Home

Advertisement

High-Def War

« previous entry | next entry »
Feb. 20th, 2008 | 10:19 am
location: Work
mood: blah blah

Well that's it, folks. It looks like Sony has won the High-Def war with their Blu-Ray technology. For those of you who don't know, Toshiba has officially dropped support for the HD format, and many of the biggest movie production houses (such as Warner Bros.) have announced that they will move exclusively to Blu-Ray.

View the Toshiba Announcement

So how do I feel about this? Frankly, I don't care much for high-definition movies. I dont' have a high-def T.V., and I don't plan to get one. I am content with my DVDs, and as long as I can buy my movies in DVD format, I will be content.

However--those of you who have been watching my blog for a while will know that I am fairly anti-Sony, as far as video games and game consoles go. For a bit of background: Sony launched its latest gaming console, the PS3, back in November of 2006. Ever since then, the PS3 has had a dismal sales record, consistently trailing behind the XBox 360 and Nintendo's Wii and DS handheld. As far as I've seen, the PS3 has pretty graphics and sound, but most of the games I've seen go that far and no further. The games look absolutely gorgeous but they're really not much fun to play. Add to that fact that the PS3 carries a $600 price tag (as opposed to XBox's $400 and Nintendo's $250), and it looked to me that the PS3 was going down the tubes.

HOWEVER!

Now that it appears that blu-ray technology has won out over HD, consumers are finally free to purchase a high-def player for their home, without worrying about whether it will soon be obsolete. Thus, folks have been going out and shopping for a blu-ray player and discovering, to their dismay, that most blu-ray players on the market cost $1000 or more. Oh despair!

"BUT WAIT!" Says Mr. average consumer. "What's this? This PS3 thing comes equipped with a blu-ray player? And it only costs $600? Hot dang, that's great! I'll take it!"

So, there has been a sudden spat of PS3 sales, finally boosting the game console's sales numbers. For the first time since its release, the PS3 out-sold the XBox 360 in January 2008 (it still trails sales of the Nintendo Wii).

It makes me cringe, because now I expect Sony to take the opportunity to announce that their game console is a huge success, and that gamers everywhere are flocking to buy it. The reality is, consumers are buying the PS3 because it just happens to be the cheapest Blu-Ray player out there, and the buyers don't care about the games. (*gasp* This thing plays games too?)

*SIGH*

Okay, done ranting.

Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend

Comments {11}

kathrishali

Maybe you should check your information...

from: [info]kathrishali
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 08:35 pm (UTC)
Link

I happen to be a PS1, 2, and 3 owner, and I've gotten 5 games for the PS3 to date that I think look fantastic and are a lot of fun to play. The Simpsons Game is a blast on the PS3, the first time I've ever really enjoyed the games as they often don't play well. Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is a phenomenon, both in gameplay, music, graphics, and story. Not to mention the character interaction had me laughing quite a bit. Heavenly Sword was impressive to me, and Spiderman 3 and Lair are both nice looking! Lair in particular makes fantastic use of the Sixaxis controller, and is fun to play once you get the hang of it. :)
While that's all a matter of opinion, the following is not.

The PS3 for one thing, has several price ranges. The 60 gig was on sale for $500 when the 80 gig was released at $600 again. The 40 Gig model is on sale for $400, but lacks backwards compatibility. So the price tag is depending on which model you seek/sought.

As for blu ray players, I had seen some that were well below $1000. I would check amazon for exact prices, but the average was not nearly that high.

You should also remember that XBox alienated a lot of people by both not having the 360 be backwards compatible until AFTER the fact, and that the HD player they offered you had to purchase SEPARATELY. Whereas the PS3 included it in the hardware. As usual, microsoft applies their policies to the gaming world same as they do in the computer world. In the gaming world, you do NOT tell the customers what they want. THEY tell you. As you may guess, I've been virulently anti-microsoft and pro-sony as far as gaming. Nintendo on the other hand I'm usually interested in, but simply can't afford to support more than one console.

But I would check your information before you rant. *hugs*

Reply | Thread

Teric

Re: Maybe you should check your information...

from: [info]teric
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 09:19 pm (UTC)
Link

Very well, I will concede your points, Kath. However, do you deny that the PS3 has had a very poor sales record, consistently falling behind the XBox 360, Wii, DS, and even the PS2 ever since it was released?

