Paramount's going HD-DVD Exclusive

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: Queasy
Neither side has to win. Someone just needs to come out with affordable dual-format players and the debate will be as academic as DVD+R vs DVD-R.

And you think someone will pay $35 for a movie when they can buy the wal-mart $12 DVD?

Heck no! The medium itself is way overpriced... still.

 

[oogabooga]

I've only bought simpsons seasons for the last two years on dvd.

I went from 1-2 dvd's a month to 0. No high format either, simply cause I'm waiting to see a winner before adding to a collection that's going to need to be replaced. I'm sure I don't represent a large part of the population, but I'm sure there are other people simply holding off on buying movies until you know.. they know what format is going to 'win'.

Also:

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Wow. Transformers is a huge title for the home theatre market.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of PS3 owners suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

This post made me laugh and I don't feel it was quoted enough, since it wasn't at all. So uh, here it is.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: destrekor
I was hoping all these successes for BD were going to kill HD-DVD once and for all. It's not just because I have a BD player (PS3), its because its better for the market. Once a single format stands alone, eventually the prices will fall and all movies will be available, and then adoption rate would sky-rocket.

If anything, the battle between HD DVD and Blu-Ray has driven stand-alone player prices down faster.

 

[DaveSimmons]

The 300 HD-DVD cost $10 extra and was outsold 2-1 by the blu-ray version.

FYI, it looks like this decsion was made because of $150 million in incentives from Microsoft:
The Digital Bits - My 2 cents (8/20)

The president of Universal also admits MS is paying them:
Hollywood Hi-Def interview
"Universal president Craig Kornblau told me this week that the studio actually wants the format war to continue.
He also said Universal is getting financial incentives to create exclusive HD DVD features such as the Xbox Live component for the upcoming "Heroes" release.
"I?m not going to tell you that we don?t cut financial deals with people every day," he says."

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: destrekor
I was hoping all these successes for BD were going to kill HD-DVD once and for all. It's not just because I have a BD player (PS3), its because its better for the market. Once a single format stands alone, eventually the prices will fall and all movies will be available, and then adoption rate would sky-rocket.

If anything, the battle between HD DVD and Blu-Ray has driven stand-alone player prices down faster.

which is a great thing, but its the only thing the battle is doing.
but the same thing would happen if only one format was around. It may take a little longer, but it would be due to lack of sales.

it would be like this. Imagine HD-DVD died, and only Blu-ray survived. Well, you may or may not have a surge in BD sales following the demise of HD-DVD, but BD sales wouldn't necessarily sky-rocket following the fall of its rival. Even with only one HD format, sales would continue to be slow compared to DVD due to the slow growth of HD owners, because eventually everyone that truly wants one for the current prices, will already have one by time a format is declared king (except some people will own a player for the deceased format). So, due to slow sales, price cuts would likely begin to take place to encourage sales at the retail level.
It may be slower, but it would eventually happen. You'd see players, like DVD, reach the $150 and below mark and sales would surge like crazy. Technically, sales should surge when they hit the $300 mark, but that's already happened and HD-DVD isn't making good with its new found happy price.

 

[magomago]

i'd prefer BR over HD-DVD

but in all reality

i think they will probably co-exist - once you sell several million units you really can't abandon those people...can you?

 

[Adul]

gf and I will just have both. We only got the BD player, next will be a HD DVD player.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Queasy
I believe the MSRP on Blu-Ray is typically higher than HD DVD. But stores price things differently so you'll see them at different pricing levels. The HD DVD version of 300 has the DVD version on it as well though. That usually moves the price of the HD DVD version of a movie higher than the Blu-Ray version.

This is also a major reason why HD will probably win. People are holding off for the war to end and they also shudder at the thought of replacing large DVD collections. Buying a disk which allows them to continue increasing their collection and possibly use the HD version later is a very good reason for them to spend the extra $10. If they don't feel the $10 is worth it, then they will probably just buy a regular DVD anyways because they don't care. To my knowledge, having both on the same disk is relatively new which is another reason why I am not relying on statistics much yet.

I don't know about you, but I cannot see anyone in their right mind, who doesn't have a HD-DVD player and only has a DVD player, buy the HD-DVD version of 300 for $35 instead of the $20 DVD version.

In theory it sounds good, but when it comes to real world application, it just isn't going to happen.

It's one of those features that sounds good on paper but when it's put into practice, it just does not make much sense for someone to do it.

And me personally, I do not like double sided discs.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: Ctrackstar126

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I haven't been following this format war because I hate these things, but I am guessing that HD will win simply because Microsoft has so much money and power to shift the market a certain direction. The difference in sales between the 360 and PS3 alone will make a big difference here.

I'd be willing to guess that Sony has just as much money to sink into hi def content.

