Pachter: Hi-Def DVD War to Decide Next-Gen Console War

its just analyst BS/hype. People are going to buy game systems regardless of the movie playback capabilities
 
[quote name='Kuma']its just analyst BS/hype. People are going to buy game systems regardless of the movie playback capabilities[/QUOTE]

Word
 
I think it's much more the other way around. If the PS3 beats out the 360 then Blu-ray is more likely to beat out HD-DVD. People will buy the system for the games, but the movies aren't going to be exclusive to either format.
 
nobody cares about hi-def...this is just industry hype to make people think they want/care about it.
 
[quote name='Apossum']nobody cares about hi-def...this is just industry hype to make people think they want/care about it.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100%. To me, DVD's became popular because people were sick of rewinding freakin' movies every time they wanted to watch it or having their tapes eaten by their VCR. A lot of early DVD's were hardly different from VHS tapes except for this feature. Even though a lot of people here have them, the average person doesn't have a nice surround sound system or HDTV, so they probably won't give a crap about HD-DVD or Blu-Ray.
 
I don't think that's true, I think after the next holiday season the amount of people with HDTV's is going to jump way up, and many people already have one now. Is it a huge deal about the Blu-ray/HD-DVD? No, but to say people don't care about HD, and HDTV is ridiculous. HDTV's are the hottest electronic item on the market.
 
IMO, HD won't make a difference on the positive side. It could sink/hurt sony a lot. The cost to make the system, the loss they will have to take and the R/D into blue ray, if it doesn't catch on will put a serious dent into there bottom line.
 
I can understand what youre saying. People who bought DVD players had a TV but the majority of people havnt made the leap into HDTV yet and that alone will be the determining factor. Hell half the people who have HDTV sets dont have HDMI ports on their TVs making it only half of what it should be.
 
I do agree with chris, HDTV tv sets have made a great improvement. It is only a matter of time before it is in every household. It is kinda like broadband internet. A couple years ago very few had it, but the subscription rate has improved a lot.
 
Maybe its a bad comparison, but I kind of compare the VHS -> DVD -> HD thing to going from dialup to broadband internet. The main reason to switch from dialup to broadband is because you get sick of having your connection dropped or sitting there for five minutes or more waiting for a site to load. I liken this to rewinding a tape or having your tape wear out in the middle of a movie. Now lets say I got a similar sized boost in my internet connection now, I would hardly notice the difference. Sure, maybe I could download something that takes a minute now in 30 seconds or something, or have slightly less lag in a game, but it wouldn't be a monumental difference and I probably wouldn't pay a bill that was 2 or 3 times higher for it, like you do when going from dialup to broadband.

Now, I think HD TV and all that is a good idea, it's almost always good to push new technology, but I'm not so sure its worth the cost to upgrade yet. I doubt people with hundreds or thousands of DVD's are going to rebuy everything just to watch it with slightly less compression and slightly better sound that they will need to invest in a new system in order to perceive the difference.

Back to the main point, I thought it was pretty cool at first that the PS2 played DVD's, especially since we didn't have a DVD player yet when I got mine. But looking back on the past 4 or 5 years that I've had it, I hardly ever use it to play movies anyway. If I'm buying a PS3 or 360, I'm doing it for the games and whatever else it can do is extra. I don't care how much data can be saved on one either, if I'm playing Final Fantasy or whatever I can switch discs after every 20 hours or so in the game, its not a big deal. If console and game makers really want to advance, eliminate stupid loading times! It seems like they're already on track with that using hard drives, but why limit which HDD's you can use? Anyone can easily buy a 200 GB one for less than the 360's dinky hard drive, and thus cache more games on it.
 
[quote name='Chris in Cali']I don't think that's true, I think after the next holiday season the amount of people with HDTV's is going to jump way up, and many people already have one now. Is it a huge deal about the Blu-ray/HD-DVD? No, but to say people don't care about HD, and HDTV is ridiculous. HDTV's are the hottest electronic item on the market.[/quote]
It'll happen eventually, but it won't be for a couple more years. The difference between DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray is that in the DVD era, all you had to do was shell out for a DVD player and the movies. Even then, DVDs didn't take off until more than 2 years after it came out (because then most people could afford it). HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, however, requires you buy a new player, a new TV (for 85% of people anyway) AND new, more expensive discs. Even when DVDs first came out, they were like max $30 for a normal movie. All that adds up and seeing as most Americans still don't buy a new TV until their old one craps out, I don't see HD-DVD/Blu-Ray seeing success that rivals DVD sales for another 3-4 years. It will take probably about 2 years just for the players to be cheap enough for most people to afford them. If anything, HD-DVD/Blu-Ray will help HDTV sales, not the other way around. As it is, unless your a gamer, HD TV programming is the only reason to own an HDTV.

Also, I think technically speaking iPods and cell phones are hotter as far as overall sales, than HDTV. HDTV is probably the fastest growing market though.