Surely, the fact that it has just now had its first month where it has out-sold the XBox 360 looks really fishy when paired with the fact that Blu-Ray has recently been declared the winner of the hi-def war.

I agree that each player has his/her own opinion as to what makes a game fun. I looked at Heavenly Sword and Lair, but never played either one of them. We got them both for free from Sony as a promo package (we're a game dev company). Most of the guys here at work tried Lair but then declared that it was fairly disappointing. Another of the employees here said that Heavenly Sword is more like 'Goddess of War.' :)

So yeah, some have really enjoyed PS3 games, so I can't make the blanket statement that PS3 games are not fun.

Reply | Parent | Thread

kathrishali

Re: Maybe you should check your information...

from: [info]kathrishali
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 10:00 pm (UTC)
Link

Of course not, but all that means is that they weren't the first out of the starting gate like with the PS2 and 1 where they were consistently the top seller. Let us not forget that the XBox 360 was released substantially earlier than the PS3 because microsoft KNEW they would face much stiffer competition if they released the same time as their more profitable and longer running rivals, Nintendo and Sony. Had they all come out at once, I believe the XBox 360 would be run into the ground much as the XBOX was.

Additionally, both the PS2 and the DS, even the PSP are dirt cheap these days, so it's no wonder with the vast libraries of software available for them that they would increase sales, especially with the release of the PSP slim and the DS Lite, thinner, new and improved versions of their predecessors.

I firmly believe in the PS3, as they have never let me down yet. PS1 was my first 32 bit system, and it blew me away. PS2 was a surefire purchase, as it doubled as a DVD player and was fully backwards compatible. PS3 was following the trend, with backwards compatibility, DVD and Blu Ray capability, and the PSP is so versatile it's sick.

You say fishy, I say about time. I think the PS3 will become dominant now with the combination lower price and blu ray capability.

PS3 has some really good games now that it's been running for a while, as very few systems seem to have good stuff at launch (the better stuff comes later, when they know what the system can do), and while I will concede Heavenly Sword is like God of War in gameplay, it should not be written off because of that. I prefer Nariko to Krahnos, myself.

As for UMD's, seeing the below post, I used to think that way too. And while the DVD may be a better overall value, a UMD is smaller and more portable. The screen may not be a big screen tv, but it's not bad either. Obviously my UMD vid collection will never rival my DVD collection, but they're not that expensive, especially for older titles, and they're cheap convenient entertainment. I was able to watch two full length movies on a full charge on my PSP on my trip back to NY, and I was glad to have the UMD's.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Teric

Re: Maybe you should check your information...

from: [info]teric
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 10:22 pm (UTC)
Link

Granted, the XBox was released a year earlier than the PS3, yes. However, the Nintendo Wii was released at essentially the same time as the PS3, and has been consistently outselling the PS3 3-to-1 (some months 4-to-1 or even better).

Sure, some of the increased sales can be attributed to the lower price of the Wii. But can we truly say that's the only reason? The Wii appeals to a much wider demographic, reaching even into households that previously never owned a game console.

What's my point here? I dunno, I guess I'm jaded against Sony. After being burned out (nay, incinerated!) by Everquest and Star Wars Galaxies, and then having to work with Sony when we develop games for the PS2 and PSP, I have to say that I would be happy to never work with them again nor buy another SOE game.

Just my own opinion.

Reply | Parent | Thread

kathrishali

Re: Maybe you should check your information...

from: [info]kathrishali
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 11:51 pm (UTC)
Link

However, the Wii is also a testament to the fact that Nintendo is more willing than the other two to take a chance. The Wii could've just as easily fell on it's face. But as seen with the DS and the touchscreen, Nintendo is thinking creatively, finding new ways to involve the user in gameplay. After all, Link can blow out flame via the microphone and draw on his map! Wii is similarly advanced with it's unique controller. While graphically it isn't that much more powerful than it's predecessor, what caught people's attention is the uniqueness. It should also be pointed out that while more people that don't play games may pick up a Wii, it should also be noted that Nintendo has never shaken it's reputation as a 'kiddie' system.

As far as Everquest and Star Wars: Galaxies, I should point out that half of the star wars games are crap and unplayable by definition. They just don't put the effort into it that the license deserves. Only now are they starting to put the focus on what's important, such as graphics, reactivity, and story.

