Post by: Terranigma Freak on February 26, 2006, 06:46:17 AM
Oh man, this is going to be hilarious. Let say it DOESN'T affect games, you'll still be paying extra for the Blue-Ray drive that can't watch HD movies.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 26, 2006, 07:22:00 AM
Post by: capamerica on February 26, 2006, 07:37:47 AM
This is great news, this is a huge nail in the coffin of both Blu-Ray and the PS3.
Now their going to be putting in a more expensive drive that less then 5% of the market can use. Man this is so freaken funny.
I was already saying that Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were going to be another laserdisc and VCD but this is a far worst problem that both of them ever had. I mean Now you can't even watch a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movie with out having a HDTV or Computer that is HDCP compatible which currently don't exist. So right now every single HDTV owner who thought their system would be ready for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies are screwed.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 26, 2006, 07:49:42 AM
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 26, 2006, 09:06:12 AM
Besides, even if this happens, people will buy HDTVs anyway and fool themselves into thinking they're getting vastly superior image quality.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 26, 2006, 09:58:24 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
Besides, even if this happens, people will buy HDTVs anyway and fool themselves into thinking they're getting vastly superior image quality.
For $1,000+ for something which serves no sexual function whatsoever, I'd have to lie to myself, too.
And no, I don't think HD compatible porn will hit the market anytime soon.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 26, 2006, 10:05:31 AM
That's self-destruction, especially if they implement the "warning and nothing" reaction for non-HDCP receivers. Imagine all the furious rednecks screaming at electronics store employees because their "new DVD" won't play and tells them to get a HDTV instead, which they assure you they have.
Post by: capamerica on February 26, 2006, 10:19:29 AM
The movie industry is freaken out because once HD-DVD and Blu-Ray hit the market there will be no reason what so ever for people to go to the movie theaters. The one thing most movie theaters have going for them right now is that they are showing movies in HD. But once HD-DVD and Blu-Ray hit the market people will be able to watch HD movies at home.
When VHS came out the movie industry introduced Widescreen and Stereo to the Theaters.
When TVs and VHS got Stereo the movie industry added Surround Sound.
When DVDs came out and offered Widescreen and Surround Sound the movie industry introduced HD.
Now with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD offering HD what would the movie industry introduced to the theaters?
They have nothing to introduce to the theater and keep people going and cause of that they are freaking out. As it stands right now a DVD costs about the same as going to the theater and buying a popcorn and soda. When you buy a DVD its yours for the rest of its life, when you go to the theater you have it for 2-hours and then its gone.
I don't know about most people but I rather wait a few months and buy a DVD then go to the theater.
Anyway Me and My Dad think the reason they are doing this is to buy some time until they can come up with a way to keep people coming to the theater or at least find some way to make up for the money lost.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 26, 2006, 10:22:21 AM
Oh, and the movies not sucking might help a bit.
Post by: TrueNerd on February 26, 2006, 11:35:50 AM
And while the PS3's software library will the sole factor in my decision to buy the console or not, playing Blu-Ray movies would have certainly been a nice extra feature. EXTRA FEATURE NEGATED!
Post by: Terranigma Freak on February 26, 2006, 11:59:54 AM
If you read the first paragraph, you'll realize this is already a REALITY!
"In perhaps the greatest disservice to the general consumer market yet perpetrated by players in the electronic entertainment industry, it has been revealed that next-generation DVD technologies (HD-DVD and Blu-ray) will only function with monitors and HDTVs with HDMI or DVI connections."
It is NOT speculation or something left to be decided. It is already decided. How it'll affect the PS3 is another matter. There might be changes for games, but it is official.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 26, 2006, 12:21:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: capamerica
I was just talking about this with my Dad and we came up with 1 reasons why they are doing this and no its not to stop pirates.
