They are so caught up right now on DRM and revocable this and that. I can easily see consumers saying "thanks..but no thanks" and sticking with DVD which looks fine up to 50" screens.
I disagree.
I talk to the guys developing Blu-Ray at Sony fairly often and they are very optimistic and confident in the format and are quite excited about the possibilities for the future - and it's not BS, corporate Sony-speak, it's genuine passion for the work they do.
They're trying to deliver the best product possible.
Take heart, I'm only starting to lean towards the "neither will win" side of the fence. The longer these two formats are stalled, the more I start to lean.
Consider: If they'd gone the divx on DVD route, we'd already have our next gen video players.
Are you saying that HD video is much more compressed with DivX than with H.264?
Are you saying that HD video is much more compressed with DivX than with H.264?
Absolutely not, I'm making no claims one way or the other.
In fact, what I'm trying to point out is that there have been suitable solutions for a while now but the industry is hung-up on capacity and DRM. divx on DVD is just the easiest example. We could already have improved picture quality, backward compatibility and cheap hardware. There are over a hundred DVD players on the market that already play divx files. If Hollywood and electronics manufactures were truly focused on consumer desires, we'd have a new and improved standard already without an increase in price.
Why didn't they go this route? They want better copy protection. It's why we never got a successor to CDs and why we may never get a successor to DVDs. It looks like we're moving to internet distribution as the replacement for CDs. Eventually I assume that this will include better fidelity sound files. The same could happen with DVDs if the industry continues its current course. DVDs might hold out for another decade while internet distribution slowly takes over.
I truly hope it doesn't play out this way. I'd rather be watching hd movies on my projection system as soon as possible. (Without expensive hardware)
Like I've written before. I don't give a damn which format prevails, I just want to watch 1080i/p content. DRM is a pain in the ass, and will get defeated. The wisest thing for companies to do is not invest too much money in it. Look at box office and DVD sales... they're making plenty of money -- about the only thing invasive DRM schemes will accomplish is to annoy paying customers.
At this point, I think Sony looks better to prevail. They can overcome inertia and uncertainty by piggy-backing Blueray onto PS3. That's a powerful brand, and it could provide a beach head in the early going -- when next gen format purchases will be almost exclusively confined to $1000 players and early adopters... PS3 must debut sooner than later though...
Absolutely not, I'm making no claims one way or the other.
In fact, what I'm trying to point out is that there have been suitable solutions for a while now but the industry is hung-up on capacity and DRM. divx on DVD is just the easiest example. We could already have improved picture quality, backward compatibility and cheap hardware.
-capability to store 3-4 hours worth of High Definition content
-compatibility
-price
capacity isnt a big issue at least to regular consumers as opposed to nerds. The basic requirement is the ability to store 3-4 hours of HD content. If getting a few Gigabytes more means paying for a new manufacturing process and more expensive media, it isnt economically or technically 'elegant'.
Not to mention that one is proprietary and the other is from the DVD forum. That means licencing fees, etc issues to studios.
Microsoft is in the HD-DVD camp, so is Nintendo. Sony will be pushing the BR-DVD format with the PS3, chances are M$ and Nintendo will be pushing the HD-DVD format(although not confirmed).
Sure the geeks will be salivating over more Gigabytes(makes backing up porn and pirated movies so much easier), but in the end it's the movies and support from movie studios will make or break a format. The fact that Sony has such a huge library of movies (tristar, sony pictures, MGM, etc) will play a major role.
But bitching about a few extra gigs, when they probably wont really matter to HD content in the end, is rather juvenile.
But bitching about a few extra gigs, when they probably wont really matter to HD content in the end, is rather juvenile.
For starters, replace 'a few extra gigs' by 'a few dozen extra gigs' and you'll be a little closer to the truth.
Regardless...15GB for HD-DVD and 25GB for Blu-Ray on a single layer just doesn't cut it. The industry isn't waiting long enough between new formats. 15GB is a super weak increase over the 8GB dual-layer disks that movies ship on today. Sure, both HD and BR will move to dual-layer also but the 3:1 ratio isn't big enough to justify pushing it as a new format. BR is a tad better but not by much.
