# Blu-ray Declaring Victory



## Woochifer (Oct 19, 2006)

I know it's old news because this declaration of victory by the Blu-ray Association occurred at CES a couple of months ago, but no one else has yet brought this topic up (at least in this folder)! When I first read about it, I thought the BDA was just blowing smoke and making an incredibly arrogant proclamation that could very well put a lot of egg of their collective faces in due time. But, the sales data that has come out in the ensuing weeks does absolutely nothing to contradict their assertion. 

Blu-ray has had the advantage with major studio support and hardware manufacturer support for a while now. But, it seems that despite its less-than-stellar launch, the PS3 has vaulted Blu-ray solidly into the lead and Blu-ray's broader studio and hardware support is now poised to extend that lead as 2007 goes on. 

Before the PS3 debuted, HD-DVD was consistently outselling Blu-ray by a wide margin. But, once the PS3 launched, Blu-ray disc sales jumped by 700% and took the lead in December (excluding freebies). The Nielson Videoscan numbers show Blu-ray outselling HD-DVD by more than 2-to-1 so far in 2007, and just last week, Blu-ray took the lead in overall disc sales, despite a more than six month headstart for HD-DVD. 

On the hardware side, HD-DVD and Blu-ray sold a nearly equal number of standalone players last year, which does not include gaming console sales. HD-DVD had the advantage of a headstart, but Blu-ray had more manufacturers producing and marketing players. And then you have the PS3, which sold about 2 million units worldwide -- more than 4x the _combined_ total HD-DVD and Blu-ray player sales. Even if a minority of PS3 owners buy Blu-ray discs, that's still a very large installed user base (a survey of 10,000 PS3 owners indicates that 80% of them intend to purchase Blu-ray discs). My understanding is that the Xbox 360 HD-DVD add-on has sold about 100,000 units. A respectable number, but far from what's needed to negate the sales bump that the PS3 created. If Microsoft wants to impact the market, they'll need to integrate the HD-DVD drive into the Xbox 360. 

Moreover, the release slate for 2007 looks more top-heavy with Blu-ray exclusives. Among the major studios, Universal supports HD-DVD exclusively, while Fox, Disney, Sony, and MGM (whose distribution is split between Fox and Sony) support Blu-ray exclusively. Warner and Paramount are neutral. Supposedly, among last year's top 20 DVD titles, 19 of them are out or will come out on Blu-ray, while 4 of them are due out on HD-DVD. Furthermore, 16 of these releases are Blu-ray exclusives, while only 1 of last year's top titles is a HD-DVD exclusive. 

Prior to these sales numbers, I thought that HD-DVD had enough momentum to at least force a draw in the format war by steering the market towards dual-format discs (which Warner has now developed in its Total HD disc format) and dual-format players (which LG has already come out with, and Samsung is purportedly developing). The market seemed headed in that direction with the basic video decoders used in players for both formats capable of decoding signals from both HD-DVD and Blu-ray drives. But, these latest numbers indicate that Blu-ray very well could win the format war outright, and a draw might be the optimistic best case scenario for HD-DVD. 

Right now, a lot of things have to happen for HD-DVD to remain competitive, whereas Blu-ray will win the format war if Universal simply declares itself neutral. 

Bill Hunt of the Digital Bits has been following this issue for some time, and he recently posted a couple of commentaries about the current state of the market that IMO are spot on. A lot of the responses that I've seen in other forums seem to reflect what people _would like_ to see happen, rather than objectively looking at how the market structure has stacked up in favor of Blu-ray. Hunt lays out a very persuasive case for why Blu-ray is likely to win the format war, and why it's best that one format emerge as the clear victor in short order. Like Hunt, I could care less which HD disc format wins, but I've come over to thinking that the best thing for the market right now is that one HD disc format emerge as a clear winner. And as things are right now, I don't see how HD-DVD can possibly win the format war outright. Too many of Blu-ray's advantages have to flip-flop, and do so in a hurry, in order for HD-DVD to gain an advantage.

Here's the link to Bill Hunt's commentaries ...

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwocentsa133.html#commonsense

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwocentsa133.html#uniend


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

If blu-ray wins we'll be locked into region control and have players with various interactivity and audio levels(Profile 1.0, 1.1, 2.0(BDLive), 3(Audio Only) etc. :coocoo: 

At least with HD DVD any player you buy supports everything including all interactivity and internet capability. 

Anyway I give up on both:wits-end: ......bring on the HVD(3.9TB), apparently Maxell are releasing the 300GB HVD this year to kick things off:boxer: 

cheers


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

MACCA350 said:


> If blu-ray wins we'll be locked into region control and have players with various interactivity and audio levels(Profile 1.0, 1.1, 2.0(BDLive), 3(Audio Only) etc. :coocoo:
> 
> At least with HD DVD any player you buy supports everything including all interactivity and internet capability.
> 
> ...


I think rather than sweeping away both formats and choosing a third, we need to establish a SINGLE format for the sake of clarity. Bringing another controversial format into the mix is both silly, and from a business stand point, a huge mistake. 

What the HD DVD doesn't support is some of the basic functions of a standard DVD player. Resume from pause when the player is turned off, or you change inputs doesn't exist with HD DVD, but does with DVD. Three out of the four models Toshiba has out do not support Dts HD lossless master audio. All of the players are glitchy including their top of the line X2. 

I have personally decided that I will not buy a second Toshiba player. The fact that the second generation players are just a buggy as the first is not blowing my pant legs very much. Secondly, after buying about 40 titles, I have found nothing else left to buy, and a release schedule that has only four HD DVD I would purchase within the next six months. This is very dissapointing to me, but is the face of reality.


----------



## bobgpsr (Apr 20, 2006)

Sir Terrence said:


> What the HD DVD doesn't support is some of the basic functions of a standard DVD player. Resume from pause when the player is turned off, or you change inputs doesn't exist with HD DVD, but does with DVD. Three out of the four models Toshiba has out do not support Dts HD lossless master audio.


1. Resume can work if the HD DVD is authored with it enabled correctly. I have two Studio Canal discs that can do the resume function. Not a HD DVD format problem. The authoring houses just have to enable it when they author a HD DVD.

2. No player in either BD or HD DVD format yet has dts-HD Master Audio decoding running yet. Just promises. They all can extract the core legacy 5.1 dts out of dts-HD MA. 

3. My XA1 and XA2 are not "glitchy". Just lucky I guess. It does seem like 1/3 of the first gen players had problems. Most that are repaired seem to work OK after the drive is replaced. So far it looks like the new 1.3 firmware has fixed many user's complaints about glitches in the gen 2 players. Reports are another firmware update is coming in three weeks to address a reviewer's complaints about minor stutter in a couple of places on a few discs with the XA2 only.

