Right, only very few games, like Final Fantasy, which hasn't topped ANY Top 10 Best Selling Console Games lists, EVER.
Final Fantasy games have historically had about an hour or so of FMV. At 1080p, how exactly would that fit on a DVD?
See, this is why people keep making fun of you, for being twelve, or a fanboy, or possibly mildly retarded. Because half of what you say indicates all three.
'Final Fantasy games' meaning the last four, right?
Besides, with the Overwhelming Power of the PS3, I'm sure Square should have no problems resisting the urge to feed us more of their overkill CG wankery. Overkill in-game wankery should suffice nicely, thank you very much.
I can't help but feel, as a consumer, that Blu-Ray is being forced down my throat. I can't figure out why I'm feeling so hostile to this format.
It's not being forced down your throat. Nobody says you absolutely must buy Blu-ray now or any time in the near future. You can still buy DVDs. This format war was a bad idea to begin with, regardless of how some people keep saying that somehow having both formats around for the next decade is good for the consumer. Does anyone think DVDs would have their current market penetration if Divx had competed well and persisted through the last decade?
Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) today announced that the first 500,000 PlayStation 3 owners to register on the PlayStation Network when the PS3 launches in Europe will receive a copy of last year's smash hit reinvigoration of the Bond franchise, Casino Royale, on special edition Blu-ray disc.
Casino Royale, which has already grossed more than $560 million at the box office worldwide, and has established itself as the most successful Bond film of all time will debut on a 50GB dual-layer Blu-ray disc encoded in MPEG-4 AVC. With a ground breaking collection of added-value features in 1080p high-definition visual quality, and with uncompressed audio features for the best possible audio experience, Casino Royale not only demonstrates the exceptional visual quality of full 1080p high-definition movies on Blu-ray disc, but is the perfect vehicle to highlight the broader entertainment credentials of the PlayStation 3 system.
Explaining the offer, Darren Carter, VP Brand and Consumer Marketing said, "The PlayStation Network unlocks the broad range of interactive entertainment features of PlayStation 3. It?s easy to set up, offers free online gaming, has great tools for staying in touch with friends and family, and includes a wide variety of content for download through the PlayStation Store."
"All this, and more, will enable users to experience a whole new world of interactive entertainment, and that is why we are offering the phenomenal incentive of Casino Royale, on Blu-ray disc, to PS3 owners who register on the PlayStation Network. Casino Royale not only makes the most of the features and capabilities of the Blu-ray format, but is one of the most exciting and entertaining movies to debut on Blu-ray this year."
The PlayStation 3 launches in Europe on March 23, 2007.
Blu-ray does NOT cost significantly more than HD DVD
Using the pricing data and example calculations in this article we can make a few conclusions on replication costs at this plant. Replicating on HD DVD SL (15GB) will always be the most inexpensive option at any quantity. Replicating on Blu-ray DL (50GB) will always be the most expensive option. But the pricing of the other two media types (HD DVD DL and Blu-ray SL) is where the most interesting information is. Looking at the pricing and calculated data we can conclude that replicating content on the Blu-ray format is not significantly more costly than HD DVD. In fact, replicating on Blu-ray SL (25GB) can actually be less expensive than replicating on HD DVD DL (30GB). Hopefully this article will help to dispell the myth that Blu-ray disc replication is significantly more expensive than HD DVD replication. If you have any comments please post them in the reply section of this article below and thank you for reading.
Good post, and yet another dispelled HD DVD myth. Why is HD DVD still better to some? I can't answer that as apart from Blu-ray being technically superior as well as vastly better contenting in terms of movies, price for discs and price for hardware are the same.
It just seems if it wasn't for the underhanded and unethical tactics of Toshiba & Co. in the DVD Forum, we really wouldn't be having this format war, as it is clear that the industry, and now the consumers it appears, are on Blu-ray's side. 8)
I'm glad to see the consumer shift, but it was so obvious to many of us right away anyway.
The price for a Blu Ray single later 25GB, is less expensive that a Dual 30GB layer HD-DVD disk, and those two hold the same amount of data for the most part. For now other than backup, and what were boxed sets you don't really need to go beyond that.