[quote name='ryanbph']I do agree with chris, HDTV tv sets have made a great improvement. It is only a matter of time before it is in every household. It is kinda like broadband internet. A couple years ago very few had it, but the subscription rate has improved a lot.[/quote]
Actually...

According to a recent report by Pew Internet & American Life Project broadband adoption in the United States is slowing down. John Horrigan, Pew's Director of Research, compared national surveys of Internet users in 2002 to 2005. Horrigan found that the intensity of Internet use (a product of connection speed and years of online experience) drives the number of online activities people perform, which in turn drives the adoption of broadband at home and Internet experience were significant factors in Internet usage. However, in 2005 only having broadband at home had a significant influence on intensity of Internet usage. This implies that there is little pent-up demand for broadband at home. We talked to John Horrigan about his findings. (processing more bits). The two factors (speed and experience) vary in their influence of use over time. In 2002 both having
"We don't see a large influx of new Internet users in the U.S. Internet's population are new users, and only 23% of them are on broadband, about half the overall rate. Current dialup users are less engaged in the Internet than past dialup users." anytime soon. 6% of the​
Dialup users today are older, less affluent, and less educated than their 2002 counterparts. With switching costs still high, today's dialup users are less likely to switch to broadband than they were in 2002. The report concludes that slowing broadband growth may add pressure on policymakers to take a bold approach (municipal wireless broadband networks for example) to catch up to leading broadband countries like Korea or Canada."
Click to expand...


Anyway, to respond to the OP and the article, I don't think HD movie formats will effect console sales at all. Even with the PS3 coming out this year at a relatively cheap price for a Blu-Ray player, I don't think either format will take off for a while. Most people that will buy a PS3 in the US aren't going to have an HDTV at that time, and probably aren't going to want to spend $30-40 per movie even if they do, especially when most DVDs these days are $15 or less and you can get an upsampling DVD player (some of which do quite a good job apparently) for the price of like 4 Blu-Ray movies. By the time Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will matter to the average gamer, a clear front runner in the console wars will have emerged again, probably the PS3. Although if PS3 sales are trailing Xbox 360 sales at that time (I guess it's possible) Blu-Ray functionality could boost PS3 sales if Blu-Ray in fact is the winning format.
 
It'll have to happen sooner or later. I believe 2009 is the set date for all broadcasting to become high definition. That'll be at the height of this current generation. It's ok to say that most people don't care high def now, but they will care in a few more years. It's a good move by Sony to be ready for the future.
 
[quote name='depascal22']It'll have to happen sooner or later. I believe 2009 is the set date for all broadcasting to become high definition. That'll be at the height of this current generation. It's ok to say that most people don't care high def now, but they will care in a few more years. It's a good move by Sony to be ready for the future.[/QUOTE]
It's going to be digital, and digital is not necessarily hd. Just wanted to point that out. Many people have a misconception about that.
 
They have the relationship inverted. A strong showing for the PS3 can be decisive in the format war for HDTV content. Regardless of how it does in comparison to the Xbox 360 the PS3 will contribute strongly to the installed base of Blu-ray. If Sony has 10 million PS3s sold in the North American market, which is a very low target comparison to its predecessor, this will have a huge effect on the choices made by movie studios. Blu-ray already has an advantage in studio support and offering an installed base many times greater than HD-DVD would be a huge reason for those dedicated to HD-DVD to add or switch to Blu-ray.

Microsoft may or may not produce an HD-DVD playback add-on for the Xbox 360 but this would never have the numbers of a feature that comes standard in every PS3 shipped. Microsoft has far less stake in what format leads the market and isn't going to bend over backwards to put HD-DVD in every home as Sony will for their product.

There isn't much reason to think the reverse is true. Even if HD-DVD became dominant, it would have little effect on the console competition. Until CD-ROM and DVD-ROM, proprietary media was the rule in game systems. Every platform had a unique cartridge format. Sony is already geared up for mas production of BD-ROM discs and drives. Dominance of Blu-ray for movie playback would help bring down the cost of the drive but it's failure in video distribution wouldn't cripple the PS3 business plan on the gaming side.
 
[quote name='PsyKyX']It's going to be digital, and digital is not necessarily hd. Just wanted to point that out. Many people have a misconception about that.[/QUOTE]

exactly, and the 2009 date is in danger of being pushed back too. Broadcast stations want nothing to do with it
 
[quote name='Kuma']exactly, and the 2009 date is in danger of being pushed back too. Broadcast stations want nothing to do with it[/quote]

Well, that is true, but that's why the government made a deadline in the first place. The government REALLY REALLY wants to end analog TV because it's like free money for them. They get back that radio frequency spectrum, some of which goes to EMS and Police and the FD, and the rest they get to sell off, probably to cellphone companies. I think I read somewhere it could be worth almost $500B.
 
