pricdews

I'd like to see that studies methodology. I'm sure there are a large share of PS3 owners that have misconceptions about HDM, but 60% completely oblivious to Blu-ray movies - not sure I can believe that. Anyways, since the 40gb release, I'd bet that number is changing.

Deftones

I know the PS3 is expensive, but think about how many parents bought it for their kids for Christmas or something, and their kids are young and only care about games. I think it might be a tad bit high, but I wouldn't discount it being pretty close.

TheNightFlier

Wasn't very hard to find.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161833

cultshock

Wow, Sony is really getting serious with non-believers.

pricdews

Online surverys aren't exactly the gold standard of scientific research. Anyone know the exact question that was asked?

WMAangel

I'm going to go out on a limb here (OK, not really much of one), and say that it will always be pretty much impossible to ever truly figure out a way to determine a 100% foolproof method to compare these formats...
Here's the main reason why: The PS3 is just too much of a wild card.
Think about it...obviously anyone who purchases a standalone unit, be it HD DVD or Blu-ray, is doing so specifically to watch high def media on a high def TV...so those numbers are valid, as are the numbers of HD DVD add-on drives sold for the 360, as those serve no other purpose but to play HD DVD movies....
But then we get to the PS3...I'm absolutely positive that out of the almost 3 million units sold, there are a good number of them NOT connected to an HDTV...hell, I know a couple people who got the system and don't have HDTVs....and until those units are actually accounted for, then they really can't be included in a truly accurate comparison since Blu-ray means nothing to those people....the ones who only bought the system for its game-playing abilities and just wanted the next gen system and newer games that it brings with it...
That number could be anything! Half a mil? A million? More than that? This could possibly be having a huge impact on some of the stats everyone tries to compare...maybe the Blu-ray attach numbers are actually higher if you took out all the PS3s that don't get used for Blu playback? Or maybe if enough PS3s ARE being used for Blu, then their 2:1 sales advantage over HD DVD is actually worse than what it should be?
If only there was some way Sony could track Blu usage through their network or whatever...I mean, nobody wants Big Brother watching over us or anything, but it could benefit their pro-Blu argument (or damage it too, in which case they wouldn't want to bring it up of course...)

DVD Polizei

non-owners were captured in order to further probe

There's your Alien Conspiracy explanation right there. In the back of my mind, I always wondered if Sony was an alien entity.

The Bus

It is a fact. A 39 Gbps encode doesn't mean the picture quality is great. Certainly, it has room to get better, but can you tell which of these two pictures is encoded at a higher bitrate?



One of the two parts of this image (top or bottom) is 2x in size of the other. Which is it? Can you tell, very obviously?

My point is that it is quite possible that at some size (bitrate / level of encoding), it becomes increasingly difficult to tell the difference between one and the other. That is, the marginal utility of a 50GB disc vs. a 25GB disc may be very low considering the movie by itself.* That is, you may not be able to tell the difference.

Or, to make my point loud and clear: a higher bitrate does not necessarily mean the encode is any better to the human eye.

Consider, for example, this review of Good Night, Good Luck by HD Digest:

This is on a disc that is 12.5GB. Does that mean that all movies are OK with 12.5GB? No, it doesn't.

But it does mean that maybe something like Shoot 'Em Up would look A-OK on a 25GB HD DVD disc. Certainly, the way to prove that it looks better on Blu-Ray is not to simply spout off some high-bitrate you saw in some PC program.

So, forgive me if I phrased my argument in the form of a "stupid" "joke" but it took less time to do that than to do all this.

But, hey, it's not like you'll listen to these "facts" either.


* Once special features (or data) are put into the mix, the 50GB BD is obviously superior because it holds more information**. However, I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that an HD DVD of, say, Kingdom of Heaven, would look and sound 90-100% as good as the Blu-Ray version eventhough it's on half of the space. Now, if Fox had actually stuffed the disc with special features, then you could make a convincing argument. I'm not sure how much the extra(neous) data on the Ratatouille BD is, but if it's a lot of information (15GB, to put a number on it), then it would probably need to be on a second disc for HD DVD. But that's not what we're talking about. We're discussing an asinine comment where an arbitrary number for a bitrate was thrown out as "proof" that one format outperforms the other in visual acuity. Even if it does, the way you made your point was lousy.

** For the record, I own both formats.

Hammer99

And it certainly doesn't necessarily mean that the two different encodes will always look the same to the human eye.

ScottsDvds

I remember reading an article about Sony demonstrating Blu-ray, they compared the trailer of Click, first with the 400 Mbps HD master and the Blu-ray with an average 24 Mbps. They had to pause it and closely look to find a difference. I think people put too much emphasis on the bitrate.

nmr1723

I agree with you almost entirely about the bitrate issue. A higher bitrate won't always yield a better image. But, I do think that we should be gunning for the highest quality possible...

If a higher bitrate encode can lead to better PQ for certain films, then it should be used. The bigger question is...When do you start seeing the differences between bitrates? You will hit the point of diminishing returns at some point, and it really doesn't makes sense for neutral studios to spend the extra $ on separate encodes if the differences aren't even noticable in the first place.

One more thing...showing small image comparisons on a computer screen isn't a very good argument for or against the whole bitrate issue. I don't think the human eye is capable of discerning the difference in images that small.

