71m HD consoles sold disagrees with you on that one, no doubt not all of them use the HD, but I imagine a fair number do, HD take up is good has been fairly good hasnt it?

Not really.  HD uptake has mostly been caused by stores no longer selling SD widescreens.  As for the consoles, i'd guess there adoption was quite similiar.  With the only non HD console being the Wii which offered a whole different expierence.

Either way, after seeing how expensive HD is I hate to see how expensive 3D is. 

3D HD may leave only EA standing if any company decides to launch with that.

If it doesn't require glasses then cool. If it does then count me out. I already wear glasses, two pairs at once is bloody annoying.

I see, well, I hope they dont make it too expensive, my PS3 was cosly enough at £300

I doubt they would launch with anything that it was too expensive for anyone to develop games for.

Kas, by "HD costing more than it´s worth" or 'most people won´t care', you specifically mean HD consoles, or High Definition in general?

Because the way I see it, HD is a natural evolution...so I guess you mean the timing MS and Sony decided to go HD was the problem, not HD itself, right?

Symantec's my friend, symantec's

Of course.  It's all timing.  I think all parties involved would of been better off had HD been put off until next generation... with studios being the biggest benfactor as the explosion in costs wouldn't of been so high as the technology became more used in TV and movies.

er...you mean "semantics" right?

and no, not really, there being used for different reasons with different technology, copying implies Nintendo went to Sony and just did the same thing they did.

copying sony?

3d has existed in pc for a while and the 3d wtih glasses has been used in the cinemas since the 50's. Its hardly a new technology.

Hey Kas, talking about Blu-Ray...do you think the format would´ve won against HD-DVD even without the help it got from the PS3?

I think there was a thread here on vgchartz...quite old, like 2 years ago or something...where someone detailed in a very good way how BD would´ve won anyway, it would just take longer, but I dunno.

What do you think?....obviously BD got a major push through the PS3, but was it really necessary in order to put HD-DVD to bed for good?