@jtsiren

Quote:

However, the average Joe with their viewing distance and screen size will not see that much of a difference

If it's a HDTV they will IMO be able to see a big difference.

Quote:

For a home theater enthusiast the situation is of course different and now that HD DVD is gone, Blu-ray offers the best for that.

Blu-Ray was already better before HD DVD left the building. Comparatively, Blu-Ray was superior technically (scratch resistant, higher bitrates, more strorage). The HD DVD players also had horrible load times, eject times, etc compared to the PS3.

@MikeB

Quote:

The launch in PAL regions is when the PS3 first started to outsell the 360. At the time retailer sales suggested a near 9 million gap early 2007.

Doesn't really matter, same result - Xbox 360 has exceeded any gains made by PS3 during that period of time and any gains made by Xbox 360 from now on are adding to the lead until PS3 can pass Xbox 360 again.

VGChartz Hardware data for the period 03rd Mar 2007 to 13th Dec 2008:

Console
Total
PS3 16,451,571
X360 16,709,695

Now, of course, this is VGChartz.com data - it can be right, it can be wrong, but it is one point of view. PS3 was not able to really capitalize on its gains and make them exponential or growing, it was just lingering above Xbox 360 the whole year and now Xbox 360 is surprising us with impressive growth. We'll see how far it lasts or is it just a Christmas fad (relative numbers compared to PS3 of course).

Quote:

If it's a HDTV they will IMO be able to see a big difference.

The problem is, many don't see a big difference even if they have a HDTV (didn't see on HD DVD either). People just watch TV from too far, are not sophisticated enough to see the difference (how many are watching DVD on composite video crap and are perfectly happy) and have too small screen sizes. This graph illustrates the problem:



http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/

If you are watching a 32" HD TV from a distance of 12 feet (~3,5 meters) you will likely see no benefit from even 720p, let alone 1080p. If you are watching 42" from 4 meters, the same thing. Watch a bit closer, 720p might become tangible, but hardly the blow-DVD-out-of-water experience as watching a huge projected image. And sadly, a lot of people watch TV from quite a few meters and many TV screen sizes just aren't cut out for that, HD or not. Of course one can (and many enthusiasts do) move closer, but the regular Joe watches from where has always watched...

Blu-ray adds no convenience to a regular user (the opposite in fact as long as compatibility, profiles, firmware updates continue to be an issue) and the quality difference is problematic in common viewing circumstances. Net downloads (HD or not), have a major convenience benefit that could truly bring something new to a regular Joe (ability to watch anything anytime) - Blu-ray does not have such a benefit over DVD, both are similar (except for picture quality difference many will not really see, and don't even get me started on audio) and Blu-ray is more hassle and pricier. It has a value proposition problem in my opinion - of course HD DVD had that too, although its more mature extras/no profiles had some benefits too.

Pricing and convenience in time for Blu-ray will probably approach DVD, but still the problem remains, if DVD is good enough for many people - will Blu-ray be able to replace it? Especially when net downloads are competing increasingly hard.

For home theater enthusiasts, Blu-ray is of course pretty much mandatory and a really welcome thing after DVD.

All (well most, HD DVD was more mature when it came to extras and "profiles") this applied to HD DVD as well, so this is not to belitlle Blu-ray at all.

Quote:

Blu-Ray was already better before HD DVD left the building. Comparatively, Blu-Ray was superior technically (scratch resistant, higher bitrates, more strorage). The HD DVD players also had horrible load times, eject times, etc compared to the PS3.

I didn't mean to make a comparison with HD DVD, just say that clearly now that HD DVD is out, Blu-ray is the one and only game for home theater enthusiasts who have large projected screens and are looking for good picture quality. DVD just doesn't cut it there. They really, really need Blu-ray, the regular Joe not so much (upscaled DVD is plenty good for regular screen sizes and viewing distances).

HD DVD had its benefits over Blu-ray (and vice-versa Blu-ray had/has its), but discussing them now is academical at best. The real question now is can an optical HD format beat DVD before network downloads replace physical media alltogether (or whether or not latter will happen at all). Interesting times.

