| kanariya said: BD will replace DVD in a few years jsut like DVD replaced VHS. It didn't happen over night. |
Actually, DVD replacing VHS almost did happen overnight. That's how you knew that VHS's days were numbered. It took only a couple years for DVD to catch on and then explode as the primary format for movies. Blu-Ray will not accomplish this task for a variety of reasons:
1. To the average consumer, the difference from DVD to Blu-Ray isn't enough. It's not as dramatic a change as VHS to DVD. It looks like minor advancement for much money.
2. DVD is too well engrained. Everybody has and can easily afford DVD players these days. People took years getting ready for a format to replace VHS--that format ruled for 25 years (give or take). Other formats like Beta and Laserdisc failed in the mainstream market. They were the "higher quality, more expensive" products that didn't speak to regular consumers who had budgets. People are now finally comfortable with DVD--the average consumer isn't going to jump up and just move on to a new format just because it's there. To most people, it's a waste of money to suddenly switch gears on something they've just gotten used to. They aren't going to turn around and suddenly offload all their DVD's to re-purchase their whole collection on Blu-Ray. I still have VHS that I don't feel the need to replace with DVD yet.
3. Sony will not even use it next time. Kojima already indicated that MGS4 maxed the Blu-Ray disk. And as history shows, Sony has used a different storage medium for every single one of their game systems. CD, DVD, UMD, Blu-Ray.
4. Not everything needs Blu-Ray. Unless it's some Hollywood blockbuster that will actually take advantage of all the glorious HD crap Blu-Ray has to offer, there's no reason to have all that HD-ness. Troma films do not need Blu-Ray. Independant cinema does not need Blu-Ray. Box set TV series from forgotten 80's sitcoms do not need Blu-Ray (that's right, crap like Alf and that awful show with the robot girl and Growinig Pains). Porn does not need Blu-Ray. Porn costs enough as it is without needing to pay $20 more just to see the fine detail on some guy's sweaty, flopping sack. Underground films do not need Blu-Ray. DVD's can be produced on the cheap and sold for cheap and it's much easier to churn out classic/lost/forgotten/etc movies/films/media to DVD than it is to do it on Blu-Ray. More people own DVD players and are familiar with DVD, so it's a much safer gamble to release (often awesome) B-grade shlock like Unhinged, Reanimator, Puppet Master, and various old 80's, 70's, 60's, 50's films on DVD. The vast, vast, vast majority of films released do not, and will not, benefit from being on Blu-Ray. Most of this stuff isn't AAA Hollywood awesomeness. Most of it is B, C, D, Z-grade stuff. The vast majority of released films are of this nature. What possible advantage would Terror Firmer or the Toxic Avenger possibly have being on Blu-Ray?
5. Most of the world is still Standard Def. HDTV's are finally catching on, but they're still expensive. Old tube SD TV's still last for ages before going bad. Hell, my 27" Sharp still has a pretty awesome picture. Why would Blu-Ray replace DVD when HD hasn't even replaced most TV's? Sure, maybe in hyper-1st world nations like the US, parts of Europe, and parts of Asia (especially S. Korea and Japan) are moving into HDTV territory. But most of the rest of the world is not.
Blu-Ray is not growing by the same leaps and bounds that VHS and DVD did. It's the new Laserdisc. It's the higher-defintion, much fancier product that is for the people who can both afford it and can live with dumping all that extra money for not that much better picture. The thing is, it's more accessible and successful than Laserdisc. But it is not the way of the future, nor will it become standard.
There will be another completely different, yet unknown format that will replace DVD's. And it won't be here for quite some time. It'll come at a time when 1080i just isn't "HD enough." And it will come when mainstream consumers are ready to completely abandon the old format. Hell, I can get a 3-pack of zany zombie films, including notorious Zombie Holocaust for $15 in a DVD set. Not only am I highly unlikely to find that on Blu-Ray, but the movie would be by itself and cost $25 at least. Which sounds like the more successful format?
