Originally Posted by Vampidemic
I have trouble relating. I don't use 3D or Wi-Fi myself, but these players pack a lot of bang for there buck. Players with this feature set sold for around twice as much a few years ago and much less than a decent VCR sold for 20 years ago.
Wi-Fi is considered a basic feature these days as many users simply aren't equipped to use the network features without it. I have to think there is very little if any cost saving to remove 3D support.
Also, the Sony players can stream more video formats than the Xbox, they're quiet and they use less electricity. The streaming features are very compelling for users that don't already have a game console. See the glass as half full! :-)
Since you don't understand, I'll explain it to you. 3D and/or Wi-Fi blu-ray players sell for more money than non-3D Wi-Fi Blu-ray players. Hell, adding a wireless-n card to a laptop costs at least $20. I imagine adding 3D support would be just as expensive, if not more. Yes, wi-fi is a basic feature on laptops. That doesn't mean it doesn't cost money.
So, paying retail for a $1,000 laptop is a great deal because it would have cost you $3K two years ago? Using your logic, I should pay more than $1K for extra features I will never use just because it used to cost $4K.
Xbox has more streaming content (you do realize they've been doing it for much longer & therefore have more license agreements). The Xbox is quiet too (at least the new ones which I have). Who the hell cares about electricity (what, it's gonna cost $1 more per month?).
Obviously, a wi-fi blu-ray player is extremely useful for people who don't have game consoles. It doesn't take a genius to know that. Obviously, my whole point is that people who don't use wi-fi or 3D shouldn't have to pay extra for it just to get a decent blu-ray player.