Blu-ray takes lead in the war for your sitting room

Manufacturers and Hollywood studios have been pushing two different formats, and consumer confusion reigns. Sony is leading the fight for Blu-ray DVD players, so-called because they use a blue laser instead of the red beam in standard players. Toshiba and Microsoft are among the big names promoting HD DVD.

Since the first high definition players began appearing last year, the battle for hearts and wallets has been on a level. Last week, however, video rental group Blockbuster tipped the scales in Sony's favour.

[Blasphemy]

That information is only stating what Sony said back in May that they have shipped 5.5 million PS3s..

[nix]

it's just like 360 "sold" 12 millions...

if it is true then hey! who's complaining...? q:

EDIT: @Jenzo (below):

yup.. dude, you could be right.

[InMyOpinion]

I think they mean Blu-Ray players sold totally, not just counting PS3's...

[FordGTGuy]

this means that they usually count shipped as sales because they get paid for all the ones shipped because the retailers that sell them buy them from Microsoft and Sony.

For Example.
Microsoft sells Xbox 360 to retailer for 350$(guess) then the retailer sells Xbox 360 for 400$.

[ImWithStupid]

Phil Harrison in his latest interview said they are "very pleased" with how the console is selling. Sounds like alot of these "sales numbers" sites are lying out right out of their ass.

Playstation is an extremely strong name which has been subjected to the widest most well coordinated smear campaign in the history of gaming.

[FordGTGuy]

is that why there are stacks of them in every gaming store now?

[ImWithStupid]

and that is your evidence that they aren't selling??

one could easily turn around and say that Sony has resolved their production and supply issues. They shipped 5.5 million at the end of march and it is now 3 months later. What's so hard to believe??

does the notion of the PS3 selling well scare the crap out of yur inner xbot?

[Violater]

I have been around and seen piles of both 360 and ps3, usually smack dab as you enter the store, "sh!t I said are they giving them away" Its just store marketing strategy.
But yes the PS3 isn't selling as much.

[_insane_cobra]

Next time try Google before posting a question/trolling attempt as news on N4G, this is getting silly...

[FordGTGuy]

Last time I checked when something doesn't sell it usually stacks up. BTW I have a personal friend that works at Gamestop and his told me that they haven't sold a PS3 in a month. My other personal friend down in Miami saw over 40 PS3's hiding behind the counter in a BestBuy. They kept two in the front to make it look like they were in limited supply.

Actually the more Sony sells the better because the better the competition the more it works out for the consumer in the end.

BTW i'm the 12yo yet you typed this?
"does the notion of the PS3 selling well scare the crap out of yur inner xbot?"

@achira
I said my personal friends not random people.

[achira]

bla bla bla, and the cousin of my taunt which is married with bush, who works by ebay games, told me they have sold only one xbox360 for the whole year.

[gaffyh]

I heard last week I think 1.5 Million sold in US, 1 Million in EU and lets just say around 1.5 million (cuz I'm not sure) in Japan and other territories. That would make 4 Million sold, which is quite a lot still

[Bloodmask]

If they aren't selling well they will pile up and retailers won't order more until the sales pick up.

Sony has just priced itself too high this generation. Most of the people that bought PS2 was when it came down to the $200 dollar range. Even if Sony lowers it's price to $499 I don't see sales spiking dramaticly.

[paracardium]

$600 really alot of money for people? I had no problems spending it for what in the box its a good deal.

[genix13]

I somewhat agree, because for me spending the $600 for a console seemed rather steep when I got it. Now, after the subsequent updates and learning how to get the most out of it I think that $600 could be too little a price for what I got. Overall I agree with you that this is a far shot from being too expensive.

[jerrell]

I just got my PS3 3 Weeks ago and I must say that for the $500 dollars I spent on my 60gb PS3 (due to trading all my PS2 equipment), I am very very happy with the turn around and can play my PS2 games in a higher resolution and watch DVD'S upscaled. I must say that the DVD upscaling is insanely good! Btter than any one I would of bought otherwise and then I have BLU-RAY to boot. 1080p never looked so good on my 50inch Sony SXRD. $600 dollars in my opinion may be too lttle. When I got the 1.8 update and when I saw my music off my computer pop up on my PS3, I almost flipped a lid to see it being streamed like that! Amazing machine and I think the price is right.

[Bhai]

Blu-Ray will definitely be winning..or has won. The announcement is a
matter of time. If people try to shut Blu-Ray down, they'll just make
it special and a collector's item for owners of PS3s...resulting in
multitudes of PS3 owners to buy several movies as well, even those who
might had never thought of buying movies for PS3...this means millions.
PS3 will definitely be winning the gaming hardware race, and with it,
the Blu-Ray !!!

[pshizle]

ps3 is the next dreamcast its a only matter of time

there are what 20,000 ps3s sold a month =0

bluray picture quality is not as good as HD DVD its been proven and...

i dont know why people would support a inferior format unless they are a sony droid

im guessing the reason why bluray is winning because the ps3 has no games and thats a fact...

[DJ]

30GB is better than 50GB, and MPEG-4 is better than MPEG-4. Wait! That doesn't make any sense. Hmmm, looks like someone's a little brainwashed.

