>Sony (SNE) will lose $241.35 on every PlayStation 3 game console it sells at $599, and $306.85 on every console it sells with a smaller hard drive at $499, according to an analysis of the component costs conducted by iSuppli, a research firm.
>That’s a staggering figure that is sure to influence how this round of the console war plays out. (In perspective, Sony will take a loss equal to the retail price of a Nintendo Wii every time it sells a PS3.)
no, xbox had an hd-dvd add on you had to buy separately.
PS3 had a BRD drive in the launch console and even came with Talladega Nights on blu-ray, I remember because I got a PS3 at launch.
Ironically, my parents had an HD-DVD played they paid like a thousand bucks for at home, as their video guy convinced them HD-DVD was the future and to get one. They bought a few dozen HD-DVD movies before the format expired.
The main reason blu-ray won was because the studios choose it as the format they were going to release their media on though, PS3 definitely contributed to it too.
I had quite a few HD-DVDs too, stuff like battlestar galactica season 1 and batman begins and a bunch of other movies.
You mean Sony pictures is literally a studio and the other studios knew most people wouldn't buy hddvd but they would buy ps3s and so it was an easier way to sell a higher makeup product to a wider array of consumers with less barriers to consumption.
Sony managers were well aware of the long battle they lost against VHS with Betamax and paid other movie studios to go with Bluray. Warner was the largest at the time but Sony also got Disney, 20th Century Fox, MGM, and some others on board. And unlike jannies, they didn't do it for free.
Paramount, universal, and dreamworld chose hddvd. It's not as simple as you claim, 'midwit'
7 months ago
Anonymous
Once Sony got Warner on their side, along with the other studios in their fold, they accounted for about 70% of the home entertainment market. I think even a dummy like you can subtract 70 from 100
If I remember correctly, Paramount and Warner bros were the only movie distributors that supported this format. Everyone else chose blu ray. And we must remember that movie distribution isn’t like how it is today.
I thought it was this to
Especially because porn was a physical media people actually bought when movie rental outpaced VHS/DVD sales, and it was all gonna go digital anyway
The classic argument I saw at the time was that porn picked blu-ray.
Honestly, it's a difficult question. Neither format did well, I think HD-DVD just gave up first and Sony didn't mind losing money on movies when they were making a decent amount on games.
I thought it was this to
Especially because porn was a physical media people actually bought when movie rental outpaced VHS/DVD sales, and it was all gonna go digital anyway
Porn determining format wars is a meme - especially for something as late as BD vs. HD-DVD. Downloading/streaming existed in 2006 and was shit, but that ensured most of the people buying porn were older guys who weren't staying on top of tech trends. Outside of hentai, it doesn't look like porn's released on BD anymore. There are still new DVDs being put out, presumably for the olds. No UHD discs at all.
>Outside of hentai, it doesn't look like porn's released on BD anymore.
There was a long period where BD was the only option in Japan. And while the west has moved into purely digital, Japan still maintains the physical releases.
It would be easy to assume that Americans saw the much larger sales of BD in Japan and assumed that this was going to be the dominant format. The PS3 was also a guarantee that more households had a BD player than HD-DVD.
I doubt American movie studios were really looking at Japan. That market is very much its own thing, with lots of tech popular there that didn't catch on elsewhere (or to the same degree). More importantly, this wasn't a staggered format war either. They had their own sales data in western countries.
PS3 and Sony Pictures being a movie studio are the biggest reasons HD-DVD flopped. The former brought the format into millions of households HD-DVD wouldn't reach. The latter made it easier to convince the other major studios.
>convince the other major studios
Toshiba and Sony were paying studios millions and millions of dollars to go with their respective format. Sony won on that alone
>Outside of hentai, it doesn't look like porn's released on BD anymore. There are still new DVDs being put out, presumably for the olds. No UHD discs at all.
Vinegar Syndrome has released loads of porn on blu-ray and even 4K UHD
The classic argument I saw at the time was that porn picked blu-ray.
Honestly, it's a difficult question. Neither format did well, I think HD-DVD just gave up first and Sony didn't mind losing money on movies when they were making a decent amount on games.
>the storage format of a video won because a game console could play it
How does that make any sense? I don't remember laser disc dying because some atari played vhs
Would have been cool if first consoles were vhs tapes. Press buttons to move over or through video. Pretty arcadey and actually real graphics. Lightgun shooting would be even cooler. Flight sims. Think Rebel Assault. Fricking university students. No imagination.
