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

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

Khuutra on 20 March 2009
Kos-mos said:
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:

It has better prize, but IT isn`t better. Needs isn`t the same as better. It is better, but people don`t need it? Well, in very very few cases. So I think I understand the word BETTER perfectly.

But the downloading has something to do with the NEEDS of something BETTER, right?

No, this shows pretty artfully that you don't know what "better" means in consumer circles.

It means that people consider it better as a balance of factors, not justh aving features that are better. Yes, price and utility come into that. Right now, DVDs are better for the average consumer. Like I said, that will change, but it doesn't change the reality of what's up right now.

 But do the article say: Better for the average consumer? No it says dvd is better than blu-ray. And that is what I was reacting to. Blu-Ray have better quality. So, I could write an article that says Blu-Ray is better than dvd, and you would have said "no, not for me as an average consumer..ehh...". But then I`d step forward and say: "IT HAVE BETTER QUALITY, SO IT IS BETTER".  Then I`d make an clearer statement of the word BETTER  (^_^)

No, higher quality would not make it better. IGN's article was also speaking about consumer needs, not just quality.

If you think blu-ray is going to be better for everyone, I have a bridge to sell you.

The bridge is totally mine to sell, you see.



Around the Network
Kos-mos on 20 March 2009
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:

It has better prize, but IT isn`t better. Needs isn`t the same as better. It is better, but people don`t need it? Well, in very very few cases. So I think I understand the word BETTER perfectly.

But the downloading has something to do with the NEEDS of something BETTER, right?

No, this shows pretty artfully that you don't know what "better" means in consumer circles.

It means that people consider it better as a balance of factors, not justh aving features that are better. Yes, price and utility come into that. Right now, DVDs are better for the average consumer. Like I said, that will change, but it doesn't change the reality of what's up right now.

 But do the article say: Better for the average consumer? No it says dvd is better than blu-ray. And that is what I was reacting to. Blu-Ray have better quality. So, I could write an article that says Blu-Ray is better than dvd, and you would have said "no, not for me as an average consumer..ehh...". But then I`d step forward and say: "IT HAVE BETTER QUALITY, SO IT IS BETTER".  Then I`d make an clearer statement of the word BETTER  (^_^)

No, higher quality would not make it better. IGN's article was also speaking about consumer needs, not just quality.

If you think blu-ray is going to be better for everyone, I have a bridge to sell you.

The bridge is totally mine to sell, you see.

 

Haha. So who isn`t Blu-Ray better for? Those who wants bad quality? Yuk yuk. Let`s just state: If you got some rupees to spend, Blu-Ray si BETTER. Good night. I`m off too bed now. Thanks for the arguments :)



heruamon on 20 March 2009
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:

It has better prize, but IT isn`t better. Needs isn`t the same as better. It is better, but people don`t need it? Well, in very very few cases. So I think I understand the word BETTER perfectly.

But the downloading has something to do with the NEEDS of something BETTER, right?

No, this shows pretty artfully that you don't know what "better" means in consumer circles.

It means that people consider it better as a balance of factors, not justh aving features that are better. Yes, price and utility come into that. Right now, DVDs are better for the average consumer. Like I said, that will change, but it doesn't change the reality of what's up right now.

 But do the article say: Better for the average consumer? No it says dvd is better than blu-ray. And that is what I was reacting to. Blu-Ray have better quality. So, I could write an article that says Blu-Ray is better than dvd, and you would have said "no, not for me as an average consumer..ehh...". But then I`d step forward and say: "IT HAVE BETTER QUALITY, SO IT IS BETTER".  Then I`d make an clearer statement of the word BETTER  (^_^)

No, higher quality would not make it better. IGN's article was also speaking about consumer needs, not just quality.

If you think blu-ray is going to be better for everyone, I have a bridge to sell you.

The bridge is totally mine to sell, you see.

Beta was "Better" than VHS...if the goal of brd supporters is for it to replace dvds...they are going to be sorely dissappointed.

