| HappySqurriel said: When people claim that "Blu-Ray isn't worth it" what they are typically refering to is that most people don't notice enough of a difference on their TV, at the difference they view the movie at, when the images are not played back-to-back (or side by side) to justify the massive price difference between the two formats. To understand why people might not see it your way, I want you to put both images on your screen and for you to stand 10 feet away and decide whether the difference in quality between the two images justifies spendinging hundreds of dollars on a Blu-Ray player and (often) $20+ more for every movie you buy. People's opinions will change when they only "have to" spend $50 for a Blu-Ray player and can pick up movies in the Bargain Bin for $5 to $10 |
I would tend to agree with this. DVD was seen as a huge leap in quality and features over VHS. Blu Ray is looked at as an upgraded DVD by the average consumer. That is not to say that it isn't a great improvement, it is. Also, there are a number of people who have 300 + DVD's in their collection such as myself that drove DVD sales for quite a while, that don't see a need to replace those said 300 + DVD's with Blu Ray. I will buy new Blu Ray movies when they are released; but I won't be replacing the majority of my comedies and classics, other than movies that will be more dependent on visuals such as The Matrix, and The Lord Of The Rings.