@MikeB

Quote:

Of course it is, excluding movie playback software from the PSP would not have made the medium more successful. Actually it was a smart move to include this, no matter the limited potential (small PSP screen compared to laptop, portable DVD players, etc), it helped to bring down production costs and there´s a nice library of value add movies now.

Oh c'mon, UMD is not a success. :) I have PSP and love it dearly (btw watched one UMD movie on it, the Spidey I got for free, it was cool) but UMD has not really made it. It isn't dead, but not a success either.

UMD is fine as a medium for PSP, but to say UMD is a success is far-fetched. It failed to capture anything significant beyond being the mandatory medium for PSP games. The movie thing just didn't fly and there isn't any other uses or similar users for it. It isn't a bad idea, and I think it is implemented well (judging from that very limited experience), it just didn't succeed in capturing a real market.

That doesn't mean there isn't a value-add selection of movies - of course there is. I agree. And that selection will remain and slowly grow(ish) I'm sure, so PSP owners can enjoy that and nothing wrong with it. But a success it is/was not and the value-add is limited. On comparison, Blu-ray on the PS3 is much more a success (although even the fate of that format remains to be seen in the long run, will it remain a sort of niche or break out and replace DVD).

PSP itself I'd say is a relative success. Games numbers are small compared to the poorer (but maybe a bit more imaginative) DS, and it is clearly a second, but a relative success I'd say.

Edit: fixed typos.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Dec-2008 at 07:20 PM.
Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Dec-2008 at 07:19 PM.

@jtsiren

Well said.

For me, the PSP has certain positive analogies with Xbox 1.

On the previous/sixth console generation, Xbox stirred the pot in a positive way and introduced significantly better gaming visuals and performance (not to mention solid online experience) to the generation at a point in time when PS2 was starting to show the age and level of its design. Xbox 1 never got to be number one (in numbers sold or mindshare), or match the number of games that PS2 had, but for a hardcore gamer (or a casual gamer preferring "hardcore" games like myself) Xbox brought something tangibly better in performance than the then-current status quo maintained by the market leader.

On the current/seventh console generation, as far as handhelds go, Nintendo continues to hold the lead with their offering as they have for multiple console generations. We've seen some examples of trying to introduce superior performance for hardcore gaming (Atari Lynx and its Amiga roots come to mind) over the years, but the basic handheld gaming has persisted with various incarnations of Gameboy. Nothing has come even close in success. Nintendo DS did introduce 3D to a Gameboy successor, but still it is relatively limited in that regard. It is best for innovative gaming ideas based on touch etc., and regular, more limited handheld gaming... but for home console-like "hardcore" gaming on the go, Nintendo has been limited.

Cue in the PSP. The first mainstream handheld to allow modern hardcore gaming. Sure, the graphical performance may not be much more than a PS1, but the small screen size allows lesser resolution to still produce impressive visuals. PSP has not caught on like the portable Nintendos have, it is a distant second especially in number of games (somehow PSP trails there more than in number of units sold), but for the hardcore gamer - like Xbox 1 on the home consoles a generation ago - it represents a welcome addition to the market. And it has succeeded well enough to deserve a continue presence in the market place, a real choice for the consumer.

So, from my point of view, the PSP has a solid footing in the hearts of hardcore gamers. iPhone/iPod touch may finally threaten its performance levels, but those lack some of the controls needed by games so we'll see where that goes...

Personally, as far as current home consoles go, the jury is still out on the PS3. On the Xbox 1 it was constant and consistent to get the best experience of the generation, no such apparent benefit (instead negatives some time) for PS3 on multiplatformers. That leaves exclusives, and maybe some future advances, but for the moment Xbox 360 and PS3 continue to battle for the hearts and minds (and euros/dollars) of hardcore gamers. I for one can not make up my mind. PS3 gets the least use here, don't know why - I really have nothing against it and I believe it has certainly at least potential to beat Xbox 360 performance levels, but there is no consistent lead in that even now.