4. Titles are really where people differ as to tastes. It looks like the floodgates turn on for HD DVD on March 27th. No movies from either BD or HD DVD this release Tuesday, but BD has some coming out on the 13th and 20th.


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

bobgpsr said:


> 1. Resume can work if the HD DVD is authored with it enabled correctly. I have two Studio Canal discs that can do the resume function. Not a HD DVD format problem. The authoring houses just have to enable it when they author a HD DVD.


Bob, its a format problem IMO. If Toshiba cannot work with the authoring houses to get this corrected, then its a problem with the format. The hardware can support it, but its not utilized and that's a format problem. 



> 2. No player in either BD or HD DVD format yet has dts-HD Master Audio decoding running yet. Just promises. They all can extract the core legacy 5.1 dts out of dts-HD MA.


This is true. However only the XA2 can support it out of all of the players Toshiba has released. So only if you spend $1,000 will you have this option in the future, or you can spend $499 or $599 and have that same option on Blu-ray. Or you could have fully uncompressed 5.1 audio only found on blu-ray. The point I am trying to illustrate here is that HD DVD currently only supports one lossless codec over all its players, and they don't use it very often. You can find so many blu-ray titles with raw uncompressed 5.1 PCM that its not even funny. So does blu-ray really need any of these codecs? My answer is, no. Does HD DVD? Without a doubt yes. Lossy just does not cut it any more. 



> 3. My XA1 and XA2 are not "glitchy". Just lucky I guess. It does seem like 1/3 of the first gen players had problems. Most that are repaired seem to work OK after the drive is replaced. So far it looks like the new 1.3 firmware has fixed many user's complaints about glitches in the gen 2 players. Reports are another firmware update is coming in three weeks to address a reviewer's complaints about minor stutter in a couple of places on a few discs with the XA2 only.


A little more than half of the first gen players had issues. Hence the firmware update, or which only one has been issued. So first gen owners are basically stuck with what they have good or bad. My A1 has glitches from time to time, but nothing repeateable. However this is my third player. The first two were so glitchy that I just couldn't deal with them. The one persistant problem that bothers me is the player comes to a stop when you switch away from the HDMI to another imput and starts the movie over when you go back to the HDMI input. Terribly annoying problem. 

Toshiba seems to be supporting the second gen players much better than the first, which leaves a VERY bad taste in my mouth. Wasn't it the first gen buyers that put HD DVD on the map?

After reading the review of the XA2, I am not filled with hope. You have LFE issues when using the analog outs. Video studdering on certain DVD and HD DVD(you might not see it, but it is there). If you use the digital outs(if you do not have analog inputs on your reciever) you get a transcoded DD at 640kbps instead of Dts at 1.5mbps. There is the lip syncing issues and the beat goes on. You are a lucky man if you don't experience this, but you are also a rarity as well. 



> 4. Titles are really where people differ as to tastes. It looks like the floodgates turn on for HD DVD on March 27th. No movies from either BD or HD DVD this release Tuesday, but BD has some coming out on the 13th and 20th.


I looked at the release schedule up until June. I found only four titles that I would purchase in that time period. For me(and only for me) that is pretty pitiful out of 33 titles released. When I compare that to the more than thirteen titles that I would purchase on blu-ray in this same time period I am not filled with hope for HD DVD at least in my case. Don't get me wrong, I love my players upconversion process very much, and if I bought the player for that alone, it was worth the money. I have over 1600 DVD's that could benefit from this player. However the lack of widespread studio support amoung the majors is hurting this format dearly.


----------



## bobgpsr (Apr 20, 2006)

Just some short responses. I think you and I are looking out different colored glasses and seeing the glass half full or half empty. :duck: 

1. Microsoft needs to convince/teach the rest of the studios/authoring houses to use the HDi resume.

2. Yes, dts-HD MA was promised in the future for the XA2 -- but only by a dealer. Not sure about the upcoming A20, but I think it is said that that one will have it also. A lot of the Studio Canal HD DVDs use dts-HD MA. I don't think that anybody can be sure that the A2, XA1 and A1 will never get dts-HD MA we will see. And you are right -- without the luxury of 50 GB it is hard to fit 16bit/48kHz 5.1 linear PCM on a title. IMHO it was a mistake and compromised picture quality on the 25 GB BD titles that used PCM. But I really want 20bit/48kHz lossless and in 7.1 channels. For HD DVD to do that for 4 hour LOTR it will take the proposed TL51/1.5x of HD DVD. BD50 can do it using the right codecs like AVC and dts-HD MA for instance.

3. We are going to have to differ on the % of problems with the gen 1 units. The polls/surveys that I trust show around 30%. YMMV in what you believe.
Toshiba is supposed to come out with a firmware update for the gen 1 units by the end of this week. We'll see. Version 2.1? It will be the the fourth update (1.0 original, then 1.2, followed by 1.4, then 2.0 with 5.1 TrueHD, and now hopefully this week 2.1).
Toshiba is already on the second update to gen 2 HD-A2 with (1.0, 1.2 then 1.3). It appears that there will be at least two more updates to the XA2 (currently on its first update to 1.3 from 1.0 original). The next XA2 update is supposed to fix the residual video stutter issues and the low analog LFE. Followed by a scheduled update in July to enable 1080p24 output on HDMI.

4. Like I said before, YMMV. I have over 40 HD DVD's. Some are loaned out to my adult kids.

Happy Trails! :cowboy: :sn:


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

bobgpsr said:


> Just some short responses. I think you and I are looking out different colored glasses and seeing the glass half full or half empty. :duck:
> 
> 1. Microsoft needs to convince/teach the rest of the studios/authoring houses to use the HDi resume.
> 
> ...


We have different information concerning the number of problems. Since I got my information from a closer source than just polls and surveys, I can solidly rely on what they told me. They have no reason to lie, and they never have.


----------



## Woochifer (Oct 19, 2006)

bobgpsr said:


> 4. Titles are really where people differ as to tastes. It looks like the floodgates turn on for HD DVD on March 27th. No movies from either BD or HD DVD this release Tuesday, but BD has some coming out on the 13th and 20th.


You're right that people tend to prioritize titles differently, but Blu-ray simply has more of them in the pipeline. And like it or not, it's new releases that drive sales and create buzz. In that respect, Blu-ray has a huge advantage, since Universal is the only major studio exclusively supporting HD-DVD. And last year was a bad year for Universal, and a banner year for Sony, Disney, and Fox who support Blu-ray exclusively. 

Here's a link to last year's box office chart, and you'll see that 12 of the top 20 movies are tied to the three Blu-ray exclusive major studios, while Universal had only 1 movie in last year's top 20, _The Break Up_ and it has already come out on HD-DVD. 

