Where is the option for....OH MY GOD CAN WE TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE BESIDES FIGHTING ABOUT THIS FUCKING WAR???

I own a PS3 but I chose HD-DVD for all 3 scenarios, cause they are cheaper and as of today they have all the Universal titles.

I bought the HD-DVD add-on for the 360 and I was an HD disc holdout (and still am to a certain extent). For $150 with the media remote and King Kong included it was a pretty good deal (especially since I haven't gotten around to watching King Kong).

I don't want to stack in a blu-ray player, an hd-dvd player, a regular HD-DVD player, a Dish DVR, along with my 360/PS2/Wii/SNES/NES. I've got enough stuff on the rack.

What I need to support both: I need a combo player with Faroudja-quality deinterlacing for normal DVDs OR that will output unscaled SD-DVD @ 480i and HD stuff in hi-def (this is unlikely). Some of the Toshiba HD-DVD players tested good on secrets, though, I admit.

I can't settle with the deinterlacing provided by the 360 or PS3 for standard DVDs. I need a device with a better deinterlacer.

Or a much cheaper (sub-$300) PS3 with a game lineup worth playing.

I'll end up with both formats when the PS3 gets enough good games to warrant playing and thus I end up with Blu-ray whether I want it or not.

I've been watching (HD-DVD) on my friend's system, but two things have to happen:

1) there has to be a simplier way to hook up the 5.1 audio from a HD-DVD player to my existing forest of cables.

2) less expensive third generation HD-DVD player with 1080p output.

Amen.

Can't vote, I'm afraid - my biggest gripe is with the Encoders used by the two camps.

Most HD DVD movies are in VC1, whereas the BD exclusive studios mostly avoid VC1.

I prefer VC1 - as I think it has the best PQ of the three supported codecs on each format.

So the fact that HD DVD is cheaper and that the players have more features is just an extra "ancilliary" factor in my choice.

The Codec is the key for me right now...

F the Loyalties. The best format whatever it is.

neither

Easy

Wheres the "I dont want to support Sony" option? Cause thats really it for me.

1. I thought I was a Sony mark 4 life. Had the ps1 and ps2.

2. I was a day one supporter of the PSP. Got it on launch, and was very impressed with it as a system. But then I see more UMD movies on the shelf than games. It started to feel like Sony was not catering to me as a customer. I was more interested in Games, Mp3 and web browser second, and UMD dead last, if not at all.

3. A year and a half later I had enjoyed 2 games on the system, and it was just collecting dust. So I sold it, and felt Sony let me down software wise, when concentrating too much on the UMD.

4. PS3. I wanted one, but price was rather steep, and that bothered me. Again I wasn’t interested much in movies, just for games. But I was going to get it anyway just for Smackdown vs Raw 2007. THQ says the game is cancelled. The system is too hard to program for. THQ announces for 360, and that leads me to buy that system.

5. Blu-ray. Again Sony wants to try to carve its legacy into media formats. Fine, try again, but they went against the DVD forum, and that bothered me. HD-DVD comes out, sticks to “the rules” and the war starts. Then it became simple economics. $40 off CC coupon gets me into HD for $160 with my new 360, which I would not even have, if I felt Sony had not let me down as a consumer.

30+ HD DVD later and here I am.

Am I the only person who feels that the selection of titles on HD, available now, kills the selection of titles available now on B-r?

If the libraries were "equal", regardless of price why would anyone own both? Equal to me is "the same". Why anyone would want to own the same thing twice is beyond me.

I have a 360, so for me to upgrade to HD it is a mere $149.99. I still haven't because I really have no interest in Hollywood films. I just see the crap unfold at a better resolution. Once they start (if ever) supporting indy or international, I'll jump. The price isn't as important as the library. You can give me a 360 add-on for $50 and it's still useless to me because I have nothing to put inside of it. I'd take a $500 player over a $50 if I can get certain films, just as I did when I puchased a Malata 520 back when it was the King of 'All Region' Players. I was more concered about everything outside of R1 then the region in which I live.

So my final answer - Neither, because both have crappy libraries at this time.

As much as I would love to make a switch to HD, I just can't begin making an investment on something that may or may not survive. Sure, HD is the future, but for now the players are super expensive, the discs are super expensive (compared to their regular DVD cousin), and titles are sometimes only on one or the other format. Call it a war or not, but I won't make the transition until the market goes one way or the other. Otherwise, my upconverting DVD player is great for now.

Um, depends on who you ask. I think HD DVD has a better mix of older/newer films, but there's plenty of people who'll defend BD's offerings. Those 4 exclusive studios help...well 3 if you don't count Fox.

I do think both destroy what dvd was offering in its first year.

In defense of software pricing, the new releases are very similar in terms of list price. The big difference is 1 format has been out 10 years, so stores like Best Buy and Circuit City can heavily discount them and use them for loss leaders. HD discs aren't there yet. Plus, the list price of HD does match what DVD was listed as during its beginning, with retails between $29.99 - $34.99

Some dvd releases have the exact same list price as their HD counterparts:

World Trade Center
2-disc dvd: $39.99 list price
HD DVD: $39.99 list price
BD: $39.99 list price