[quote name='lionheart4life']Maybe its a bad comparison, but I kind of compare the VHS -> DVD -> HD thing to going from dialup to broadband internet. The main reason to switch from dialup to broadband is because you get sick of having your connection dropped or sitting there for five minutes or more waiting for a site to load. I liken this to rewinding a tape or having your tape wear out in the middle of a movie. Now lets say I got a similar sized boost in my internet connection now, I would hardly notice the difference. Sure, maybe I could download something that takes a minute now in 30 seconds or something, or have slightly less lag in a game, but it wouldn't be a monumental difference and I probably wouldn't pay a bill that was 2 or 3 times higher for it, like you do when going from dialup to broadband.[/QUOTE]That's pretty much how I feel. The leap from VHS to DVD was such a fundamental change in format that anyone could perceive the improvements. We went from the analog, sequential access storage to digital storage. After that fundamental shift, the only thing left was to make incremental improvements to the capacity, image resolution, and sound quality. So like you said, I don't think the differences will be enough to get people's attention. The old movies that they are re-releasing can't even take full advantage of the technology, making it seem even less necessary to the average consumer.

It's the same thing with music. I'm hoping we stay with CD's forever, because I really don't feel like re-buying everything. Once we've broken the digital barrier, there's not much else to improve. Sure there's DVD-Audio, but I feel like very few people take advantage of that (and those audiophiles are probably the kind of people that prefer vinyl anyway). And with iTunes and all that, I'm hoping that the record labels are in less of a rush to start pointlessly changing the format (since downloads are all the rage).
 
Hi-Def disk format will have little-to-no bearing on this console war. I would equate it with the CD-i's ability to play VCDs, or hypothetically if the Genesis could've played Laserdiscs. A nice added bonus for a small niche in the marketplace, but nowhere near as deciding as DVD was this/last gen.
 
[quote name='Stuka']

Actually...
According to a recent report by Pew Internet & American Life Project broadband adoption in the United States is slowing down. John Horrigan, Pew's Director of Research, compared national surveys of Internet users in 2002 to 2005. Horrigan found that the intensity of Internet use (a product of connection speed and years of online experience) drives the number of online activities people perform, which in turn drives the adoption of broadband at home and Internet experience were significant factors in Internet usage. However, in 2005 only having broadband at home had a significant influence on intensity of Internet usage. This implies that there is little pent-up demand for broadband at home. We talked to John Horrigan about his findings. (processing more bits). The two factors (speed and experience) vary in their influence of use over time. In 2002 both having
"We don't see a large influx of new Internet users in the U.S. Internet's population are new users, and only 23% of them are on broadband, about half the overall rate. Current dialup users are less engaged in the Internet than past dialup users." anytime soon. 6% of the​
Dialup users today are older, less affluent, and less educated than their 2002 counterparts. With switching costs still high, today's dialup users are less likely to switch to broadband than they were in 2002. The report concludes that slowing broadband growth may add pressure on policymakers to take a bold approach (municipal wireless broadband networks for example) to catch up to leading broadband countries like Korea or Canada."
.[/quote]

Your still making my point, 5 or so years ago the broadband users were a lot lower. It is only a matter of time, and with verizons new optical service, we hopefully will see cut throat competition. Verizon is/was pissed of major cable companies going into the digital phone service. Verizon is currently laying optical cables in my area. Within the next year, I will have the option of getting high speed internet at 32 mps for $35.00 a month, compared to what I get at comcast of 7mps for $45. Currently on comcast i have hd programing, with a hd 12 gb dvr and I get 6 hbo channels. 2 boxes, 2 dvrs. All that for roughly $100. Verizon is going to offer me the same 2 x hd boxes, 2 x 80gb HDDVR, HD programing, about 100 more channels on digital, and every movie channel possible. 14 hbo's, 14 cinemax's, 12 or so showtimes, and 44 channels of encore, starz, and the movie channel. For the same $100. They also had reduced rates on the phone service. Check it on on there home page
 
Believe me I know about Fios. I've been praying for it to come to Charlotte. As is, broadband uptake is plateauing, but obviously as fiber optics because more widespread and prices drop, it will increase. The problem though is that fiber optics are being laid at an extremely slow rate because of the enormous cost. In fact I think I read somewhere that Verizon has been scaling back their Fios roll out (could be wrong about that).

Also, you are very wrong about the prices. Straight from the Verizon website:

Up to 5 Mbps/2 Mbps $34.95 - $39.95
Up to 15 Mbps/2 Mbps $44.95 - $49.95
Up to 30 Mbps/5 Mbps $179.95 - $199.95

LINK.

They'd be literally insane to sell internet access at nearly $1/1Mbps. Not to mention their stock would be in the shitter for nearly a decade.
 
That is odd, I had overheard people talking when I was waiting for my accountant. They were talking about verizon fiber optics wires being laid. I checked it out that night, about a month ago, and the fios internet services were different. The low one was a 30 mps, the middle was 120 mps, and the next was over 300mps....the 30mps was going for $34, the 100mps was $100, and the 300mps was over $200. I rember the pricing and speed, as I also went to comcast to compare shit. I spent over an hour on the 2 sites. Sons of bitches seemed to have scaled back the speed/pricing structure. A month ago, it wasn't as easy to find the fios stuff. It was in a link in the lower left hand side, and wasn't listed with there other products.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top