Sony slightly outpaces Microsoft in revenue, but Microsoft makes much, much more profit each year.(about 16.6x more according to wikipedia)

 

[PricklyPete]

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: Queasy
Neither side has to win. Someone just needs to come out with affordable dual-format players and the debate will be as academic as DVD+R vs DVD-R.

And you think someone will pay $35 for a movie when they can buy the wal-mart $12 DVD?

Heck no! The medium itself is way overpriced... still.

I agree. I get a kick out of people who complain that $50-60 is too expensive for a video game that keeps them entertained anywhere from 6-70hours (maybe even more with multiplayer), but they have no problem paying $20-35 for a 2 hour movie. Just cracks me up.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Adul
gf and I will just have both. We only got the BD player, next will be a HD DVD player.

Agreed. Toshiba's new HD-DVD players will come out in October, so I'll pick one up then.

The HD-DVD drive for the XBOX 360 doesn't make much sense unless you have an HTPC. I couldn't stand having my noisy XBOX 360 running during a movie. No analog output either for uncompressed PCM.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: purbeast0

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Queasy
I believe the MSRP on Blu-Ray is typically higher than HD DVD. But stores price things differently so you'll see them at different pricing levels. The HD DVD version of 300 has the DVD version on it as well though. That usually moves the price of the HD DVD version of a movie higher than the Blu-Ray version.

This is also a major reason why HD will probably win. People are holding off for the war to end and they also shudder at the thought of replacing large DVD collections. Buying a disk which allows them to continue increasing their collection and possibly use the HD version later is a very good reason for them to spend the extra $10. If they don't feel the $10 is worth it, then they will probably just buy a regular DVD anyways because they don't care. To my knowledge, having both on the same disk is relatively new which is another reason why I am not relying on statistics much yet.

I don't know about you, but I cannot see anyone in their right mind, who doesn't have a HD-DVD player and only has a DVD player, buy the HD-DVD version of 300 for $35 instead of the $20 DVD version.

In theory it sounds good, but when it comes to real world application, it just isn't going to happen.

It's one of those features that sounds good on paper but when it's put into practice, it just does not make much sense for someone to do it.

And me personally, I do not like double sided discs.

I agree with you there. I *might* buy it if I thought HD-DVD was likely to win. But by the time I buy an HD-DVD player and even consider buying the movies, the discs would have to be $20 apiece. $15 for a release week DVD + $20 for a HD-DVD/BD sometime down the line = the $35 you'd pay for both in the same package.

Side note: I don't even buy DVD movies anymore, I only rent because I don't rewatch movies often enough to justify buying. I only buy TV show seasons on DVD... I must have around 75 seasons of various shows by now. Those I rewatch all the time.

 

[Tifababy]

Originally posted by: purbeast0

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Queasy
I believe the MSRP on Blu-Ray is typically higher than HD DVD. But stores price things differently so you'll see them at different pricing levels. The HD DVD version of 300 has the DVD version on it as well though. That usually moves the price of the HD DVD version of a movie higher than the Blu-Ray version.

This is also a major reason why HD will probably win. People are holding off for the war to end and they also shudder at the thought of replacing large DVD collections. Buying a disk which allows them to continue increasing their collection and possibly use the HD version later is a very good reason for them to spend the extra $10. If they don't feel the $10 is worth it, then they will probably just buy a regular DVD anyways because they don't care. To my knowledge, having both on the same disk is relatively new which is another reason why I am not relying on statistics much yet.

I don't know about you, but I cannot see anyone in their right mind, who doesn't have a HD-DVD player and only has a DVD player, buy the HD-DVD version of 300 for $35 instead of the $20 DVD version.

In theory it sounds good, but when it comes to real world application, it just isn't going to happen.

It's one of those features that sounds good on paper but when it's put into practice, it just does not make much sense for someone to do it.

And me personally, I do not like double sided discs.

I bought the HD-DVD version of 300 and while I'll probably never use the SD side, if my parents or neighbors wanted to borrow the movie, they could watch the SD side since they don't have HD-DVD players. Or if I wanted to watch it on a plane ride, I could put it in my laptop and watch it. It's not something I'll use very often, but it's nice to have.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: mugs
I don't even buy DVD movies anymore, I only rent because I don't rewatch movies often enough to justify buying.

I don't know how much you pay for rentals, but buying previously viewed DVDs at rental chains is ridiculously cheap nowadays.

With various promotions, trade-in deals, etc., the cost per movie is usually between $2-$4. Yesterday I picked up 16 Blocks, Good Night And Good Luck, and Inside Man for $2.18 each. None had scratches (and you can always exchange scratched discs for another copy).

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Originally posted by: dainthomas
Which format (if either) do pr0n studios use?

Wicked Pictures, Pink Visual, Bang Bros., Digital Playground, and Vivid Entertainment support HD DVD and only Vivid supports Blu-ray.