I don't know what the hurry is...hardly anyone's got an HDTV. Why not wait until we get a format that truly is an improvement over current DVDs and when at least 50% of people have got HDTVs?
Very nice quality movies already fit on today's media.
Approach this from the consumer perspective instead of from a technology-mongering perspective for a bit.
Most consumers think that DVDs already look good. Yet they could easily get twice the resolution without spending more when buying a DVD player or movies. The technology already exists and has already been adopted as the defacto standard on the internet. A pretty significant percentage of all internet traffic are bittorrents of television shows and movies. Some estimates put this figure at over 50%.
Yet hollywood has decided to ignore this technology and spend year after year playing marketing and legal games. This is perfectly understandable since they are simply out to make money. They think that spending years on DRM and format wars will make them more profitable.
However, we are quickly ending up in the same situation that the music industry found itself in a few years ago. The spread of divx is an exact parallel to what happened with mp3. The record industry got so caught up in maintaining their historical stranglehold on their intellectual "property" that they failed to change with the times. All of their next generation formats failed and it forced consumers into the black market.
The black market was actually providing a superior product... for free. Sure, it was lower fidelity sound, but damn it was convenient.
The same thing is happening again. For whatever reasons, the movie industry is floundering while the black market has invented products which consumers actually want.
I was in best buy this weekend and saw 5 dvd players that play divx files. If hollywood had endorsed this standard, best buy would have filled their complete lineup with compatible players.
This isn't meant as an anti-corporation or media conglomerate rant. I perfectly understand their motivations. I simply think that they made poor decisions this time around and have missed out on a technology which would benefit them and their consumers.
Will we ever see a physical replacement for the CD? If we don't, does this mean the music giants will disappear or will they succeed in dethroning apple in online distribution? I suspect that we'll never see a widely distributed physical replacement for the CD.
Like I've mentioned in my past few posts, I'm hoping that we don't get a repeat of SACD and DVD-A. However, the longer the industry goes without releasing an improved product, the more likely consumers are to turn to alternatives. Impressive and adequate alternatives exist so they had better hurry!
To illustrate this point, check out the following two products. These are the types of things, that if hollywood would have pursued, would have given us HD DVDs already.
For $250 you get a player capable of playing existing discs and various HD formats. It can even play movies off of your computer or iPod! Yep, it has ethernet and USB2.
For starters, replace 'a few extra gigs' by 'a few dozen extra gigs' and you'll be a little closer to the truth.
Regardless...15GB for HD-DVD and 25GB for Blu-Ray on a single layer just doesn't cut it. The industry isn't waiting long enough between new formats. 15GB is a super weak increase over the 8GB dual-layer disks that movies ship on today. Sure, both HD and BR will move to dual-layer also but the 3:1 ratio isn't big enough to justify pushing it as a new format. BR is a tad better but not by much.
I don't know what the hurry is...hardly anyone's got an HDTV. Why not wait until we get a format that truly is an improvement over current DVDs and when at least 50% of people have got HDTVs?
Yeah i agree. it's a few extra gigs though....wont have a drastic impact on quality of the video, just give nerds a more convenient way of storing gigs of porn n ripped movies. Not a good idea to invest in a format when only that particular demographic sees that as a thing worth paying for imo.
As far as pushing the new format....'they' (Studios) want a new format, why ? DVD burners have become prevalent...encryption on DVDs is a joke and anyone who is yechnically inclined can duplicate DVDs if they wanted to. hence...present a hardware limitation, with new barriers to piracy to try and fend it odd for a few years, until thats broken, and the next format is needed. Which is another reason why BR-DVD isnt as 'scalable' in the business sence as one would think. Sure...more gigs probably means they will be around a little longer. but how long till someone breaks the encryption ? until blank media becomes as assesable as CDs and DVDs have ? and BR-DVD burners become widespread ? when that happens you will have the next format emerge. thats a good 5-8 years away. Therefore , claimingthat BR-DVD can 'last longer' because it has a greater capacity is kinda stupid, because it's not the capacity that determines the life of a medium.