Next week, _Casino Royale_ (last year's #6 box office hit) will come out concurrently with the DVD version as a Blu-ray exclusive. _Pursuit of Happyness_ (last year's #10 movie) gets its concurrent Blu-ray release two weeks thereafter. Next month, _Night at the Museum_ (#3 in last year's box office) also gets a concurrent release as a Blu-ray exclusive. And in June, last year's top two movies, _Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest_ and _Cars_ come out on Blu-ray. That's a lot of market push that HD-DVD cannot answer. 

The biggest HD-DVD titles coming out on March 27 (_Happy Feet_ and _March of the Penguins_) will also simultaneously come out on Blu-ray. 

http://www.highdefdigest.com/

Although it's entirely plausible that Universal will recover and have a great year at the box office, Blu-ray's lead in hardware sales, year-to-date disc sales, and disc sales since inception, will continue to increase in the meantime. By the time Universal's movie slate for 2007 has an impact on the HD disc sales, Blu-ray's lead might be firmly entrenched.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

Does Blu-ray have a player out yet that is good to go for less than $1000? From what I understand they only have one player that up to par and it's expensive.... the Pioneer maybe?

As soon as Blu-ray gets jiggy with their players at a reasonable price, I'm in. They have quite a few titles I would like, but not as many as I already have with HD-DVD. As far as HD-DVD players... I've not had any problems out of either of my units. They've worked as advertised and SD-DVD is the bomb!


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

OK, so here is how they pan out for the coming 3 months.
*
Blu-ray =20
HD-DVD =26*



> *March*
> 
> _Blu-ray(9)_
> Casino Royale
> ...


Reference 

Things may change, but there you have it.

cheers


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

Hmmm... none of those really float my boat... :huh:


----------



## Woochifer (Oct 19, 2006)

MACCA350 said:


> OK, so here is how they pan out for the coming 3 months.
> *
> Blu-ray =20
> HD-DVD =26*
> ...


By High Def Digest's count it comes out to

Blu-ray: 45
HD-DVD: 35

As mentioned earlier, Blu-ray will have last year's #1, #3, #9, and #10 box office performers coming out over the next three months, along with #2 _Cars_ coming out in June, with most of these titles coming out concurrently with the DVD. Contrastly, the highest ranking HD-DVD exclusive that will come out during this period is _The Good Shepherd_, which ranked #50 in last year's domestic box office.

Given this release schedule, I don't think it's a stretch to say that Blu-ray's current 2-to-1 sales advantage will widen in the next few months.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

So does anyone know the answer to post #9 ... :huh:


----------



## bobgpsr (Apr 20, 2006)

Sonnie said:


> So does anyone know the answer to post #9 ... :huh:


$599 player from Sony in June from some announcement a couple weeks back. Question as to what lossless audio codecs it will have (none?) but IIRC it will have DD+ along with legacy DD and dts. Not sure about BD J live/video (latest BD Java with PiP, etc).

I think Samsung announced a $799 machine that is to be comming (May or June?). It is supposed to have the same Reon video processing that the Toshiba HD-XA2 has.

Edit: Newer posts elsewhere say the new Samsung machine is delayed (fall?) or may never come out -- instead a 3d gen model may late in the year.


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

It's looking more and more likely that Blu-ray will win this stupid war.

I personally won't be buying into it until there is a player that does everything that the format can do, and at present thats none of them:hissyfit: 

My list of player requirements
1) It needs to support all the audio codec's fully
2) Have 7.1 analogue outputs as well as HDMI 1.3
3) Support ALL forms of interactivity (this is a big one and what a mess that is:coocoo: )
4) Output the raw 1080p/24 data direct from the disc w/o any conversions within the player(IIRC current 1080p/24 output players actually convert to 1080i/60 then back to 1080p24 before it's spit out of the player:sneeky: )
5) Be region free or at least have a region free crack for both DVD and Blu-ray(I'm from Australia, so no legal ** please:hush: )
6) And all of this for under AU$1000(Panasonic DMP-BD10 RRP AU$2749:raped: )

So as you can see I'll be waiting for a while yet and seriously No's1-5 should have been the players minimum support from the start, get your act together guys you've had over 5 years to sort this out

*rant over.....now back to our regular programming*:bigsmile: 

cheers


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

MACCA350 said:


> It's looking more and more likely that Blu-ray will win this stupid war.
> 
> I personally won't be buying into it until there is a player that does everything that the format can do, and at present thats none of them:hissyfit:
> 
> ...


Blu-ray doesn't really need #1. HD DVD does. You don't really need the advanced codecs if you have enough space to store a raw unprocessed uncompressed 7.1 soundtrack. Blu-ray does, HD DVD does not. 

If you have 7.1 analog outs, then HDMI 1.3 becomes unecessary. Nobody and nothing supports deep color right now. 1080p is supported in the 1.1 and 1.2 HDMI standard.


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

Sir Terrence said:


> Blu-ray doesn't really need #1. HD DVD does. You don't really need the advanced codecs if you have enough space to store a raw unprocessed uncompressed 7.1 soundtrack. Blu-ray does, HD DVD does not.


Hmmm......thats interesting because the upcoming 'Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl' and 'Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest' on Blu-ray on May 22, both titles will be a "75GB" release, aka a BD-50 dual-layer disc for the movie, and an extra BD-25 single-layer disc with additional extras. refrence



Sir Terrence said:


> If you have 7.1 analog outs, then HDMI 1.3 becomes unecessary. Nobody and nothing supports deep color right now. 1080p is supported in the 1.1 and 1.2 HDMI standard.


I want HDMI 1.3 so I can use analogue now and have an upgrade path for a receiver in the future.

This is what I want, plain and simple

cheers


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

I'll take that price for a Sony or even better the Samsung... since I should be able to get that at dealer cost.

As far as Blu-ray titles... there are only a handful I could find that I really wanted now. Of course there are a some being released soon, such as POC, that I'll get. But it's a lot less than what I have on HD-DVD.

One's I've ordered:

Black Hawk Down
Fantastic Four
The Fifth Element 
Casino Royale 
Entrapment
Underworld - Evolution
Toto: 25th Anniversary: Live in Amsterdam


----------



## Bob in St. Louis (Oct 21, 2006)

_Sorry-to-intrude,-don't-mean-to-bother.
I-don't-know-of-any-other-way-to-get-notification-than-to-'reply'.
Bye, sorry to bother, I'll go away now_


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

Bob in St. Louis said:


> _Sorry-to-intrude,-don't-mean-to-bother.
> I-don't-know-of-any-other-way-to-get-notification-than-to-'reply'.
> Bye, sorry to bother, I'll go away now_


lol... you can subscribe to any thread using the *Thread Tools* drop down menu (top right just above the first post). Just click on *Subscribe to this Thread* and then select *Instant Email Notification*... :T


----------



## Bob in St. Louis (Oct 21, 2006)

Thank you Sonnie (O.T. over).
Sorry.
Bob


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

MACCA350 said:


> Hmmm......thats interesting because the upcoming 'Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl' and 'Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest' on Blu-ray on May 22, both titles will be a "75GB" release, aka a BD-50 dual-layer disc for the movie, and an extra BD-25 single-layer disc with additional extras. refrence
> 
> I want HDMI 1.3 so I can use analogue now and have an upgrade path for a receiver in the future.
> 
> ...


