digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

PS3 expected to remain the driving force behind Blu-ray

tgdaily.com — Lots of data on movie sales. It is somewhat obvious that the PS3 rescued the Blu-ray format from failure and if it wasn't for the PS3, movie sales could not protect themselves from HD DVD (if it was still alive) either. Funny to see that Microsoft sold only 316,000 Xbox 360 HD DVD add-ons.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • arlok789, on 07/02/2008, -5/+10Classic Business tactic. Attach one product to another product that you know is going to be successful to launch both and make more money.
    • Barackalypse, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3Sort of like AT&T with the iPhone.
    • zephyrxero, on 07/03/2008, -9/+2...but I could of swore it was supposed to read "BluRay remains driving force behind PS3 sales"
    • rockstar1o9, on 07/03/2008, -2/+5it doesn't always work out, especially for sony.

      umd discs + psp (umd never caught on outside the psp)
      memory stick + everything sony (sd wins)
      mini disc + walkman (at least in the united states, mp3/ipods eventually succeeded the tape/cd)
      i guess betamax can be added to the list too.
    • daridave, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1"make more money". That's the sad part. Are they making any with PS3 sales now, btw ? Not long ago, they were still losing with every console sold. Just wondering ...
      • dandonia, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2thats just how console sales work - the wii is the only one that made profit from the start and thats because it wasn't a major leap forward
      • DarkShroud, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1On manufactureing costs Sony is breaking even on the PS3 now. And yes the PS3 is selling, it's actually domination the 360 in all places out side the US. And when MGS4 came out it out sold the Wii in Japan.
    • ericrous, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Just like Marlboro did with "Mr. Teddy Bear Smokes-a-lot" in the 60's. I still blame that cuddly bastard for my smoking habit.
  • agisten, on 07/02/2008, -10/+3Mind boggling is how Gaming console's drive is virtually the only kind of Blu-Ray player out there and yet it was enough to win the war
    • seraph582, on 07/02/2008, -12/+4"Win the war?" What are you talking about? The war was over when Sony bought exclusivity rights from all movie publishers/makers. That's right, they got the people who license the movies to say they'd only release them on BluRay to the tune of some hundreds of millions of dollars.

      What does this mean? It means instead of the better format winning out by virtue of value, technology, advertising, etc. - they spent money they COULD have used to produce a better product or make the same product cheaper, and bought out the market. This means they now have ZERO incentive to bring down pricing or improve their product -- they have no competitors.

      I hope digital downloads send these ***** assholes to their financial graves. ***** you, Sony. ***** YOU.
      • WhereAmI, on 07/02/2008, -7/+20The better format did win.

        Go cry with your HD-DVD player in the corner, no one cares about you.
      • mattyice11, on 07/03/2008, -2/+13Digital downloads suck and aren't close to taking off. You can't resell or loan movies and the quality will be significantly worse until you go through multiple generations of compression technology. Not to mention that prices will be standardized leaving deal hunters like myself paying full price. You can already see it in the gaming world with Steam. It's a great service, but you can always find the boxed copies for less.
      • MewTwo, on 07/03/2008, -2/+6It doesn't matter the quality or "virtue of value" (whatever the ***** that means)... to you it just matters that it's Sony. Dumbass, Microsoft could have used those same marketing tactics and you would still come all over them. They're both multi-billion dollar corporations, douche, why don't you defend something else with your energy.
        Maybe instead of buying that gta content for millions of dollars, they should have put that money towards doing more research on their ***** product they put out a couple years ago. Same ***** ***** dude, businesses will be businesses. Well, I see you're a PC gamerso that doesn't apply to you.

        Oh yeah, and yes, WON the war. So if Microsoft was in the same position as Sony you would have said they didn't "win" the war? Give me a ***** break dude.
      • BlaqReaper, on 07/03/2008, -0/+7"This means they now have ZERO incentive to bring down pricing or improve their product -- they have no competitors."

