Choo-choo, baby.

Too little, too late...possibly...IF it's true.

This isn't aimed at one user in particular, but even though this is a quasi-free-for-all thread, the blatant baiting is getting old.

Wait a minute. The rumor is Sony switching to VC1 (someone we all said they should do months ago) and not Universal coming to HD DVD?

Where the fuck did the Universal coming to HD DVD stuff come from and what Moderator at AVS is making a guarantee that its going to happen?

Yes, that's the rumor. The rest Josh is making up in his head.

The Mod is guaranteeing that the VC1 switch is going to happen.

Universal coming over is just one explanation. Another could be that New Line required it, or that Sony/Disney/Fox/LG have titles that have so much extra stuff that they need the space. Sony isn't going to switch to VC-1 just for fun.

I think there's a 0% chance of Universal going to BD. They have made NO mention whatsoever of even thinking of BD. I believe they along with Toshiba and Microsoft are in it for the long haul.

I can't wait to throw a Welcoming Party for Fox. See, I can do it too.

serious question for the die hard HD-DVD guys here.

if Blu-Ray starts kicking out discs that are in great quality(equal to HD-DVD) would you buy into it or just hold out on the chance that the studios would eventually release on HD?

I know alot of this comes down to price so lets say a Blu-Ray player is released at say, $400.00, would you bite?

What about the possiblity that they need VC-1 to better match HD DVD PQ?

Haven't we seen empirically that VC-1 trounces MPEG-2? Even if you argue that (given enough bandwidth/disc space) MPEG-2 could theoretically match VC-1, it sill is inferior because it simply takes more resources than VC-1. VC-1 simply provides far better compression than MPEG-2. By using VC-1 you effectively give yourself more disc space. And on a BD25 that becomes rather important. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

The simplist explanation is usually the best.

I'm holding out. There are already way too many HD DVD discs coming out that I want to drop a grand on a player. No need to rush... I'll wait and see where the studios go.

Same answer if the BD players are $400. They certainly have to do better than match HD DVD, too.

I'd probably bite, yes. What has made me such a big HD DVD supporter is the fact that we've not been jerked around by those involved. We've been given quality material, and that's what's important to me; that's why I'm paying the dinero. Sony and Blu Ray have been sitting on the sidelines, contributing very little. Basically, it's because of Sony that I support HD DVD.

I completely agree with Vipper and Awmurray, except I'm not buying it until/if HD DVD is dead. Buying both, IMHO, just makes this format war go on longer.

If the future is combo players, then I'd consider it depending on price and BR actually delivering WITH extras.

This argument is getting really tired.

Paramount titles were released as VC-1 on HD DVD and MPEG-2 on Blu-Ray. They have been reviewed as looking exactly the same. So where is the great advantage of VC-1 there?

Well, we completly, completely agree then. I actually had that typed but edited it out of my post before sumitting it. I think it would certainly prolong the format war. The only votes that count are the ones we're making with our dollar bills. No use cancelling out my HD DVD votes.

Jeez...and who would've thought THAT 7 months ago ;)

So, you're doing exactly what I said: theoretically MPEG-2 can look exactly like VC-1. I'll give you that for argument's sake, but MPEG-2 is still inferior because it took more disc space to MATCH VC-1. I don't see anyone claiming MPEG-2 is superior.

And actions speak louder than words. Who exactly is switching from VC-1 to MPEG-2? Anyone?

Adding to that ...

Guys, and this is aimed primarily at digi & joshd but applies to everyone here:
I realize that it's hard to announce news or cast doubts on news without baiting the other side or without responding personally to each other, but you guys really need to chill.

Until something is official, everything is speculation. If you want to discuss one speculation, then we'll probably allow the speculation of the opposite as well. And let's try to do this without getting too ugly.

namja
Moderator, DVD Talk Forums

One reviewer commenting on one set of titles from one studio does not a definitive conclusion make.