I was strictly speaking about the movie and soundtrack, not about the extra content. Of course when you add as many extra's as Disney is going to have for these movies you will need a couple of disc. How many do you think they would need if it was going to be released in HD DVD?


----------



## Vader (Jul 8, 2006)

> Blu-ray doesn't really need #1. HD DVD does. You don't really need the advanced codecs if you have enough space to store a raw unprocessed uncompressed 7.1 soundtrack. Blu-ray does, HD DVD does not.


Playing devil's advocate, this could also be counted _against_ Blu Ray. Since the beginning, the BR camp has touted vastly "increased storage capacity", and yet chose to introduce their "red carpet" titles using MPEG-2, and LPCM (presumably because the geniuses at Sony didn't want to pay for the advanced codecs, and thus actually take advantage of this extra space). So, to me, until advanced codecs (both audio and video) become the norm on BR, this argument is so full of holes you could fly a star destroyer through it. And as for the argument that LPCM sounds better than Dolby TrueHD (I would assume it probably does), I make no claims to audiophile trained hyper-hearing: I used to work for John Dunlavy, who insisted on an insane +/-1 dB tolerance in every speaker that went out the door. IMO, maybe a dog could make out the difference, (while listening to an extremely hi-end system), but that does not apply to me (look at my equipment list...): a tolerance of +/-3 dB is just fine to my ears. I honestly hope that BR does win (just that HD-DVD holds out long enough for a high-end hybrid player to come about from Denon or Marantz), but that the mental giants at Sony step back and let Disney and Fox take the lead: they are doing their releases right!

On the other side, I would also love to see this blow up in Sony's face, for all of their arrogance...



> How many do you think they would need if it was going to be released in HD DVD?


If Sony were releasing this, probably about the same: because they would invariably use MPEG-2 and LPCM, while HD-DVD would use VC-1 and Dolby TrueHD. But, since it is Disney, there is hope...


----------



## wbassett (Feb 8, 2007)

I have neither yet, but have seen the A1 up close and personal for quite a few movie viewings.

I have around 1300 SDVDs, so up conversion is a big factor to me just as much as the high def features the player has (or doesn't have).

Sony makes great TVs, the SXRD looks incredible and I haven't seen or heard of a DLP set that can come close. What I dislike about the whole situation is that they are trying to use their muscle and the fact they own so many studios to force a win. I know they really want to win this one seeing Sony lost so many format wars in the past, but they really have to be careful or this could blow up in their faces as a 'monopoly' case. Look what happened to Microsoft. They were not the only OS manufacturer out there and nobody was 'forced' to buy a PC running windows. Macs and Linux systems were and are available. 

Yeah I know, it was the browser thing that caused the bulk of the problem, but let's put that in perspective some. The one company complaining was Netscape. They cried foul and started the whole lawsuit, yet they had their browser bundled with Novel, which at the time was a big OS in the IT world. They also used very strong arm tactics to destroy Mosaic's browser... in fact they put that company out of business. Once the competition was eliminated, Netscape started selling their browser instead of giving it away free. Along comes Microsoft with IE. They did not use any tactic that Netscape themself did not use, and there was no real monopoly, yet there was an awful lot of court time.

Sony in a way is in the same situation. They don't own the controlling rights to every movie studio, but they own enough to cause some concern. They are using that to try to dominate and win. If they were just a hardware company and the individual movie studios independently decided to go with Bluray over HD, then that would be different to me... but this is a little on the strong arm side in my opinion.

I am split because there are movies that are either BD or HD and I like them both. I haven't fully decided on which one I want yet, so I am not taking sides here, just saying if the big boys wanted to they could take a chapter from the IE/Netscape war and make a real mess of things, and we know high paid lawyers can do that. (No offense to any lawyers out there) The fact that HD hasn't gone this route yet (it still could happen) gave me some respect for them. I am sure they have talked about this and checked into it. Maybe they can't, or maybe they are keeping it for a last resort, but it won't be a good thing if it happens.

I guess I am saying anytime a company tries to force me to go a specific direction I tend to dislike that. Right now I am still riding the fence and it has more to do with upconversion quality than titles. I know that in ten years all my SDVDs will most likely be replaced with a high def version of some kind, but right now I do have a lot of titles that I would like to be able to upconvert at the highest and best quality. HD, specifically Toshiba's players have had a lot of reviews and write ups on just this capability, but I have not seen any big mention of it in any of the Bluray reviews. Yes I know BD players can upconvert, but I haven't seen any comparisons yet.

I was actually planning on buying a BD player and then my brother and I could do our own independent comparisons. Universal's announcement of the titles they are releasing, and the rumors that some companies that were firmly in camp with Sony are now planning on making HD players has me split again. I tend to like older titles, but I also don't like the idea of either being excluded from newer ones or forced to buy two players.


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

Vader said:


> Playing devil's advocate, this could also be counted _against_ Blu Ray. Since the beginning, the BR camp has touted vastly "increased storage capacity", and yet chose to introduce their "red carpet" titles using MPEG-2, and LPCM (presumably because the geniuses at Sony didn't want to pay for the advanced codecs, and thus actually take advantage of this extra space). So, to me, until advanced codecs (both audio and video) become the norm on BR, this argument is so full of holes you could fly a star destroyer through it.


Why would you say its full of holes? There is nothing wrong with optimized MPEG-2 and there is certainly nothing wrong with LPCM. It has already been proven that MPEG-2 can turn out images just as good as VC-1. I saw it myself at Pioneers manufacturing facility. If you have the space, then you have the necessary bits for optimization. VC-1 is not the end all. Other codecs are being used with great results. Just because a guy gets on AVS as says the codec that HIS company designed is the bees knees doesn't make it so. Any arguement about the results of MPEG-2 and LPCM on BD-25 have completely sidestep the reality that the print was the problem, and not the choice of video codec or audio format. If I have enough space to put a well tested(in the field)video codec, and audio that doesn't have to be zipped(which can cause some problems within itself) and save paying royalites I would, because its a good business practice to keep your production expenses to a minimum. 