I believe that you just picked a bad crop of games, and personally I think Sony and Nintendo are both worthy of gamer's attention.

Microsoft, however, needs to learn how to play well with others, and to stop bullying customers into what they will sell them.

Reply | Parent | Thread

anthony_lion

(no subject)

from: [info]anthony_lion
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 09:25 pm (UTC)
Link

I still think that Sony will lose the console war...

And frankly, it's just 'business as usual' with Sony...

They launced the Beta video system, which was technially superior to VHS...
Unfortunately, they also decided that they could decide what was and wasn't sold on Beta tapes.

Ever tried a Sony MD-player?
(I have several)
At least, on these they allowed others to build players on license, but othervise they royally screwed up.
They launced a series of SCSI-based portable players. These could be connected to PCs, but... If you had a MUSIC MD in the player, all you were allowed was to edit the names of the tracks!
And yes, they had separate DATA MDs, which of course couldn't be used for playing music...
And with the transfer rate being comparable with a 3.5" floppy... and the Iomega Zip and the LS-120 being launched at the same time.. (The MD was 150MB, so they had the size on thir side)
They FINALLY launched the HD MD at 1GB, and even gave the player a USB-interface to make it easier to copy files(both music and other stuff), but...
The player could only play ATRAC3-format music files.
(It's a better format than .MP3)

Got anything that uses Sony MemorySticks?
If so, I bet it also has a Sony logo?

UMDs... Yeah, right... They just had to stick a dang! DISK DRIVe in the PlayStayshun Puny...
They're slow, powerhungry, and probably a bit noisy, too...
Not that the screen on a PSP is big enough to watch movies on, which is probably why you can now pick up quite a lot of movies VERY CHEAPLY in the discount bins of electronics stores...

So, how could an UNFINISHED standard win?

That said, there's ONE good reason to buy the PS3...
It's the ONLY BD-player with any 'future-proofing'(There's no way of easily upgrading the FirmWare of normal players to account for the changes made to the BD standard before it's finalized)

Reply | Thread

Teric

(no subject)

from: [info]teric
date: Feb. 20th, 2008 09:35 pm (UTC)
Link

Hehe when was the last time you watched a UMD Movie? Me neither. :) If it costs me $16-$20 to buy a UMD movie, where it just has the movie itself (no extras), and I can *only* watch it on that little PSP screen, why not spend that $16-$20 to buy the real DVD and watch it on any DVD player on a nice big screen?

Yeah.

Reply | Parent | Thread

richard_renard

(no subject)

from: [info]richard_renard
date: Feb. 21st, 2008 03:18 am (UTC)
Link

*cling to my DVD's* I don't want to start all over with my movies. I love my DVDs. *sniff* I don't want to spend extra bucks to buy another system. I got used to do that with the PS and Xbox, but the DVD players? I've already missed the VHS and they still haven't but some old movies into DVD's. If I see my old movie go to the HD I will be pissed.

Reply | Parent | Thread

anthony_lion

(no subject)

from: [info]anthony_lion
date: Feb. 21st, 2008 08:13 am (UTC)
Link

Luckily, BD-players should be able to play 'oldfashioned' DVDs, so no reason to replace the collection, yet...

as for my VHS-collection...
I picked up a HDD-equipped DVD-recorder, and one of these days, I'll start transferring the contents of my VHS-cassettes...
(Just need to buy a huge amount of popcorn, chips and cookies first... :-)

Reply | Parent | Thread

$1000?

from: anonymous
date: Feb. 21st, 2008 06:45 pm (UTC)
Link

Wow, $1000 for a blu-ray player? People aren't going to be flocking to switch any time soon. Still, I could have sworn that I saw a blu-ray player at Costco in the $400 range. And now that the format war is over, the price could go down as low as $200 or less in the near future.

Still, I find the quality of my HD-upgrading DVD player exceptional. We have an HD CRT with really sharp picture quality, and I don't see how a blu-ray would be all that much more impressive.

-Russel

Reply | Thread

kylontario

(no subject)

from: [info]kylontario
date: Feb. 25th, 2008 12:39 pm (UTC)
Link

"*gasp!* This thing plays games too?"
My point exactly when I say the PS3 is completely useless. It's games suck, the new controller is a rip-off of the Wiimote, and the blu-ray player is just another one of the pieces of crap they keep stuffing into their do-all machines that don't do at all...

Reply | Thread

Advertisement