Looking at the pricing and calculated data we can conclude that replicating content on the Blu-ray format is not significantly more costly than HD DVD. In fact, replicating on Blu-ray SL (25GB) can actually be less expensive than replicating on HD DVD DL (30GB).
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
Good point Kolchak. I still don't think Porn is a factor this time, but what you say could be important to the porn industry. Although with limited production runs that is typical of porn movies HD may end up being lesser. I don't think they replicate in that high of a quantity. I think they do it depending on demand for a particular title. They don't have a million copy (plus or minus) minimum sales per disc to outlets like video rental stores, and stuff that they can guarantee for every title like the big studios do.
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
And HD DVD SL is cheaper than Blu-Ray SL. And I am guessing, since most porns are not feature length, a SL HD DVD would be plenty of space. So "rock-bottom replication cost" still favors HD DVD at this time.
I'm glad to see the consumer shift, but it was so obvious to many of us right away anyway.
The price for a Blu Ray single later 25GB, is less expensive that a Dual 30GB layer HD-DVD disk, and those two hold the same amount of data for the most part. For now other than backup, and what were boxed sets you don't really need to go beyond that.
I'd think only folks wanting to print BD would do 5K runs, but most smarter people would probably do 10K runs to waive the set up fee. Which makes SL BD same price as DL HD-DVD. BTW, the printing cost isn't the only cost involved. The given format disc would be required to be going through authoring process and whatever else process required to put all the information on a given format prior to printing and that would also be added to the cost of the disc. Obviously, BD supporters don't like talking about the other more expensive cost of making BD discs other than printing cost because that would reveal all the hidden cost behind it. It would also reveal why Sony is trying to eat the cost now, and rip off the consumers later.
BTW, how credible is the site providing the cost information?.... Would a moonshine taste like a cognac in a cognac bottle?
Industry?s First*1 Blu-ray Disc Player to Record High-Definition TV
Sharp Corporation introduces into the Japanese market the BD-HP1 Blu-ray Disc Player, which has a Hybrid Recording function that works with the AQUOS LCD TV*2 iLink connection to allow recording of high-definition programs on Blu-ray Disc (BD-RE)*3, an industry first.
With the ability to record high-definition images from video software and digital broadcasting sources and give high-definition, high-resolution images and high sound quality superior to that of DVD, the Blu-ray Disc is expected to become an indispensable part of the high-definition equation.
The BD-HP1 is one more way to enjoy the AQUOS Fami-link, a setup that combines the AQUOS LCD TV and AV equipment to provide entertainment. This player is installed with the industry?s first Hybrid Recording function, allowing users to record high-definition programs received by the AQUOS? digital tuner through i.LINK. The player also has the Easy BD Dubbing function, which allows users to transfer programs recorded by an existing AQUOS HD Recorder*4 to Blu-ray Disc without losing the high-definition quality. Sharp is promoting this player as a new product genre that enables users to easily record onto Blu-ray Discs from the AQUOS LCD TV and the AQUOS HD Recorder.
The BD-HP1 is just the beginning of a string of products that Sharp will bring out to give consumers new ways to enjoy high-definition images by combining Blu-ray Discs with the AQUOS LCD TV.
Product name Blu-ray Disc Player
Model name BD-HP1
Suggested retail price Open
Date of introduction March 20, 2007
Monthly production 3,000 units
Major Features 1. Hybrid Recording function allows recording of high-definition programs onto Blu-ray Discs from the AQUOS LCD TV via the Fami-link home entertainment network, an industry first.
2. The Easy BD Dubbing function enables users to dub transfer*3 programs recorded on hard disks to Blu-ray Discs through the connection with an AQUOS HD Recorder.
3. The 1080p-compatible image engine allows users to watch Blu-ray Discs in high image quality on the AQUOS LCD TV.
*1 As of February 14, 2007
*2 Limited to connections with AQUOS LCD TVs equipped with an i.LINK terminal.
*3 Only single-layer BD-RE Discs without cartridge can be recorded on.
