By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Our all-digital future? Was microsoft right and blu-ray wrong?

daroamer on 29 November 2010
baggy said:

Is this before or after microsoft supported hd-dvd??


During.

At the same time the lack of Disney and New Line movies was a big problem for the HD-DVD format, these companies had HD movies available on the Xbox Live Marketplace.

This article is from Mar 27, 2007:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2724344720070328

"We're completely committed to HD-DVD and have the $200 external HD-DVD drive add-on for Xbox 360," Penello said.

"When developing Xbox 360, we thought there would be two trends that would be prominent in this generation," Penello said. "The first is high definition and the second was online. The digital distribution and the online method of getting HD content has really blown us away."


Around the Network
makingmusic476 on 29 November 2010

I don't think there was ever any doubt that digital distribution would take over in the long term.  The question was always just how long it would be before a predominantly digital world came to pass, and whether there would be time for a new optical format to thrive in the interim.

I think Blu-ray's current and continued success has shown that there was (and still is) room for another optical format after DVD. 

I notice you mentioned Netflix's growing success, and I must say that I subscribe to Netflix's streaming only service, and I absolutely love it.  However, for my favorite films and shows, Blu-ray is still my preferred viewing method.  I don't have the bandwidth to support HD streaming, and what HD streaming I've seen pales in comparison to Blu-ray, in both video and (especially) audio.  You can't beat Blu-ray at the moment.



Mitsurugi on 29 November 2010

I have comcast and the fastest sustained download speed I can currently manage is 1.5MB/s or 1GB in about 11min. Under optimum settings, it'd take me roughly 70 minutes to download a 6GB game on XBL. Theres a Walmart and a Gamestop within 5min driving distance from my house. Even with parking, incompetent employees and a lengthy line, I could still acquire the phsyical copy of the game in a fraction of the time. It usually only takes me like 10-15min. When I can obtain the digital copy as quickly as (or faster than) I can get the physical one, we'll be in predominantly digital world. And I'll be much happier gamer. (never have to get outta bed to change disc, no more read errors and no more lawn mower 360 noises)



Squilliam on 30 November 2010

Broadband speeds are increasing faster than content on a per item basis is getting larger. It is obviously the future and there are significant investments in digital distribution from TV manufacturers to Blu Ray players to iPads and mobile phones and the personal computer.



Tease.

OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
thranx said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:

MS was completely wrong, physical media isn't never going to die, blu ray is the obvious future here are some things to think about 

-Storage size: the average game is about 8 gigs (behind held back by dvd) on 360 and ps3 exclusives are like 15-20 gigs on average there's no way you could build up a decent collection with DD only, not to mention if you wanted movies and other things on your harddrive, there just isn't the space

-The rest of the world: NA has pretty much the best internet network and still they can't stream blu ray quality movies, UK is next best and japan is up there I think everything else would be pretty much impossible to reliably download full size games or movies on, when you can just ship a dvd or blu ray to it the same as anywhere else and get sales, I mean MS doesn't even have xbl up in half the countries they ship too, and pretty much everywhere besides US they have a poor network so again not going to happen

-Price compare to HDDs: blu rays are cheaper to make then a harddrive of the same size, much cheaper, so for the consumer when buying something that takes up alot of space it's cheaper to buy blu rays then invest in a massive harddrive which still might not be enough 

Don't get more wrong DD is going places, it makes it much easier, cheaper and faster for smaller files and works out great, but storage media is just so much farther ahead in terms of storage capacity and don't rely on online networks, storage media isn't going anywhere until the entire world is covered in wifi thats capable of downloading gigs a minute and even then we'll probably have storage media being set to a mars colony or something 

PC's and Steam say hello!
 Aslo do you have any info on that average game size? I have never seen averages stated that high and am wondering where you got your info.

