And it's gloat time for the anti-Sony crowd, apparently.
Will you apply this same standard to those in the anti-HDDVD crowd who gloat about BluRay's disc sales? You're conspicuously silent when Marzetta dances in the in-zone. Which is frequently.
Will you apply this same standard to those in the anti-HDDVD crowd who gloat about BluRay's disc sales? You're conspicuously silent when Marzetta dances in the in-zone. Which is frequently.
I'm conspiculously silent? Shit, now you're following me around and critiquing what I don't say?
I figured I'd get an HDTV someday, but suddenly I found myself buying a new 32 inch Sony Bravia. My reason for the size is that LCD prices are going to drop a lot, I believe. In a couple years I can likely get a 46 inch for the same price and put this one in the bedroom. One thing lead to another and I then found myself getting a Yamaha digital sound system, and then just a couple days ago I purchased a HD satellite receiver with built-in DVR. Next is a Blu-Ray disc player. My son is willing to chip in if we get a Sony PS3. Not sure when that will happen yet.
Since some of you may be going through the same sort of thing before long, I thought I'd post my impressions. First, the TV. I thought the Sony Bravia had the best picture quality. What sold me however, was two seemingly insignificant details. It swivels 15 degrees to either side, and the controls are on top. I really like the top controls in actual use. The cheaper set I initially planned on buying had them under the screen, and that would have been bad IMHO.
Second is the sound system. I needed a new, digital audio receiver I thought, until I heard the Yamaha Digital Sound Projector. If you haven't heard it demonstrated in a good sound room, do it before you buy something else. It costs about the same as a really good receiver, but includes all the speakers except the subwoofer. It does not have an FM/AM tuner.
Third, is just a strange story. After we got the new TV and sound system set up and working, our Dish satellite receiver and DVR combination died. I called and found I could get a new HD model with DVR for $149. My wife thinks I helped the old Dish receiver die so I could the the new HD model. If you have satellite, I discovered something.
I looked at the HD channels available and found we watch none of them except for A&E. Mostly movie channels and sports. We have netflix and don't watch sports. But all is not lost. Someday there will be many more channels on HD. For now, however, Dish offers all our local channels. Four of these broadcast in HD and it is only $5 a month more for local channels. That will be our HD programming for now, and when we get the PS3 we can get Blu-Ray disks from Netflix. In the mean time, regular DVDs look great.
it fixed a few graphic hiccups and has a few second faster load times after an entire year of extra development on hardware that is SUPPOSED to be light years ahead of the 360 (according to sony) ???
this after all the other games that looked worse??? you really cant be serious can you?
not to mention this isn't even a jump like the xbox version of grand theft auto was compared to the ps2 version when it was released almost a year later.
I haven't been keeping score in this apparently long battle, but does this mean that regardless of the past, PS3 is currently a superior machine, &/or that Blu-Ray is a superior format? I'm not talking about the console battle since XBox arrived... Maybe the score is "5-2; XBox", and I'm really not interested in who beat who to what. It just sounded to me like finally the consensus, at least at the moment, was that PS3/Blu-Ray might be proving the better. Again, this is despite any expectations for something better, or any "curve" for year older tech. Am I about right in my perception of the pulse of this discussion?
Personally, I hope both consoles, and formats, are around for a while. That way we all win.
It just sounded to me like finally the consensus, at least at the moment, was that PS3/Blu-Ray might be proving the better.
.
where is this consensus? you getting it from this forum? cuz honestly walking in here is like walking into the f*cking twighlight zone.
the consensus from a majority of gamers, journalists, sites, blogs,forums is that the ps3 as a gaming unit is nothing but a 600 dollar bluray player. thats it, thats all it is right now. it doesn't have any blockbuster games, besides the ports that have been out for the 360. i guess some people are still riding on that "it's got great potential" sony propaganda
even in it's home town it's getting sh*t kicked by the Wii. as far as this blueray vs hdvd debate goes- outside of the tech savvy blogger or online shopper its still pretty damn bleak.
I haven't been keeping score in this apparently long battle, but does this mean that regardless of the past, PS3 is currently a superior machine, &/or that Blu-Ray is a superior format? I'm not talking about the console battle since XBox arrived... Maybe the score is "5-2; XBox", and I'm really not interested in who beat who to what. It just sounded to me like finally the consensus, at least at the moment, was that PS3/Blu-Ray might be proving the better. Again, this is despite any expectations for something better, or any "curve" for year older tech. Am I about right in my perception of the pulse of this discussion?
Personally, I hope both consoles, and formats, are around for a while. That way we all win.
In this case, the PS3 is the superior machine:
- the XBOX 360 doesn't use HD-DVD for games, just movies
- the PS3's Blu-ray bandwidth is actually a bit slower than the 360's DVD player
- the PS3 takes advantage of the hard drive to cache the most commonly accessed resources, which is why it's so much faster here.