Even assuming the picture quality is identical, there are plenty of other possibilities:

1) A comparable quality MPEG-2 encode doesn't leave room for lots of extras on more lavish special editions than these.

2) MPEG-2 encodes can look comparable to VC-1 but require a lot of 'hand-tuning' to get them to that point.

3) Studios are crying out for VC-1 even if it's not absolutely necessary, and Sony is just trying to placate them.

We can fanwank whatever explanations we want, but we don't "know" anything. It's all speculation either way.

If the hardware were reasonably priced and fully capable, and if there were a good selection of exclusive software, I'd dive right in.

And yet, your initial question implied that BD needed VC-1 to match PQ. Now that we both agree that they can look equal (as has been shown through execution by both Warner and Paramount), let's move on to the size.

BD50 is plenty of space for a movie, lossless audio, and HD extras (as Sony has shown). If, for some reason, they have so much extra stuff for a release that they can't fit it all on one disc, why not release two (as so many HD DVD fans are quick to point out)? I believe that this move is purely politcal.

1) BD50 (ref: Black Hawk Down)
2) VC-1 takes longer to encode
3) We have a winner. Though, existing BD studios could already do VC-1 encodes (ref: Warner), unless they wanted to use the added bandwidth of Blu-Ray...

And yes, its all speculation, but that is what this thread is living on! Plus, what happens to the greatest speculation-treated-as-fact? Lionsgate going neutral? Seems to me that if Sony is doing their VC-1 treatments, they aren't going neutral at all.

If you can have a BD-25 with VC-1 or a BD-50 with MPEG-2, and MPEG-2 itself offers little-to-no-advantage, why would you opt for the latter?

There's just a tendency in this thread to treat speculation as more than it is.

I'd be happy to see Lionsgate publish on both formats, but I can't imagine that that's the "greatest speculation-treated-as-fact".

Truth is stranger than fiction. And that would be the case if Sony actually goes VC-1. Or if Microsoft decides to make a BD add-on. -eek-

I have thought about getting the Samsung, but only for $500 or less. No way in hell I will pay $1000 to watch a movie at home. The PS3 won't be easily found until sometime next year. But I would get the PS3 for gaming mostly.

The better idea is to wait until after Christmas to see if the Sammys get marked down in stores. You can get a new one on Ebay for $600 or so, but I'd rather not buy one there. Plus, I kinda want to wait and see if Disney decides to support HD DVD. LionsGate, based on heavy rumors, will produce for HD DVD.

Fox's library would be the reason that I would get a BD player.

For those interested, Amazon only has 5 A1's left in stock. Once they're gone, they're gone.

I wonder how much commission you would have made on your A1 sales.

Tell me about it. If Toshiba asked me to be a sales rep for HD DVD, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Like I said, I used to sell DIVX and if i could sell something I had no interest in, I could definitely sell this. Just don't ask me to sell BD cause I couldn't do that in good conscience. ;)

Coffin?

It makes about 0 sense for Sony to go with VC-1 over AVC. All their royalties come in the MPEG-2/4 flavor. Either DVDfile is wrong, Sony worked a giant deal out with MS(I doubt), or Sony is bowing to pressure from within the BDA.

Regardless, did anyone really think Sony would stick with MPEG-2 for the life of Blu-Ray? How else will they justify re-releasing their movies five times over?

Yep, and another would be that Sony knows they are taking a bath on the BD50 discs, hence no other replicator touching them, and need to find another way to handle the BD25 storage space problems.

[Do I even dare wade into this? Oh what the hell...]

If the rumor about Sony going to VC-1 is true, that is good news for BD player owners because we already know that VC-1 delivers good results and is much more space efficient than MPEG2. What's not to like?

Perhaps the studios have been having problems getting AVC to work as well as we already know VC-1 does. But to spin this rumor into Universal jumping ship to BD is the most remarkable non sequitur I have yet seen in this forum.