The movie industry is freaken out because once HD-DVD and Blu-Ray hit the market there will be no reason what so ever for people to go to the movie theaters. The one thing most movie theaters have going for them right now is that they are showing movies in HD. But once HD-DVD and Blu-Ray hit the market people will be able to watch HD movies at home.
You've spelled it out to me. Hollywood doesn't want Movie Theaters to become the new Arcades =D
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
Besides, even if this happens, people will buy HDTVs anyway and fool themselves into thinking they're getting vastly superior image quality.
For $1,000+ for something which serves no sexual function whatsoever, I'd have to lie to myself, too.
And no, I don't think HD compatible porn will hit the market anytime soon.
Why get HDCP compatible porn when HD porn is already out there?
Post by: Terranigma Freak on February 26, 2006, 12:37:04 PM
Quote
You've spelled it out to me. Hollywood doesn't want Movie Theaters to become the new Arcades =D
Can you say 3D Holograms?
Quote
And no, I don't think HD compatible porn will hit the market anytime soon.
Can you say 3D Holograms?
Post by: BigJim on February 26, 2006, 12:37:09 PM
I didn't read the whole article, but the first paragraph is not entirely accurate. It's not that players won't function on non-HDMI setups, the video will be down-rez'ed to quarter size -- 960x540 -- if watched through an analog connection.
The trouble here is that studios want to remove "fair use". Which depending who you ask is illegal. I'm not going to be picking up a player anytime soon though.
Post by: wandering on February 26, 2006, 12:49:10 PM
I hope hollywood collapses and everyone starts watching independently-created content over the internet.
Post by: capamerica on February 26, 2006, 01:40:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
I didn't read the whole article, but the first paragraph is not entirely accurate. It's not that players won't function on non-HDMI setups, the video will be down-rez'ed to quarter size -- 960x540 -- if watch through an analog connection.
Actually it also says or what the studios are suggesting, a warning screen followed by nothing.
So some movies will be downsized while others won't play at all. either way its not good cause once it gets downsized your just better off buying the cheap DVD version.
Post by: BigJim on February 26, 2006, 01:45:59 PM
That'll probably happen anyway.
HD/BRD will likely be the last solid state digital format. On-demand is going to take over next. Even George Lucas thinks that we'll move to an on-demand "same day as theater release" market in the next decade or so, which will start to kill theaters... and Blockbuster.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 26, 2006, 01:57:07 PM
Post by: Epitaph on February 26, 2006, 06:20:34 PM
Also companies such as microsoft want content protection in place because it gives them a stronghold on the computer market. As it stands now you can download linux for free and run any media you want on it. Basically linux is getting to the point where it could be a good alternative to windows media edition. Now if this format only plays on windows media edition it changes everything.
To top it all off they want you to keep buying. They want movies to be a dissposable comoditie. Lets say you go to the store now and buy a movie, with high definition you would never have a reason to rebuy a copy of the movie. There wont be any new format to make you want to update the qualitie of your movie. Now if you are given only an intelectual property instead of a garanteed product they can stipulate that after a year your movies dissapear or that you can only watch a movie for as long as you pay a subscription. This buisness model garantees that people will continue to put money in their pockets.
Post by: Caliban on February 26, 2006, 06:44:04 PM
One more thing, recently MicroSoft said the X360 will be capable of playing Blu-Ray, now I wonder if that is only possible because of ATI's gpu?! LOL, I Love Chaos!
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 26, 2006, 08:12:46 PM
http://www.craphound.com/msftdrm.txt
June 17, 2004
``That's what happened to Jon Johansen, a Norweigan teenager who
wanted to watch French DVDs on his Norweigan DVD player. He and
some pals wrote some code to break the CSS so that he could do
so. He's a wanted man here in America; in Norway the studios put
the local fuzz up to bringing him up on charges of *unlawfully
trespassing upon a computer system.* When his defense asked,
"Which computer has Jon trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His
own."
