HD when Johnny watches his programs in the living room. If he is, he is way, WAY too into children's programming
There are many situations and applications that simply don't call for high definition and the correlating price tag. Heck, most of the TV shows I watch, I stream online. "House MD" or "The Simpsons" just wouldn't really require 7.1 surround sound and are quite acceptable even on my 17" laptop screen. But if your bedroom isn't equipped with surround sound and a good sized screen, the benefits of blu-ray are virtually zero, so why buy a $400 BD player when you can get one for $200 or a good DVD player for $50?
Blu-ray isn't widespread enough to warrant upgrading exclusively to BD players in the house yet. There are many, many films that are only available on DVD. Furthermore, if your kids are old enough to care about BD, they've probably been playing video games for several years now and would most likely prefer their doting parents to purchase a PS3 rather than a standalone player if said parents are willing to drop $400 on a high end blu-ray player for a bedroom