*4 Limited to connections with AQUOS HD Recorders sold since February 2004
Specifications
Model name BD-HP1
Recordable discs BD-RE Ver. 2.1 single-layer type
Playable discs BD video, BD-RE Ver. 2.1 single-layer type, BD-R Ver. 1.1 single-layer type, DVD video, DVD-RW/-R (video format finalized), DVD-RAM*5, DVD+RW/+R (video format finalized), standard audio CDs, CD-RW/-R (audio CD format)
Recording compression method (BD-RE/-R) Video MPEG2
Audio MPEG2 AAC
Approx. recording time*6 (25GB Blu-ray Disc) Terrestrial digital broadcast HD 3 hours (at approx. 17Mbps)
Digital broadcast HD 2 hours 10 minutes (at approx. 24Mbps)
SD 6 hours 30 minutes (at approx. 8Mbps)
Video digital-to-analog converter 12-bit/148.5MHz
Audio digital-to-analog converter 24-bit/192kHz
Jacks Input i.LINK (TS) 2
Output Video 1
S-Video 1
D video 1 (D1/D2/D3/D4)
HDMI 1
Audio 2-channel analog output: 1
7.1 channel analog output: 1
Digital audio Optical: 1
Coaxial: 1
External dimensions (W x D x H) 434 x 343 x 68 mm (17.1" x 13.5" x 2.7")
(not including protruding parts)
Approx. weight 4.4 kg (9.7 lbs)
Power supply 100 V AC, 50/60 Hz
Power consumption 30 W (0.8 W standby)*
* Instant-On function OFF
*5 When using a DVD-RAM disk, the playback disk must be removed from cartridge.
I think the general consumer would be more inclined towards HD DVD. I say this because everyone is familier with the DVD brand name and with all the new displays being HD, most people will make a simple assumption... I need HD DVD to play high def DVDs on my HD display. Blu-Ray? What's that?
Personally I don't mind who wins the format war, I just wish that they would make their minds up and let us have a standard that we can start investing in.
Comments
Right, only very few games, like Final Fantasy, which hasn't topped ANY Top 10 Best Selling Console Games lists, EVER.
Final Fantasy games have historically had about an hour or so of FMV. At 1080p, how exactly would that fit on a DVD?
See, this is why people keep making fun of you, for being twelve, or a fanboy, or possibly mildly retarded. Because half of what you say indicates all three.
'Final Fantasy games' meaning the last four, right?
Besides, with the Overwhelming Power of the PS3, I'm sure Square should have no problems resisting the urge to feed us more of their overkill CG wankery. Overkill in-game wankery should suffice nicely, thank you very much.
I can't help but feel, as a consumer, that Blu-Ray is being forced down my throat. I can't figure out why I'm feeling so hostile to this format.
It's not being forced down your throat. Nobody says you absolutely must buy Blu-ray now or any time in the near future. You can still buy DVDs. This format war was a bad idea to begin with, regardless of how some people keep saying that somehow having both formats around for the next decade is good for the consumer. Does anyone think DVDs would have their current market penetration if Divx had competed well and persisted through the last decade?
Marzetta7, what publication is that?
I believe it's Blu-ray Today.
http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/
On another note...
First European PS3 Owners Get Casino Royale for Free
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=119
Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) today announced that the first 500,000 PlayStation 3 owners to register on the PlayStation Network when the PS3 launches in Europe will receive a copy of last year's smash hit reinvigoration of the Bond franchise, Casino Royale, on special edition Blu-ray disc.
Casino Royale, which has already grossed more than $560 million at the box office worldwide, and has established itself as the most successful Bond film of all time will debut on a 50GB dual-layer Blu-ray disc encoded in MPEG-4 AVC. With a ground breaking collection of added-value features in 1080p high-definition visual quality, and with uncompressed audio features for the best possible audio experience, Casino Royale not only demonstrates the exceptional visual quality of full 1080p high-definition movies on Blu-ray disc, but is the perfect vehicle to highlight the broader entertainment credentials of the PlayStation 3 system.
Explaining the offer, Darren Carter, VP Brand and Consumer Marketing said, "The PlayStation Network unlocks the broad range of interactive entertainment features of PlayStation 3. It?s easy to set up, offers free online gaming, has great tools for staying in touch with friends and family, and includes a wide variety of content for download through the PlayStation Store."