So, I too think the whole bitrate issue is blown out of proportion somewhat. But a small part of me still wants to see studios gunning to get the most out of each encode.

The Bus

Agreed all around. I think poor quality releases are more due to poor masters than poor encoding. BD didn't make Fifth Element or Robocop better. And another 25GB would not have made The Game or Spartacus any more stellar.

obispo21

The first/top picture there definitely looks notably nicer to me. (Did I win? Will you tell us the answer?)

I agree w/ you though. (I own both formats as well.) The BD bandwidth is nice in theory, but past a certain point you get very highly diminishing returns. Where that point is is of course debatable, but HD DVD has without a doubt proven itself to me to have video & audio quality every bit as good as BD.

dsa_shea

The beauty of the "60%" of PS3 owners that are oblivious to Blu-Ray and the "lack of" HD sets in the homes of some Blu-Ray owners speaks well for the future. As some owners upgrade over the next year or so to high definition sets I see more and more people that already own the PS3 start to use it for more than just games. If there are so many people out there that own PS3s that do not own high def. sets then at this point they don't feel the need to buy BD (or even HD-Dvd) for their standard definition sets and they're right in thinking that way. The underlying point is that the seed has been planted and is just waiting to sprout. The option is there and more and more will take advantage as time goes on. I think the key here is the larger scale implementation of the high definition sets which are getting cheaper and cheaper. And I still do not understand the hate for Sony but the undying love for companies like Toshiba and Microsoft.

The Bus

Just because you're aware that the PS3 plays BD movies doesn't mean you will want to buy BD movies.

I'm aware it plays SACD. Doesn't mean I'm going out and buying any.

In gaming circles, Sony has earned their hate with disgusting amounts of hubris. This has slightly carried over into the CE world with Blu-Ray. Microsoft, while hated in many places (Slashdot) is not generally disliked in gaming circles. At least not as much as Sony, which is my impression.

And Toshiba...? I don't think I've ever harbored a strong opinion on that company.

obispo21

It goes both ways. I agree that there are PS3 owners out there w/o HD sets that will likely get an HD set in the future.

However, also in short order the PS3 will be notably more expensive than all comparable stand-alone HD players. (It already is notably more expensive than HD-DVD players).

As that occurs and HD media becomes more ubiquitous, the PS3's usage should move increasingly towards gaming, and away from HD movies. There were alot of people that used the PS2 & XBox for DVD playback several years ago. Toward the later years of those consoles, virutally no-one did as they had much better options for DVD playback.

I own a PS3 as well, and it's a much nicer BD player than the PS2 was ever a DVD player. IMO though, the greatest impact the PS3 will have on HD media is today, not years from now.

wordtoyamotha

What I wish would happen: Blu-Ray Exclusive
What is likely to happen: Neutral or HD-DVD buyout
What will happen at CES: Nothing

Gizmo

So there is no way that the BDA would buy out Warner, right?
Only evil Microsoft?

nmr1723

I agree 100%. The PS3 will have its greatest impact early on for BD. If BD survives (and I hope it does), then people will most likely move on to newer and better standalone units that offer more audio options, etc.

While I don't think the PS3 will have the impact on BD that the PS2 had for DVD (I still think both the PS2 & Xbox were pretty big for DVD)...it will be the force that drives the format to the top or help it die a slow death if BD goes t*ts up.

bunkaroo

Slightly OT:

I am not a Sony lover by any stretch, but I don't see how people in gaming circles could have anything but an intense loathing of Microsoft after this RROD debacle.

At least Sony delivered a machine that doesn't have to be sent in within months for repair, wrapped in towels, etc. I know the content and XBL are great - I've tried them. But I'm not spending $400 on a brick again. Luckily I sold mine before it started dying (repeatedly per my buyer). And I would hate to rely on a 360 as my HD movie player.

nmr1723

I don't believe he's saying that anywhere in his post. I definitely don't see the words "no way" anywhere...

I think we all know that either side could possibly throw money towards WB/New Line. For all we know, the BD or HD DVD groups have already tried to "buy them out".

bunkaroo

I think it's a case of, we have a fairly good idea what Microsoft's endgame is.

We don't necessarily know what the BDA wants long term (if it's not continued HDM sales).

If we had as much reason to think the BDA wanted to migrate away from discs to VOD as we do Microsoft, then I would be equally dismayed at them paying off WB.

In the end Sony and Microsoft to me really are like Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. You don't really like either of them, and neither likely have their constituents (customers) best interests in mind.

Gizmo

This is what I see

Meaning they will either stay the same, or HD DVD will "buy them out". No mention of a Blu-ray buyout, only HD DVD.

Gizmo

What about Sony? They are already planning on having their own Video download store on the PS3, how do you know they don't plan on doing the same thing that Michael Bay claims Microsoft will do? We don't.

In the end, I don't care. I own both formats, I'm fine. I'll continue to buy HDM movies regardless of what goes on. I imagine many of us on this forum will as well, since a good chunk of us own both formats.

bunkaroo

As far as I know, Sony's leader hasn't come out and made a statement the way Gates did about discs being obsolete.

Also, I'd be very surprised if Sony's video download store can catch up to XBL. And Sony developing a VOD service is all the more reason for Microsoft to try and bolster their position. Which is fine with me, as long as they don't do it at the expense of HDM.