Maybe it's because they just use double up data on games to reduce load times if they have the room, and I can't find it again I hate when that happens, but either way does anyone honestly think people wouldn't be using more space if they had it, but since they know their limit they build the game around the limit holding it back from the start in a way that can never be measured, though more space doesn't necessarily mean a better game, it is an advantage that can be taken advantage of, I honestly think MS should of used HD-dvd, 15 gigs would have been more then enough for this gen, but dvd is just too small, and next gen MS has to use HD-dvd, blu ray or something else because dvd definitely isn't going to cut it 



Around the Network
thranx on 30 November 2010
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
thranx said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:

MS was completely wrong, physical media isn't never going to die, blu ray is the obvious future here are some things to think about 

-Storage size: the average game is about 8 gigs (behind held back by dvd) on 360 and ps3 exclusives are like 15-20 gigs on average there's no way you could build up a decent collection with DD only, not to mention if you wanted movies and other things on your harddrive, there just isn't the space

-The rest of the world: NA has pretty much the best internet network and still they can't stream blu ray quality movies, UK is next best and japan is up there I think everything else would be pretty much impossible to reliably download full size games or movies on, when you can just ship a dvd or blu ray to it the same as anywhere else and get sales, I mean MS doesn't even have xbl up in half the countries they ship too, and pretty much everywhere besides US they have a poor network so again not going to happen

-Price compare to HDDs: blu rays are cheaper to make then a harddrive of the same size, much cheaper, so for the consumer when buying something that takes up alot of space it's cheaper to buy blu rays then invest in a massive harddrive which still might not be enough 

Don't get more wrong DD is going places, it makes it much easier, cheaper and faster for smaller files and works out great, but storage media is just so much farther ahead in terms of storage capacity and don't rely on online networks, storage media isn't going anywhere until the entire world is covered in wifi thats capable of downloading gigs a minute and even then we'll probably have storage media being set to a mars colony or something 

PC's and Steam say hello!
 Aslo do you have any info on that average game size? I have never seen averages stated that high and am wondering where you got your info.

Maybe it's because they just use double up data on games to reduce load times if they have the room, and I can't find it again I hate when that happens, but either way does anyone honestly think people wouldn't be using more space if they had it, but since they know their limit they build the game around the limit holding it back from the start in a way that can never be measured, though more space doesn't necessarily mean a better game, it is an advantage that can be taken advantage of, I honestly think MS should of used HD-dvd, 15 gigs would have been more then enough for this gen, but dvd is just too small, and next gen MS has to use HD-dvd, blu ray or something else because dvd definitely isn't going to cut it 

again pc's say hello. All pc games come on cd or dvd or are downloaded. If pcs do not need a larger disc why would consoles?



OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
Squilliam said:

Broadband speeds are increasing faster than content on a per item basis is getting larger. It is obviously the future and there are significant investments in digital distribution from TV manufacturers to Blu Ray players to iPads and mobile phones and the personal computer.

And the fact that only 50% of america has those fast speeds and 0% in the majority of countries MS/Sony ship to it is fairly obvious physical media is here to stay and DD isn't a replacement but another option more suited to older/small games and files 



OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
thranx said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
thranx said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:

MS was completely wrong, physical media isn't never going to die, blu ray is the obvious future here are some things to think about 

-Storage size: the average game is about 8 gigs (behind held back by dvd) on 360 and ps3 exclusives are like 15-20 gigs on average there's no way you could build up a decent collection with DD only, not to mention if you wanted movies and other things on your harddrive, there just isn't the space

-The rest of the world: NA has pretty much the best internet network and still they can't stream blu ray quality movies, UK is next best and japan is up there I think everything else would be pretty much impossible to reliably download full size games or movies on, when you can just ship a dvd or blu ray to it the same as anywhere else and get sales, I mean MS doesn't even have xbl up in half the countries they ship too, and pretty much everywhere besides US they have a poor network so again not going to happen