"All this, and more, will enable users to experience a whole new world of interactive entertainment, and that is why we are offering the phenomenal incentive of Casino Royale, on Blu-ray disc, to PS3 owners who register on the PlayStation Network. Casino Royale not only makes the most of the features and capabilities of the Blu-ray format, but is one of the most exciting and entertaining movies to debut on Blu-ray this year."
The PlayStation 3 launches in Europe on March 23, 2007.
Blu-ray vs HD DVD replication costs analyzed again
Conclusion:
Blu-ray does NOT cost significantly more than HD DVD
Using the pricing data and example calculations in this article we can make a few conclusions on replication costs at this plant. Replicating on HD DVD SL (15GB) will always be the most inexpensive option at any quantity. Replicating on Blu-ray DL (50GB) will always be the most expensive option. But the pricing of the other two media types (HD DVD DL and Blu-ray SL) is where the most interesting information is. Looking at the pricing and calculated data we can conclude that replicating content on the Blu-ray format is not significantly more costly than HD DVD. In fact, replicating on Blu-ray SL (25GB) can actually be less expensive than replicating on HD DVD DL (30GB). Hopefully this article will help to dispell the myth that Blu-ray disc replication is significantly more expensive than HD DVD replication. If you have any comments please post them in the reply section of this article below and thank you for reading.
Hope this hasn't been linked to yet:
Blu-ray vs HD DVD replication costs analyzed again
Conclusion:
Good post, and yet another dispelled HD DVD myth. Why is HD DVD still better to some? I can't answer that as apart from Blu-ray being technically superior as well as vastly better contenting in terms of movies, price for discs and price for hardware are the same.
It just seems if it wasn't for the underhanded and unethical tactics
The price for a Blu Ray single later 25GB, is less expensive that a Dual 30GB layer HD-DVD disk, and those two hold the same amount of data for the most part. For now other than backup, and what were boxed sets you don't really need to go beyond that.
Well it looks like they both have come down with a touch of the Pox.
The DRM on both formats has been broken. How long did that take...exactly?
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/13/1724238
C
Looking at the pricing and calculated data we can conclude that replicating content on the Blu-ray format is not significantly more costly than HD DVD. In fact, replicating on Blu-ray SL (25GB) can actually be less expensive than replicating on HD DVD DL (30GB).
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
Good point Kolchak. I still don't think Porn is a factor this time, but what you say could be important to the porn industry. Although with limited production runs that is typical of porn movies HD may end up being lesser. I don't think they replicate in that high of a quantity. I think they do it depending on demand for a particular title. They don't have a million copy (plus or minus) minimum sales per disc to outlets like video rental stores, and stuff that they can guarantee for every title like the big studios do.
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
Good point indeed.
How would that play out with the ever-contentious porn argument? I would think porn publishers would be interested in 1) rock-bottom replication cost and 2) biggest installed base of players. There's a million PS3s out there, mostly owned by a demographic that has a solid interest in porn (i.e. young males). If I were a publisher, that'd be the market I'd target. Add in the lower costs given their bargain-basement budgets and it should be a lock.
And HD DVD SL is cheaper than Blu-Ray SL. And I am guessing, since most porns are not feature length, a SL HD DVD would be plenty of space. So "rock-bottom replication cost" still favors HD DVD at this time.
I'm glad to see the consumer shift, but it was so obvious to many of us right away anyway.
The price for a Blu Ray single later 25GB, is less expensive that a Dual 30GB layer HD-DVD disk, and those two hold the same amount of data for the most part. For now other than backup, and what were boxed sets you don't really need to go beyond that.
I'd think only folks wanting to print BD would do 5K runs, but most smarter people would probably do 10K runs to waive the set up fee. Which makes SL BD same price as DL HD-DVD. BTW, the printing cost isn't the only cost involved. The given format disc would be required to be going through authoring process and whatever else process required to put all the information on a given format prior to printing and that would also be added to the cost of the disc. Obviously, BD supporters don't like talking about the other more expensive cost of making BD discs other than printing cost because that would reveal all the hidden cost behind it. It would also reveal why Sony is trying to eat the cost now, and rip off the consumers later.