His no-fooling, real and physical property has been expropriated
by the weird, notional, metaphorical intellectual property on his
DVD: DRM only works if your record player becomes the property of
whomever's records you're playing.``
Ain't that somethin'. The pursuance of DRM application and enforcement lead to this HD/DVI standardization disaster.
``It's a bad business. DVD is a format where the guy who makes the
records gets to design the record players. Ask yourself: how much
innovation has there been over the past decade of DVD players?
They've gotten cheaper and smaller, but where are the weird and
amazing new markets for DVD that were opened up by the VCR?
There's a company that's manufacturing the world's first
HDD-based DVD jukebox, a thing that holds 100 movies, and they're
charging *$27,000* for this thing. We're talking about a few thousand
dollars' worth of components -- all that other cost is the cost of
anticompetition.``
Take out "DVD" and insert B-something or H-something. Sounds familiar.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 26, 2006, 10:52:38 PM
No. The cinema has a gigantic screen and expensive sound setup. It gets movies first. That's the big factors, not the resolution.
Never mind that the cinema is cheaper than buying a DVD and I never watch a movie twice anyway. Rentals are the biggest problem there, rentals don't require that you show up at a specific time to watch the movie and rentals allow you to eat the food you have at home. Rentals also allow you to skip the ads (I've done that often enough even when the DVD was programmed not to let me, stop and chapter skip are your friend).
Senator Orin Hatch who was recently apointed to a copywrite position was lobieb by both the riaa and the mpaa. Now call me crazy but shouldnt a person at such a position be unbiased to either party?
Lobbyism is just a nice word for legalized corruption. No politician should be allowed to take bribes because he has already received the only support he needs, that is the vote. A politician is under a duty to the people, he has to fulfill this duty without compromises. Bribes mean making a politician act in a way that is not representative of the will of the people. Such a person must be removed for he is a traitor. Politicians have power and with that power should come severe restrictions, sacrifice is necessary to perfectly serve the people. Soldiers are required to put everything on the line to serve the people, why shouldn't politicians who wield far greater power?
These politicians are democratically elected, they didn't receive their office from a king, an emperor or even God himself, they received it from the people to serve the people. To SERVE, not exploit!
Orin Hatch is a traitor and should be expelled as such.
As it stands now you can download linux for free and run any media you want on it.
No, you can't. You need DeCSS which is illegal in the United States of America because of corruption through the MPAA and RIAA. Such freedom is illegal in this country. Power by the people has been replaced by power through wealth. Freedom of expression has been replaced with freedom of compliance. Privacy has been replaced with "If you haven't done anything wrong you have nothing to fear". Justice for all has been replaced with rights for the rich, persecution for the poor. The dark ages are returning.
All thios does is make me even less interested in movies than I already am. I think I watch roughly one movie per year and that's in the cinema. I consider 10 Euros for a DVD to be overpriced. The MPAA can disappear for all I care and it wouldn't do much bad. These days you don't need to watch a movie, you just read the book it's based on or ripped from.
Post by: Arbok on February 26, 2006, 11:42:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: capamerica
When VHS came out the movie industry introduced Widescreen...
VHS has been around since the 50's?
Post by: KDR_11k on February 27, 2006, 03:09:21 AM
Post by: capamerica on February 27, 2006, 03:41:08 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: capamerica
When VHS came out the movie industry introduced Widescreen...
VHS has been around since the 50's?
Sorry that was a mistake. I was typeing really fast and I was grouping things together. And hey It was just a theory I was working on with my Dad.
Widescreen was created by the Film industry to counter TV.
Also looks like i was off with Stereo too, I was thinking the time it came out for TV not movies.
But anyway what I'm just trying to say is that the Theaters always had something better then the Home user had but now they don't.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
No. The cinema has a gigantic screen and expensive sound setup. It gets movies first. That's the big factors, not the resolution.
