Gaming Format War?!

[James]

[quote]
Back then it was an ancient technology, and the argument as I remember it wasn't so much "VHS is good enough." It was "DVD isn't all that impressive."[/quote]

[color=#606060]Right, I see your point. But this is essentially the argument you are putting forward in this thread, isn't it?

You're not saying there's anything wrong with DVD - far from it - you are just pointing out that you don't find Blu-ray impressive enough to warrant switching over.

My point is that the environment was the same during the VHS/DVD switch. So in actual fact we agree on that point, haha.[/color]

[quote]Sure, upscaling is radically different than a film being "made" in a native hi-def resolution. But realistically, it doesn't matter, because when something like Jurassic Park is upscaled and still blows you away, visually, that's incredibly significant.[/quote]

[color=#606060]Oh yeah, I don't doubt that Jurassic Park looks good upscaled. Don't forget that Jurassic Park on Blu-ray would likely be upscaled. So if you are blown away by upscaled imagery, you'd be even more impressed with native HD content.

Another comparison is probably Wii and Xbox 360. My HDTV upscales Wii, essentially. It looks great. But on an HD set, I notice big difference between native resolutions.

The same will essentially be true for next generation formats, at least when we get proper native resolutions going. This difference will be even more noticeable as movies become increasingly filmed in digital formats.[/color]

[quote]n all honesty, I see this format war puttering out. There's not going to be a clear winner, even four or five years from now. And whichever format does come out on top is going to be seeing immense competition from the few companies who were exploring and expanding digital distribution. And come to think of it, big reason I see that digital distribution might take another few years to really kick off is because so many companies are focusing all of these resources on physical media.[/quote]

[color=#606060]Well there are a few things there.

First, companies are definitely heavily invested in physical media. If you went to the board of Time Warner and told them that discs will be irrelevant in five years, they would all laugh at you; it's still a critical part of their business and will continue to be at least for another decade.

In terms of not being a clear winner, I think you'll find that there probably will be a decisive winner in the end. It is not in the industry's interest to have a protracted format war - it divides markets and ultimately harms publishers.

At this stage Blu-ray is the clear front runner and whoever has the momentum at this point is more likely to win. So those predicting a Blu-ray victory are probably going to be right, at this stage.

In the end I think publishers will probably focus on both digital and physical distribution. It's a question of infrastructure, consumer interest, copyright concerns and various other elements.

I think that both formats will sit side-by-side for quite a few years yet. Physical media complements digital media in many respects.

It'll be a long time before we see digital distribution taking up even 50% of the total market. But eventually, down the track, I'm sure we'll see digital distribution coming out on top.

In terms of Internet 2 (which I'm sure is actually different to Web 2.0, if I'm not mistaken), I don't even think it's an issue right now.

Many world markets are still struggling to implement basic broadband infrastructure of an average broadband speed. The issue we are discussing doesn't relate to bleeding-edge, it relates to mass market. And infrastructure has long been a cause of slower mass market penetration for many systems. I think it'll be another decade or so before global networks are at a point where the mass market experience becomes completely doable. Right now it's all still very, very early.

Xbox Live is a good example of how early it is, actually. Microsoft haven't yet begun full media distribution through that service. And even when they do, it will only reach a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.

So at this stage it's still very much an enthusiast thing - the Xbox 360 isn't going to standardize digital distribution, because it is not a mass market device.

Even if all ten million Xbox 360 owners in America went online tomorrow...that's still a tiny fraction of the audience needed to outright replace physical media. And we're only talking one country there too, of course.[/color]

[Doublehex]

[QUOTE]
Actually, I did the math and there's no reason they shouldn't be able to get 26 HD quality episodes on one 50 GB disc. Given a 26 minute running length per episode, that's 26 x 26 = 676 minutes of video. 676 x 60 gets us 40,560 seconds. Now let's say episodes are encoded at, oh, 9,000 kbps. 40,560 x 9,000 = 365,040,000 kilobits. Divide that by 8 to get 45,630,000 kilobytes, then divide by 1,024 twice to get ~43.5 gigabytes?easily enough room for all 26 episodes.[/QUOTE]

Since when was our Link obsessed admin a major in mathematics?

In other news, I believe the Blu-Ray will come out in the end. Reason? More space. With just computers alone, people will be willing to push out a few extra bucks just to hold more stuff. There's also the fact that Blu-Ray is requiring all computer manufacturers to have the Blu-Ray drive be backwards compatible with DVDs - or at least that's what I read a while back.