Personally, I hope all the consoles are around for a while. While I am glad the PS3 is so powerful, the price is out of hand, and you can bet that won't happen next generation because of the Wii.
For formats, HD-DVD needs to die so HD adoption will actually happen. With two formats, no one wins: its bad for consumers, media companies, and hardware companies.
- the XBOX 360 doesn't use HD-DVD for games, just movies
- the PS3's Blu-ray bandwidth is actually a bit slower than the 360's DVD player
- the PS3 takes advantage of the hard drive to cache the most commonly accessed resources, which is why it's so much faster here.
.
what is any of that have to do with games? tell me. also, tell me how many games will take advantage of the space that bluray provides?
you think studios are going to develop 20million + games all the time? seriously, more doesn't always equal better. you're seeing gaming studios back out of exclusives constantly now.
i guess i have to just realize what forum i'm in, and realize that people on tech sites are concerned with nothing but specs cuz all i see is spec after spec after spec after spec comparisons.....
no one talks about price usually, no one talks about the pain in the butt this bluray crap will be for consumers, or that sony would have a serious control over DRM and the way we may watch movies in the future.
hell, lets just give them the entire bag of marbles cuz they already own music studios , film studios, on top of their hardware and now idiots want to give them a content medium.
we'll be f*ckin trapped underneath whatever sony decides to do.
what is any of that have to do with games? tell me. also, tell me how many games will take advantage of the space that bluray provides?
You might have noticed that what I wrote was a direct response to someone? As in, I was answering his specific question?
He asked if the PS3's speed advantage came from Blu-ray over HD-DVD. It doesn't, because 360 games don't run on Blu-ray.
Oh, and considering that some PS2 games (like Xenosaga) could only just barely fit on a dual-layer DVD, it's pretty obvious that DVD is a dead format for games.
Quote:
you think studios are going to develop 20million + games all the time? seriously, more doesn't always equal better.
What? Well, it is upsetting to see that no studio yet has decided to work on 20 million games all at once, but I'll somehow survive...
Quote:
no one talks about price usually, no one talks about the pain in the butt this bluray crap will be for consumers, or that sony would have a serious control over DRM and the way we may watch movies in the future.
What a pain that vastly superior format as, with its larger capacity, scratch resistance, and partial involvement with a company Elixir apparently hates...
As for DRM—what happened when CDs started implementing DRM? All the customers returned them. What happened when Sony put rootkits on CDs? Half the states in the US sued them. While it's good to be nervous about DRM, HDCP isn't going to happen. The movie studios know it's suicide. Everyone hates it.
And, although you seem to be forgetting, in case snowballs can survive in hell, it's coming to HD-DVD too.
interesting enough..... few weeks of BD movie sale spike and all the PS3/Sony fanboys are already celebrating. Well, all the FUD BD/Sony had put out at CES cheerleader session will die out soon, as it did in 2006. I think when HD-DVD players came out in March/April, all the bond fire from BD cheerleader died. Also, when Samsung BD player was release, BD movie sales also spiked for about month or two then died down, again. Same think will happen to BD movie sales around the mid year or even sooner. The HD-DVD supporting studios will start releasing 300 + titles including 100 HD exclusives from Universal which have been already listed for few. The standalone HD-DVD player sales are still going strong despite the recent HD-DVD movie release slowed down. Obviously, the main reason for high popularity of HD-DVD player is alot to do with cost of entry still being alot cheaper than even when you consider PS3 as a BD player. The current street price of HD-DVD 2nd gen standalone player is $370 shipped vs. $499 shipped for PS3. Not to mention that HD-DVD player is a fully capable and well performing upconverting SD-DVD player which is a feature that PS3 is lacking. BTW, PS3 as a gaming console is still remaining to be an expensive doorstop, but nothing more. If you're a console gamer and bought one of the doorstop for either $499/$599, you basically wasted your money. I really hope it was worth the money to watch one or two BD movies with it while you're waiting for more PS3 games.
greg- there are very few games that run on more than 1 disk. majority are japanese titles, long RPG's like final fantasy, and like i said said those are very few.
the funny thing is i'm starting to believe sony might be kind of smart. the ps3 right now blows as a gaming console, but since some people picked them up anyways, they figured " hey i might as well justs watch bluray movies on this thing"
cuz apparently thats all the device is good for right now haha
Okay, I followed some of those gizmo links, and found something interesting.
Quote:
The BDA's unwillingness to support Vista features like Mandatory Managed Copy and iHD seems to be for no other reason than it wants to oppose Microsoft (which supports HD DVD).