        Last time I checked, there were other companies making Blu-Ray players too. Panasonic? Samsung? LG? It just happens Sony's PS3 is the cheapest and best player in the competition.
      • Zettabyte, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4At the start of the year cheapest BD drive was 300 bucks. Now they are $160.
      • DangerMouse9, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2@seraph

        You seem to forget how Universal, Dreamworks, (NBC) and a few other companies were HD exclusive as well. Why aren't you bitching about that?
    • Tahiri, on 07/03/2008, -2/+7Sony didn't buy exclusivity, they earned it via huge PS3 sales compared to other players which brought in huge amounts of bluray sales. Publishers follow the money, and more money is made with bluray. This is the reason studios cited as why they went with bluray. *****
    • MewTwo, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3What do you mean "...virtually the only kind of Blu-Ray player out there..."? Sure, PS3 put it out there, but... I know a few people who have stand alone blu-ray players.
      • dandonia, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1My girlfriends mum foolishly purchased a standalone BD player for £300 the other week - it's already out of date. She should have bought the PS3 for cheaper and she would have had a whole lot more than a bluray player
      • MewTwo, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1Yeah I mean, don't you want to have fun too? I don't get why people don't understand to get a PS3...
    • Barackalypse, on 07/03/2008, -0/+7The PS3 wasn't the only Bluray player, however it was the only one most people could justify spending that much money on, because it did more than just play movies.
  • FURIOUSgeorge24, on 07/02/2008, -0/+18"The EMA noted that only 44% of those who own a HDTV actually watch HD programming and 22% believe to watch HD programming, while they in fact do not."
    This is still unbelievable. Having worked at an electronics retailer in the past, it was easy to see first hand how much faster the technology was moving over the general public's understanding of it. So I guess kudos to the HD marketing people who have duped millions into buying products they have no idea how to use.
    • listereo, on 07/03/2008, -1/+9My dad bought a huge monstrosity of a cathode ray HD set. He likes to watch the sports highlights.

      It's muddy, the contrast is way too low, it's been turned up too bright, and every time I'm there, he's watching it in the mode intended for normal TV channels. The TV makes you "zoom in" on channels that are in HD to get them to fill the screen, and then manually "zoom out" again to get the full image of a SD channel. Ever time I return, he's got it zoomed out and he's squinting at the image, and I come in and fix it, and he settles back against the couch and stops killing his eyes to see the score.

      I guess years of "you turn it on and that's it, the TV is on" makes it hard to adjust to TVs that demand more noodling and prodding than Windows.
  • seraph582, on 07/02/2008, -23/+17"Funny to see that Microsoft sold only 316,000 Xbox 360 HD DVD add-ons."

    No, no it's not. At all. Microsoft's HD-DVD addon wasn't in the same position as the PS3. The PS3 is the cheapest BluRay player, and there are certainly cheaper ($99) HD-DVD players on the market than the XBox one - which is a peripheral for a gaming system - not the main drive for the gaming systerm. It makes perfect sense that the HD DVD addon wouldn't be as popular for these reasons. The author of the description of this article is either retarded or reeks of Sony fanboi.

    edit: also missing - this article is basically false -- (abysmal) sales figures show that the PS3 is being purchased mainly to watch BluRays on. Therefore it is BluRay that is saving the PS3's ass. Not the other way around.
    • WhereAmI, on 07/02/2008, -8/+16It is funny to see that Microsoft only sold 316,000 add-ons (using his numbers) after the 360 crowd was all around saying why get a PS3 when there's the HD-DVD add on which will win anyway?
    • Tahiri, on 07/03/2008, -9/+14Buried cause you reek of fantrollism
      • solesoul, on 07/03/2008, -7/+5Maybe he is a fanboy, but he does have a point.

        And before you accuse me of being a 360 fanboy, I dont have one, I'm a Wii owner.
    • MewTwo, on 07/03/2008, -4/+1"It makes perfect sense that the HD DVD addon wouldn't be as popular for these reasons."
      Are you reading your own post? It isn't about emotions it's about business, I tried to tell you...
    • SupaDawg, on 07/03/2008, -11/+6"Therefore it is BluRay that is saving the PS3's ass. Not the other way around."

      Couldn't have said it better myself.

