By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Solid_Snake4RD on 15 April 2010
Edit Thread
nightsurge said:
gekkokamen said:
@nightsurge

yeah, you seem to know it all. I think I will make you my God, lol. All hail nightsurge!

I don't know it all.  But feel free to praise me.  I just pity that you think you know things that you don't, and are too lazy to find out otherwise.  Oh well, ignorance is bliss as they say.  All hail NightSurge!

Reasons why HD-DVD was better:

  • HD-DVD players were cheaper to purchase
  • HD-DVD players were unified spec (all had networking support long befor it became common place in Blu-Ray players and for much cheaper still)
  • HD-DVD discs/movies were cheaper
  • HD-DVD drives had faster read speeds than Blu-Ray
  • HD-DVD used similar pressing technology to DVD so it was easy to manufacture and easy to produce combo HD-DVD/DVD discs.  (I had 300 which was a combo HD-DVD/DVD disc for only $5 more than the standard DVD back in the day, for example)

The only place that Blu-Ray lead was in overall capacity, but even then it was only a slim margin.  HD-DVDs were going to be expanded to 64GB of space per disc and even higher, but they didn't last long enough.  Blu-Ray won the HD war because it claimed the majority of support from movie publishers and it had the added benefit of being a gaming platform as well.

being cheap doesn't make it better.basically all physical formats strenght basically depends upon how much content it has and blu-ray won there.your saying that HD-DVD is cheaper make wouldn't it better.Please talk about quality and not its production aspects.

faster read times you talk about,Blu-ray has variation of speed which are way above hd-dvd.