MikeB said: @ jalsomni All companies including Sony are pushing for (cheaper) digital distribution. However as an additional option, just like all the other companies you mentioned above. I bought many PSN games and I would love to download some high quality music videos to my PS3. But for instance Gran Turismo 5: Prologue sold much better on Blu-Ray disc than on the PSN and I am sure for bigger games like the full version nearly all Gran Turismo fans will want to have it on Blu-Ray disc.

Again, games are an entirely different issue than movies. More people bought GT5P than downloaded because:

a) We're talking now abotu the finite space on a PS3 hardrive, as opposed to the infinate variations of distribution models, download sizes and potential means of storage digital media provides.

b) Games (specifically in terms of console gaming) as a medium are still very much oriented towards discs as the means of consumption. Different mediums are at different places in terms of their level of adoption of consumption via new media. Music is the most far gone (though arguably writing actually is, as much more reading is done online than via printed form these days). Movies are close to where music was around the time Napster folded. Television is still primarily viewed via, well, via a television (thanks to in certain places and certain ways free broadcasting and similar ease of use to new media). Video games are actually pretty close to movies in this manner but we tend to ignore things like Yahoo games and their user bases ten times or more that of any console when it comes to video games. In terms of console gaming, the size of the file is much more prevalent to the quality of the media as a whole. Viewing Kill Bill on an iPhone doesn't suddenly give it a crappy ending or make the Crazy 88 into the Crazy 14. Video games, ironically because they are created purely digitally, right now need the things external storage devices like discs give them--space for all that code so we can have a longer game with more enemies on screen at once and all that jazz. But tis won't always be the case. It used to be emulations of anything post 4th gen was pretty impossible. That's not the case any more, and eventaully, when bandwitch and harddisk space gets to a big enough point, games probbly will become a primarily downloaded medium. Hell, I remember a forum on that topic on VGChartz a few weeks ago. It may not happen soon, but it will probably happen eventually.

@ jalsomni

Before that I had a Conner hardrive and several Seagate harddrives die on me. The IBM drive had top ratings. 2.5 inch harddrives should be relatively more reliable. There was a recent report on average harddrive reliability isn't that great for the long run.

Anway you will have to re-download everything if your harddrive fails, if you have it on disc it's much less of a hassle.

With the current state of technology I see most potential for music videos (small, only about 5 minutes max) and smaller games (often too small projects to be viable for being spread on disc and relatively small in storage size).

I love my PS3 to double as a DVR (PlayTV), but mainly for recording TV programs, content I usually would delete as soon as I watched it. Big games (above 4-5 GB) and high quality movies I greatly prefer to have on Blu-Ray disc. They take up too much storage and it's too much of a hassle if you don't have a backup on disc. Bigger harddrives would allow for more content, but if you fill it up there's also a much bigger risk / burden to retrieve this content if the harddrive fails.

With regard to DVD issues I guess you are talking about PC DVD drives, standalone dedicated DVD players are usually more sturdy. The moving parts move a lot slower. Just like Blu-Ray discs need to spin much less (due to higher density of data) to achieve similar or better results than is needed for DVD based games.

@ Stillwell

Or it may be just as successful for the long run as Sony's introduction of 3.5 inch diskettes and Sony/Philips's introduction of Compact disc was.

BR adoption is happening faster than DVD adoption took place. BR disc has an ensured long term future as the PS3 has one by default, using Blu-Ray discs to store games and movies. Even if in a worst case scenario the industry would drop its support (no chance of this happening) there's still Sony Pictures and its partner movie studios to pump out content.

In any case if interested in Playstation gaming, it's a non-risk oppertunity. Blu-Ray disc is crucial for high end gaming for the long term, adding movie playback system software just adds a very interesting additional feature.

MikeB said: Anway you will have to re-download everything if your harddrive fails, if you have it on disc it's much less of a hassle.

Well, like any good video editor I back up to more than one location, but that's neither here nor there for this discussion.

Anyway, I have to go to bed now--early shoot tomorrow morning--but I'm glad to see my topic get some traction. As a quick note to everyone, though--as I've said I'm not just talking about high end HD downloads. I'm talking about digital distribution methods as a whole. Most people don't need to have the film in HD. Standard def type quality, and sometimes worse, is enough for most people, and that's, in my mind, enough for it to even within the next few years take over as the primary market for post-theater film viewing.

I don't think digital distirubtion and formats will completley take over for another 10-15 years at least , there will always be a market for Physical media.

And there's ongoing disputes between ISP's and digital service providers over who should cover the costs of this new digital distribution phenomenom , i'm pretty sure ISP's want nothing to do with it unless they're making money from it.

jalsonmi said: Very shortly, the primary way people will buy and consume movies is via download.

 

See, this is the problem with Hollywood's film execs. These people live in giant mansions, have expense accounts larger than the budgets of entire countries, and have no clue how ordinary people live.

Sure, people will consume movies on the web. But they won't pay for them. Why? Visual quality is middling. Youtube is free, so noone minds. But visuals do count - people will rent the DVD or BluRay disc of their favorite media, stuff they like and treasure.

Downloadable media has two constraints: (1) takes forever to download, and (2) takes an expensive HD to store. Neither problem is soluble for the next ten years. 

What we're likely to see is tiered broadcasting - people will pay for hi-res access to watch the World Cup or Olympics, but watch everything else for free on lo-res streams. HD media will sell on discs, so Hollywood will stay afloat, but everything else will be streamed and free. 