 



"...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

Khuutra on 20 March 2009
Kos-mos said:
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:
Khuutra said:
Kos-mos said:

It has better prize, but IT isn`t better. Needs isn`t the same as better. It is better, but people don`t need it? Well, in very very few cases. So I think I understand the word BETTER perfectly.

But the downloading has something to do with the NEEDS of something BETTER, right?

No, this shows pretty artfully that you don't know what "better" means in consumer circles.

It means that people consider it better as a balance of factors, not justh aving features that are better. Yes, price and utility come into that. Right now, DVDs are better for the average consumer. Like I said, that will change, but it doesn't change the reality of what's up right now.

 But do the article say: Better for the average consumer? No it says dvd is better than blu-ray. And that is what I was reacting to. Blu-Ray have better quality. So, I could write an article that says Blu-Ray is better than dvd, and you would have said "no, not for me as an average consumer..ehh...". But then I`d step forward and say: "IT HAVE BETTER QUALITY, SO IT IS BETTER".  Then I`d make an clearer statement of the word BETTER  (^_^)

No, higher quality would not make it better. IGN's article was also speaking about consumer needs, not just quality.

If you think blu-ray is going to be better for everyone, I have a bridge to sell you.

The bridge is totally mine to sell, you see.

Haha. So who isn`t Blu-Ray better for? Those who wants bad quality? Yuk yuk. Let`s just state: If you got some rupees to spend, Blu-Ray si BETTER. Good night. I`m off too bed now. Thanks for the arguments :)

And if you don't?



averyblund on 20 March 2009
Kos-mos said:

 

Haha. So who isn`t Blu-Ray better for? Those who wants bad quality? Yuk yuk. Let`s just state: If you got some rupees to spend, Blu-Ray si BETTER. Good night. I`m off too bed now. Thanks for the arguments :)

 

Wow, just wow. I'm blown away by this argument especially in the middle of a global recession. Many people have zero interest in investing thousands of dollars in an AV setup. We have bills and priorities. BR is better to the video/audiophile with limitless funds. To people who just want a cheap disk that contains a film they love DVD is often good enough. The sarcasm in your post makes you come off as an elitest who is out of touch with the mainstream media buyer- normal people who would rather put food on the table than get an extra sound channel.

 

And to they guy saying you can download Blu-Ray movies- I'm stunned to hear something so hillarious on a site populated by nerds. You do realize Blu-Ray didn't invent HD right?

 

What really cracks me up is that I am videophile who rarely watches DVDs and even I understand the concept of not upgrading.



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

 

Around the Network
Rpruett on 20 March 2009
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:

 

Haha. So who isn`t Blu-Ray better for? Those who wants bad quality? Yuk yuk. Let`s just state: If you got some rupees to spend, Blu-Ray si BETTER. Good night. I`m off too bed now. Thanks for the arguments :)

 

Wow, just wow. I'm blown away by this argument especially in the middle of a global recession. Many people have zero interest in investing thousands of dollars in an AV setup. We have bills and priorities. BR is better to the video/audiophile with limitless funds. To people who just want a cheap disk that contains a film they love DVD is often good enough. The sarcasm in your post makes you come off as an elitest who is out of touch with the mainstream media buyer- normal people who would rather put food on the table than get an extra sound channel.

 

And to they guy saying you can download Blu-Ray movies- I'm stunned to hear something so hillarious on a site populated by nerds. You do realize Blu-Ray didn't invent HD right?

 

What really cracks me up is that I am videophile who rarely watches DVDs and even I understand the concept of not upgrading.

The point I think these people are making is that those were the same arguments that were used when the switch from VHS to DVD transpired and we all know how that turned out.