BTW, how credible is the site providing the cost information?.... Would a moonshine taste like a cognac in a cognac bottle?
http://www.assodigitale.it/content/view/5074/74/
Industry?s First*1 Blu-ray Disc Player to Record High-Definition TV
Sharp Corporation introduces into the Japanese market the BD-HP1 Blu-ray Disc Player, which has a Hybrid Recording function that works with the AQUOS LCD TV*2 iLink connection to allow recording of high-definition programs on Blu-ray Disc (BD-RE)*3, an industry first.
With the ability to record high-definition images from video software and digital broadcasting sources and give high-definition, high-resolution images and high sound quality superior to that of DVD, the Blu-ray Disc is expected to become an indispensable part of the high-definition equation.
The BD-HP1 is one more way to enjoy the AQUOS Fami-link, a setup that combines the AQUOS LCD TV and AV equipment to provide entertainment. This player is installed with the industry?s first Hybrid Recording function, allowing users to record high-definition programs received by the AQUOS? digital tuner through i.LINK. The player also has the Easy BD Dubbing function, which allows users to transfer programs recorded by an existing AQUOS HD Recorder*4 to Blu-ray Disc without losing the high-definition quality. Sharp is promoting this player as a new product genre that enables users to easily record onto Blu-ray Discs from the AQUOS LCD TV and the AQUOS HD Recorder.
The BD-HP1 is just the beginning of a string of products that Sharp will bring out to give consumers new ways to enjoy high-definition images by combining Blu-ray Discs with the AQUOS LCD TV.
Product name Blu-ray Disc Player
Model name BD-HP1
Suggested retail price Open
Date of introduction March 20, 2007
Monthly production 3,000 units
Major Features 1. Hybrid Recording function allows recording of high-definition programs onto Blu-ray Discs from the AQUOS LCD TV via the Fami-link home entertainment network, an industry first.
2. The Easy BD Dubbing function enables users to dub transfer*3 programs recorded on hard disks to Blu-ray Discs through the connection with an AQUOS HD Recorder.
3. The 1080p-compatible image engine allows users to watch Blu-ray Discs in high image quality on the AQUOS LCD TV.
*1 As of February 14, 2007
*2 Limited to connections with AQUOS LCD TVs equipped with an i.LINK terminal.
*3 Only single-layer BD-RE Discs without cartridge can be recorded on.
*4 Limited to connections with AQUOS HD Recorders sold since February 2004
Specifications
Model name BD-HP1
Recordable discs BD-RE Ver. 2.1 single-layer type
Playable discs BD video, BD-RE Ver. 2.1 single-layer type, BD-R Ver. 1.1 single-layer type, DVD video, DVD-RW/-R (video format finalized), DVD-RAM*5, DVD+RW/+R (video format finalized), standard audio CDs, CD-RW/-R (audio CD format)
Recording compression method (BD-RE/-R) Video MPEG2
Audio MPEG2 AAC
Approx. recording time*6 (25GB Blu-ray Disc) Terrestrial digital broadcast HD 3 hours (at approx. 17Mbps)
Digital broadcast HD 2 hours 10 minutes (at approx. 24Mbps)
SD 6 hours 30 minutes (at approx. 8Mbps)
Video digital-to-analog converter 12-bit/148.5MHz
Audio digital-to-analog converter 24-bit/192kHz
Jacks Input i.LINK (TS) 2
Output Video 1
S-Video 1
D video 1 (D1/D2/D3/D4)
HDMI 1
Audio 2-channel analog output: 1
7.1 channel analog output: 1
Digital audio Optical: 1
Coaxial: 1
External dimensions (W x D x H) 434 x 343 x 68 mm (17.1" x 13.5" x 2.7")
(not including protruding parts)
Approx. weight 4.4 kg (9.7 lbs)
Power supply 100 V AC, 50/60 Hz
Power consumption 30 W (0.8 W standby)*
* Instant-On function OFF
*5 When using a DVD-RAM disk, the playback disk must be removed from cartridge.
*6 All recording times are rough estimates.
Personally I don't mind who wins the format war, I just wish that they would make their minds up and let us have a standard that we can start investing in.
Did someone say "A plague on both your houses"?
Well it looks like they both have come down with a touch of the Pox.
The DRM on both formats has been broken. How long did that take...exactly?
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/13/1724238
C
Java? I wonder if it has been ported to C yet? I'd bet it would be much faster.