And yeah...adoption will be slow imo(i mean the public in general). heck DVDs JUST overtook VHS. And i dont know ANYONE who owns a HD capable display...theyre still pretty expensive. But i think when push comes to shove...the public tends to choose a cheaper format that will deliver the same functionality which in this case is HD-Video. a few(or dozen) extra gigs, wont make a difference in the end...if delivery of HD-Video is the main objective. On the other hand, if trying to push a 'standarnd' where a company can eventually charge whatever they want to licence technology....a few gigs here and there COULD be perceived as a competitive advantage by unsuspecting consumers. Microsoft Windows and your average PC is a prime example of that sort of thing.
The DVD forum can ensuret hat licencing fees arent in the hands of a greedy cooperation (such as Microsoft or Sony, etc). And if manufacturing costs can be kept down, while still delivering HD-Video which is the whole point of pushing these two formats, i dont see any particular advantage of BR-DVD over HD-DVD....at least any worth paying for.
I'm not sure that I understand what you are getting at with those rebutals.
[Edit] The post this sentence refered to has since been edited/replaced. I forget who I was replying to... was that you Hawkeye? Next time I'll make sure to quote you before the post dissappears. [/Edit]
If you haven't checked out high quality divx files played from a DVD player, you really should.
It really puts the merits and delay of blu-ray/HD-DVD in perspective. It makes one realize that the delay isn't for lack of good-enough or cheap-enough technology. We're still waiting only because the industry is busy trying to ensure that the next-gen distribution schema is as profitable as possible... no other reason.
Whether this is right or wrong is also a fascinating discussion. But one thing is for sure, the phenomenon is real. Divx on DVD is already here and would have satisfied consumer desires for price, compatability, and image quality.
Not that divx is supperior to everything out there. It is simply the best example to illustrate how the technology is already here.
If you have the capability, rip some HD stuff to divx and check it out on your computer at least. Even television shows pirated off of bit torrent can look better than DVDs. Granted, that opens up a can of worms given the subjectiveness of picture quality. In general though, 480p rips (at 350mb per fourty something minute show) from an HD source look better than DVDs.
Once again, if you haven't checked out high quality divx files played from a DVD player, you really should. It puts blu-ray and HD-DVD in a completely different light.
I'm not sure that I understand what you are getting at with those rebutals.
I'm just asking because I want to know what you think is a nice quality (resolution and so on).
Quote:
Originally posted by dfiler
It really puts the merits and delay of blu-ray/HD-DVD in perspective. It makes one realize that the delay isn't for lack of good-enough or cheap-enough technology. We're still waiting only because the industry is busy trying to ensure that the next-gen distribution schema is as profitable as possible... no other reason.
And because not many have HD Ready TV sets anyway.
It makes little difference what I personally consider to be "nice". More important is, what do most consumers consider "nice".
I would wager that most consumers don't require full HD resolution to give their official "nice" certification. Once you figure in how much industry pushed HD gear costs, they would probably consider divx-on-dvd more nice than the non-existant industry backed stuff.
[EDIT]
I'm hesitant to give an exact resolution figure as to what I consider adequate. However, by the time HD-DVD and blu-ray actually happen in consumer land, divx-on-dvd will be HD res so the point seems moot.
And because not many have HD Ready TV sets anyway.
Good point.
I think that if hollywood had gone with a the existing, cheap, and backward compatible solution, consumers would have had a reason to buy a higher-def set.
Ok, I'll sit back now and allow the thread to return to HD-DVD and Blu-ray discussion. I just wanted to point out that neither technological constraints nor consumer desires are what is driving or holding up this standards war.
Guess i must have missed that press release. could you post a link ?