My first reaction is that this is a plug for Blu-Ray, from my point of view. I favor open standards, not tying HD discs to a Microsoft propriety standard. Good for the BDA, I say. Yet I am speaking from ignorance. Is Microsoft trying to control how discs are copied? Is this something to be concerned about? I assume HD-DVD will go along with the Microsoft scheme for copy protection.
Comments
And it's gloat time for the anti-Sony crowd, apparently.
Will you apply this same standard to those in the anti-HDDVD crowd who gloat about BluRay's disc sales? You're conspicuously silent when Marzetta dances in the in-zone. Which is frequently.
Will you apply this same standard to those in the anti-HDDVD crowd who gloat about BluRay's disc sales? You're conspicuously silent when Marzetta dances in the in-zone. Which is frequently.
I'm conspiculously silent? Shit, now you're following me around and critiquing what I don't say?
Sorry guys.
I figured I'd get an HDTV someday, but suddenly I found myself buying a new 32 inch Sony Bravia. My reason for the size is that LCD prices are going to drop a lot, I believe. In a couple years I can likely get a 46 inch for the same price and put this one in the bedroom. One thing lead to another and I then found myself getting a Yamaha digital sound system, and then just a couple days ago I purchased a HD satellite receiver with built-in DVR. Next is a Blu-Ray disc player. My son is willing to chip in if we get a Sony PS3. Not sure when that will happen yet.
Since some of you may be going through the same sort of thing before long, I thought I'd post my impressions. First, the TV. I thought the Sony Bravia had the best picture quality. What sold me however, was two seemingly insignificant details. It swivels 15 degrees to either side, and the controls are on top. I really like the top controls in actual use. The cheaper set I initially planned on buying had them under the screen, and that would have been bad IMHO.
Second is the sound system. I needed a new, digital audio receiver I thought, until I heard the Yamaha Digital Sound Projector. If you haven't heard it demonstrated in a good sound room, do it before you buy something else. It costs about the same as a really good receiver, but includes all the speakers except the subwoofer. It does not have an FM/AM tuner.
Third, is just a strange story. After we got the new TV and sound system set up and working, our Dish satellite receiver and DVR combination died. I called and found I could get a new HD model with DVR for $149. My wife thinks I helped the old Dish receiver die so I could the the new HD model. If you have satellite, I discovered something.
I looked at the HD channels available and found we watch none of them except for A&E. Mostly movie channels and sports. We have netflix and don't watch sports. But all is not lost. Someday there will be many more channels on HD. For now, however, Dish offers all our local channels. Four of these broadcast in HD and it is only $5 a month more for local channels. That will be our HD programming for now, and when we get the PS3 we can get Blu-Ray disks from Netflix. In the mean time, regular DVDs look great.
Not an article about the merits of the technology. But about how Sony is gaining studio support for BR by promising even more DRM.
C.
it fixed a few graphic hiccups and has a few second faster load times after an entire year of extra development on hardware that is SUPPOSED to be light years ahead of the 360 (according to sony) ???
this after all the other games that looked worse??? you really cant be serious can you?
not to mention this isn't even a jump like the xbox version of grand theft auto was compared to the ps2 version when it was released almost a year later.
I haven't been keeping score in this apparently long battle, but does this mean that regardless of the past, PS3 is currently a superior machine, &/or that Blu-Ray is a superior format? I'm not talking about the console battle since XBox arrived... Maybe the score is "5-2; XBox", and I'm really not interested in who beat who to what. It just sounded to me like finally the consensus, at least at the moment, was that PS3/Blu-Ray might be proving the better. Again, this is despite any expectations for something better, or any "curve" for year older tech. Am I about right in my perception of the pulse of this discussion?
Personally, I hope both consoles, and formats, are around for a while. That way we all win.
It just sounded to me like finally the consensus, at least at the moment, was that PS3/Blu-Ray might be proving the better.
.
where is this consensus? you getting it from this forum? cuz honestly walking in here is like walking into the f*cking twighlight zone.
the consensus from a majority of gamers, journalists, sites, blogs,forums is that the ps3 as a gaming unit is nothing but a 600 dollar bluray player. thats it, thats all it is right now. it doesn't have any blockbuster games, besides the ports that have been out for the 360. i guess some people are still riding on that "it's got great potential" sony propaganda
even in it's home town it's getting sh*t kicked by the Wii. as far as this blueray vs hdvd debate goes- outside of the tech savvy blogger or online shopper its still pretty damn bleak.
I haven't been keeping score in this apparently long battle, but does this mean that regardless of the past, PS3 is currently a superior machine, &/or that Blu-Ray is a superior format? I'm not talking about the console battle since XBox arrived... Maybe the score is "5-2; XBox", and I'm really not interested in who beat who to what. It just sounded to me like finally the consensus, at least at the moment, was that PS3/Blu-Ray might be proving the better. Again, this is despite any expectations for something better, or any "curve" for year older tech. Am I about right in my perception of the pulse of this discussion?