      The PS3 attach rates are a sad sign for the Playstation brand, but a great sign for BluRay.
    • Darksoul, on 07/03/2008, -2/+1Wow more xbot fanboyism not surprised really though I have to ask why is it most of you xbox goons can't understand that sales on the ps3 have been constantly better then 360 sales. But then again to ask such a question is stupid because it assumes people like have a brain at all. Now if I where to ask about RROD and Disk Drive failures then you would have a point and please don't ***** me on the issues first consoles I bought this gen was a 360. Sounds to me your just pissed that hd-dvd lost.
    • brundlefly76, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2I bought my ps3 to play blu-ray - figured I would get a game for it, but there arent any games exclusive to the PS3 that I want.

      i was furious when i found out it wasnt backwards-compatible.
      • sodade, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2The PS3 can't play PS2 games? That's ***** lame.
      • WhereAmI, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1The 40GB won't and the 80GBs have half software half hardware that allows a certain amount of games to work (google the list). This was known for quite some time, it is how they reached the 400$ price point.
      • brundlefly76, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1yeah i know - what pissed me off is that I had heard that the ps3 had some backward compatibility, but I never considered that a console would only have *certain versions* that had compatibility and others that didnt, when I purchased mine.

      • DarkShroud, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1It says on the side of the box that it will not play PS2 games. And if you're going to spend that much money on a product maybe you should spend five minutes and research it first. The 80gig bundles (NTSC) play over 90% of PS2 games without a problem as Sony continues to improve the emulation software. The PAL bundles were in the 80% range of full PS2 compatibilty last time I checked.
  • jacksons98, on 07/02/2008, -3/+24And PS3 is going to remain the driving force until there is a better option. Currently not only is PS3 one of the least expensive, but also one of the best.
    • wolferz, on 07/03/2008, -9/+3It doesn't have hdmi 1.3

      No no no WAIT! Hear me out. While it does NOT have HDMI 1.3 it does have a PARTIAL implementation of HDMI 1.3.

      All that fancy loss less surround sound? PS3 can't transmit it over HDMI. It CAN decode Dolby TrueHD internally and then re-encode it as a multi-channel PCM (wav) stream which, depending on your receiver, may provide a very similar end result... but DTS-HD Master Audio is out of the question and many receivers do not handle Multi-Channel PCM the same way they handled Dolby or DTS streams.

      I almost decided against a PS3 as my blu-ray player for that reason... but most of the other players at the time didn't have any HDMI 1.3 or were god awful expensive. Oh... And they don't play rock band.

      That has now changed. Still dont play rockband though

      It's also not very convenient to try and play movies with the 6-axis controller and a universal remote is out of the question. (which means purchasing the proprietary one)
      • mattyice11, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4The remote thing does suck, but DTS-HD has already been patched in.
    • grassykid, on 07/04/2008, -1/+0the ps3 sucks sooooooooooooooooooo much it sucks so much xbox 360 is the best and PS gamers suck they have no life and no freinds
  • dujkan, on 07/02/2008, -13/+7that's a fascinating story but i think there never was HD-DVD vs Blu-ray war. the real war is physical media vs digital delivery model. i'm fed up with these companies thinking up the new media every 5-10 years, incompatible with previous formats. that forces me to purchase new players and other hardware equipment and to re-purchase all my existing libraray just to stay on top of the game.

    i want digital delivery, fairly priced, that can be readable and playable by any autohroized machine, be it a game console, a computer or a mobile phone.
    • MarkusX, on 07/03/2008, -4/+7I agree with you, digital delivery is probably the way to go for the future, although I love to have nice cases and professionally designed covers for all my movies.

      But if we'll have digital delivery, I certainly don't want my movies on my computer and CERTAINLY NOT on my frickin' cellphone. Whoever came up with that idea must have had some stock in miniturizing companies and medical prostheses production (my poor eyes).

      I DO want it delivered digitally and INSTANTLY (in other words streamed), much like Comcast OnDemand has it already, but a universal (unlimited) library to choose from.
      And what I want most, whatever format it comes in, I DO WANT to watch in comfortably in my couch on my big ass TV and nowhere else.
      Movietime is sacred time. When I watch a movie, I am not doing anything else, so why in the world would I want to watch a movie on a cellphone? ...or in my office chair in front of my computer?

      I am in the lucky position to own a couch, yeah!