-Price compare to HDDs: blu rays are cheaper to make then a harddrive of the same size, much cheaper, so for the consumer when buying something that takes up alot of space it's cheaper to buy blu rays then invest in a massive harddrive which still might not be enough 

Don't get more wrong DD is going places, it makes it much easier, cheaper and faster for smaller files and works out great, but storage media is just so much farther ahead in terms of storage capacity and don't rely on online networks, storage media isn't going anywhere until the entire world is covered in wifi thats capable of downloading gigs a minute and even then we'll probably have storage media being set to a mars colony or something 

PC's and Steam say hello!
 Aslo do you have any info on that average game size? I have never seen averages stated that high and am wondering where you got your info.

Maybe it's because they just use double up data on games to reduce load times if they have the room, and I can't find it again I hate when that happens, but either way does anyone honestly think people wouldn't be using more space if they had it, but since they know their limit they build the game around the limit holding it back from the start in a way that can never be measured, though more space doesn't necessarily mean a better game, it is an advantage that can be taken advantage of, I honestly think MS should of used HD-dvd, 15 gigs would have been more then enough for this gen, but dvd is just too small, and next gen MS has to use HD-dvd, blu ray or something else because dvd definitely isn't going to cut it 

again pc's say hello. All pc games come on cd or dvd or are downloaded. If pcs do not need a larger disc why would consoles?

Oh I don't know maybe the fact that you can upscale anything on pc with good enough hardware or deal with lower res if you don't where on consoles you don't have the luxury of adding a new video card every 2 years so you need to use higher quality native textures which take up the bulk of any space, and we haven't exactly seen any pc ports of ps3 exclusives either, so maybe they are being held back in the same way 360 is since there aren't alot of pc only games, and they aren't ps3 exclusive quality either



Killiana1a on 01 December 2010
Bokal said:
Killiana1a said:

Depends on how you look at it. In the long run we are all dead. In the short run, Blu Ray is the obvious choice, but don't place your bet just yet because Microsoft may go all DD next generation and try to win it by offering a comparable console to the PS4 along with $30-50 software due to no physical media costs.

The PS1 and PS2 were smash successes because they banked on future media formats. CD for PS1 and DVD for PS2. Sony has not had such luck with Blu Ray and the PS3.

They have not had the luck this generation because digital distribution was well established by the time the PS3 arrived and tried to win this generation via Blu Ray (Steam was 3 years old in 2006 and Netflix was 9 years old in 2006). What Sony has dealt with this generation is 2 competing transitional, future media formats (Blu Ray and DD). Sony never dealt with this during the PS1 and PS2 eras. There are other factors involved in the PS3 placing 3rd, but discussing them would be going off-topic.

What you can count on are businesses always trying to cut out the middleman. Physical media via DVD and Blu Ray present middlemen between the company and the consumer, thus driving up the cost of production making the product less profitable and more expensive for the consumer. 

Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft would be completely ignorant to just resign themselves to Blu Ray next generation. Xbox Live and PSN have reached a level where it is conceivable and possible to sell each and every game DD.

Personally, I prefer physical format because it means I "own" it instead of renting it from a server. Furthermore, if gaming goes all DD and your hard-drive crashes, then what would stop Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo from charging you full price for every lost product or adding in a lost and found fee for something you already bought?

I know some video games shops that won't support the next Xbox then...

This is the point of DD only. Getting rid of shipping, manufacture, and distribution costs. Yes, GameStop, Wal-Mart and others may not support the next Xbox, but I don't think they would dig that grave themselves because they would lose a chunk of business if they stopped selling Xbox consoles because they could not sale the games.

The situation would be equivalent to bank tellers and online banking. The only reason why bank tellers still exist is because of checking and cash deposits from customers. If they ever get the technology to the point where it feels natural and perfectly safe to deposit hundreds of dollars worth of cash and checks into ATMs, then banks would gladly terminate the position of "bank teller" leaving the inside of the bank full of bankers and loan officers handling the business and mortgage side of things.