[pshizle]

hd dvd does not use mpeg 4 it uses VC-1 which is why it has better picture =0

[blackmagic]

Actually, both formats have VC-1 and H.264 (AVC) codecs available to them and both of those codecs are Mpeg4 variants.

To DJ above(12.1), 30 gb is enough space for a little over 4 hours of 1080p video encoded in either VC-1 or H.264. 50 gb is required if you are going to achieve the same quality using mpeg 2. If a publisher decides to use VC-1 or H.264 then they can easily fit the movie onto a single layer BD which is cheaper to manufacture. If they use Mpeg2 then they need to publish a dual layer BD to achieve the same quality which is more expensive to print but mastering in Mpeg2 is cheaper and easier for the studios, especially Sony who owns most of the royalty rights for the Mpeg 2 codec.

A good chunk of the back catalogue titles that have come out of Sony (which includes MGM, Columbia and Tristar) have been single layer BDs using Mpeg 2 encoding, a cost cutting move which horribly undermines picture quality and has even bitten Sony with their cult classic 'Fifth Element' fiasco. Sony continues to release single-layer Mpeg 2 BDs though (Edit: clarification - back catalogue titles).

A properly mastered HD-DVD (without film grain tech) and Blu-ray should be indestinquishable in terms of picture quality but if the publisher decides to take advantage of the Thomson's Film Grain Technology for HD-DVD then the picture quality difference is in favour of HD-DVD especially on a large screen, native 1080 display.

[Bordel_1900]

Blu-ray uses both Mpeg-2, AVC Mpeg-4 and VC-1.
HD-DVD uses both AVC and VC-1.

Picture quality is just as good on AVC but can take more space on the disc. This is no problem on Blu-ray when you have 50GB to take from. Also the video/audio bitrate that Blu-ray supports is higher than the max bitrate for HD-DVD. For Blu-ray it's 54.0Mbps, for HD-DVD it's 36.55Mbps. Potentially Blu-ray will give you the best audio and picture. (Uncompressed PCM sound at constant 6.2Mbps, where HD-DVD has a max bitrate at 1.3Mbps).

Most new Blu-ray movies are encoded in VC-1 and AVC anyway.

[blackmagic]

It's true that Blu-ray has 50gb of space and a 54mbps transfer rate but these are required to support an mpeg2+pcm bitstream. A bd player doesn't have the processing power to decode an mpeg4 based 54mbit stream nor does it need to with the average 2 hour movie only taking up about 13-15 GB when using VC-1 or H.264 codecs.

Why publish a more expensive to manufacture 2 layer mpeg 2 based BD when you can master VC-1 or H2.64 and get the same quality on a cheaper single layer BD (which means more profit)? It only makes financial sense for Sony to use mpeg2 due to their unique position of owning many of the technology patents for mpeg2 (ie limited licensing fees to use mpeg2).

[peksi]

takes a LOT more space, especially if/when you start using Dolby TrueHD or DTS equivalent: uncompressed multichannel sound formats of lossless quality - beating the hell outta Dolby Digital / DTS.

That output is included in HDMI 1.3 which is supported by PS3 but not many amplifiers support it yet (I think).

[blackmagic]

Yes, but HD-DVD has mandatory support of Dolby TrueHD and at a higher bitrate than the optional support offered by Blu-Ray. both only support the dts lossless codec as an option. Seriously, the only time you actually need the full 50 Gb offered by blu-ray is when you are delivering an mpeg2+uncompressed pcm bitstream. Otherwise, a single layer bd or dual layer HD-DVD is more than enough space. Besides, a single layer BD is cheaper to make which means cheaper prices for the consumer which is a good thing.

[Bordel_1900]

@blackmagic

nah. not true.

Pirates of the Caribbean 1 and 2, and many other Blu-ray discs come on 50GB discs. They are encoded with VC-1 and also have Uncompressed PCM. (I have 32 BD discs and 23 of them are VC-1, 5 of them are on 50GB and AVC.).

Not only are they 50GB discs, but PotC come on 2 discs each, the first disc containing the movie and the second disc with bonus material.

You're telling me you don't need 50GB?? That's your opinion, not facts.

[Maddens Raiders]

is winning for a reason. I have friends from all over the world and they have told me repeatedly that once the price of the PS3 drops they will be scooping it up. Now sure, people are going to say -- oh yeah well i have 1,000 friends across the world and they say "_____________". Well, that's not the reason I'm saying this. What I'm trying to gleem out here is that once SCEI drops the price of the PS3, then it could really catalyze this format as the standard bearer for years to come. To look back and criticize them (mainly KK, and Kaz) for including the Blu-ray seems somewhat laughable now. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. It's just so funny for me to still here people say that the PS3 is the next Dreamcast when Peter Moore is the head of 360 ops and we see where that system's hardware integrity has been compromised. Let the war play out for SNE a little longer than 7.5 months before declaring Dreamcast-ish outcomes. You're not thinking clearly. Seriously, this thing is only getting cranked up for the Tokyo based company.

cheers

[Shaka2K6]

Correction.

Blu-ray always had the lead in the war for your sitting room.
and its not gonna change anytime soon.

h-dvdead R.I.P.

~h-dvdead. ' ' the look and smell of a dead format ' '

[Zaskark2]

http://www.youtube.com/watc...