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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - IGN: Why DVD's better than Blu-Ray....

Kos-mos on 20 March 2009
DKII said:
If the Blu-Ray player I'd gotten with my 50" HDTV hadn't been free, I'd say it was a waste of money. You can recite all the stats you want at me, but the Blu-Ray discs are at best a tiny marginal upgrade over the upscaled DVDs it plays, with little to no functionality improvements that I've noticed (in fact, it's worse, since my player apparently can't play all BR discs even though all DVD players I've ever had can play all DVD discs). There's no reason for me to pay anything for it (no I don't have surround sound, either, and neither do most people, that's an even smaller niche than HD usage).

I`ve spent alot of money on PS3, 42" HDTV and surround system (good surround system that is) and watching movies without it, is loosing 50% of the experience. I promise investing some rupees in surround, HDTV and Blu-Ray player won`t disappoint anyone.

Stating that "dvd is good enough or even better" is a lie, or just  plain stupidity. It wouldn`t surprise me that ign is just trying to kill off ps3. Because a gaming/movie nerd always want the best out of sound and picture quality.

 



Around the Network
Words Of Wisdom on 20 March 2009
DKII said:
If the Blu-Ray player I'd gotten with my 50" HDTV hadn't been free, I'd say it was a waste of money. You can recite all the stats you want at me, but the Blu-Ray discs are at best a tiny marginal upgrade over the upscaled DVDs it plays, with little to no functionality improvements that I've noticed (in fact, it's worse, since my player apparently can't play all BR discs even though all DVD players I've ever had can play all DVD discs). There's no reason for me to pay anything for it (no I don't have surround sound, either, and neither do most people, that's an even smaller niche than HD usage).

So your BluRay player is worse than a DVD player because it can't play all BluRay movies?

You might be interested to know that your DVD player can't play them at all.



Khuutra on 20 March 2009
Kos-mos said:
DKII said:
If the Blu-Ray player I'd gotten with my 50" HDTV hadn't been free, I'd say it was a waste of money. You can recite all the stats you want at me, but the Blu-Ray discs are at best a tiny marginal upgrade over the upscaled DVDs it plays, with little to no functionality improvements that I've noticed (in fact, it's worse, since my player apparently can't play all BR discs even though all DVD players I've ever had can play all DVD discs). There's no reason for me to pay anything for it (no I don't have surround sound, either, and neither do most people, that's an even smaller niche than HD usage).

I`ve spent alot of money on PS3, 42" HDTV and surround system (good surround system that is) and watching movies without it, is loosing 50% of the experience. I promise investing some rupees in surround, HDTV and Blu-Ray player won`t disappoint anyone.

Stating that "dvd is good enough or even better" is a lie, or just  plain stupidity. It wouldn`t surprise me that ign is just trying to kill off ps3. Because a gaming nerd always want the best out of sound and picture quality.

Most people don't see that kind of investment to be worth it, else more people would do it. Hell, even I haven't invested in surround sound (or HD, but that will change). It just wouldn't be worth the money involved, here.

DVD is good enough for me too, right now.



averyblund on 20 March 2009
Kos-mos said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
I`ve recently watched sunshine on DVD and on Blu-ray, and it was better picture quality and sound on Blu-Ray. That`s the reason Blu-Ray is better. It`s as easy as that.
Amen

Agreed, but I think you are missing the point. Nobody is arguing that BR looks and sounds better than DVD.

 

But still isn`t better? I always thought watching movies was all about sound and picture.

 

Well cost and access (relevant vs downloads) are pretty important to many of us.

 

 

Ooooh. You`re talking about cost and access. I see, but still Blu-ray IS better than dvd.  You can`t say dvd is better because it`s cheaper and have more access, or is it the same with cars, games, computers, televisions, toasters, bed frames, condoms, dildos, tooth brushes just to mention a few. Quality over quantity or vice versa? What`s better?

I hope you realize how absurd that sounds. Of course cost and access are important. Let me give you an example. I would glady pay $15 for Return of the King , it is worth it. Would I pay $30? Hell no! The word "better" is not just based on picture quality or sound. If DVDs were unwatchable you would have a point, but they aren't.

 

To me it comes down access more than anything. Why would I buy a disc, that will only play in a few players when I can get the same thing online which will play on any TV in my house or on any computer?  Video is trailing music in the download department because of the bandwidth required but that is rapidly changing. I mean how many computer literate people buy CD's these days? None I know. Movies are just the next wave.

 



XBL: WiiVault Wii: PM me  PSN: WiiVault

PC: AMD Athlon II Quadcore 635 (OC to 4.0ghz) , ATI Radeon 5770 1GB (x2)

MacBook Pro C2D 2.8ghz, 9600m GT 512 iMac: C2D 2.0, X2600XT 256

 

JWS on 20 March 2009
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
I`ve recently watched sunshine on DVD and on Blu-ray, and it was better picture quality and sound on Blu-Ray. That`s the reason Blu-Ray is better. It`s as easy as that.
Amen

Agreed, but I think you are missing the point. Nobody is arguing that BR looks and sounds better than DVD.

 

But still isn`t better? I always thought watching movies was all about sound and picture.

 

Well cost and access (relevant vs downloads) are pretty important to many of us.

 

Personally I'm far more interested in Blu-Ray as a PC storage medium than as an AV format. A Blu-Ray disc can hold a dozen Blu-Ray quality H.264 videos. Or a heck of a lot of backups.