[Red]

[quote name='The Blue Jihad']And come to think of it, big reason I see that digital distribution might take another few years to really kick off [I]is because[/I] so many companies are focusing all of these resources on physical media.[/quote]

That's awfully vague. What about the fact that the big media companies are quite schizophrenic about whether their catalogues will be available to legal online distributors? Or that sales are poor because customers don't enjoy the (very) restrictive DRM & lack of physical product despite most movies being the price of a normal DVD?

[quote]EDIT: Des, the industry is looking at it as a new, faster way to distribute information using existing technology. Combine that faster, more efficient means with fiberoptics and you've got yourself a remarkably better way to transfer data.

[URL]http://www.internet2.edu/[/URL]

Plus, even as much as you'd like to be a little ***** about it, Internet2 (or Web 2.0, whichever you prefer) isn't something to be scoffed at. It's a viable new way of examining data and information transfer.[/QUOTE]

The industry is currently looking to throttle nearly all kinds of distribution until they can figure out how to monetise it in a way they like.

From what you've said it seems like you've linked to a site you haven't read. :/

Web 2.0 is a buzzword with no real meaning outside of Tim O'Reilly's fluffy mind; Internet2 is a group overseeing the installations & use of high-speed fibre backbones among companies/universities that exchange huge amounts of data. That sort of speed being made available for everybody else is a [i]long[/i] way off (who will lay & pay for the fibre? Who will maintain it? Where will the capacity come from? Sure as heck won't be Sony or MGM). I sincerely doubt media companies are interested in having people illegally download HD movies in mere minutes.

DVR is slightly better but it has a long way to go.

[Desbreko]

[color=#4B0082]Oh snap, Red pwned him before I could. But still, it always makes me lol when Alex throws around technology-related terms without knowing what they mean.[/color] :lecture:

[quote name='Matt']Since when was our Link obsessed admin a major in mathematics?[/QUOTE][color=#4B0082]I've been good at math pretty much forever. But my good friend Mr. Calculator helped me with those bit rate calculations.[/color]

[Guest The Blue Jihad]

"pwned" nothing, Des. Have a cookie. Better yet, get laid. You'll feel better.

[quote name='Red']That's awfully vague. What about the fact that the big media companies are quite schizophrenic about whether their catalogues will be available to legal online distributors? Or that sales are poor because customers don't enjoy the (very) restrictive DRM & lack of physical product despite most movies being the price of a normal DVD?[/quote]

Vague? Like I said earlier, digital distribution still has issues. But those issues are due to most companies failing (neglecting) to establish any real standardization. Catalogue problems? Poor sales? Restrictive DRM? Classic examples of corporate half-assery. What you say is vague I say is a summary.

[quote]The industry is currently looking to throttle nearly all kinds of distribution until they can figure out how to monetise it in a way they like.[/quote]

And they'll suffer for it.

[quote]From what you've said it seems like you've linked to a site you haven't read. :/[/quote]

Nah. I just wanted to summarize instead of going into every little detail.

[quote]Web 2.0 is a buzzword with no real meaning outside of Tim O'Reilly's fluffy mind[/quote]

While his individual points about Amazon and Google seem asinine, his thoughts on designing systems with user flexibility in mind are pretty smart (especially hackability), as are his views regarding a sort of "collective intelligence." I see Web 2.0 as a concept that can very easily be used along with more powerful infrastructures to create a much better and more efficient national/global network. Embracing the user is something that most companies--especially the media a-holes--have yet to actually do. Sure, "Web 2.0" itself can be seen as a buzzword. But the underlying philosophy behind it isn't fluffy at all.

[quote]Internet2 is a group overseeing the installations & use of high-speed fibre backbones among companies/universities that exchange huge amounts of data. That sort of speed being made available for everybody else is a [I]long[/I] way off (who will lay & pay for the fibre? Who will maintain it? Where will the capacity come from? Sure as heck won't be Sony or MGM).[/quote]

Ah yes, the universities. Birthplace of the internet. Seems only fitting that universities are again the starting place for the next huge technological breakthrough in data transfer. You honestly aren't sure who would pay for the national/global fiber lines? Tax dollars, obviously. Who wouldn't prefer their money going toward that than, say, a government-endorsed "Focus on the Family" media campaign?