> And as for the argument that LPCM sounds better than Dolby TrueHD (I would assume it probably does), I make no claims to audiophile trained hyper-hearing: I used to work for John Dunlavy, who insisted on an insane +/-1 dB tolerance in every speaker that went out the door. IMO, maybe a dog could make out the difference, (while listening to an extremely hi-end system), but that does not apply to me (look at my equipment list...): a tolerance of +/-3 dB is just fine to my ears. I honestly hope that BR does win (just that HD-DVD holds out long enough for a high-end hybrid player to come about from Denon or Marantz), but that the mental giants at Sony step back and let Disney and Fox take the lead: they are doing their releases right!


I have 5 SC-V, a HRCC, and two TSW-5 subwoofers in my recording studio. I completely understand why he insist on a +/-1 tolerance on his speakers. They require less equalization after installation. They don't allow the frequency response to color the sound in any way. You are sure that you are hearing more music and less speaker. It doesn't take a dog to hear the difference between his speakers, and others with a less flat frequency response. 

A hybrid player is not a pancea in a format war. It doesn't resolve anything A single format will. A majority of the hollywood studio have chosen which format they want to release their product on, a couple of studio are supporting both(and already grumbling about it) and you have one studio Universal, which has a bad history with Sony solely supporting HD DVD.(Weinstein is a minor player in Hollywood). 
At some point Paramount and Warner are going to have to support one format, and my business sense tells me that it will be the one with the largest player base. Currently blu-ray has that edge by a very large margin. When one of them makes that decision, Universal will be under a lot of pressure to follow suit. All studios and manufacturers want this war to come to a end fast so HD on disc can finally take off, and their profit magins increase. DVD no longer makes the manufacturers any money, and if Toshiba continues to push the prices of its players downward(a mistake IMO this early in the game) it would make no sense for any manufacturer to produce a player if it only gives them the same profit magin as a regular DVD player. 




> On the other side, I would also love to see this blow up in Sony's face, for all of their arrogance..


This is the part of this format that really confuses me. I have heard a lot about Sony's arrogance, but has any been paying attention to Toshiba and Microsoft's arrogance? Let's see....Toshiba's greed to continue to get patent royalties like they got with DVD, pushed for a rule change to first get the DVD forum to see their format, and to get it adopted into the DVD forum. Quite a few companies who were already on the BDA didn't want HD DVD to be apart of the DVD forum becuase of course its not SD DVD for which the organization was founded on. So many companies obstained from accepting HD DVD into the forum that Toshiba conspired to change the rules and did. It barely passed, but it didn't have the support of quite a few major CE companies, and 5 of 8 studios. Toshiba also sold highly secretive technology to America's enemies, so I would hardly call their actions "pristine"

Microsoft business plans do not include HD on disc. They have openly said that downloading movies onto a server is the wave of the future. They have designed both VC-1 and HDi just for that purpose. They do not make HD DVD players, and they do not make movies. So what better place to test their new technology than on the back of HD DVD. If HD DVD does not survive, it does not change Microsoft's plan to move content off disc, and on to the internet. By then their codec would have been well optimized(they have pushed for more and more compression on VC-1 to speed up downloads) for downloading, and HDi would have been well tested for interactivity all off the back of HD DVD. Microsoft could easily add a blu-ray drive for the x-box, and not take a single hit for manufacturing a player for a format that failed. Let's not even talk about the lawsuits for their anti trust activities in both America and Europe. 

How do we look past the shady past of both Toshiba and Microsoft, but kill Sony? This is completely illogical. 





> If Sony were releasing this, probably about the same: because they would invariably use MPEG-2 and LPCM, while HD-DVD would use VC-1 and Dolby TrueHD. But, since it is Disney, there is hope...


You cannot assume that HD DVD would use Dolby TrueHD. They have used it on but three handfills of titles out of the 130+ releases they have. The more likely hood would be they use DD+. Just because MPEG-2 and LPCM would be used would not mean it would automatically make it bad, or not as good as HD DVD. The blu-ray studio's have already proven this combination works extremely well together if the print is clean. Even on a BD-25 disc!


----------



## wbassett (Feb 8, 2007)

Well I fell off the fence lol.

I just bought a Sony 55" SXRD 1080p set and on impulse bought a PS3 to test. My brother was putting a bug in my ear about it, and when I was at Best Buy looking at 1080p sets I asked if they could hook a BD player to them. I spotted an LG 50" plasma 720p set that was the demo unit for sale for $1899 with $380 off (well not really off, they give you a Best Buy gift card, but you can use that for the extended warrenty...) Anyway, I asked them to hook it to that first. It was just 720p but wow, it actually looked better than the RPTV 1080p set. 

Okay, so he unhooked the Samsung display and took it to the LG first and hooked it all up... and it broke! The Samsung would recognize any discs. It was almost closing time so that kinda killed any play time testing a Bluray player out with the 1080p sets. 

So I asked how well the PS3 worked as a Bluray DVD player and the guy said hundreds of people have bought them just for that purpose and nobody has complained (we shall see  I figure I have 30 days to test it and do a comparison against my brother's Toshiba HD player.

I bought Casino Royal in BD, my wife wanted The Lake House, and we happen to have that from Netflix right now so I can check out the BD and SDVD versions at the same time.

I probably will get an A2 as well, so I'll go from fence riding to owning property on both sides.


----------



## Vader (Jul 8, 2006)

Sir Terrance,

Thank you for the information, most of which I was not privy. My comments were not intended to be construed as fact, or even the feelings of the majority; they were strictly from my layman's POV.



> Why would you say its full of holes?


I am not questioning the PQ of MPEG2 or the AQ of LPCM at all. I am simply questioning BR saying "we have more space" when they used codecs that take up the extra space (rendering the argument moot IMO) in the beginning. Based on every review I have read (with the exception of a few written by rabid fanboys on either side), the PQ of BR has evolved to being, at most, equal to HD-DVD. As for LPCM, my reference to Dunlavy was simply to point out that _from my POV_ unless placed side-by-side +/-1 dB and +/-3 dB are indistinguishable. I have known may people who couple easily distinguish between the two (you included), most of which were either musicians or A/V professionals. But, as I also pointed out, my audio system is nowhere near the best (small understatement), and frankly could probably not illuminate the differences in the first place.



> This is the part of this format that really confuses me.


My allusion to the arrogance of Sony, again, was merely my perception; I was unaware of Toshiba's questionable practices you mention. Basically, it irritated me that Sony started a big "GET READY FOR THE HUGE LAUNCH OF BLU RAY" at the beginning of this year. Hello? They had a launch even more disastrous than Toshiba's last summer(?). Just because that Samsung screwed up does not mean that Sony can pretend that it didn't happen. That kind of thing belongs on the playground in grade school. You can't just ignore a botched launch and cry "Do Over!". This is not to say that the format has not shone tremendous improvement, but that is due to the format far itself, not Sony. If not for HD-DVD, we would be stuck with "Fifth Element" quality releases, because there would be no reason to improve upon it. The credit for bringing BR up to it's potential belongs to Fox and Disney (IMO). 



