Blu-Ray may very likely have greater market penetration

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: magomago
You guys need to really wake up on this one. A LOT of the people I know who have a PS2 use it to play DVDs and play games. Games get played more for sure, but it gets a good exerscise as a DVD player. I never bothered with DVDs until I DID get my Ps2 simply because I had no need for DVDS....but once the ps2 provided the option I found myself getting more attached to them. All this BS about how no one will use it to play movies simply isn't true. If anything I would think tge only case where most people don't play any DVDs are the Xbox because people are too lazy to get that adapter (i don't think cost matters that much, its only 20 bucks now)-- the Ps2 does it built in.

Technology pushes people to get better technology. Once people get PS3s and Xbox2s and they see how much better it does look on HDTV, it will propel them to get 720p or 1080i/p sets.

edit:

pointing out though that the estimation of 65K HD players in Oct06 vs 500K Blue Ray being infused into the market really puts things into perspective

But the ps3 doesnt do blu-ray in HD out of the box. You have to buy an HDMI cable, which costs a pretty penny (more than that xbox remote), and have a tv that supports it. Studios are holding off on downrezzing non-HDCP connections, but its only a matter of time before they start that stupidity up again.

The only perspective 500k blu-ray drives puts into the market is a bullet point on a marketing presentation. Theres no way to determine actual numbers at this point, but I'd say theres a very fair bet than many, if not most of those ps3's will never see a BD movie touch their drives due to lack of HDTV or HDCP.

 

[konakona]

Sony will release their standalone BD players as well, and they stated PS3 BD movie playback will be worse, presumably for a good reason. Again, not that average joe might care. But once the standalone player manufacturers and BB/CC salesmen get their marketting groove on, things could change somewhat.

 

[0roo0roo]

yea its bs, gamers are mostly young guys, limited spending cash. money spent on game > spent on films for them. never mind the fact that buying the films would be not only expensive but a format gamble. i doubt its going to make a big difference.

You guys need to really wake up on this one. A LOT of the people I know who have a PS2 use it to play DVDs and play games.

i know almost no one that did this. if you are that poor i doubt you can afford much dvd spending anyways. pirating whores are basically irrelevant in this kinda thing. everyones got a dvd players these days, one per tv in mulitple rooms even. once players get to a reasonable price no one will even consider a console for playing video.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
yea its bs, gamers are mostly young guys, limited spending cash. money spent on game > spent on films for them. never mind the fact that buying the films would be not only expensive but a format gamble. i doubt its going to make a big difference.

Actually, the average gamer is now in the range of 26-31 I believe. So based on that range, I would say the average gamer is single, established in a career, and with plenty of disposable income,

 

[0roo0roo]

i highly doubt the average is 26-31. consoles have gotten more wide spread in recent years so it should be heavily weighted towards the bottom end. and i know there is gaming drop off as these gamers age, so whether theystill have the enthusiasm to jump in on launch day and such things in large numbers is a bit different from just being counted as a gamer to push up an average. you know how they push up female gaming numbers by expanding the definition of gaming to include everything from solitair to webpage games funny numbers.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i highly doubt the average is 26-31. consoles have gotten more wide spread in recent years so it should be heavily weighted towards the bottom end. and i know there is gaming drop off as these gamers age, so whether theystill have the enthusiasm to jump in on launch day and such things in large numbers is a bit different from just being counted as a gamer to push up an average. you know how they push up female gaming numbers by expanding the definition of gaming to include everything from solitair to webpage games funny numbers.

Heh...as I was standing in line for the PS3 preorder the other day, two mid-20 year olds that do tech work for a cell phone company stood in line playing their Nintendo DSs. Had another guy in his late 20s show up with his one to two-year old baby. A big fanboy in his early 30s with a "Videogames Live" shirt showed up with his big girlfriend. And had an indistinguished mid 20s guy showup as well.

Out of the 10 people that stood inline for preorders, only two were parents there placing orders for their kids...one of those two was placing an order for his 17-year old son.

 

[randay]

A 500 dollar BD player that also plays games? yes please.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i highly doubt the average is 26-31. consoles have gotten more wide spread in recent years so it should be heavily weighted towards the bottom end. and i know there is gaming drop off as these gamers age, so whether theystill have the enthusiasm to jump in on launch day and such things in large numbers is a bit different from just being counted as a gamer to push up an average. you know how they push up female gaming numbers by expanding the definition of gaming to include everything from solitair to webpage games funny numbers.

Heh...as I was standing in line for the PS3 preorder the other day, two mid-20 year olds that do tech work for a cell phone company stood in line playing their Nintendo DSs. Had another guy in his late 20s show up with his one to two-year old baby. A big fanboy in his early 30s with a "Videogames Live" shirt showed up with his big girlfriend. And had an indistinguished mid 20s guy showup as well.