      • solesoul, on 07/03/2008, -4/+2I understand not wanting movies on your phone, but whats wrong with them being on your computer? Ever heard of a laptop?
      • KJ83, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1Holographic Storage Disk.
    • solesoul, on 07/03/2008, -6/+2may I take this moment to ask why you are being dug down for being correct?

      *waits for dukjan's comment to get dugg up, making this reply irrelevant.*
    • MewTwo, on 07/03/2008, -1/+5No. That isn't the war. It isn't about movie formats. Most people still watch dvds. We're talking about HD movies (hence the HD format war), and that doesn't include cellphones, computer monitors, laptops...
      And a replier mentioned Comcast. Once again, we are caring about HD movies in this instance, and Comcast OnDemand looks very bad. So I would not want a system like Comcast because it would compromise quality. Yuck.
      Digital delivery in HD is not a reasonable expectation at this time.
      • MarkusX, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Accepted, my bad!

        I did in fact overlook, that we are talking HD exclusively. Therefore you are right at the current time the bandwidth (offered in the USA) would not allow HD streaming to your cable box or through DSL.

        I was the one mentioning Comcast OnDemand, and yes the quality is sometimes quite low (seeing MPEG artifacts during fast movements), but the convenience and simplicity is unrivaled. You are already sitting in front of your TV, so take the (same) remote, a few clicks later you are watching a movie, streamed just for you into your living room TV.
        It doesn't get any better, only the quality could of course improve. So I would say that is the way for the future.

    • WhereAmI, on 07/03/2008, -2/+4Look guys we all know what digital media is and all probably used it at one point, but point to the grandma that has a ***** hard drive in her entertainment center.
      • SupaDawg, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3Point to the grandma that has an HD-DVD player or Blu-Ray player. lol

        Hell, I'm a pretty heavy duty tech obsessed guy, and even i don't have one, nor do i want one.
      • WhereAmI, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1"Point to the grandma that has an HD-DVD player or Blu-Ray player. lol"
        Mine?
        Not HD-DVD because she's not an idiot but she has a Blu-Ray player. It goes with her HDTV along with the HDTV receiver for the over-the-air HDTV.

        Thats fine if you don't want one, people with CRTs don't need a Blu-Ray player.
    • MewTwo, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1I just realized you're not actually so wrong, just sensationally irrational, "i want digital delivery, fairly priced, that can be readable and playable by any autohroized machine, be it a game console, a computer or a mobile phone."
      Sigh... wouldn't that be nice? Don't we all want that? Ha.
    • cytric79, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0Yeah, I recently got the Vudu box and have been quite pleased with it. Works a lot better than Comcast On Demand (better controls for pausing and rewinding, I don't like the 2 second delay everytime I click on something).
    • TwiztOG43, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4the only problem with digital delivery media is that not many people have a fast enough internet connection to download those Hi-Def videos and another thing that is about to limit this is that "some" companies now are "beta" testing "pay per GB" and i dont think many people will be able to afford it once the they switch to this new pricing plan.
    • truspect0r, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3Not sure about that considering my ISP has started showing up bandwidth usage and rumors from credible sources are stating they'd limit monthly bandwidth to 50GBs
  • Tenlow, on 07/03/2008, -1/+10Why isn't the fact that BluRay no longer has a competitor the "driving force" behind it?
    • JayD16, on 07/04/2008, -1/+1It does. It has to compete with, HD Cable, HD Satellite, video on demand, Netflix, bit torrent as well as good old fashion DVD.
  • CIAVT, on 07/03/2008, -6/+5Blu-ray looks awesome on my 20" Sony Triniton.
  • willynilly, on 07/03/2008, -7/+3"and if it wasn't for the PS3, movie sales could not protect themselves from HD DVD (if it was still alive)"