$400 would be tempting but since I am happy with HD DVD I would probably wait for a lower price before buying a BD player. There are some Sony/Columbia and Fox titles I would like to get, if they are ever released on a high def disc (although nothing announced so far is of interest to me). While it is theoretically possible that Fox could eventually go neutral, that isn't a realistic possibility for Sony/Columbia.

I am in agreement with namja's CE industry experts: I think that both HD DVD and BD will survive and even thrive. Eventually I will have to pick up a BD player to watch movies from BD only studios. But I would expect it to take at least a year before the prices get low enough to tempt me and I will have plenty of HD DVD releases to play with in the interim.

So, perhaps that means I am not a "die hard HD DVD guy", just someone who is happy with what I have for now.

I'm more about content than format. If Blu-ray puts out quality discs I want and has the players down to $400 I will come aboard. However, I have some loyalty to HD DVD for putting out a great affordable player and 2007 belongs to them as long as they remain a strong contender. If Blu-ray has it together and has a quality $400 player in Jan 2008 and many exclusives I want then I will buy one.

With the exception of Sony, I can't see why a studio would align itself with only 1 format. What's the benefit?

Serious answer from a die-hard HD DVD guy:

$400? Nope.

Now that I have an HD DVD player, fantastic HD DVD quality, and great upconversion, I've become very patient about BD. Even at $300 for a player with some decent quality BD releases, I'm not sure I'd bite. I'll wait for a while longer (a year... maybe two?) and see how the format war shakes out now that I've picked a side. I don't see any logical reason that I (as a consumer) should buy two formats and two pieces of hardware that do essentially the same thing. I've voted with my wallet. If it turns out that the marketplace doesn't agree with me, or if both formats remain viable for a long time with some exclusive studio support, I'll re-evaluate. But I won't be going to BD for a long time. When players are dirt-cheap, there are dozens of high-quality titles I want, and it's clear that I won't be able to expect that stuff on HD DVD.

It's going to be painful at times. I figure that Sony will be putting Spider-Man 1&2 out on BD for the theatrical release of 3. I imagine that Fox will be putting Alien and X-Men stuff out shortly. And probably Die Hard in time for the 4th movie. That's going to suck. But I'll wait it out...

$400.00?? Nope...Not now. Maybe before hand but it has to be at least, sub $200 and all the kinks worked out. I'm not even a hardcore HD-DVD, but they were first for me with affordability and quality so now I can play the waiting game.


Ive been wondering the same myself...I have yet to see a very good answer, but I am also not a CEO or CFO of a multi-million dollar corporation.

did the studios that are exclusive to blu-ray have to sign some kind of contract with them saying that they would only put out their movies with Blu-Ray for a certain amount of time? I could understand doing that in the beginning because everyone thought Blu-Ray would dominate, but i don't see a reason not to become neutral now.

As far as what I was told, yes, there were certain agreements made.

Oh...and some more rumors to throw out there...

Exactly how I feel. And I'm sure that's how most of the consumers will feel.


And ditto that.

And hopefully they'll feel more for quality than for content.

I really don't want to bother having 2 HD format players and still keeping my Malata. If Fox holds steady with Blu-ray and Sony releases some stuff I want, I probably won't upgrade until I can get a combo player that also is a region free dvd player that upconverts better than the HD-A1 for under $500. It might be asking for a lot, but I am pretty damn happy as it is right now.

Here is what I don't understand about the rumored neutrality talk: Why would any studio make a move at this point? HD sales are a very small drop in a very large bucket and studios have very, vey little to gain by switching at this point. At the end of the day, they will probably lose by being forced to support two formats vice one. You can't convince me that studio execs haven't thought this out for themselves.

The Disney talk, in perticular, is troubling. The largest stockholder at Disney is Steve Jobs who, in his own right, is more anti-Microsoft than Sony. We have already seen that Disney has decided to go with AVC over VC-1 (whether for that reason or another, no one but Disney can be sure). Apple has actively choosen AVC for their own media distribution over the Microsoft alternative. I just don't see Steve saying that Disney should support a Microsoft backed format.