Artman

I think what we have here is a case of some folks having invested into a library of films, and the realization that DVD's are not the premier format anymore brings out a variety of responses. Some have taken it in stride, others... not so much.

orangerunner

It's easy to dump on people or call them whiners for not wanting to switch but i think the OP does have a legit point.

I think it's the act of taking something away from a product that was once there and now exclusively placing it on the higher priced item that gets some people upset.

It's like buying a bag of Oreos and finding they no longer have the cream in the center. You look on the shelf above and there's a bag of new & improved chocolate covered Oreos for two bucks more that have the cream.

Do you call them a whiner for not wanting to pay another $2 for the Oreos to be covered in chocolate?

Larry C.

Are you really gonna compare cookies and technology base products? In the world of electronics things have a very short "shelf life" (since you like food references) We all here are brought together by this technology and our love of movies. If this is the case why all the resistance? Enjoy it on a much better format.

People bitch and moan about how now everyone is giving the BD's the royal treatment. Duh its better and will be the stardard before you know it.

Cheato

^ This is an example of a very poor analogy. A single consumable/replaceable good from a single company that has an easily identifiable set of expectations by its entire consumer base, compared to a vast array of non-consumable/semi-permanent goods from multiple companies with no single set of expectations from any segment of its entire consumer base.

A better analogy would be:
It's like buying a bag of Oreos and finding they no longer have the cream in the center. You look on the shelf above and there's a bag of new & improved Oreos in 1080p with uncompressed audio and a scratch-free coating for two bucks more that have the cream and a cookie-in-cookie commentary by the Nabisco lab technician who mixed the ingredients.


Yes, the studios have a potentially collusionable polygopoly (I don't know if those are the right technical words, but I think you get my point) in pushing people into Blu-ray, but so what? They also have that when they release Special Editions and Ultimate Editions and Complete Series sets (I have been most outspoken about the latter), and everything else. At least with Blu-ray, you know what you should expect: better audio and video quality, and potentially more special features. Sometimes the Blu-ray falls short (Gladiator), and sometimes its spectacular (Battlestar Galactica). An interested and informed consumer would keep his options open, and buy what he wants and the price he wants to pay. A short-sighted consumer would be stubborn and unwilling to consider alternatives, spend his money impulsively, and then whine when others got better deals on better quality. Which do you want to be?

TheKing

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/car...r-on-sale.html

And on the other end of the scale, here's the $1.7 million car, the most expensive in the world:

http://www.thesupercars.org/bugatti/bugatti-veyron/

So yes, even cars have a huge swing in price from low end to high end.

Fist of Doom

Ah, the Bugatti Veyron


No cupholders...


...Bugatti screws us yet again.

Hokeyboy

I shoved an Oreo into my Blu-Ray player, and now I can't watch The Blind Side. Screw you $teven $pielberg, George Luca$, and Di$ney!!!!

bigE

BD zealots ruin another discussion

orangerunner

Well since the Oreo comparison was unclear, how about if the studio's next choice is to remove all extras from any future Blu-ray discs and exclusively place them on the new, "better" & more expensive 3D versions which they will want to steer us onto?

The same argument will be; What? You don't like 3D? You're happy with that old 2D Blu-ray? ("An interested and informed consumer would keep his options open, and buy what he wants and the price he wants to pay. A short-sighted consumer would be stubborn and unwilling to consider alternatives, spend his money impulsively, and then whine when others got better deals on better quality. Which do you want to be?")

toddly6666

I just don't understand the concept of someone thinking "I want to see the extras for the film The Blind Side." I just don't get it.

highclassrob

Not unless it was a behind the scenes on what her husband was doing during filming.

Eric D.

Wow, there are some incredibly bitter and jaded people in this thread. I keep imagining little kids crossing their arms and stomping their feet. Were you all this hyper pissed off when VHS was phased out?!? It's not like BD is expensive and if you guys have huge DVD collections, then you can certainly afford a hundred dollar BD player. I can get not being interested in the format, but I don't get the hate for it. It just seems silly.

Cheato

I already have a 3D-capable TV here in Japan, along with a PS3. So I'm cool with that.