Never mind that the cinema is cheaper than buying a DVD and I never watch a movie twice anyway. Rentals are the biggest problem there, rentals don't require that you show up at a specific time to watch the movie and rentals allow you to eat the food you have at home. Rentals also allow you to skip the ads (I've done that often enough even when the DVD was programmed not to let me, stop and chapter skip are your friend).
The "Gigantic" screen really isn't that great compared to a nice 46" HDTV. Unless your in one of the first 5 rows the movie really seems no bigger. The sound set up is nothing special as well. And as for getting movies first, well that is slowly starting to change, Universal and Disney are going to be starting to push out more direct to DVD movies AND Disney is planing to start releasing movies to Theaters AND DVD the same week.
The Cinema here is not cheaper than buying a DVD. And I'm referring to the whole Cinema experience, Ticket, Popcore and a soda. Heck even not getting a Popcore and Soda if just 2 people go to the Cinema it costs almost the same as buying a DVD.
DVD = $15-20
Cinema = $17 (Ticket=$9 / Popcorn(small)=$5 / Soda(small)=$3)
I will agree that Rentals are a big problem, But not only to the Cinema. Hollywood keeps bitching that they are losing money cause of people Pirating movies on the internet. What they should be bitching about are the Mom & Pop Movie Rental stores that go to Wal-Mart and buy a copy of the movie and rent that. Not only does that Cut into Hollywood's profits and make them think people are Pirating movies its also illegal. I think the people to mostly blame for all this Security BS is the Rental stores. Cause God forbid that Hollywood look into them.
I worked at a Movie Rental place for awhile while I was in school and the guy there would buy all his DVDs from Wal-Mart and all his videogames used from GameStop. He did this so he could bypass the licencing fees to rent the movies. Normally when you buy a movie to rent you buy a copy that costs around $700(give or take) this is on a per-copy base so for every copy you want to carry you have to pay $700. Now you understand a bit why they get so pissed when you lose a movie.
Post by: Pryopizm on February 27, 2006, 05:27:24 AM
This won't affect PS3 sales at all. PS3 games will be able to play on both digital and analog hookups.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 27, 2006, 05:42:07 AM
When did they introduce HD to cinema? I don't recall blocky 640x480 movies. Cinema always had finer "resolution" (on film it's called granularity, I think) than a TV. Maybe they introduced digital but so far I haven't seen it. Movies still have the dirt and roll change marks.
And what home user has a 12.3 sound setup? That's what cinemas use.
Cinema = $17 (Ticket=$9 / Popcorn(small)=$5 / Soda(small)=$3)
Cinema = 6 Euros. 8 Euros if you don't go at a cheap time. You don't have to buy that crap they offer. DVDs can easily run you 20 Euros or more.
worked at a Movie Rental place for awhile while I was in school and the guy there would buy all his DVDs from Wal-Mart and all his videogames used from GameStop. He did this so he could bypass the licencing fees to rent the movies. Normally when you buy a movie to rent you buy a copy that costs around $700(give or take) this is on a per-copy base so for every copy you want to carry you have to pay $700. Now you understand a bit why they get so pissed when you lose a movie.
I don't think that's really illegal. Copyright is about the right to make a copy, not the right to decide what else the customer can do with the copy. If renting something out is illegal that's a clear malfunction of the law and must be removed.
Post by: Artimus on February 27, 2006, 05:52:10 AM
Post by: Terranigma Freak on February 27, 2006, 06:07:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pryopizm
RE: The title of this thread.
This won't affect PS3 sales at all. PS3 games will be able to play on both digital and analog hookups.
Please read the message. Nobody said anything about games. You're basically forced to pay extra for a Blue-Ray drive that DOESN'T watch movies. Games isn't even the issue here.