Out of the 10 people that stood inline for preorders, only two were parents there placing orders for their kids...one of those two was placing an order for his 17-year old son.

yea well but its preorders, the true hardcore gamers. like people that line up to see starwars not entirely representative of wider reality

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i highly doubt the average is 26-31. consoles have gotten more wide spread in recent years so it should be heavily weighted towards the bottom end. and i know there is gaming drop off as these gamers age, so whether theystill have the enthusiasm to jump in on launch day and such things in large numbers is a bit different from just being counted as a gamer to push up an average. you know how they push up female gaming numbers by expanding the definition of gaming to include everything from solitair to webpage games funny numbers.

Heh...as I was standing in line for the PS3 preorder the other day, two mid-20 year olds that do tech work for a cell phone company stood in line playing their Nintendo DSs. Had another guy in his late 20s show up with his one to two-year old baby. A big fanboy in his early 30s with a "Videogames Live" shirt showed up with his big girlfriend. And had an indistinguished mid 20s guy showup as well.

Out of the 10 people that stood inline for preorders, only two were parents there placing orders for their kids...one of those two was placing an order for his 17-year old son.

yea well but its preorders, the true hardcore gamers. like people that line up to see starwars not entirely representative of wider reality

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-05-12-gamer-demographics_x.htm

A survey compiled by the Entertainment Software Association and released at E3, the video game industry's major trade show in Los Angeles, found that a slight majority of video game players are now over 18 years of age.

In fact, the average age of game players was 29 and the average age of buyers was 36, with men making up 59% of the playing audience.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/top_10_facts.php

3. The average game player is 33 years old and has been playing games for 12 years.

4. The average age of the most frequent game buyer is 40 years old. In 2006, 93 percent of computer game buyers and 83 percent of console game buyers were over the age of 18.

 

[abaez]

500k.. "market penetration"???.. what is that like less than a quarter of a percent of all the video players on the market right now? 500k is not even a blip in the radar.

 

[j00fek]

Originally posted by: Sphexi
How many of those PS3 owners are going to run out and blow $25 on BluRay movies though? Pretty sure it'll be a small number, since most are buying it for the games.

Still, could be the boost Sony needs to keep BluRay alive for a little while longer.

:thumbsup:

 

[Bateluer]

In a year, we'll all be singing the praises of Hybrid drives/players, while trashing HD-DVD/BluRay devices.

Personally, I have a great need for BluRay's superior storage compared to HD-DVD, but its too dang expensive for the time being.

Also, the time will come when all optical drives will be using blue lasers. BluRay is more revolutionary, HD-DVD is more evolutionary. Both have the inherent ups and downs normally associated with each.

 

[jtvang125]

Originally posted by: abaez
500k.. "market penetration"???.. what is that like less than a quarter of a percent of all the video players on the market right now? 500k is not even a blip in the radar.

Why are you comparing it to all the video players? I was comparing it to only HDDVD which are the two competing formats right now. Therefore considering HDDVD being out quite some time before BR the estimated number of HDDVD players sold so far is only 65,000 units. If all the initial 500,000 ps3 gets sold via preorders, which they probably are, then that's a huge jump ahead of the number of hddvd units sold. The hddvd add on for the x360 would have to be pretty damn successful to catch up.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
In a year, we'll all be singing the praises of Hybrid drives/players, while trashing HD-DVD/BluRay devices.

Personally, I have a great need for BluRay's superior storage compared to HD-DVD, but its too dang expensive for the time being.

Also, the time will come when all optical drives will be using blue lasers. BluRay is more revolutionary, HD-DVD is more evolutionary. Both have the inherent ups and downs normally associated with each.

I don't think either can be called revolutionary... that should be reserved for a tech like HVD.

As to the main topic, there is no doubt that the PS3 will help get more Blu-Ray players into homes, but I'm not sure how significant it will be to the HD-DVD vs BR war. For one, a significant portion of those are going to wind up on non-HD TVs anyway, so the Blu-Ray player, from a movie standpoint, is worthless. Then some of those that do wind up on HD systems won't be used for movies anyway. There will be a lot people that buy the system just to play games (imagine that!).

I'm not getting a PS3 at launch anyway, but I personally would probably be waiting till stand alone players, preferably dual format, come down in price anyway. If the past is any indication, the PS3 may not even have video quality that is as good as the stand alone players. I also don't plan to use my 360 for an HD-DVD player when the add-on launches. For one, the 360 itself is just too damned loud to be used as a movie player.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
In a year, we'll all be singing the praises of Hybrid drives/players, while trashing HD-DVD/BluRay devices.

Personally, I have a great need for BluRay's superior storage compared to HD-DVD, but its too dang expensive for the time being.