Well, they wouldn't issue a press release stating what their product won't do. But Mr. Iwata did say the add-on accessory would play standard DVDs during his E3 presentation. While they haven't given specific details about the optical media they're using for their games, knowing for sure that the accessory would only enable the playback of standard DVDs, and that the system isn't supporting video resolutions greater than 480p anyway, it's pretty much assured that HD media is not being supported.
Well, they wouldn't issue a press release stating what their product won't do. But Mr. Iwata did say the add-on accessory would play standard DVDs during his E3 presentation. While they haven't given specific details about the optical media they're using for their games, knowing for sure that the accessory would only enable the playback of standard DVDs, and that the system isn't supporting video resolutions greater than 480p anyway, it's pretty much assured that HD media is not being supported.
Well, seeing as they havent stated what media they would use, i wouldnt assume its one or the other. What i do know they have stated:
-12 cm optical media
As far as HD:
HD wont be a requirement(like with the XB), although developers can choose to support it if they want (ala GameCube).
DVD playback:
Thats the thing about HD-DVD...it's backwards compatible to DVDs, and capable of reading that media as well. Seeing as how neither HD-DVD or BR-DVD have 'won' for delivering movies, or have any movies out on either of those mediums(at least outside Japan), i dont think it would be wise for Nintendo or Microsoft(who arnt responsible for developing HD-DVD, would announce support for that medium since it could change).
Therefore i think it perfectly plausable that both Nintendo and Microsoft (seeingas they both support the HD-DVD as opposed to BR-DVD) to ship consoles with those drives.
Obviously just speculation, but still possible since at least Nintendo hasnt announced the media they will use (Microsoft announced that Dual Layer-DVDs are the media for the XB360, but obviously this chould change).
With the add-on accessory only playing back standard DVDs, and no HD video support, the writing is quite clearly on the wall. The chances of HD media are nill.
They would have to re-engineer the product to some degree at a later time, as MS claimed they might for 360, to allow HD media. That's always an option. But as it stands now, there is no HD support of any kind in Revolution.
Comments
Originally posted by hmurchison
They are so caught up right now on DRM and revocable this and that. I can easily see consumers saying "thanks..but no thanks" and sticking with DVD which looks fine up to 50" screens.
I disagree.
I talk to the guys developing Blu-Ray at Sony fairly often and they are very optimistic and confident in the format and are quite excited about the possibilities for the future - and it's not BS, corporate Sony-speak, it's genuine passion for the work they do.
They're trying to deliver the best product possible.
It's not all about DRM lockdown.
Originally posted by dfiler
Take heart, I'm only starting to lean towards the "neither will win" side of the fence. The longer these two formats are stalled, the more I start to lean.
Consider: If they'd gone the divx on DVD route, we'd already have our next gen video players.
Are you saying that HD video is much more compressed with DivX than with H.264?
Originally posted by JLL
Are you saying that HD video is much more compressed with DivX than with H.264?
Absolutely not, I'm making no claims one way or the other.
In fact, what I'm trying to point out is that there have been suitable solutions for a while now but the industry is hung-up on capacity and DRM. divx on DVD is just the easiest example. We could already have improved picture quality, backward compatibility and cheap hardware. There are over a hundred DVD players on the market that already play divx files. If Hollywood and electronics manufactures were truly focused on consumer desires, we'd have a new and improved standard already without an increase in price.
Why didn't they go this route? They want better copy protection. It's why we never got a successor to CDs and why we may never get a successor to DVDs. It looks like we're moving to internet distribution as the replacement for CDs. Eventually I assume that this will include better fidelity sound files. The same could happen with DVDs if the industry continues its current course. DVDs might hold out for another decade while internet distribution slowly takes over.
I truly hope it doesn't play out this way. I'd rather be watching hd movies on my projection system as soon as possible. (Without expensive hardware)
At this point, I think Sony looks better to prevail. They can overcome inertia and uncertainty by piggy-backing Blueray onto PS3. That's a powerful brand, and it could provide a beach head in the early going -- when next gen format purchases will be almost exclusively confined to $1000 players and early adopters... PS3 must debut sooner than later though...