Post by: capamerica on February 27, 2006, 06:58:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
If you're within the first five rows in anything but a tiny cinema you can't even see the entire screen at once because you end up with 120° of movie, usually more. For the investment a 46" HDTV would cost (1000 Euros at Aldi and I think that was just 40") I could watch every movie that came out on opening day for at least a decade. A decade is most likely longer than the TV would last and I wouldn't want to watch every movie that comes out within the time period, anyway. There are TV shows worth watching but not that many and there are a lot of reruns so buying the DVD box set is cheaper compared to paying TV fees (17 Euros a month just for owning a TV!) and cable fees (I don't think there are any HD broadcasts on terrestrial).
a 46" HDTV is only $1400 in the US, that equal to watching about 155 movies. I watch at least 1 movie every week (Renting, Buying or going to the theaters) so 155 movies is a little less then 3 years. And thats if prices don't keep going up. Each year the price goes up another $0.50 here. Back in 2000 it was only $6 to see a movie now its $9. And I'll get alot more use out of a HDTV then just watching 155 movies, I also get to use it to watch TV and playvideo games.
I don't pay anything for TV, I also don't have Cable since I can get most of the stations I want for free over my antena and there really isn't anything on Cable I want to watch. I do buy TV shows on DVD I like doing that since alot of my favioret shows ended and most stuff on TV now is pure garbage.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
When did they introduce HD to cinema? I don't recall blocky 640x480 movies. Cinema always had finer "resolution" (on film it's called granularity, I think) than a TV. Maybe they introduced digital but so far I haven't seen it. Movies still have the dirt and roll change marks.
All the theaters in my area have been useing it for at lest a year now maybe longer. They did the switch around the time StarWars III came out.
And what home user has a 12.3 sound setup? That's what cinemas use.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Cinema = 6 Euros. 8 Euros if you don't go at a cheap time. You don't have to buy that crap they offer. DVDs can easily run you 20 Euros or more.
As I said for us here its almost cheaper to buy a DVD then to get 2 people to go see a movie in the theater.
I normally go to the movies with a group of friends, I rarely go alone. You might not watch a movie more then once, but some of us do. I rather wait a few months for the DVD release and buy it for $20(or less) and own it for the life of the DVD then go to the movies and waste $9 on something that I can only watch once.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
I don't think that's really illegal. Copyright is about the right to make a copy, not the right to decide what else the customer can do with the copy. If renting something out is illegal that's a clear malfunction of the law and must be removed.
Here is the US it is illegal. On all the US movies it states that it is illegal to rent the movies and its also illegal to show them in a public place.
Post by: Pryopizm on February 27, 2006, 08:01:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Terranigma FreakQuote
Originally posted by: Pryopizm
RE: The title of this thread.
This won't affect PS3 sales at all. PS3 games will be able to play on both digital and analog hookups.
Please read the message. Nobody said anything about games. You're basically forced to pay extra for a Blue-Ray drive that DOESN'T watch movies. Games isn't even the issue here.
My point is that it will not screw the PS3. The PS3 will live or die based on its user base and game sales. None of which will have too much to do with Blu-Rays incompatibility with current/older HD-Sets.
The only thing that's screwed will be the adoption rate of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 27, 2006, 10:04:11 AM
Post by: capamerica on February 27, 2006, 10:09:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: PryopizmQuote
My point is that it will not screw the PS3. The PS3 will live or die based on its user base and game sales. None of which will have too much to do with Blu-Rays incompatibility with current/older HD-Sets.
The only thing that's screwed will be the adoption rate of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players.
This will have some effect on the PS3 sales. IF Sony was trying to duplicated the success they had with the PS2 in terms of people picking it over the Dreamcast due to the fact it played DVDs. Those sales are in jeopardy. Since now Sony can't really push the Blu-Ray player as a item to sell the PS3. It brings the war back down to even ground. All Systems play games and all systems play DVDs. No one will care about Next gen video format. Sony loses this ace they had up their sleeves. Now they have to really push the system as a gaming system. This will also effect Sony's plans to use the PS3 as a Trojan Horse to get Blu-Ray players into everyones house and killing off HD-DVD cause no one is going to buy a PS3 to use it as a Blu-Ray player now since no one can use it as one.