Of course, to make your point, what you did was go to a (currently) ridiculous extreme. Are SD versions completely barebones? Are they intentionally hobbled to such a degree? No, the situation is not even close to that. The point of an analogy is to illustrate a point that's difficult to see by relating it to an equivalent situation--not to take your illustration to an extreme end of the spectrum and say "see? it's like this" when it's clearly not like that.

But do I think the studios are paying attention? Of course they are. So do I think it's possible to see a move like you suggested in the future? If the beancounters say it's worth it, then yes. But if they know they will alienate too many consumers and see lower profits, then no.

Vote with your wallet. Make your voice heard by writing a letter and showing them what you are willing to buy and what you won't buy. Or complain on a message board. Your choice. But if you buckle in and buy that hobbled DVD anyway, because it's the only one available, well, you just gave aid and comfort to the enemy you're trying to destroy. One doesn't get to be principled without making sacrifices, but one can be a whiner for free.

Cheato

I thought the SD zealots already did that, starting with the OP. So I guess this wasn't really a "discussion?" Just a nonsensical rant where the OP was expecting everybody to just go "yeah, we're pissed, too!"

BTW, once again, I still buy almost everything on DVD. I have thousands of titles, and only 17 Blu-rays. In the past month, I've purchased 71 titles, of which 3 were Blu-rays. The DVDs are working just fine on my PS3.

jjcool

Agreed.

Hokeyboy

Spelling retarded as "retarted" is makes you the worse looser on the planet!!!!1!!1!!1one!!1

orangerunner

The principle of it is not a ridiculous extreme. We've already heard the range from mild disinterest to outspoken anger aimed at the 3D format from those who recently purchased Blu-ray.

If the Blu-ray 2D format becomes a second-tier format to 3D, we'll hear the same discussions as the DVD/Blu-ray discussions.

With the home video market, as a whole, in a relative slump I think we've all been voting with our wallets hence why they're trying out a new mousetrap.

jjcool

Talk about spelling making you look like a "looser"....

JumpCutz

I think he did that on purpoise.

Hokeyboy

Adam Tyner

No, you won't. 3D Blu-ray releases are backwards compatible. If you pop a 3D disc in a player that's only geared for 2D, a normal 2D presentation will play. (You get either the left eye version or the right eye version...and still in full 1080p to boot. I suppose the maximum bitrate of the video could be lower than a dedicated 2D release, though.)

DGibFen

Fixed. From what I saw, the BD-combo was the one to get. More bang for your buck. Yes, you don't get all the special features on the DVD that you would on the Blu-Ray. But studios have a vested interest in the success of the Blu-Ray format, so they are going to find ways to get people to purchase them, even if it includes disc exclusives (like extra features.)

Same argument for DVD vs. VHS. Picture and audio quality aside, studios included a myriad of extras because it was a value-added incentive to convince people to purchase these titles on the DVD format.* Warner Bros. wants people to purchase the Blu-Ray, so they will include extra incentives to convince people to purchase the Blu-Ray - even at the expense of possibly losing a number of DVD sales to people who refuse to upgrade to Blu-Ray.

*Plus, adding 3-4 hours of video extras was near impossible in the VHS era, unless you produced 3-4 VHS cassettes per release.

The Man with the Golden Doujinshi

I like how when SD had more bonus features, the BR people didn't make threads about it. Hell, we were missing all the special features in many cases.

Texan26

Actually someone did make a thread about it in the BR forum complaining about missing special features:http://forum.dvdtalk.com/hd-talk/570...-features.html

orangerunner

The difference was they didn't remove things from VHS in order to entice people to buy DVD. With DVD it was simply value-added.

The studios are removing features and extras that were once standard on most DVDs and are now exclusively putting them on Blu-ray in order to entice people to switch to Blu-ray. That's the difference.

Had the studios started to record VHS tapes in SLP record mode (slow speed, really bad quality) to make DVD look superior, that would have been comparable.

Such tactics weren't necessary for DVD because consumers in huge numbers universally agreed the disc format had significant increased value over the VHS format.