Originally posted by dfiler
Absolutely not, I'm making no claims one way or the other.
In fact, what I'm trying to point out is that there have been suitable solutions for a while now but the industry is hung-up on capacity and DRM. divx on DVD is just the easiest example. We could already have improved picture quality, backward compatibility and cheap hardware.
How? If you can't fit a HD DivX movie onto a DVD?
-capability to store 3-4 hours worth of High Definition content
-compatibility
-price
capacity isnt a big issue at least to regular consumers as opposed to nerds. The basic requirement is the ability to store 3-4 hours of HD content. If getting a few Gigabytes more means paying for a new manufacturing process and more expensive media, it isnt economically or technically 'elegant'.
Not to mention that one is proprietary and the other is from the DVD forum. That means licencing fees, etc issues to studios.
Microsoft is in the HD-DVD camp, so is Nintendo. Sony will be pushing the BR-DVD format with the PS3, chances are M$ and Nintendo will be pushing the HD-DVD format(although not confirmed).
Sure the geeks will be salivating over more Gigabytes(makes backing up porn and pirated movies so much easier), but in the end it's the movies and support from movie studios will make or break a format. The fact that Sony has such a huge library of movies (tristar, sony pictures, MGM, etc) will play a major role.
But bitching about a few extra gigs, when they probably wont really matter to HD content in the end, is rather juvenile.
Originally posted by nowayout11
Nintendo's in neither camp. Revolution isn't using HD media. The accessory add-on will only play standard DVDs.
Guess i must have missed that press release. could you post a link ?
Originally posted by Hawkeye_a
But bitching about a few extra gigs, when they probably wont really matter to HD content in the end, is rather juvenile.
For starters, replace 'a few extra gigs' by 'a few dozen extra gigs' and you'll be a little closer to the truth.
Regardless...15GB for HD-DVD and 25GB for Blu-Ray on a single layer just doesn't cut it. The industry isn't waiting long enough between new formats. 15GB is a super weak increase over the 8GB dual-layer disks that movies ship on today. Sure, both HD and BR will move to dual-layer also but the 3:1 ratio isn't big enough to justify pushing it as a new format. BR is a tad better but not by much.
I don't know what the hurry is...hardly anyone's got an HDTV. Why not wait until we get a format that truly is an improvement over current DVDs and when at least 50% of people have got HDTVs?
Originally posted by JLL
How? If you can't fit a HD DivX movie onto a DVD?
How what?
Very nice quality movies already fit on today's media.
Approach this from the consumer perspective instead of from a technology-mongering perspective for a bit.
Most consumers think that DVDs already look good. Yet they could easily get twice the resolution without spending more when buying a DVD player or movies. The technology already exists and has already been adopted as the defacto standard on the internet. A pretty significant percentage of all internet traffic are bittorrents of television shows and movies. Some estimates put this figure at over 50%.
Yet hollywood has decided to ignore this technology and spend year after year playing marketing and legal games. This is perfectly understandable since they are simply out to make money. They think that spending years on DRM and format wars will make them more profitable.
However, we are quickly ending up in the same situation that the music industry found itself in a few years ago. The spread of divx is an exact parallel to what happened with mp3. The record industry got so caught up in maintaining their historical stranglehold on their intellectual "property" that they failed to change with the times. All of their next generation formats failed and it forced consumers into the black market.
The black market was actually providing a superior product... for free. Sure, it was lower fidelity sound, but damn it was convenient.
The same thing is happening again. For whatever reasons, the movie industry is floundering while the black market has invented products which consumers actually want.
I was in best buy this weekend and saw 5 dvd players that play divx files. If hollywood had endorsed this standard, best buy would have filled their complete lineup with compatible players.
This isn't meant as an anti-corporation or media conglomerate rant. I perfectly understand their motivations. I simply think that they made poor decisions this time around and have missed out on a technology which would benefit them and their consumers.
