And so...the 360 Won in North America this gen....whats for sony now?

[Jordahn]

selnor said:

Jordahn said:

selnor said:

Jordahn said:

selnor said:

Jordahn said:

selnor said:
How many times have we heard "PS3's year is next year" or "wait for X game".
M$ seem to have used the cards they have at the right time.

It seems with the glowing reviews of HD stream quality via Netflix that BLU RAY is not a selling point in America anymore. Not having to use a crappy old tech like disc and store them on a shelf is brilliant. Afterall how many times must we change bloody meda and have to buy all 400 films all over again. Netflix subscription saves alot of money.

I call it right here right now that the PS3 is 3rd by end of gen. For those that dont agree, when is it time that you call it? Because the gap since launch of PS3 was 5.5 mill. Now 2 years after launch nearly and the gap is 5.94mill. By Summer I expect to se nearly 7 mill.

I think Netflix is gonna help alot more than we all envisioned in the beginning. And M$ help they may even help get licenses sorted for more new releases to.

 

There will always be movie collectors, and as of now, the infastructure of streaming HD movies cannot accomodate all the features a Blu-ray has to offer. Streaming will do more damage to the rental industry than the physical purchases of movies. If you want to own a movie, you will buy a physcial copy because there is far more flexability in it. Apparently, you haven't read the glowing reviews of the picture quality, sound quality, and extra features only a Blu-Ray can provide.

I know what your saying, but every few months the broadband industry gets better and better. Here in the UK they are trialing 60 mb broadband. 20 mb is now easy to come by and very cheap. I'm on 10 mb broadband for les than £10/month.

I have read the reviews of BLU RAY and watched a few. They are impressive. But I would rather have thousands of films to hand, as opposed to spending thousands replacing my 400 DVD collection in BLU RAY.

 

 

Personally, I think anyone who decides to replace their entire DVD collection are the exception. Why would I need to replace my (actually my wife's) copy of "When Harry Meets Sally"? Also, I'm a fan of the 70's sitcom "The Jeffersons." I see no point in waiting and owning that series in Blu-Ray. But almost everything new I buy is on Blu-Ray now while there are a nice handful of titles I will replace such as Spider-man and upcoming older releases such as Lord of the Rings. It's also encouraging me to buy classics I've never entirely seen such as Close Encounters and 2001 Sapce Odyssee.

EDIT: Oh, and about the broadband industry... I can get HD surround sound NOW with the extras on a Blu-Ray disc. Something you are NOT getting with Netflix streaming if I understand correctly. And there is no need to see things so one-sided. Yes, the broadband industry has and will be better, but that applies to most all industries. It happened to VHS, DVD, and it's happening to Blu-ray right now. It's not as clear cut as "BLU RAY is not a selling point in America anymore."

The problem is why pay £200 for a bluray player then £20 for 1 Blu Ray movie? Ok so the quality of picture may be slightly better (according to first reviews it's not much) and I understand DD 6.1 is available for HD streaming on 360. So for £160 + £60 + £40 = £260 for unlimited at your fingertips HD movies. Thats 12 months live and 12 months Netflix converted to Enlish £. The PS3 is £300 on it's own with no BLU RAY films. PS3 + 5 HD BLU RAY films is £400. Streaming is certainly the future and I expect BLU RAY in America to slowly die out from Christmas onwards.

 

You are ONLY presenting near worse case scenario for Blu-ray.

Opinionated, subjective.

As stated earlier, you still have your movie collectors.

The bottom line of your argument is entirely subjective/narrowminded supported by subjective/narrowminded points.  In fact, your entire argument is subjective/narrowminded. That is the problem. Please stop trying to find reason for your hate.  Is this what you always do in "real life," force worse case scenario for the PS3 and best case for 360???

 

Ok lets do subjectively. The music industry. Yes the first industry to adopt downloads widely.

 

The best ever year according to RIAA for CD singles sales ever was 1997 where they sold 66,700,000 units.

In contrast the first year recorded for singles downloads was 2004. According to RIAA that year downloads did 139,400,000.

 

Now supposedly the music quality is less on MP3. By 2006 the downloads for singles figures jump to 586,400,000.

Now bearing in mind that BLU RAY is tracking way way lower than DVD, the fact that Downloads for movies is kicking off when BLURAY is barely out of the blocks in terms of sales it's only gonna hurt BLU RAY. For CD's it was ok, because everyone had a CD player. For BLURAY it's disasterous because BLURAY isnt even classed as 10% of the movie market.

I expect the full first year of streaming and downloads for movies in HD to beat BLU RAY by sveral 10's of millions. And I expect to see BLU RAY in America to dive rather than rise. Also anyone who was considering PS3 for HD films only, have a cheaper alternative this christmas with the option of loads of available films.

I'm not blindly using fanboyism, but downloading is something that is far bigger than hard copy as the music industry shows.

Last but not least if your wandering about 2007 music comparison

CD singles 2007       =  27,000,000

Download singles 2007 = 800,000,000

All RIAA figures.

 

I can see you are getting more and more desperate by moving more and more away from the focus.  The CD/mp3 argument for comparison to the HD optical/video streaming has always failed because these are two different industries with two different aesthetics.  Audio is normaly employed in conjunction to other activities such as traveling (going to a from work, a friend, school, etc...), work (house work, in the office, mowing the lawn, etc...), and verbally socializing (like having folks over for dinner or conversing in the living room over coffee) for examples.  Most of these examples also applied to past situations where quality was sacrified for convience with 8-tracks and cassettes over albums while albums still did well for a while.  But to give your undivided attention to music and music only is the exception.  In regards to audio and video (like watching a movie) requires more of your undivided attention, and more can be benefitted from when given both higher quality audio and video.  Most people who sit down to watch a movie are more dedicated to that action in of itself for the obvious reasons.  Having video on the go is more of the exception. And because of its limit in presentation size for convience, the quality for a 1080p picture on a minmum 40" HD screen with a minimum 5.1 digital decoded audio far outweighs the convience and enjoyment of a movie on a smaller scale.  Now, I realize that you were first arguing Blu-ray vs. streaming which you failed to have a concrete valid argument.  But the comparison to CD's/mp3's was hardly ever a valid one to begin with because of the nature and purpose of the movie viewing industry.