| GooseGaws said: Your comments on bitrates and compression seem to be based solely on hearsay. Virtually all of the releases that have been dual-format have been nearly indistinguishable from each other. Warner themselves have admitted that the HD-DVD release of 300 was preferrable to the Blu-ray release. They have also chosen only to release the Matrix trilogy on HD-DVD thus far, deciding to wait until the Blu-ray feature set catches up. When you state that King Kong reached the limitations of the HD-DVD disc, don't forget that Kingdom of Heaven did the same thing on Blu-ray. |
Of course multiplats look the sameon both formats. That were encoded with both formats in mind. It's the exclusive that show where each format shines, and currently Pirates of the Carribean 1&2 have the best pq of all HD movies yet released. They max out Blu-Rays bitrates, which are higher than HD DVD's bitrates. In their current form, they could not be done on HD DVD, and there has yet to be a film released on HD DVD that shows that PQ of the level of PotC can be attained on the HD DVD format. This is fact. You cannot deny it.
About King Kong and Kingdom of Heaven, Universal was forced to release King Kong without Lossless audio because of the lmited space. Kingdom of Heaven does have lossless audio. Not to mention, as Chronotrigger already pointed out, Kingdom of Heaven only filled up a single layered 25gb BD-Rom, not the dual-layered 50gb BD-Rom.
Will movies the size of Apocalypes Now or the LotR: EE fit on a single dual-layered HD DVD? Hell no. Maybe if they sacrificed some PQ along with the lossless audio, they might be able to oull it off, but they'd probably prefer to go the 2-disc route to keep the AQ and PQ high. The days of multidisc movies should be over by now, but if HD DVD wins, it probably won't be. Who wants to switch a disc halfway through the movie? The AQ and PQ of HD movies are supposed to help create a sense of immersion in the movie. Switching discs would destroy that affect.