Truthfully if Sony was smart they would drop Blu-Ray off of the PS3 and go with a normal DVD player like Microsoft and Nintendo.
I have a feeling that very few companies are going to take advantage of the size of a Blu-Ray disc. Most likely all 3rd party developers who create games that will fit on a Dual-Layer DVD Especially the companies that release multi-consoles games.
Post by: IceCold on February 27, 2006, 08:00:50 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 27, 2006, 10:14:29 PM
Really? No. GTA San Andreas hit the limit of the DVD. Okay, so it only used one layer but you cannot use two layers if you stream data (a DVD player takes a second or so to refocus on the other layer) and even if you don't stream using two layers causes problems.
Post by: capamerica on February 28, 2006, 02:51:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Most likely all 3rd party developers who create games that will fit on a Dual-Layer DVD
Really? No. GTA San Andreas hit the limit of the DVD. Okay, so it only used one layer but you cannot use two layers if you stream data (a DVD player takes a second or so to refocus on the other layer) and even if you don't stream using two layers causes problems.
You had to go and point out the one case where dual layer wouldn't work hu? Most games still have load screens.
What I was trying to point out is that all 3rd party developers are going to develop games for the lowest settings, Since MS and Nintendo use DVDs they are going to make games based around them.
If I'm not mistaken the new Unreal engine has some cool tech that loads levels with out you knowing it so it seems like your playing in once large level, so maybe that would be the way they would get around it.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2006, 04:21:39 AM
If I'm not mistaken the new Unreal engine has some cool tech that loads levels with out you knowing it so it seems like your playing in once large level, so maybe that would be the way they would get around it.
That'd be the streaming we're talking about. GTA does that, Metroid Prime does it, SSX 3 does it.
Post by: BigJim on March 14, 2006, 10:22:58 AM
http://neasia.nikkeibp.com/neasia/003549
Sweet. So my future Series 3 Tivo can use the HDMI, and BRD/HD and console(s) can use the component inputs.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 14, 2006, 10:53:27 AM
Seriously, Sony failed twice in getting their proprietary standard adopted as the widely accepted media. Apparently, they think the third time is a charm...
Post by: Renny on March 14, 2006, 04:21:42 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 14, 2006, 08:10:14 PM
Post by: SixthAngel on March 16, 2006, 05:41:36 AM
My dvd player is only a few years old, just like many other people I know. Why would we buy a whole new player much less rebuy movies for what seems like such a tiny difference? My dvds look very good on a hi-def tv if I'm around one (usually I'm not), this would have to be an astronomical rise in quality to make me buy hd-dvd or bluray. At least the switch to to dvd saved (physical) space and gave extras. The last format changes also had a big change in appearance. This new format to any average person looks no different and doesn't have that "high-tech" appeal.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 16, 2006, 07:26:02 AM
Not much. Since the prices didn't go down after the cartridges were replaced with CDs I don't think they factor the price of the medium in. Games are priced at "What those suckers will pay" and the suckers wopn't pay more than 60 Euros.
Post by: Arbok on March 16, 2006, 08:19:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Not much. Since the prices didn't go down after the cartridges were replaced with CDs I don't think they factor the price of the medium in.
Since when? PS1 games were much cheaper than N64, or SNES before them, games. That was one of the prime factors behind why they won out that generation. Once the PS2 was released, and their userbase was established, they went back up to the old levels for the CD/DVD games on that system.
Post by: BigJim on March 16, 2006, 10:51:35 AM
Anyway, what you say is true, Sixth. The difference between DVDs and HD DVDs isn't as dramatic as broadcast TV vs. HDTV. The picture is definitely sharper thanks to the higher resolution, but the difference won't blow you away. Video games resemble that scenario and is probably why Nintendo chose not to invest in HD yet.