> A hybrid player is not a pancea in a format war.


I do not have the allusion that it would be. I simply want to continue to enjoy the titles I have now as well as BR (I don't have a BR player yet, but am stocking up on BR titles in anticipation of java-capable players). The Tosh has never been anything other than a stop-gap in my mind, and I want a more refined player for both formats. Ultimately, I agree that a single format must emerge victorious (and I agree that BR has quite the edge right now, if only because of the lack of new HD-DVD titles). Now, if the HD camp were to announce the Spielberg films (icecubes chance), I could see that changing quite rapidly….


----------



## wbassett (Feb 8, 2007)

Below is from another site and a huge thread on the PS3 as a Bluray player. There was a large FAQ in the first post with some good questions and answers. The one that I was concerned about was...
_____________________________________
_From the Video Questions:



Does the PS3 upconvert regular DVDs?
No.

Click to expand...

______________________________________


I bought the PS3 solely because both the guy in the HDTV department said it upconverts, and so did the guy over in the game console department. If it doesn't upconvert SDVDs Sony really needs to provide some training to the sales reps. If this is true I am more than a little ticked off... enough that I will probably take back not only the PS3 but the 55" SXRD 1080p set I just bought too and buy something from another company and then personally boycot Sony. That may sound harsh, but I specifically asked if it upconverts and was told it does by two different people working there. It's ** if they don't know what they are selling. Besides, as far as the set goes, it was a toss up between the Sony and the 57" Mitsubishi DLP 1080p set. If I was duped or mislead I have no problem taking back both Sony products and buying a Mits HDTV and Toshiba HD DVD player. I'm not trying to be argumentative on here or bash one unit in favor of another, I just feel a bit played, especially when I dropped over $3grand there last night.

Kinda OT, but not totally... another reason for opting for the PS3 as a BD player was when I asked the sales person if they could hook up a Bluray player to a couple of 1080p sets so I could check it out, they were more than receptive to doing this. They disconnected the Samsung demo unit and took it to the first set we were going to check out, and the Samsung broke! It wouldn't recognize any discs. It was a bit ironic since I just asked him if Samsung finially worked out all the bugs and he said yes... and then the player broke immediately after that. That's when the discussion about the PS3 came up and my question about upconverting.

Why am I so concerned and a bit 'hot' about upconversion? I have around 1300 SDVDs, that's why. I fully intend on buying high def movies but I still want to use my existing collection and enjoy them in the highest resolution and quality possible. This may sound trifling, but I have seen the A1's upconversion capabilities first hand and was hoping that Bluray was as good. I understand this is just a 'game console' and some may say "Well what did you expect? It's a game system first, if you wanted a full BD player you should have bought one." Again, I was told it would do what I wanted and was looking for.

Does anyone on THIS site know for sure if the PS3 will upconvert or not?


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

Vader said:


> Sir Terrance,
> 
> Thank you for the information, most of which I was not privy. My comments were not intended to be construed as fact, or even the feelings of the majority; they were strictly from my layman's POV.


That is what these boards are for, the sharing of ones POV. Nobody's gonna hate you for doing that here:bigsmile: 





> I am not questioning the PQ of MPEG2 or the AQ of LPCM at all. I am simply questioning BR saying "we have more space" when they used codecs that take up the extra space (rendering the argument moot IMO) in the beginning. Based on every review I have read (with the exception of a few written by rabid fanboys on either side), the PQ of BR has evolved to being, at most, equal to HD-DVD. As for LPCM, my reference to Dunlavy was simply to point out that _from my POV_ unless placed side-by-side +/-1 dB and +/-3 dB are indistinguishable. I have known may people who couple easily distinguish between the two (you included), most of which were either musicians or A/V professionals. But, as I also pointed out, my audio system is nowhere near the best (small understatement), and frankly could probably not illuminate the differences in the first place.


The question becomes, how much space does MPEG-2 really take up on a large capacity disc? It might not be as much as you think depending on the length of the movies. I recall several movies that used MPEG-2 and a uncompressed soundtrack on a BD-25 that had excellent PQ and AQ. There are also alot of BD-50 that have MPEG-2, LPCM soundtrack and a extra's indentical to HD DVD, without having to pay royalities for either audio or video codecs. The question begs to be answered is do you think newer is better just because somebody says it is? Keep in mind that the BR standard includes all of the same codecs, both audio and video as HD DVD does. While they might not be necessary to use on all disc, it does give a studio a choice. HD DVD has no such flexibility. 





> My allusion to the arrogance of Sony, again, was merely my perception; I was unaware of Toshiba's questionable practices you mention. Basically, it irritated me that Sony started a big "GET READY FOR THE HUGE LAUNCH OF BLU RAY" at the beginning of this year. Hello? They had a launch even more disastrous than Toshiba's last summer(?). Just because that Samsung screwed up does not mean that Sony can pretend that it didn't happen. That kind of thing belongs on the playground in grade school. You can't just ignore a botched launch and cry "Do Over!". This is not to say that the format has not shone tremendous improvement, but that is due to the format far itself, not Sony. If not for HD-DVD, we would be stuck with "Fifth Element" quality releases, because there would be no reason to improve upon it. The credit for bringing BR up to it's potential belongs to Fox and Disney (IMO).


I think both sides had disasterous launches. I had two A1's before the one I have now. Even now occasionally I get video studdering that is not repeatable. Both rushed products to launch, neither products were perfect at launch. Information from my sources tell me that Toshiba had a problem rate of about 40-45% from the first generation players. Blu-ray players have proven to be much more stable than HD DVD players, though HD DVD worked very hard to make sure that PQ was top notch. Blu-ray did not initially, but according to a compulation of review numbers from various websites, each format has five titles with 5 star rating in PQ, but the nod to AQ soundly goes to BR for the use of LPCM on its titles. 

The idea that HD DVD was the reason that PQ improved might not be true at all. Remember, reviewers have a lot of sway when it comes to the studio's. When they compared Fifth element BD to the standard DVD, thats when the comment about the substandard PQ came out. This has nothing to do with HD DVD at all. I think that online and print reveiwers should get a bunch of credit for not giving BR a break on PQ, whether HD DVD is here or not. You keep PQ up so your titles do not get a bad review on that issue, and the keeps the interest in your product. HD DVD is a prime example of that. 





> I do not have the allusion that it would be. I simply want to continue to enjoy the titles I have now as well as BR (I don't have a BR player yet, but am stocking up on BR titles in anticipation of java-capable players). The Tosh has never been anything other than a stop-gap in my mind, and I want a more refined player for both formats. Ultimately, I agree that a single format must emerge victorious (and I agree that BR has quite the edge right now, if only because of the lack of new HD-DVD titles). Now, if the HD camp were to announce the Spielberg films (icecubes chance), I could see that changing quite rapidly….