    ...and if it WEREN'T for the PS3, movie sales could not protect themselves from HD DVD (if it WERE still alive)...
  • Barackalypse, on 07/03/2008, -10/+4I don't want to buy easily scratched pieces of plastic for $20 a piece. How about someone like Verizon or Comcast build a giant video on demand service with every single DVD title that has ever been available for sale and charge me an extra $29.95 or $39.95 a month for access to it? It would be kind of like Netflix Watch Now, except with 20x more stuff and full bitrate versions. And yes, my actual internet speeds allow me to download 70 gigabytes a day, so don't tell me it would take forever to get HD movies, because I could get 3 or 4 a day.
    • SolituSneiku, on 07/03/2008, -1/+11You obviously didn't see the video where a Blu-Ray was scratched with steel wool all over and still played like a charm....either way not everyone has High Speed nor do I want to see "Buffering" while I'm sitting with a bowl of popcorn and my gf's head resting on my shoulder....sorry not romantic
    • wolferz, on 07/03/2008, -0/+8Yes I'd love to pay money for a movie ($7) and then pay for it again when I watch it again the next night with friends ($14)... and again when we watch it a year later in preparation for the sequel($20), and again when my third son is old enough to understand it ($24), and again when I'm feeling nostalgic($28). Oh and the rental fee for the box to hook up to my tv ($5.00 plus $3.50 in hidden fees a month). I suppose the entire family could huddle around the computer but that's just so uncomfortable...

      Or I could just buy the disk pre-owned two days after it is released ($15) and not leave it laying around outside the case like a moron ($0).
    • phinn, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Easily scratched? You must really be careless. The Bluray plastic technology is like 10x stronger than DVDs, not to mention with the best video/audio quality you can currently get (1920x1080p and uncompressed TrueHD audio) they are worth taking care of.

      I Netflix all my Blu-rays, and I've yet to see a single one scratched. It's quality stuff.
  • LucerinRed, on 07/03/2008, -6/+9I own a PS3, but since HDDVD lost and Bluray movie prices went back up, I'm not paying a dime for them. I'll live with my lower but satisfactory definition DVDs until Bluray gets to under $20 a pop
    • staticneuron, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4Try amazon. Honestly it is insane to pay the MSRP prices for BR. JR sometimes have sales that drop BR's down to 10-13 bucks.

      People just need to look more.
      • ibeetle, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3Even Best Buy has over 100 titles under $25.00.
        Manufactures did not raise prices. Retailers stopped having discounts and sales. Retailers have learned.
        In the past 3 months I have purchased 5 new Blu-ray Disc titles. Not one cost over $25.00. Two under $20.00.
    • sodade, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2I am confused. Why are you buying movies? Haven't you heard of Netflix?
    • phinn, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Eh, I don't buy them yet either, I got a $8.99/month Netflix that lets me rent unlimited Blu-rays. I love it. Plus it plays all the best games, it's a win win.
    • DarkShroud, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Best Buy has good sales every few weeks on Blu-ray. BB will also price match to Amazon.com and Deepdiscount.com as long as you take a print out into the store with you. I have a stack of Blu-ray that I love and I've never payed more than $25 for one. Hell some 2-disc DVD sets are still around $25-$30.
  • tama00, on 07/03/2008, -5/+19'Blu ray movies are WAY overpriced.' - i think that line says it all.
    • staticneuron, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4""According to the EMA, the average Blu-ray title was priced at $33.03, while HD DVD movies cost an average of $31.77. Contrary to common belief, these prices were not much higher than new theatrical releases on DVD, which were priced at an average of $27.13, the EMA said"


      This says it better. Besides amazon has been selling blu ray and hd dvd's for under $20 for more than a year now. Just need to look.
      • munkyxtc, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1I think the problem with this analysis is they are using MSRP averages. Even so BR & HD DVD are $5.90 and $4.64 more expensive per disc respectively when compared to regular ole dvd.

        Now, that being said; if you check the ads in your Sunday paper and look at the sale prices of your new release dvd's will be priced around $17-19 each; whereas new BR titles are listed for $25-35 each. That is a difference of $6-18 per disc. This right here is what keeps people from adopting the format, there are much deeper price cuts to new movies on standard dvd. Most people feel that BR are only marginally better in picture quality than upscaled standard def dvd's and therefore do not justify the additional cost.
    • ibeetle, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3Cars on standard definition DVD $19.00
      Cars on Blu-ray Disc $21.00

      Oh yea... Blu-ray is soooo expensive.
      • truspector, on 07/03/2008, -6/+1Cars rented from blockbuster on DVD $4, single layer dvd to burn it on $0.05.

