An interesting article - Read and Comment

[JimPullan]

Here is an article published with Hi-Def Digest. I found it interesting, you might as well. The author is Joshua Zyber. Neutral or Red slaant? The link is:

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/sh...the_Niche/1154


Jim

[Moefiz]

I saw this article yesterday and I don't fully agree with him.To an extent people couldn't care less about the format war they are happy with DVD for now i think is true but people spending 2500+ for a big screen tv just for show I have to disagree on.

[Deciazulado]

More fearing understandable death of his format articles from J

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

More fearing understandable death of his format articles from J

More of the usual red slant from JZ misleadingly presented as "neutral."

[dialog_gvf]

The video game market has survived and thrived for many years despite the presence of multiple formats. Why can't the High Definition market do the same? Peaceful coexistence should be possible.

It's the losing side that sues for peace, right?

[Jazar]

Originally Posted by Zyber

The video game market has survived and thrived for many years despite the presence of multiple formats. Why can't the High Definition market do the same? Peaceful coexistence should be possible. The split in studio support means that neither format will have 100% of movies that any given customer may want, but by the same token each video game console has its own highly-desirable exclusive titles. Hard core gamers buy every console, while casual gamers look at the selection available and pick the format that has more titles appealing to their taste. The same rationale applies here.

That line really made me sick. Is that really a desired result for some people? To fragment the home movie market with different but equal formats? A movie is just Video + Audio, there should be no need for different HD formats. Games have graphics, audio, input, networking, all of which can have different approaches with different price points that appeal to different audiences. It would be nice to have a single console where gamers can stop bickering but at least you can appreciate the distinctions.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

It's the losing side that sues for peace, right?

Yeah, but the winners make the terms.

[darinp2]

The video game market has survived and thrived for many years despite the presence of multiple formats. Why can't the High Definition market do the same? Peaceful coexistence should be possible.

Just because it is possible doesn't mean it is the best outcome. It is almost like Josh would prefer that things continue so that people who want all the content have to buy 2 players, or a more expensive combo player. Yet he uses the thing about prices coming down being good for consumers as if that means a war is good for consumers going forward. Even if it was good over the last year and half, that definitely doesn't mean it is good going forward. I personally think the ideal would be Blu-ray players coming in from at least 2 Chinese companies (which would guarantee they compete with each other) and then the studios moving toward Blu-ray. Then every Blu-ray player would pretty much be as good as a combo player for content going forward (in the sense that it will play all the content), but isn't likely to cost as much as combos.

I read that in 2005 before anything launched Microsoft was contacting retailers and telling them how bad having 2 formats would be. But then when HD DVD got behind they started pulling out this stuff about video games having incompatible formats, as if that means it is the best result for movies and other video. As dialog_gvf said, it is the side losing that sues for peace and looks like both Microsoft and Josh are pushing to not have one clear winner (at least as long as that would likely be Blu-ray). I wonder if Josh would have supported having 2 incompatible formats if DVD had been competing with a format built off modified CD replication machines that had 2/3rds the bandwidth of DVD and about 6GB per dual layer disc, and whether he thinks we would have been better off if we had ended up with 2 formats like that instead of a single format for all these years with DVD content.

Laserdisc was competing with what I believe was called SED, another format from RCA. Would Josh have been pushing for a split there instead of one winner? The situation he talks about as so good with Laserdisc was with one high end format dominating and the other one being dropped by its backers.

I'm not worried about these formats taking over for DVD as long as all the content gets released. And I already know of one group who released some content and has decided that releasing content on these just isn't worth it right now. With one format at price points that Blu-ray is likely to hit in the next few months I think that would be much less likely to be a problem, because while there are always going to be people who don't care about this stuff, there are definitely people who will buy much sooner if one format wins than if we continue with a split like now. I wonder if Josh doesn't know about the pullback in some content because of slow sales, or if he doesn't care. As he pointed out, Laserdisc got lots of content. But there was one key difference there. Publishers didn't have to make 2 versions of everything just for same enthusiast crowd. The war may be encouraging some studios to release more, but at this point I think the war continuing is going to cause some content to not get released on either one.

I personally prefer Blu-ray, but might choose an outright win for HD DVD soon over a split for the next few years where enthusiasts have to buy players for both or combo players. But Sony owns a studio, I'm a realist, and HD DVD isn't going to get all the content anytime soon even if things do go their way. I think Blu-ray has a lot more chance of giving us one format that gets pretty much all the content, like DVD. Especially with how things are going outside the US, where the odds of HD DVD winning in Japan are extremely slim.

Basically, I understand why Josh would tell enthusiasts to get both so they can enjoy both now, but do wonder why he seems to be in favor of a continued split market. His article doesn't tell me how that is better than one winner (especially since he leaves out some important stuff either because he doesn't know it, or didn't want to include it), just that it doesn't necessarily mean the death of these. Should we want a less than ideal outcome, especially compared to having one high end format, like Laserdisc had?

--Darin

[tru2blu707]

josh is stating some of the possible outcome of this format war. it can go the same route as laserdisc or it can go the same as video games with 2 formats. wether we want to admit it or not blu rays future is still unseen. this format war isnt doing anyone any good. people who buy video game consoles already know what they want. its 20 years of evolution. they know what is expected of a system. unlike hd dvd and blu ray where it has yet to hit the mainstream audience. most people dont even know what blu ray is. truth is if we dont hit the mainstream soon.....all this money were dishing out wont mean sqwat 5 years from now.

[WickyWoo]

The video game market has survived and thrived for many years despite the presence of multiple formats. Why can't the High Definition market do the same? Peaceful coexistence should be possible. The split in studio support means that neither format will have 100% of movies that any given customer may want, but by the same token each video game console has its own highly-desirable exclusive titles. Hard core gamers buy every console, while casual gamers look at the selection available and pick the format that has more titles appealing to their taste. The same rationale applies here.

I've explained that one many times, but I'll do it again for everyone's benefit

ONE movie studio has more titles than all 3 systems from last generation COMBINED.

Movies are kept perpetually in print, while 90% of games are run once, twice if you're lucky and then they're gone for good. Movie studios will not devote the space and production resources to supporting 3 formats, especially when 2 are essentially redundant

In summary- Game industry is a quick burn, fast turnover buisiness. Movies are low and slow with far less margin requiring greater volume to generate the same income. Hardware manufacturers don't get anything for the movies, but game systems get $8-10 a game.