[quote]I sincerely doubt media companies are interested in having people illegally download HD movies in mere minutes. DVR is slightly better but it has a long way to go.[/quote]

While I don't agree with illegally downloading, I can't say that I'm terribly sympathetic to the media companies' plights. Illegal downloads aren't the problem; it's unregulated, non-standardized digital distribution. I'm amazed that so few businesses and companies haven't caught on how to [I]use[/I] the allure of digital distribution. Regarding DVR, considering how far it's come in the past year with such limited support, and how useful it already is...with the right backing, I don't see it having a long way to go at all.

I'll get to James later today. Got stuff to do around here.

[Red]

Ahh, quote tangents. Weren't we all talking about green ray a page back, or something? :p

[quote name='The Blue Jihad']Vague? Like I said earlier, digital distribution still has issues. But those issues are due to most companies failing (neglecting) to establish any real standardization. Catalogue problems? Poor sales? Restrictive DRM? Classic examples of corporate half-assery. What you say is vague I say is a summary.[/quote]

What are you on about? My point was that you [i]didn't[/i] summarise most points of why uptake of digital distribution has been so poor, which is why I mentioned things such as DRM!

[quote]Nah. I just wanted to summarize instead of going into every little detail.[/quote]

You said Internet2 was "...a viable new way of examining data and information transfer." Not for us it isn't, certainly not anytime soon! You also claimed Web 2.0 = Internet2, which certainly isn't the case. Summaries involve facts, not conjecture & poor understanding!

[quote]While his individual points about Amazon and Google seem asinine, his thoughts on designing systems with user flexibility in mind are pretty smart (especially hackability), as are his views regarding a sort of "collective intelligence."[/quote]

Wikipedia is a classic example of how well collective intelligence works. Not going to bother arguing the rest of the Web 2.0 stuff because it leads to much frothing at the mouth from all sides :p

[quote]Ah yes, the universities. Birthplace of the internet. Seems only fitting that universities are again the starting place for the next huge technological breakthrough in data transfer. You honestly aren't sure who would pay for the national/global fiber lines? Tax dollars, obviously. Who wouldn't prefer their money going toward that than, say, a government-endorsed "Focus on the Family" media campaign?[/quote]

Universities had a hand in the creation of the internet but they weren't the birthplace. Nor were they the only starting point for internet2.

Fibre is incredibly expensive to lay, install & maintain. There's a reason there is so much "dark fibre" (lines that haven't been switched on) in the US, and why it wasn't taken up by many countries at all.

[quote]While I don't agree with illegally downloading, I can't say that I'm terribly sympathetic to the media companies' plights. Illegal downloads aren't the problem; it's unregulated, non-standardized digital distribution. I'm amazed that so few businesses and companies haven't caught on how to [I]use[/I] the allure of digital distribution. Regarding DVR, considering how far it's come in the past year with such limited support, and how useful it already is...with the right backing, I don't see it having a long way to go at all.[/quote]

Unregulated, non-standardised digital distribution...in other words, illegal downloading? I don't understand what you're getting at with that point.

Agree with what you say about companies not catching on though; I suppose you have executives and the like to thank for that. I'm guessing you live in the US, where DVR has had a pretty good run for the past few years. Over here in the UK it's been an abysmal failure.

[James]

[color=#606060]Your point about fibre networks is another reason why physical media is going to remain dominant for quite some time - and why it's both necessary and logical to look for a replacement to the existing DVD format.

I'm glad you joined the discussion, Red. You clarified the differentiation between Web 2.0 and Internet 2 (I was certain they were different but I'm not an expert on the detail). That was a necessary distinction, nevertheless.

I also think it's worth pointing out that mass digital distribution - as a replacement for physical media - is absolutely relevant and worthwhile in theory. But any discussion involving that theory needs to recognise the very real physical and regulatory constraints that exist today.

The debate about fibre optic networks is interesting because this is actually something Australia is struggling with right now.

We do have an existing cable infrastructure but there is much debate about the development of a [i]new[/i], ultra-high speed fibre optic network. Why is there that debate? Simply because of the massive, massive expense. And I know such debates are occurring in other wealthy nations as well (including the U.S.)

So while the overall concept of how digital distribution might be a reasonable replacement for digital media at some point is fair to consider...I do think it has to go hand-in-hand with an understanding of the realities as well. It's important to understand [i]why[/i] new physical media formats are being sought by major industry players.

Also as a footnote to this...I read today that Howard Stringer thinks that Blu-ray and HD-DVD are basically neck and neck. There have been a few recent shifts on the part of some key major publishers (Paramount, anyone?)