We discussed this many threads ago, but even today I can not genuinely say I consider PS3 gaming superior in performance to Xbox 360. There just isn't a consistent end-result on the market, as far as games go, to make such a claim. I think in exclusives we may see superior results in some regards, and certainly in time PS3 will continue to advance I'm sure, but if there is a PS2 vs. Xbox 1 or DS vs. PSP kind of difference in Xbox 360 vs. PS3 I certainly do not see it! For exclusives one needs to use the console that the exclusive is made for anyway, so comparisons are hard. Certainly there isn't a jagged vs. not jagged kind of difference in visuals like in PS2 vs. Xbox 1, or cartoonish/basic vs. modern 3D kind of difference like in DS vs. PSP...

In the end, I think the graphics processor in PS3 let it down. Much of potential was wasted there, had that part been better things might be quite different. Developers have to spend too much time and SPU power to get it to Xbox 360 levels - add to that the complexities of SPU development and the PS3 architecture in general and we understand why all the game delays, mixed bag of multiplatform game performances etc.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Dec-2008 at 06:56 PM.

In the U.S., console sales were up 18% from last year previous week, but Sony's total market share has dropped (PSP, PS2 and PS3 combined) from 38% that time last year to 21%. PS2 is fast loosing its appeal and PS3 is not making up for the difference.

http://news.vgchartz.com/news.php?id=2689

Not only the lack of tangible differentiation to Xbox 360 in quality, the price is hurting PS3 a lot more.

I certainly would pay for a PS3.5 with better internals a lot more than it costs now... if that meant better console games (performance-wise) than on an Xbox 360. But currently, when the difference is so small and inconsistent, I wonder how many hardcore gamers justify owning both. Mine certainly has been collecting dust more than anything. Not that I'm selling it or anything, I think it is a nice piece of hardware, but there are these lingering questions about its ability to woo the marketplace... (especially the current marketplace).

Like I said about Microsoft last year when the Xbox 360 hit sales trouble, Sony really needs to get their act (price) together and not let Xbox 360 get away with a solid, growing lead.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Dec-2008 at 07:21 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou The game looks promising. FFXIII on the PS3 looks sweet as well: http://www.gametrailers.com/game/3498.html

It will look equally promising on the 360, Japan excluded ofcourse.

edited by wegster, fixed hanging quote

Last edited by wegster on 22-Dec-2008 at 08:27 PM.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @MikeB Amazing those that the Wii user has no DVD or Blu-Ray, no Wi-Fi and yet it's the best selling console.

The Wii has 802.11g.

@jtsiren
I dunno.. I easily saw a difference between SD and 720p when i had a 27" 720p. I did not get the full benefit of 720p, but it definitely looked noticable better than standard definition.

@Lou
Looks like your url broke the forum

@jtsiren

Quote:

Personally, as far as current home consoles go, the jury is still out on the PS3. On the Xbox 1 it was constant and consistent to get the best experience of the generation, no such apparent benefit (instead negatives some time) for PS3 on multiplatformers. That leaves exclusives, and maybe some future advances, but for the moment Xbox 360 and PS3 continue to battle for the hearts and minds (and euros/dollars) of hardcore gamers

Well said. A few people's fanboy-ish like comments over how 'superior' the PS3 is, just doesn't, *today*, map to better games on the PS3, with far fewer exclusives than was the case for the PS2.

Pricing does little to even the field, for those that don't want or *care* about any minor perceived 'advantages.' Sony basically is in the process of blowing it, big time, IMO.

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@Tomas

Quote:

Tomas wrote: @Lou Looks like your url broke the forum

Fixed.

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@jtsiren

Quote:

Oh c'mon, UMD is not a success. :)

I guess it has to do with your personal expectations, I could have told you back in 2005 UMD had no chance at all of replacing DVD in people's homes. It's a near game console exclusive format, it's like a mini-DVD with less capacity, thus reduced PSP screen targeted quality together with reduced extras as a movie format.

In my opinion Sony was 100% correct to push UMD as a movie format though in addition to being a game format for the console, just look at the results:

http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&keywords=umd&search-type=ss&index=dvd

It didn't take Sony much additional R&D to include movie playback software at all, compared to what R&D was already needed to develop this gaming medium. I have read that a lot of UMD movie discs have been sold so far in total and thus helped bringing down production costs for game disc replication as well.