        Yeah, DVD will be around for a while.
      • mywhitenoise, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3Have you seen Cars on blu-ray? I actually got the blu-ray for $5 at Toys R Us when they were doing this amazing deal. That movie is probably the cleanest picture I have seen on blu-ray, looked incredible. Too bad the movie sucked, and I sold it right away.
    • tama00, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2You know what the funniest thing is? That line i quoted from the article DOESNT EVEN APPEAR IN THE ARTICLE!
      I just pretended it did and to anyone who actually read the article would know!

      This whole thing just proves how many digg readers Actually read the article and i can assure you from the response i got, ITS ***** LOW.
  • clesch, on 07/03/2008, -1/+12It doesn't matter how you look at it, the product strategists at Sony did a pretty stunning job with the whole PS3-Bluray symbiosis.
    Bluray feeds PS3 sales and the PS3 feeds Bluray sales.
    I'm actually considering the purchase of a PS3 now, as are many other people that didn't think so highly of the PS3 when it was first launched.
  • staticneuron, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4"According to the EMA, the average Blu-ray title was priced at $33.03, while HD DVD movies cost an average of $31.77. Contrary to common belief, these prices were not much higher than new theatrical releases on DVD, which were priced at an average of $27.13, the EMA said"

    "A total of 12,177 DVDs (including HD media, and all types of content, including TV shows) were released in 2007, which is down 13,637 in 2006."

    "The PS3 is widely believed to remain the primary driver behind Blu-ray sales, as 87% of PS3 owners said they watch Blu-ray movies on their console."

    Let us see how low the dvd numbers will drop for 08. Alot of this information in this article just flies in the face of what alot of people have been saying against blu ray and the HD market in general. Take for instance the argument that was brought up last year about only 33% of PS3 owners watching blu ray was nonesense. And everyone with their head on straight new it.
  • ButchersBoy, on 07/03/2008, -6/+7Joe Consumer doesn't feel much urge to get Blu Ray. It's nowhere near the step from VHS to DVD, and came a lot sooner. For the likes of us gamers, great (though personally I have a 360, Wii, and Blu Ray in my PC), but to be quite frank, my parents couldn't give a sh1t. DVD does just fine for them.
    • truspect0r, on 07/03/2008, -3/+5Not when you have a 1080p capable TV, and those are cheap and getting cheaper.
    • elvenseven, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2VHS to DVD?

      VCD to Blu-ray is a huge step/difference.
    • MelroseMan, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1I don't think I like blu ray as much because I see better looking on the tv than in person! That's too strange for my taste.
  • zeptobyte, on 07/03/2008, -3/+12Xbox 360 expected to remain the driving force behind Xbox Live.
    • NipGrip, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1As opposed to the PC implementation of Live, which has been an utter failure.
  • micflo, on 07/03/2008, -10/+3Go to Best Buy for all your High Definition needs, where associates will be more than happy to educate anyone on the possibilities of an HD setup.

    with service plans and Geek Squad installation.
    • feacesface, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Can you tell me about the Best Buy Rewards program? I would like the full spiel.
  • Kosher1947, on 07/03/2008, -7/+2Not to be a dick here, but MS has said that they are developing a Blu-ray player for Xbox 360; assuming it is not vaporware I am in.

    Also realize that one of the reasons why PS2 got accepted so fast was it was a cheap DVD player, while PS3 is an average priced Blu-ray, which is awsome for gamers, but the average person doesn't care. So with me, maybe anoher few months.
    • staticneuron, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3They hav not said that. It was a rumor.... and they shot that one down quickly.
    • Darksoul, on 07/03/2008, -2/+2Yeah but sorry it will never be in 360, its way to late in the game to even try to put one in. And as staticneuron said it was debunked as a rumor.
  • Born4Surf, on 07/03/2008, -3/+3Blu ray movies are totally over priced at the moment!
  • Bozmanbeyond, on 07/03/2008, -2/+1$36 to video games? I wish thats all it cost. Thats not even one game because I don't think every one is buying PS2 or Wii games only.
  • gavincato, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3it's not just picture on bluray that is a jump. everyone talks about the picture and forgets the sound, which I think is a bigger leap from dvd than the pic quality jump is.