We are in complete agreement here. I bought my HD DVD player as a stop gap as well, but I also invested in a PS3 because my godchildren love to play games, and I wanted the most flexible blu-ray player I could get. I love my A1 don't get me wrong, but BR seems to have the movies I want to replace most. 

In the end one format has to win. The studios, the manufacturers, and the retailers do not like this dual format war going on, so support from them will be tepid at best. I fear that if this format war does not end soon, we all are going to lose out big time.


----------



## Woochifer (Oct 19, 2006)

wbassett said:


> I bought the PS3 solely because both the guy in the HDTV department said it upconverts, and so did the guy over in the game console department. If it doesn't upconvert SDVDs Sony really needs to provide some training to the sales reps. If this is true I am more than a little ticked off... enough that I will probably take back not only the PS3 but the 55" SXRD 1080p set I just bought too and buy something from another company and then personally boycot Sony. That may sound harsh, but I specifically asked if it upconverts and was told it does by two different people working there. It's ** if they don't know what they are selling. Besides, as far as the set goes, it was a toss up between the Sony and the 57" Mitsubishi DLP 1080p set. If I was duped or mislead I have no problem taking back both Sony products and buying a Mits HDTV and Toshiba HD DVD player. I'm not trying to be argumentative on here or bash one unit in favor of another, I just feel a bit played, especially when I dropped over $3grand there last night.
> 
> Kinda OT, but not totally... another reason for opting for the PS3 as a BD player was when I asked the sales person if they could hook up a Bluray player to a couple of 1080p sets so I could check it out, they were more than receptive to doing this. They disconnected the Samsung demo unit and took it to the first set we were going to check out, and the Samsung broke! It wouldn't recognize any discs. It was a bit ironic since I just asked him if Samsung finially worked out all the bugs and he said yes... and then the player broke immediately after that. That's when the discussion about the PS3 came up and my question about upconverting.
> 
> ...


The short of it is that I know for sure that the PS3 does not do any upconversion. There are rumors out there that upconversion (and 1080p24) is coming soon via a firmware update, but I have no idea how plausible a rumor that is or how that would be implemented. 

Not sure why you'd want to boycott Sony given that it's your local retailer that gave you bad information. All you have to do is a quick google search to find that the PS3 does not upconvert. If you find that upconversion is an indispensible feature (keep in mind that upscaling does not add any resolution to the signal), then why not get an upscaling DVD player and compare it to the native 480p output from the PS3? Your HDTV already has a built in scaler for SD signals, and the results might work fine. If you find that the upscaled signal looks that much better, then you can figure out what you want to keep an what you want to return. If there's no visible improvement, then you're fine as is.


----------



## bobgpsr (Apr 20, 2006)

^^^#29, I would hate to see major "format wars" arguments going on here between moderators on HTS which is supposed to be a haven from emotional posts. So I will not rebut, point by point, Sir Terrence's points above. But I would like to point out in matters of personal opinion, influenced by the history of the technical facts of the "format wars" that some beg to differ with the points of the previous #29 post. But like I said before I refuse to be dragged into an emotional argument here. I would not mind if Sonnie would close this thread. Maybe after a few more posts. I do not need to have the last word on this emotional subject.


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

Sir Terrence said:


> Keep in mind that the BR standard includes all of the same codecs, both audio and video as HD DVD does. While they might not be necessary to use on all disc, it does give a studio a choice. HD DVD has no such flexibility.


Both formats support all the same video and audio, so they are both as flexible as each other. 

But the Blu-ray players only need to support Linear PCM(lossless) and Dolby Digital / DTS / MPEG Audio(lossy), whereas HD-DVD players need to support Linear PCM / Dolby TrueHD 2ch minimum yet all on the market support 5.1(lossless) and Dolby Digital Plus / Dolby Digital / DTS / MPEG Audio(lossy). What does this mean? Add the other things I mentioned(plus all HD-DVD players must support all the interactivity features including internet content) and HD-DVD has more mandatory support for their players, which means that when you buy any HD-DVD player you know that it can do virtually anything(and all the interactivity) that content providers can put on the disc. The other drawback for Blue-ray is that if content providers want everyone that has a player to be able to access a lossless track they have no choice but to use LPCM, which I think is why they've been sticking with it(kind of shot themselves in the foot, IMO) 

BTW, apparently you can fit 5.1hours of HD1080p video on HD-DVD, not sure if thats SL or DL, but either way there shouldn't be a problem fitting movies on there.

cheers


----------



## wbassett (Feb 8, 2007)

Woochifer said:


> The short of it is that I know for sure that the PS3 does not do any upconversion. There are rumors out there that upconversion (and 1080p24) is coming soon via a firmware update, but I have no idea how plausible a rumor that is or how that would be implemented.
> 
> Not sure why you'd want to boycott Sony given that it's your local retailer that gave you bad information. All you have to do is a quick google search to find that the PS3 does not upconvert. If you find that upconversion is an indispensible feature (keep in mind that upscaling does not add any resolution to the signal), then why not get an upscaling DVD player and compare it to the native 480p output from the PS3? Your HDTV already has a built in scaler for SD signals, and the results might work fine. If you find that the upscaled signal looks that much better, then you can figure out what you want to keep an what you want to return. If there's no visible improvement, then you're fine as is.


Yeah the 'boycott' thing was a knee jerk reaction to feeling that I got screwed. I called Sony and they were very short with their reply when I asked if there would be any firmware updates that enables upconversion of standard def DVDs. Their answer was "I have no information on that." so who knows, maybe something is in the works, but they are being tight lipped about it that's for sure.

As far as upscalling, I have seen my brother's setup and the A1 is incredible at upscaling standard def DVDs. Yes people have been saying that the TV will do this, but he has an HDTV and had a DVD player that upconverted to 1080i and we compared the PQ with the Toshiba and there was no contest. That's why I'm not too convinced on the set doing the work. Theoretically his set should have been doing it and from what some have said on other sites his standard definition DVDs should look just as good from a good SDVD player and that was not the case. Now one variable could be his set too. Maybe his doesn't handle upscaling as well as the newer sets, that is a possibility. If that is the case then great and I am set! I have a good SDVD player, and if my new SXRD set will do the upscaling I'll be happy.


