madskillz said:
Reformed Sony fanboy. Bought the PS1, PS2 and PSP before I wised up. When Sony decided to go for a quick buck, start orphaning their products far before they needed to (20gb PS3, PS2 HDD, BC and *core values,*), that's when I got off the merry-go-round. Folks can say what they want, but gamewise, the PS3 lineup doesn't excite me (and the other folks who bought a 360 instead of a PS3) one bit. Maybe that will change in 2008, but right now, all I see are tons of PS3 titles hyped as system sellers and nothing more than glorified flops. Uncharted looks interesting, but I need more than two titles to make me shell out $500 for a video game system. As far as BR dominance, you can gladly have your leashed format. Not me. And folks are really starting to ask questions about the formats - like "Why BR is so much more expensive than HD DVD and offers nada but studio support?" My real question is - without the PS3 trojan horse thing, would you still have bought a BR player? |
There are more differences between the formats than just studio support. Blu-Ray discs have a scratch resistant coating. It may be necessary because of the design of the discs, but it doesn't change the fact that it's there, and it's very useful.
Also, the added storage capactiy of Blu-Ray is very useful for the studios. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoneix is a prime example of this. The Blu-Ray version has an extra 44 min. A&E special on the disc that the HD DVD version doesn't have, and most of the extra features, including this A&E special, the Trailing of Tonks featurette, and a few other things are in HD, whereas the specials on the HD DVD version are all in SD. Also, far more Blu-Ray titles have lossless audio than HD DVD, though I realize few people care about that.