Blu-Ray disc is something entirely different, the format does cost a lot of additional R&D (improved quality and many extras), developed to get the most out of HDTVs, modern audio set-ups and is intended to take the place of DVD in the next 3 to 4 years in western countries.

Last edited by MikeB on 22-Dec-2008 at 09:34 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

I guess it has to do with your personal expectations, I could have told you back in 2005 UMD had no chance at all of replacing DVD in people's homes. It's a near game console exclusive format, it's like a mini-DVD with less capacity, thus reduced PSP screen targeted quality together with reduced extras as a movie format.

I don't think anyone expected UMD to beat DVD, I don't think it was made to do that anyways.

However, there were expectations for the UMD movie feature to become a prominent and successful (content-wise) feature for the PSP and this did not happen. Early gains were not followed by a lasting success.

Nor has UMD seen any other use as a format. I wouldn't be surprised if a future PSP 2 would skip a disk altogether and use memory cards.

This is not a criticism of UMD (it is just fine for what it does), just an observation that it really did not catch fire / be a "success".

Let me make a prediction on "Xbox 720" btw... I've been mulling over this for a while and I'll write it down here, so you can judge 2-4 years down the road if I got any of it right. :)

THIS IS JUST A GUESS! For fun.

I predict "Xbox 720" will not include a optical drive as standard, instead will rely on a combination of online and memory card distribution of software.

I predict that "Xbox 720" will include an optical drive only as an option. Maybe fully external, or a clip-on type like the Xbox 360 hard-disk. Maybe part of a "pro/premium" model. This drive will be for CD music, DVD for movie and Xbox 1/360 backwards compatibility, or if Blu-ray manages to secure a dominating presence in the market, the optional drive will include Blu-ray. (It will not support HD DVD.) The optical drive will not be used for "Xbox 720" software distribution, in fact, that might be prohibited by licensing terms as a deliberate move away from optical. Microsoft has a lot to gain by moving away from optical and advancing the content (games and video) on Live.

All software for "Xbox 720" would be sold online via Xbox Live (that would be mandatory in licensing terms) and downloaded to memory cards or disk drives. But it will also be available for memory card distribution at loading stations or boxed in stores. Different sizes of memory cards will be supported and allow future technical advances in memory cards to use bigger cards for later games. The lack of a standard optical drive will make the "Xbox 720" smaller in size and cheaper to make drive-wise, no mechanical drive would be standard. Hard-drive will also be optional (much like today), although standard flash memory would be included.

How's that for a guess/prediction? What do you guys think - am I predicting a move away from optical too soon? Maybe the generation after the next one instead?

In any case, I find it hard to believe Microsoft would go for DVD distribution in "Xbox 720" - and yet going for Blu-ray sound somehow a little unlikely as well. The above theory might fit the situation.

Discuss, please.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Dec-2008 at 11:31 PM.
Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Dec-2008 at 11:29 PM.

@jtsiren

The 360 is more than a games console but an entertainment console. Microsoft is expecting people to play CDs, Movies, and games on the device. As such the 3rd Xbox will need some soft of DVD or Blu-Ray option. In addition, for backwards compatibility with the Xbox360 will need a DVD drive. Microsoft will likely want an option for that too.

That being said I think there's no reason Microsoft would have to rely on DVD or Blu-Ray for game distribution. More approaching all games over the internet is bound to happen. I don't think that internet speeds will quite be enough to stream gameplay so storage of some sort is a must.

However, since the Xbox is digital entertainment it is surely to tie into Windows 8 even more than it ties into VISTA today. As such I can see Microsoft moving games to whatever you use for a storage array. This adds many options to what the Xbox3 could be.

Here are my thoughts. Low cost option -- Xbox Xtender. No drives on the machine simply plays games from your Windows 8 storage server. Your old 360 games would rip from whatever DVD you have in your house and push itself to the strorage server to be played on any device. A medium cost option would be a 360 like console. This would allow homes that want just 1 item for entertainment and not the complexities of a home infrastructure and isn't user expandable but does retain the connectivity and extensions of the low cost option. The higher cost option would be an Xbox Server. It would be the server component for your home. It records TV and is hardware expandable w/ external arrays and other devices.