 

The problem with using blu-ray as a storage medium is the price of blank discs. It's far cheaper to get an big external hd and use that as a back up.

 



Around the Network
heruamon on 20 March 2009

CAn some please post the sales numbers for DVD/BRD over the last 3 months...and let's look at it YoY...



"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."

- From By Schism Rent Asunder

Ail on 20 March 2009
JWS said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
I`ve recently watched sunshine on DVD and on Blu-ray, and it was better picture quality and sound on Blu-Ray. That`s the reason Blu-Ray is better. It`s as easy as that.
Amen

Agreed, but I think you are missing the point. Nobody is arguing that BR looks and sounds better than DVD.

 

But still isn`t better? I always thought watching movies was all about sound and picture.

 

Well cost and access (relevant vs downloads) are pretty important to many of us.

 

Personally I'm far more interested in Blu-Ray as a PC storage medium than as an AV format. A Blu-Ray disc can hold a dozen Blu-Ray quality H.264 videos. Or a heck of a lot of backups.

 

The problem with using blu-ray as a storage medium is the price of blank discs. It's far cheaper to get an big external hd and use that as a back up.

 

Blank discs are down to a few bucks in Japan, so it's bound to happen sometime in the rest of the world too.

 



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Kos-mos on 20 March 2009
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:
I`ve recently watched sunshine on DVD and on Blu-ray, and it was better picture quality and sound on Blu-Ray. That`s the reason Blu-Ray is better. It`s as easy as that.
Amen

Agreed, but I think you are missing the point. Nobody is arguing that BR looks and sounds better than DVD.

 

But still isn`t better? I always thought watching movies was all about sound and picture.

 

Well cost and access (relevant vs downloads) are pretty important to many of us.

 

 

Ooooh. You`re talking about cost and access. I see, but still Blu-ray IS better than dvd.  You can`t say dvd is better because it`s cheaper and have more access, or is it the same with cars, games, computers, televisions, toasters, bed frames, condoms, dildos, tooth brushes just to mention a few. Quality over quantity or vice versa? What`s better?

I hope you realize how absurd that sounds. Of course cost and access are important. Let me give you an example. I would glady pay $15 for Return of the King , it is worth it. Would I pay $30? Hell no! The word "better" is not just based on picture quality or sound. If DVDs were unwatchable you would have a point, but they aren't.

 

To me it comes down access more than anything. Why would I buy a disc, that will only play in a few players when I can get the same thing online which will play on any TV in my house or on any computer?  Video is trailing music in the download department because of the bandwidth required but that is rapidly changing. I mean how many computer literate people buy CD's these days? None I know. Movies are just the next wave.

 

 

 But what the statement says: "Dvd IS better than Blu-Ray" is proven wrong when Blu-Ray have better quality and sound. Is that hard to understand? Or do I need to explain the words "IS BETTER" to ye? I`d pay 30 whatever instead of 15 for better sound and quality. If it had been the same quality of course prize would be the main factor.

Just look at PS3 vs. xbox. PS3 IS better, but is more expensive.

Ok so you`ve invested in several televisions. Good for ye. I need only one. And only one blu-Ray player.

I buy cd`s to support the company`s that bring good movies. It`s a physical collection instead of storing yer movies on a computer. That of course, is a matter of taste.

And just wait. Soon people will download Blu-Ray movies from the internet. It has already started.

 



Ail on 20 March 2009
DKII said:
If the Blu-Ray player I'd gotten with my 50" HDTV hadn't been free, I'd say it was a waste of money. You can recite all the stats you want at me, but the Blu-Ray discs are at best a tiny marginal upgrade over the upscaled DVDs it plays, with little to no functionality improvements that I've noticed (in fact, it's worse, since my player apparently can't play all BR discs even though all DVD players I've ever had can play all DVD discs). There's no reason for me to pay anything for it (no I don't have surround sound, either, and neither do most people, that's an even smaller niche than HD usage).

 

early DVD players could not read every DVDs either so I am not sure what is new there ( and the PS3 can actually read them all, your player probably could too if you updated the firmware).



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Khuutra on 20 March 2009
Kos-mos said:

 But what the statement says: "Dvd IS better than Blu-Ray" is proven wrong when Blu-Ray have better quality and sound. Is that hard to understand? Or do I need to explain the words "IS BETTER" to ye? I`d pay 30 whatever instead of 15 for better sound and quality. If it had been the same quality of course prize would be the main factor.

Just look at PS3 vs. xbox. PS3 IS better, but is more expensive.

Ok so you`ve invested in several televisions. Good for ye. I need only one. And only one blu-Ray player.

I buy cd`s to support the company`s that bring good movies. It`s a physical collection instead of storing yer movies on a computer. That of course, is a matter of taste.

And just wait. Soon people will download Blu-Ray movies from the internet. It has already started.

Robots don't say "ye".

No, blu-ray is not necessarily better than DVD, because it does not fit the needs of many people at this point. There will come a time when it will, most likely, but right now it does not. There is more to being "better" than just sound and image quality.

No, the PS3 is not necessarily better than the 360. It doesn't fit the needs of as many people either.

I'm not sure that "better" means what you think it means.

And yes people are already downloading blu-ray quality movies at a fraction of the size using modern compression algorithms, but thath as nothing to do with blu-ray as a medium.