    A good bluray disc with a uncompressed pcm soundtrack or a lossless compression like dts hd is un fuggen believable, I can't get enough of them.
  • coolearl, on 07/03/2008, -3/+4"Funny to see that Microsoft sold only 316,000 Xbox 360 HD DVD add-ons."

    Because people buy the 360 to PLAY video games. I've had my PS3 for 5 months and I still have yet to do anything with it other than watch 2 Blu ray movies, watch 5 trailers that have been out for over a year and play the demo of Echochrome.
    • rusty123jimi, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3Maybe you should go out and buy MGS4, Uncharted, Resistance, Warhawk...and maybe UT3 if you love shooters. I'm thinkin' it's COMPLETELY your fault that the PS3 bores you...there's lots of good stuff out for it these days...
      • zofobread, on 07/03/2008, -3/+2Yuck. I can't even read a Blu Ray article these days without someone spitting out the same handful of PS3 titles to defend the Playstation's lack of a gaming library. With the exception of MGS4, those are all mediocre titles at best, and not everyone has the same taste in games you do. That list is almost all shooting games, and only one of those games has sold enough titles to hoot and holler over. God, I hate fanboys.
      • phinn, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Yea, PS3 has hands down the best games out there. Along with awesome Bluray capabilities. It's the best system.
  • zaptoman, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3"Driving force"? Last I knew blu-ray sales for PS3s were somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.2 discs per console.
  • petecampbell, on 07/03/2008, -2/+4Unfortunately, Blu-Ray is about the only reason I even use my PS3 lately.
    • somesthetic, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2I've never even heard of Metal Gear.
      • petecampbell, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2I have, and I completed it.
      • korvan504521, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1the problem with a game thats more like a movie is that after you've beaten it, you really don't have a lot of reason to play it again. everyone I talk to loves the new metal gear game for the awesome story and cut scenes, rather than the gameplay.. Which are the same reasons people like movies, and a lot of people won't watch the same movie more than once a year.
      • Mejogid, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1@korvan504521
        Fortunately, there's MGO, and a huge variety of unlockables and bonuses you can get by playing through a second or even third time. Not to mention that the story takes on a different light when in the perspective of its eventual ending, and a lot of the fight sequences bare watching twice. Besides, you can skip any boring cut sequences. Oh, and pretty much every stage can be played either as a FPS or traditional stealth game, with hundreds of side alleys to explore. If there's any game which deserves to be played more than once, it's MGS4.
  • paidhima, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3"Contrary to common belief, these prices were not much higher than new theatrical releases on DVD, which were priced at an average of $27.13, the EMA said."

    I think the big question is this:

    Who's paying $30+ for theatrical releases on DVD to offset the $15-20 new releases generally cost and bring the average up to $27? Unless they're including TV shows (and those aren't 'theatrical releases') that's a hell of a lot of $29.99 special super edition DVDs. What, does everyone buy their DVDs from FYE two weeks after release?
    • DarkShroud, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1I rent most movies online now. If I'm going to buy a movie I get it the week it's released at Best Buy when they're usually on sale. Best Buy will price match to Amazon.com & Deepdiscount.com. Now if only my local sales tax wasn't 10%.
  • DatoeDakari, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Hmm, where's Dan11023?
  • phinn, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5All the best games and all the best movies. I love my PS3.
    • SillyHatMafia, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Warhawk, sweet sweet Warhawk
    • grassykid, on 07/04/2008, -1/+0it sucks so much its the 360 that rocks
  • SillyHatMafia, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Is this really surprising? Perhaps at launch yet it would.. but once they lowered the price and than offered the 40 GB for only $400 it was kinda expected. The PS3 is the cheapest Blu Ray Player ( Or one of the cheapest ) and ( In the US ) it will be a video download service this summer, its great for media in general
  • P5ycHo, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1Movies on discs are going obsolete very soon.
  • micflo, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1My pleasure for every $250 you spend at the store you receive a $5 reward certificate either US Mail or e-mail. Also we are releasing a new Rewards Program which grants a special 45 day return policy on all items!!!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.