MikeB said: @ Stillwell Everyone in their right mind should shy away from yet another one of Sony own "special" storage devices, because while it might not go as bad as the BETAMAX, the BR will not be a viable storage device for any lenght of time. Or it may be just as successful for the long run as Sony's introduction of 3.5 inch diskettes and Sony/Philips's introduction of Compact disc was. BR adoption is happening faster than DVD adoption took place. BR disc has an ensured long term future as the PS3 has one by default, using Blu-Ray discs to store games and movies. Even if in a worst case scenario the industry would drop its support (no chance of this happening) there's still Sony Pictures and its partner movie studios to pump out content. In any case if interested in Playstation gaming, it's a non-risk oppertunity. Blu-Ray disc is crucial for gaming in the long term, adding movie playback system software just adds a very interesting additional feature.

What a complete load of bullshit. BR adoption is nowhere near DvD adoption. Faster? Hilarious, dude! Like I said, look at the standalone players to get the real picture of peoples intrest in this pos format. It's barely exsistant. And like I also said, analysts project standalone players to overtake PS3 players no sooner than 2016. Pathetic.

good post, but you are wrong. You arent putting enough thought into how much storage space all these downloaded HD movies are going to take.

You mentioned how $30 a month for DSL (which sucks for DL'ing HD media) is so much cheaper then a blu ray player but didnt mention at all how much this PC thats doing the downloading costs. or how much the massive hard drives are going to cost. or how costly a hard drive failure would be if you had 100's of movies on there that you paid for.

movies != music , you are relying to much on the recent histroy of cd's vs mp3's to form your opinion. people like having a physical copy of a movie. i cant take my downloaded copy of Grandma's Boy to my buddy's house but taking a blu ray is no problem.

The next Christamas season will tell a lot on how the home movies will play out. HDTV's continue to drop dramatically in price and should be a VERY popular item this Christmas. Once HDTV becomes the norm, blu ray will explode in growth.

i would even argue that right now, the % of people who own a blu ray player is larger then the % of people who know how & have the means , to download and play HD media on a screen worthy of movie watching. (19" computer monitor with PC speakers, is not worthy of HD media you spent 2+ hours downloading)

you also down play the importance of visual quality, again movies != music, mp3 vs cd isnt even noticeable to most people, thats why mp3 took off. people couldnt even notice the difference. HDTV vs SDTV is a whole 'nother world.

Digital Distribution is a step forward but at the current bandwidths most people have, It isn't adaptable. Try downloading FULL HD movies with all the HD audio with it and it'll be a painstaking effort just to download one. I for one wouldn't want that.

Same with HDTV most people don't have one. The difference is, you buy it once and you use it for years. On the other hand trying to get an ISP with crazy download speed will cost more and probably not available yet.

I'll consider it if full HD movies are downloaded within two hours only.

MikeB said: @ bdbdbd Technical superiority definately is the reason for Wii to beat PS3 in sales. Well, this would be the case in order to make your claim true. The Wii is more of a toy like nature, toys are usually designed to be cheap. The Wii is a non-factor with regard to this thread and neither is the Nintendo DS, it's not really a multi-media device. The PS3 is a very different device, it was designed to be a long term high spec gaming device as well as a multi-media entertainment device in a much broader sense. In short, a great choice for high definition entertaiment content. The device was not designed to be cheap for the short term, if Sony would have sold more launch units they would have made a far bigger loss than the 2 billion USD the company lost for the PS3's launch. IMO for the long run, the short term disadvantage will pale in comparison to the long term gains. @ thread Microsoft seems to be the main advocate of digital distribution of high definition content. But note the bulk of 360s sold only have a 20 GB harddrive, enough space left for maybe 1 movie stored on it in Blu-Ray quality... The Elite sold far less units than the 20 GB variant (~90%) and even less than the core units which lack a harddrive. 120 GB is enough to store about 5 movies, so you will be deleting movies very soon. The 360 doesn't even have the option to install larger PC world harddisks like the PS3 does, so 120 GB is the max any current 360 owner will own.

First off, all the gaming devices are toys.
I agree that Wii is a non-factor, although it's userbase makes it a lot bigger factor than PS3, while Wii supports DD (not as movies or HD), conclusion: PS3 is a non-factor too. Although, you had no real argument in your post agains DD taking over BD.
As what it comes to GT5P example, more PS3 that have access to offline content, than there are PS3:s that have access to online content. It also shows that the DD is adopted by people that have online access. DD is a new method of distribution, which definately have transition time. There will be discs available, but i don't see it being the main distribution method in the future.

And as for what Sony expected PS3 to sell, was at a rate, which it's trailing behind behind around a year in sales.

@jalsonmi: I wasn't meaning (just) mobile phones. I was talking about high-speed internet via mobile network. Think about the 3rd world countries with wireless infrastructure, all you need is to contact your mobile operator, get a mobile network modem and you have high-speed internet access for your computer.

@dgm: The question wasn't about HD content, besides the amount you pay for your DSL, isn't any more than you'd be paying for a slower connection.
As what it comes to storing the downloaded content, is where physical media comes to picture.

@slorg.net: Consider if someone would make program which would work like the TV-guide in recordable digital STB:s. You just choose what you want to download and everything else works automatically. So, if you decide you are going to watch a movie saturday, you just click a movies name from the program any day of the week and when it's downloaded, and you want to watch the movie, it's ready. Of course, DD won't kill physical media, but DD will eventually be bigger than physical media. Edit: I forgot to add, that losing your data isn't a problem, just look how Virtual Console works; once you have paid the product, you have unlimited amount of downloads for the paid content on your account.