 



Deviation59 on 20 March 2009

Wow, I didn't expect that level of garbage from IGN.



averyblund on 20 March 2009
Rpruett said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:

 

Haha. So who isn`t Blu-Ray better for? Those who wants bad quality? Yuk yuk. Let`s just state: If you got some rupees to spend, Blu-Ray si BETTER. Good night. I`m off too bed now. Thanks for the arguments :)

 

Wow, just wow. I'm blown away by this argument especially in the middle of a global recession. Many people have zero interest in investing thousands of dollars in an AV setup. We have bills and priorities. BR is better to the video/audiophile with limitless funds. To people who just want a cheap disk that contains a film they love DVD is often good enough. The sarcasm in your post makes you come off as an elitest who is out of touch with the mainstream media buyer- normal people who would rather put food on the table than get an extra sound channel.

 

And to they guy saying you can download Blu-Ray movies- I'm stunned to hear something so hillarious on a site populated by nerds. You do realize Blu-Ray didn't invent HD right?

 

What really cracks me up is that I am videophile who rarely watches DVDs and even I understand the concept of not upgrading.

The point I think these people are making is that those were the same arguments that were used when the switch from VHS to DVD transpired and we all know how that turned out.

 

Well I think that is as stretch. DVD had a lot of advantages over VHS that don't exist between BR and DVD (rewinding, size, durabuility, production cost, ect). Plus back then online video was pretty limited, now it is everywhere.

 



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

 

Rpruett on 20 March 2009
averyblund said:
Rpruett said:
averyblund said:
Kos-mos said:

 

Haha. So who isn`t Blu-Ray better for? Those who wants bad quality? Yuk yuk. Let`s just state: If you got some rupees to spend, Blu-Ray si BETTER. Good night. I`m off too bed now. Thanks for the arguments :)

 

Wow, just wow. I'm blown away by this argument especially in the middle of a global recession. Many people have zero interest in investing thousands of dollars in an AV setup. We have bills and priorities. BR is better to the video/audiophile with limitless funds. To people who just want a cheap disk that contains a film they love DVD is often good enough. The sarcasm in your post makes you come off as an elitest who is out of touch with the mainstream media buyer- normal people who would rather put food on the table than get an extra sound channel.

 

And to they guy saying you can download Blu-Ray movies- I'm stunned to hear something so hillarious on a site populated by nerds. You do realize Blu-Ray didn't invent HD right?

 

What really cracks me up is that I am videophile who rarely watches DVDs and even I understand the concept of not upgrading.

The point I think these people are making is that those were the same arguments that were used when the switch from VHS to DVD transpired and we all know how that turned out.

 

Well I think that is as stretch. DVD had a lot of advantages over VHS that don't exist between BR and DVD (rewinding, size, durabuility, production cost, ect). Plus back then online video was pretty limited, now it is everywhere.

 

True to some degree. Although BR has much better scratch resistance, includes more perks, special features, etc as well as a much better picture quality.    BR also has that 'Final Format' mentality going for it.  How much beyond 1080p will we get?  Not much.  I mean UHDV is so far from Home living rooms,  it's not even funny.  People are getting sick from watching the UHDV and the size requirements that you would need for this format is astronomical.  

If we want to move into the HD generation?  Blu-Ray's adoption is only natural and will keep accelerating. Especially as more people get HD cable and enjoy the visual quality of it.  It's already set in motion.  Go to Best Buy, Wal Mart or any other store and take note and how quickly the BR section has grown from even a few months prior.  Almost all TVs you can buy now are HD Flat Screens in nature.  It's only going to accelerate.

The point is,  people can reliably upgrade to BR without the concern of something bigger and better.   While getting a picture quality that is pretty equivalent to real-life.  

 

 

And as for the recession? Recession's drive people to stay at home and entertain themselves at Home.    Home entertainment is going to be on the rise with the economy.  While  movie theatres, amusement parks,  shopping malls, etc will see a downturn.

 



Magnific0 on 20 March 2009

@DKII

Tiny marginal upgrade or not, it will become the next format just because it's backwards compatible. DVD players/roms will be phased out just as CD ROMS/players (for the most part) were phased out.