Also, the time will come when all optical drives will be using blue lasers. BluRay is more revolutionary, HD-DVD is more evolutionary. Both have the inherent ups and downs normally associated with each.

when they have a hybrid on the market (for a good price. say $250) i will buy it. until then i will wait until everything cools down a good deal.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: magomago
You guys need to really wake up on this one. A LOT of the people I know who have a PS2 use it to play DVDs and play games. Games get played more for sure, but it gets a good exerscise as a DVD player. I never bothered with DVDs until I DID get my Ps2 simply because I had no need for DVDS....but once the ps2 provided the option I found myself getting more attached to them. All this BS about how no one will use it to play movies simply isn't true. If anything I would think tge only case where most people don't play any DVDs are the Xbox because people are too lazy to get that adapter (i don't think cost matters that much, its only 20 bucks now)-- the Ps2 does it built in.

Technology pushes people to get better technology. Once people get PS3s and Xbox2s and they see how much better it does look on HDTV, it will propel them to get 720p or 1080i/p sets.

edit:

pointing out though that the estimation of 65K HD players in Oct06 vs 500K Blue Ray being infused into the market really puts things into perspective

there's a flaw in your argument. DVD's are a hell of a lot better than VHS tapes. your current DVD's will play in PS3's, there's no incentive to buy bluray movies yet, unless you have cash and a decent HD setup. And as of right now, it's a pretty slim market for that.

You're going to get quite a few people who use a standard composite cable, on a standard tv.. who might give bluray a try, and find it worthless since they don't have what makes HD worth buying.

Altho, on the same note, you might get folks who buy bluray because they don't realize it's backwards compatible...

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: j00fek

Originally posted by: Sphexi
How many of those PS3 owners are going to run out and blow $25 on BluRay movies though? Pretty sure it'll be a small number, since most are buying it for the games.

Still, could be the boost Sony needs to keep BluRay alive for a little while longer.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsdown:
What games?

 

[jtvang125]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: Bateluer
In a year, we'll all be singing the praises of Hybrid drives/players, while trashing HD-DVD/BluRay devices.

Personally, I have a great need for BluRay's superior storage compared to HD-DVD, but its too dang expensive for the time being.

Also, the time will come when all optical drives will be using blue lasers. BluRay is more revolutionary, HD-DVD is more evolutionary. Both have the inherent ups and downs normally associated with each.

I don't think either can be called revolutionary... that should be reserved for a tech like HVD.

As to the main topic, there is no doubt that the PS3 will help get more Blu-Ray players into homes, but I'm not sure how significant it will be to the HD-DVD vs BR war. For one, a significant portion of those are going to wind up on non-HD TVs anyway, so the Blu-Ray player, from a movie standpoint, is worthless. Then some of those that do wind up on HD systems won't be used for movies anyway. There will be a lot people that buy the system just to play games (imagine that!).

I'm not getting a PS3 at launch anyway, but I personally would probably be waiting till stand alone players, preferably dual format, come down in price anyway. If the past is any indication, the PS3 may not even have video quality that is as good as the stand alone players. I also don't plan to use my 360 for an HD-DVD player when the add-on launches. For one, the 360 itself is just too damned loud to be used as a movie player.

I dont own a x360 but I've heard the majority of the noise from it is from the built in dvd drive spinning. If this is true then it wouldn't matter because the addon drive will be spinning instead of the internal one and hopefully the add on drive is a lot quieter.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: jtvang125
I dont own a x360 but I've heard the majority of the noise from it is from the built in dvd drive spinning. If this is true then it wouldn't matter because the addon drive will be spinning instead of the internal one and hopefully the add on drive is a lot quieter.

That's true, it's much louder when the drive spins. And apparently some of the drives are much quieter than others, but I must have one of the loud ones

But even without the drive spinning it's still pretty loud. I'd say it's louder without the drive spinning than the original XBox with the drive spinning. Too loud, IMO. I must have things as quiet as possible when I'm watching movies. I'm less anal about background noise with games though.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: jtvang125
I dont own a x360 but I've heard the majority of the noise from it is from the built in dvd drive spinning. If this is true then it wouldn't matter because the addon drive will be spinning instead of the internal one and hopefully the add on drive is a lot quieter.

That's true, it's much louder when the drive spins. And apparently some of the drives are much quieter than others, but I must have one of the loud ones

But even without the drive spinning it's still pretty loud. I'd say it's louder without the drive spinning than the original XBox with the drive spinning. Too loud, IMO. I must have things as quiet as possible when I'm watching movies. I'm less anal about background noise with games though.

I'm hoping my 360 dies around the time that the die shrink comes out next year. Warranty should have it replaced with the cooler (and hopefully quieter version).