----------



## wbassett (Feb 8, 2007)

bobgpsr said:


> ^^^#29, I would hate to see major "format wars" arguments going on here between moderators on HTS which is supposed to be a haven from emotional posts. So I will not rebut, point by point, Sir Terrence's points above. But I would like to point out in matters of personal opinion, influenced by the history of the technical facts of the "format wars" that some beg to differ with the points of the previous #29 post. But like I said before I refuse to be dragged into an emotional argument here. I would not mind if Sonnie would close this thread. Maybe after a few more posts. I do not need to have the last word on this emotional subject.


bobgpsr I hope my posts were not part of your feelings about closing this thread. Actually this is quite civil over here and I think it is a good discussion. There are pros and cons to both sides, and I think both have trumpeted their 'win' at one time or another. My experience was vendor related and I reacted when I was a little ticked off. BB also screwed me on the set too as far as taxes- again that wasn't Sony's fault.

I think the big thing right now is the cost of the players. They will and are coming down, but they are still up there. Some may ask would people want more than one player? My brother has four DVD players right now integrated into his HT setup. I still have my laser disc player connected to my system, but I don't use it anymore. I would be willing to yank it out of the setup and have two DVD players. In fact I am, I still have my projector connected to the other DVD player since the projector doesn't have an HDMI input and I already have the component cables run to it. So if both camps can get the price down a lot more then the 'format war' will really be a none issue for most people. At least that's how I see it and my take on things.


----------



## Sir Terrence (Jun 8, 2006)

bobgpsr said:


> ^^^#29, I would hate to see major "format wars" arguments going on here between moderators on HTS which is supposed to be a haven from emotional posts. So I will not rebut, point by point, Sir Terrence's points above. But I would like to point out in matters of personal opinion, influenced by the history of the technical facts of the "format wars" that some beg to differ with the points of the previous #29 post. But like I said before I refuse to be dragged into an emotional argument here. I would not mind if Sonnie would close this thread. Maybe after a few more posts. I do not need to have the last word on this emotional subject.


Bob,
Nobody is here for a fight, and certainly not me. I fight enough on Hidef-digest, and come here to just discuss the issues. I certainly know that both Blu-ray and HD DVD have very strong supporters, but admittedly I am a supporter of HD on disc, and not a fanboy of either format. I don't have any emotional investment in either format, I own both now. So this is not an issue of being dragged into anything, we are here to discuss the merits of both, not to bash either. So there is no reason for Sonnie to close this, and I hope he does not. I highly desire that this conversation stays civil, I hate AVS when it comes to the tone of this issue.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2007)

So... I'm a bit sad that BluRay seems to be winning this fight. I've got my opinion about things, and I prefer HDDVD. I should preface this a bit though.

I am not a video expert by any means. A lot of the technology discussion here goes a bit over my head. I worked as an assistant to a film colorist a while back (when I was getting my career going), so I have learned to watch picture closely and notice a lot of things, but I know nothing of the codecs involved and the technology.

I'm an audio guy. I make sound effects for video games. I'm working on stuff for both the 360 and the PS3, and I'll confess my displeasure with the latter (due mostly to technical difficulties in developing for the platform...read: it's a pain in the ***). So I suppose that bias might creep into my statements here.

But here it is: I think HDDVD looks better. I couldn't tell you why, it just does. I've got a home theater system including an Akai (manufactured by Samsung) DLP television that displays 720p, a PS3 connected via HDMI and an Xbox 360 w/ HDDVD player that connects via component video. The woman and I have watched numerous movies on different formats, but only once have we had the chance to compare the same movie on both formats (X-Men 3). Some of our HD selections have been King Kong, The Corpse Bride, A Christmas Story. Some of our BD selections have been Casino Royale, Eragon and Saw III.

I don't know if it comes down to how they're authoring the discs, how they're squashing the data or what. Maybe we're not configured properly (although, as far as I can tell, we are... and the PS3 games we've played certainly look stunning). The HDDVDs we've seen just look better. The BluRay discs we've watched look on par with some of the 480p TV shows we've downloaded from Xbox Live. The HDDVDs, on the other hand, are insane. They look like you could reach out and touch what's on screen.

So yeah... HDDVD ftw. Too bad they're losing. If BluRay is the winner I'm going to be sad. And if someone thinks I have things set up incorrectly, please let me know. I may make games go boom, but when it comes to video stuff I'm pretty inexperienced.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2007)

And, as an update, I just did a bit of research. It seems that the PS3 will only play BluRay movies in 1080p/i or 480p/i. It won't do 720p. So the reason our BluRay playback has looked terrible is that we're watching it in 480p. Makes sense.

I have no clue why they would nerf their machine like this, but it just adds to a long list of complaints I've had about this thing. Geez.

Anyone know if there is some sort of external HD conversion box? Would that even be financially reasonable to get, if such a thing exists?


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

introvert said:


> I'm an audio guy. I make sound effects for video games. I'm working on stuff for both the 360 and the PS3, and I'll confess my displeasure with the latter (due mostly to technical difficulties in developing for the platform...read: it's a pain in the ***). So I suppose that bias might creep into my statements here.


Can you elaborate(in layman's terms:T ) what 'technical difficulties' have come up between the two consoles? Do they affect the end user? In other words, is it something we should know about, or is it just something that affects the development stage?

Sorry for all the Q's, but it just has me intrigued

cheers


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2007)

It's more on the development side, but it can effect the end user in some ways. It's just a complicated architecture to develop for, and the tools and support provided by Sony aren't exactly fantastic. The result is that some developers aren't willing to take the time to make multiplatform games better on the PS3, they just try to keep them on par with the 360 version.

For games developed exclusively for the PS3, this probably isn't as big an issue, because they're going to make it work no matter what.

The other issue with the PS3 is that is quite expensive to develop for. Of the three current consoles (Wii, PS3 and 360), it is the most expensive. This is in terms of cost of development hardware and software as well as man hours taken to develop for it. HW/SW cost aside, the Xbox 360 has a strong toolset and support system in place and it has a lot of similarities to developing for the PC. The Wii is quite easy to develop for because it's based on the GameCube architecture, so people already know how to push the hardware around and get what they want out of it. The PS3 is just an entirely new, complicated beast.

Another concern, on the part of games publishers, is the cost of the machine and the sales of it thus far. It's an expensive piece of gear for most gamers, and it hasn't exactly been flying off the shelves.

Sorry to get into a whole discussion on it, but there are some answers to your questions. You may have already seen some of the results of these issues. A lot of once-PS3-exclusive titles are now going multiplatform (Devil May Cry, Assassin's Creed, rumors flying about Metal Gear and Final Fantasy), a lot of multiplatform titles aren't seeing any sort of exclusive features or improved performance for the PS3 (due to the cost and time involved), and there's a lot of general skepticism in the industry about it.

I don't think it will be a failure, and I think the machine has a lot to offer gamers, but it might be a while before it really grows its wings.


----------



## MACCA350 (Apr 25, 2006)

Thanks for the insight introvert, its interesting to hear information from those who actually develop for the consoles. Much appreciated:T 

cheers


----------