@BrianK

Quote:

Here are my thoughts. Low cost option -- Xbox Xtender. No drives on the machine simply plays games from your Windows 8 storage server.

Interesting ideas!

I agree that an optical drive in some form will be available for "Xbox 720", but as I outlined above it might not need be standard - it could be accessory for those who want to use optical media.

I'd think the standard "Xbox 720" would include one or two memory card slots, some built-in flash memory for basic operation and then connectivity to add hard- and optical drives. Your idea of connectivity to Windows 8 storage is interesting and could fit well with this theory.

Quote:

Your old 360 games would rip from whatever DVD you have in your house and push itself to the strorage server to be played on any device.

Xbox 360 games might also work a bit like CDs do on the MacBook AIr - you have them on a remote machine and you can access them from your driveless system. This could be one option at least.

There are nowadays many more standard storage options for consoles than just optical discs. A combination of networked data access, memory cards, built-in flash memory, hard-drives (internal and external), optional optical drives etc. could introduce a host of options beyond a primary standard optical drive for console gaming. It is just data. Provided that Microsoft/publishers would be satisfied with their DRM to protect the games that would no longer sit on only one kind of physical media.

@jtsiren

Quote:

I predict "Xbox 720" will not include a optical drive as standard, instead will rely on a combination of online and memory card distribution of software.

Yes I heard such predictions before, high capacity memory cards do cost a lot more to produce than disc media. High definition games will get even more demanding (1080p assets, lossless 7.1+ audio).

With a lot of focus on online distribution there are some considerations:

- For a near online-only console, the approach of not coming with online multi-player functionality out of the box is IMO awful.
- No or reduced retail software sales, would mean profit margins on the actual consoles themselves have to improve a lot for retailers and would cut out a lot of retailer advertising and shelf space.
- You are basically cutting out a very significant amount of gamers who aren't online or have too slow or unstable connections.
- A much bigger storage capacity harddrive would be needed.
- No direct backwards compatibility for playing legacy CD/DVD/VCD/HDDVD/etc based content. No industry standard Blu-Ray movie compatibility.

Benefits:
- Console can be smaller and cheaper to build.
- Disc scratching issues of the 360 will be a thing of the past.
- The awful 360 noise generation will be a thing of the past.
- Higher profit margins for developers by cutting out the retailer middle-man.

Surely you think of a few yourselves to come to more balanced conclusions.

Last edited by MikeB on 23-Dec-2008 at 09:12 AM.
Last edited by MikeB on 23-Dec-2008 at 09:09 AM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Surely you think of a few yourselves to come to more balanced conclusions.

My prediction covered many of those points with the optional optical drive (which would cover audio and video formats as necessary for media station use) and combination of online, loading station and optional/pricier memory card boxed games distribution (which would cover many of the issues with non-optical distribution you mentioned).

Sure there would be complications and I was wondering out loud if my prediction is a generation (or two?) too early (may well be), but I think it has some merit - at least it did address many of the problems you listed.

It might happen.

It may not happen, of course. But I am not predicting it out of some dislike towards Blu-ray, just trying to balance Microsoft's lack of interest in optical media in general, potential dislike towards the idea of paying Sony royalties for Blu-ray and the general market forces trying to move away from optical.

Latest news show that although Sony are still making a loss on each console sold it has been significantly reduced from what it was 2 years ago.

Some people are predicting that Sony could break even on the Hardware in 2009 which could lead to a reduction in the cost of the system to the consumer

Link:

PS3 looses less for Sony

_________________
Live Long and keep Amigaing!

A1200, Power Tower, TF1260 128MB RAM, 68060 Rev 6, OS3.9 BB2, HD-Floppy, Mediator TX+ PCI, Voodoo 3 3000, Soundblaster 4.1, TV Card, Spider USB, 100MBit Ethernet, 16GB CF HD, 52xCDRom.