Will we ever see a physical replacement for the CD? If we don't, does this mean the music giants will disappear or will they succeed in dethroning apple in online distribution? I suspect that we'll never see a widely distributed physical replacement for the CD.
Like I've mentioned in my past few posts, I'm hoping that we don't get a repeat of SACD and DVD-A. However, the longer the industry goes without releasing an improved product, the more likely consumers are to turn to alternatives. Impressive and adequate alternatives exist so they had better hurry!
AVeL LinkPlayer2
For $250 you get a player capable of playing existing discs and various HD formats. It can even play movies off of your computer or iPod! Yep, it has ethernet and USB2.
Here's a link to a $44 divx player.
Just how long does the industry expect us to wait and how much do they expect us to pay?
Originally posted by kim kap sol
For starters, replace 'a few extra gigs' by 'a few dozen extra gigs' and you'll be a little closer to the truth.
Regardless...15GB for HD-DVD and 25GB for Blu-Ray on a single layer just doesn't cut it. The industry isn't waiting long enough between new formats. 15GB is a super weak increase over the 8GB dual-layer disks that movies ship on today. Sure, both HD and BR will move to dual-layer also but the 3:1 ratio isn't big enough to justify pushing it as a new format. BR is a tad better but not by much.
I don't know what the hurry is...hardly anyone's got an HDTV. Why not wait until we get a format that truly is an improvement over current DVDs and when at least 50% of people have got HDTVs?
Yeah i agree. it's a few extra gigs though....wont have a drastic impact on quality of the video, just give nerds a more convenient way of storing gigs of porn n ripped movies. Not a good idea to invest in a format when only that particular demographic sees that as a thing worth paying for imo.
As far as pushing the new format....'they' (Studios) want a new format, why ? DVD burners have become prevalent...encryption on DVDs is a joke and anyone who is yechnically inclined can duplicate DVDs if they wanted to. hence...present a hardware limitation, with new barriers to piracy to try and fend it odd for a few years, until thats broken, and the next format is needed. Which is another reason why BR-DVD isnt as 'scalable' in the business sence as one would think. Sure...more gigs probably means they will be around a little longer. but how long till someone breaks the encryption ? until blank media becomes as assesable as CDs and DVDs have ? and BR-DVD burners become widespread ? when that happens you will have the next format emerge. thats a good 5-8 years away. Therefore , claimingthat BR-DVD can 'last longer' because it has a greater capacity is kinda stupid, because it's not the capacity that determines the life of a medium.
And yeah...adoption will be slow imo(i mean the public in general). heck DVDs JUST overtook VHS. And i dont know ANYONE who owns a HD capable display...theyre still pretty expensive. But i think when push comes to shove...the public tends to choose a cheaper format that will deliver the same functionality which in this case is HD-Video. a few(or dozen) extra gigs, wont make a difference in the end...if delivery of HD-Video is the main objective. On the other hand, if trying to push a 'standarnd' where a company can eventually charge whatever they want to licence technology....a few gigs here and there COULD be perceived as a competitive advantage by unsuspecting consumers. Microsoft Windows and your average PC is a prime example of that sort of thing.
The DVD forum can ensuret hat licencing fees arent in the hands of a greedy cooperation (such as Microsoft or Sony, etc). And if manufacturing costs can be kept down, while still delivering HD-Video which is the whole point of pushing these two formats, i dont see any particular advantage of BR-DVD over HD-DVD....at least any worth paying for.
Originally posted by dfiler
How what?
Very nice quality movies already fit on today's media.
What do you mean by nice quality?
[Edit] The post this sentence refered to has since been edited/replaced. I forget who I was replying to... was that you Hawkeye? Next time I'll make sure to quote you before the post dissappears.
If you haven't checked out high quality divx files played from a DVD player, you really should.
It really puts the merits and delay of blu-ray/HD-DVD in perspective. It makes one realize that the delay isn't for lack of good-enough or cheap-enough technology. We're still waiting only because the industry is busy trying to ensure that the next-gen distribution schema is as profitable as possible... no other reason.