It's interesting that there are still major publishers supporting HD-DVD. I know why they're doing it, but if retailer support doesn't change...I imagine it will be difficult for the HD-DVD consortium.[/color]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='James'][color=#606060]We do have an existing cable infrastructure but there is much debate about the development of a [i]new[/i], ultra-high speed fibre optic network. Why is there that debate? Simply because of the massive, massive expense. And I know such debates are occurring in other wealthy nations as well (including the U.S.)

So while the overall concept of how digital distribution might be a reasonable replacement for digital media at some point is fair to consider...I do think it has to go hand-in-hand with an understanding of the realities as well. It's important to understand [i]why[/i] new physical media formats are being sought by major industry players.[/color][/QUOTE]There's another thing to consider as well, until better networks are in place, services like say Comcast, are coming down on what they consider bandwidth hogs. People who download/stream a lot of material. So even if you want to rely on digital distribution, at the moment, attempting to go that route can land you in the position of being given a warning to back off or have your Internet service cut.

Right now, it's easier to have a system that does not rely on digital distribution since the set up to support it just doesn't really exist yet. At least not on the scale of getting everything that way. Plus, I would rather have most of my stuff in a physical format anyway. So better storage in a physical format is what I want to see.

[Morpheus]

HD-DVD is looking to push ahead with the exclusive support of The Weinstein Company, Dreamworks, Dreamworks Animation, Paramount, and Universal accompanied by a much lower price and smoother, better functionality. HD-DVDs entry player increased it's market penetration by 35% in 3 days when the price was dropped to $99. The PS3, Blu-Ray's main player, was even outsold last week in japan by the Xbox 360, a console that has never sold well in japan to begin with.

On the topic of digital distribution, it won't materialize in the next decade if ever for 3 main reasons:

1. Storage Constraints- Only a certain number of movies will fit on a HD before another cumbersome drive is required.
2. Download Speeds- Most people just don't have the connection to justify digital distribution. People also like to use the internet freely without a huge download bogging down the connection.
3. Resale Value- Digital distributions have none, and people like to have that safety net. Much more relevant for video games, but still relevant here.

[James]

[quote] The PS3, Blu-Ray's main player, was even outsold last week in japan by the Xbox 360, a console that has never sold well in japan to begin with.[/quote]
[font=franklin gothic medium]
It’s worth pointing out that this is largely an anomaly based on the release of Ace Combat 6. Not to mention that this really has nothing to do with the format war – Xbox 360 doesn’t utilise HD-DVD for games (and being that HD-DVD isn’t built into the console, I’m not sure how well the comparisons fare).

The biggest turnaround recently was Paramount’s decision to reject Blu-ray, which it had previously supported. This occurred very recently and it has surprised the industry, I think.

At this stage Blu-ray still enjoys superior retailer support, which is critical to the success of any next generation format. However, if more studios jump on board with HD-DVD, it does make you wonder how long it will take for retailers to change their tune.

As with other formats in the past, I think this just further confirms that we won’t see any real outcome to this situation within a short period of time.[/font]

[Morpheus]

What retailers only support Blu-Ray? Blockbuster is the only one I can think of, and one rental chain isn't much of an advantage, especially factoring in it's small selection and hundreds of stores that carry both formats. The most important store in the format war is, at least in the US, Best Buy. They keep a large and diverse stock of both formats.

As an interesting anomaly, Blockbuster's exclusive deal with The Weinstein Company for rentals and the companies exclusive support of HD-DVD makes their movies unavailable for rent in HD.

*I also remember Gamestop, but they seem to only have 5 or 6 titles at any one time.

[James]

[quote]What retailers only support Blu-Ray? Blockbuster is the only one I can think of, and one rental chain isn't much of an advantage, especially factoring in it's small selection and hundreds of stores that carry both formats. The most important store in the format war is, at least in the US, Best Buy. They keep a large and diverse stock of both formats.[/quote]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I forget which one it was now, but it was a major one. Like, a really major American one (of the Wal-Mart caliber). I did read about this recently, but I'll have to double check.

This has also happened in other countries, including Australia (and again I'm talking about major mass market retailers, not electronics stores or game-centric stores).

Retailer support is critical to "winning the war" with a proposed mainstream format.

Still, as I said, it'll be interesting to see what happens. Blu-ray still has the edge I'd say (though it's lost some of that recently), but anything could happen in the coming year.[/font]