Gizmodo

 

[mzkhadir]

Dreamworks has gone the same way

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: mzkhadir
Dreamworks has gone the same way

that's a given since Paramount and Dreamworks are one in the same, essentially.

Cannot wait for the Spielburg movies, thankfully they are non-exclusive, regardless of the two production companies being exclusive to HD-DVD.

 

[tfinch2]

Hmm, this could have a huge impact this holiday season. If the HD-A3 comes out, pushing the HD-A2 in the $150 range, this could be the hot item of the Christmas season. A month of dynamite sales for either side could make what has happened so far irrelevant since DVD sales are still beating both like a fucking drum.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
The 300 HD-DVD cost $10 extra and was outsold 2-1 by the blu-ray version.

FYI, it looks like this decsion was made because of $150 million in incentives from Microsoft:
The Digital Bits - My 2 cents (8/20)

The president of Universal also admits MS is paying them:
Hollywood Hi-Def interview
"Universal president Craig Kornblau told me this week that the studio actually wants the format war to continue.
He also said Universal is getting financial incentives to create exclusive HD DVD features such as the Xbox Live component for the upcoming "Heroes" release.
"I?m not going to tell you that we don?t cut financial deals with people every day," he says."

The Blu-Ray consortium cut similar deals with its group of exclusive studios (Sony Studios excluded of course).

 

[Tarrant64]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Ctrackstar126

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I haven't been following this format war because I hate these things, but I am guessing that HD will win simply because Microsoft has so much money and power to shift the market a certain direction. The difference in sales between the 360 and PS3 alone will make a big difference here.

I'd be willing to guess that Sony has just as much money to sink into hi def content.

Sony slightly outpaces Microsoft in revenue, but Microsoft makes much, much more profit each year.(about 16.6x more according to wikipedia)

Agreed. I think there is poor judgement in those thinking the PS3 is the end for Sony. Sony has been around long enough not to drown over an entertainment console. They have money to push when shoved as well.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Bluray isn't going anywhere. As much as I despise Sony, they've actually put out a quality product in the PS3. Once Bluray gets the 1.1 spec out of the way and studios start doing high-quality encodings (which they are now) there will be little difference between the two formats. My only beef is the price, $29.99 for a movie is insane.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: theprodigalrebel

Originally posted by: dainthomas
Which format (if either) do pr0n studios use?

Wicked Pictures, Pink Visual, Bang Bros., Digital Playground, and Vivid Entertainment support HD DVD and only Vivid supports Blu-ray.

Gizmodo

Well then, there's the answer. Looks like Sony will somehow manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again!

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
The 300 HD-DVD cost $10 extra and was outsold 2-1 by the blu-ray version.

FYI, it looks like this decsion was made because of $150 million in incentives from Microsoft:
The Digital Bits - My 2 cents (8/20)

The president of Universal also admits MS is paying them:
Hollywood Hi-Def interview
"Universal president Craig Kornblau told me this week that the studio actually wants the format war to continue.
He also said Universal is getting financial incentives to create exclusive HD DVD features such as the Xbox Live component for the upcoming "Heroes" release.
"I?m not going to tell you that we don?t cut financial deals with people every day," he says."

The Blu-Ray consortium cut similar deals with its group of exclusive studios (Sony Studios excluded of course).

That wouldn't surprise me, though any deals were probably much less generous than $50 and $100 million.

If Blu-ray has paid off anyone recently, they're be paying studios to give up 1/3 of their market, while MS is allegedly paying studios to back the losing format and give up 2/3 of potential sales.

It's the opposite of the console wars where MS pays take-two and others to say no to the PS3. The $50 million for exclusive GTA IV DLC was to favor the platform that was already going to generate 2/3 - 3/4 of the money anyway.

 

[Rob9874]

Isn't this a futile war anyway, when by the time it's settled, hard media will be dead anyway. How long before soft files become the standard, either streaming or saved to flash, much like the ipod has done for music? I haven't bought a CD in years, and could care less if they released a "better" CD format. I'm done with storing and carrying CDs. Why should it be any different with DVDs?

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Isn't this a futile war anyway, when by the time it's settled, hard media will be dead anyway. How long before soft files become the standard, either streaming or saved to flash, much like the ipod has done for music? I haven't bought a CD in years, and could care less if they released a "better" CD format. I'm done with storing and carrying CDs. Why should it be any different with DVDs?

Exactly why MS (allegedly) doesn't want blu-ray to win too soon. MS is in the video downloads business and is trying to get xbox content-delivery systems into as many homes as possible.

It will be too bad if they succeed since their HD movies are medium-bitrate 720p with medium-quality audio instead of the high-bitrate audio and 1080p video of both HD-DVD and blu-ray.

Their downloads also are almost all missing subtitiles, so if you like foreign films, enjoy the dubby goodness.