Personally, I hope both consoles, and formats, are around for a while. That way we all win.
In this case, the PS3 is the superior machine:
- the XBOX 360 doesn't use HD-DVD for games, just movies
- the PS3's Blu-ray bandwidth is actually a bit slower than the 360's DVD player
- the PS3 takes advantage of the hard drive to cache the most commonly accessed resources, which is why it's so much faster here.
Personally, I hope all the consoles are around for a while. While I am glad the PS3 is so powerful, the price is out of hand, and you can bet that won't happen next generation because of the Wii.
For formats, HD-DVD needs to die so HD adoption will actually happen. With two formats, no one wins: its bad for consumers, media companies, and hardware companies.
In this case, the PS3 is the superior machine:
- the XBOX 360 doesn't use HD-DVD for games, just movies
- the PS3's Blu-ray bandwidth is actually a bit slower than the 360's DVD player
- the PS3 takes advantage of the hard drive to cache the most commonly accessed resources, which is why it's so much faster here.
.
what is any of that have to do with games? tell me. also, tell me how many games will take advantage of the space that bluray provides?
you think studios are going to develop 20million + games all the time? seriously, more doesn't always equal better. you're seeing gaming studios back out of exclusives constantly now.
i guess i have to just realize what forum i'm in, and realize that people on tech sites are concerned with nothing but specs cuz all i see is spec after spec after spec after spec comparisons.....
no one talks about price usually, no one talks about the pain in the butt this bluray crap will be for consumers, or that sony would have a serious control over DRM and the way we may watch movies in the future.
hell, lets just give them the entire bag of marbles cuz they already own music studios , film studios, on top of their hardware and now idiots want to give them a content medium.
we'll be f*ckin trapped underneath whatever sony decides to do.
what is any of that have to do with games? tell me. also, tell me how many games will take advantage of the space that bluray provides?
You might have noticed that what I wrote was a direct response to someone? As in, I was answering his specific question?
He asked if the PS3's speed advantage came from Blu-ray over HD-DVD. It doesn't, because 360 games don't run on Blu-ray.
Oh, and considering that some PS2 games (like Xenosaga) could only just barely fit on a dual-layer DVD, it's pretty obvious that DVD is a dead format for games.
you think studios are going to develop 20million + games all the time? seriously, more doesn't always equal better.
What? Well, it is upsetting to see that no studio yet has decided to work on 20 million games all at once, but I'll somehow survive...
no one talks about price usually, no one talks about the pain in the butt this bluray crap will be for consumers, or that sony would have a serious control over DRM and the way we may watch movies in the future.
What a pain that vastly superior format as, with its larger capacity, scratch resistance, and partial involvement with a company Elixir apparently hates...
As for DRM—what happened when CDs started implementing DRM? All the customers returned them. What happened when Sony put rootkits on CDs? Half the states in the US sued them. While it's good to be nervous about DRM, HDCP isn't going to happen. The movie studios know it's suicide. Everyone hates it.
And, although you seem to be forgetting, in case snowballs can survive in hell, it's coming to HD-DVD too.
the funny thing is i'm starting to believe sony might be kind of smart. the ps3 right now blows as a gaming console, but since some people picked them up anyways, they figured " hey i might as well justs watch bluray movies on this thing"
cuz apparently thats all the device is good for right now haha
Wow, that was one of the most nonsensical and bitter posts I've seen in this thread in quite a while. Take a bow, bitemymac.
really?.... Well, while at it, here's something to cheer you up.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-ente...dvd-235144.php
I just thought it was funny..... but when I think about my copy of Fifth element on BD, it's not that funny.
Here's an interesting view towards BD/Sony and what this format war will do for Sony.
http://www.gizmocafe.com/blogs/gizmo...08/106130.aspx
seems the upturn in sales of BD is really getting to a few people
it's just that people need to stop being geeks and concerning themselves with storage space to look at the bigger picture if bluray takes over.
it's going to be a major pain in the AS5.
Okay, I followed some of those gizmo links, and found something interesting.
The BDA's unwillingness to support Vista features like Mandatory Managed Copy and iHD seems to be for no other reason than it wants to oppose Microsoft (which supports HD DVD).
My first reaction is that this is a plug for Blu-Ray, from my point of view. I favor open standards, not tying HD discs to a Microsoft propriety standard. Good for the BDA, I say. Yet I am speaking from ignorance. Is Microsoft trying to control how discs are copied? Is this something to be concerned about? I assume HD-DVD will go along with the Microsoft scheme for copy protection.
Can someone clear this up?
lots of things are a major pain in the ass... yet we still manage
true but do you willingly make things a pain in the butt? cuz i dont.