Whether this is right or wrong is also a fascinating discussion. But one thing is for sure, the phenomenon is real. Divx on DVD is already here and would have satisfied consumer desires for price, compatability, and image quality.
Not that divx is supperior to everything out there. It is simply the best example to illustrate how the technology is already here.
If you have the capability, rip some HD stuff to divx and check it out on your computer at least. Even television shows pirated off of bit torrent can look better than DVDs. Granted, that opens up a can of worms given the subjectiveness of picture quality. In general though, 480p rips (at 350mb per fourty something minute show) from an HD source look better than DVDs.
Once again, if you haven't checked out high quality divx files played from a DVD player, you really should. It puts blu-ray and HD-DVD in a completely different light.
Originally posted by dfiler
I'm not sure that I understand what you are getting at with those rebutals.
I'm just asking because I want to know what you think is a nice quality (resolution and so on).
Originally posted by dfiler
It really puts the merits and delay of blu-ray/HD-DVD in perspective. It makes one realize that the delay isn't for lack of good-enough or cheap-enough technology. We're still waiting only because the industry is busy trying to ensure that the next-gen distribution schema is as profitable as possible... no other reason.
And because not many have HD Ready TV sets anyway.
Originally posted by JLL
What do you mean by nice quality?
I can't tell if your serious.
It makes little difference what I personally consider to be "nice". More important is, what do most consumers consider "nice".
I would wager that most consumers don't require full HD resolution to give their official "nice" certification. Once you figure in how much industry pushed HD gear costs, they would probably consider divx-on-dvd more nice than the non-existant industry backed stuff.
[EDIT]
I'm hesitant to give an exact resolution figure as to what I consider adequate. However, by the time HD-DVD and blu-ray actually happen in consumer land, divx-on-dvd will be HD res so the point seems moot.
Originally posted by JLL
And because not many have HD Ready TV sets anyway.
Good point.
I think that if hollywood had gone with a the existing, cheap, and backward compatible solution, consumers would have had a reason to buy a higher-def set.
Ok, I'll sit back now and allow the thread to return to HD-DVD and Blu-ray discussion. I just wanted to point out that neither technological constraints nor consumer desires are what is driving or holding up this standards war.
Originally posted by Hawkeye_a
Guess i must have missed that press release. could you post a link ?
Well, they wouldn't issue a press release stating what their product won't do.
Linky with some info
Originally posted by nowayout11
Well, they wouldn't issue a press release stating what their product won't do.
Linky with some info
Well, seeing as they havent stated what media they would use, i wouldnt assume its one or the other. What i do know they have stated:
-12 cm optical media
As far as HD:
HD wont be a requirement(like with the XB), although developers can choose to support it if they want (ala GameCube).
DVD playback:
Thats the thing about HD-DVD...it's backwards compatible to DVDs, and capable of reading that media as well. Seeing as how neither HD-DVD or BR-DVD have 'won' for delivering movies, or have any movies out on either of those mediums(at least outside Japan), i dont think it would be wise for Nintendo or Microsoft(who arnt responsible for developing HD-DVD, would announce support for that medium since it could change).
Therefore i think it perfectly plausable that both Nintendo and Microsoft (seeingas they both support the HD-DVD as opposed to BR-DVD) to ship consoles with those drives.
Obviously just speculation, but still possible since at least Nintendo hasnt announced the media they will use (Microsoft announced that Dual Layer-DVDs are the media for the XB360, but obviously this chould change).
But, well, you did assume.
Nintendo has stated flat out that there's no HD support. Not a developer's option, but none at all.
No HD Support
Revolution Sits out HD Era
Revolution Eschews HD
Revolution HD Writing Campaign
With the add-on accessory only playing back standard DVDs, and no HD video support, the writing is quite clearly on the wall. The chances of HD media are nill.
They would have to re-engineer the product to some degree at a later time, as MS claimed they might for 360, to allow HD media. That's always an option. But as it stands now, there is no HD support of any kind in Revolution.