Because none of the home console Ataris played VHS, moron. Besides, consoles back then sold peanuts compared to juggernauts like PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.
Sony had already done this with DVDs in the PS2. The PS3 was the follow-up to the greatest selling console of all time. If everybody owns a PS3 they're probably going to buy some Blu rays for it down the line
It doesn't, especially because no one had a ps3 for the first few years. Sony just forced studios to use bd cause they didn't want to lose another format war
>How does that make any sense? I don't remember laser disc dying because some atari played vhs
Laserdisc died because both the players, and the discs,
Were expensive as frick,
And limited as far as selection went.
I recalled being amazed when I saw an ad for a Laserdisc player that was around $500, because before that Laserdisc players were usually close to $900 for the cheapest model, and in many cases over $1000.
The Laserdiscs that Blockbuster rented were actually kept in a separate section, right by the cash register, and cost a couple dollars or more per rental compared to VHS.
You may have also had to put down an actual deposit if you wanted to rent the Laserdiscs.
It should also be remembered, that this was the 1980s-mid 1990s, when $1000 is easily several thousand dollars nowadays.
The Laserdisc format died when the DVD format came out, (or at least started to).
DVDs were priced at around $25 or less when the format was initially released, at least for most major US studio releases.
The players started at $400 or so upon release, and quickly (within a few years) came down to $200 or less.
DVD drives that could play the movies were also common in computers and video fame systems, including the iMac.
Once the DVD cane out, there was little use for the Laserdisc format, except as a legacy system, or if you wanted the really high definition Muse Laserdiscs and players, which I believe were very expensive, and very niche.
HD-DVD was promoted as a “simple upgrade” to the DVD format, that would be less expensive for DVD producers to upgrade their equipment to produce.
This was literally how the HD-DVD was promoted to the public.
Blu-ray kept getting mentioned in the press as having a better picture, but being more expensive to produce for both the players, and discs.
Rhe Blu-ray format also had higher data storage capacity, which was important, since most if not all computers at the time had a laser disc drive.
HD-DVD used an interlaced video format, whereas Blu-ray used a non-interlaced format (1080i vs 1080p), and most people who had played VHS movies knew how annoying interlaced images could be for picture clarity, and for scenes with things like window blinds or other slightly off axis horizontal lines.
The public didn’t really give a crap if it cost DVD producers money to upgrade their equipment, since it cost money to purchase new video players and new movies on discs, and the public had just had to spend money to upgrade from VHS players to DVD players.
The only reason Blu-ray would have failed compared to HD-DVD, is if the Blu-ray discs or players had been significantly more expensive compared to the HD-DVD players,
but they weren’t.
Also, if HD-DVD was a “simple upgrade” to the regular DVD system, then players that could play both Blu-ray discs, and HD-DVDs should have been producible, saving the extra cost and space of buying two separate players, since both Blu-ray and HD-DVD players could also play regular DVDs as well as CDs for music.
For whatever reason, the HD-DVD format was never built into Blu-ray players though for legacy compatibility, so if you want to play HD-DVDs, you have to purchase a separate HD-DVD player.
blu ray sounds cooler and it's easier to say, and blue is a more futuristic color, also the ps3 is cool
i dont know you boomer frick, you tell me
Playstation 3
Snoy cope. The PS3 was a failure until the $400 PS3 slim released and the 360 started catering to kinect casuals. Long after HD DVD discontinued.
Movie industry choose the superior Blu-ray.
Every PS3 could play a blu ray, not every Xbox could play a HD DvD without some add on, so no one wanted to buy. thats literally it
Why didn’t Microsoft just add an HD DVD drive to the Xbox 360?
How would they sell the addon if they did that?
That would have driven up the cost of each unit. Sony was taking a big loss for each unit sold but made it back in software and licensing.
Pretty sure that's balony. It was shit hardware even for it's time.
>Sony (SNE) will lose $241.35 on every PlayStation 3 game console it sells at $599, and $306.85 on every console it sells with a smaller hard drive at $499, according to an analysis of the component costs conducted by iSuppli, a research firm.
>That’s a staggering figure that is sure to influence how this round of the console war plays out. (In perspective, Sony will take a loss equal to the retail price of a Nintendo Wii every time it sells a PS3.)
Yeah just lies. It was crap sold at a high price.
PS3 was also the cheapest blu-ray player on the market at the time which made it all the more popular.
It came out at basically the exact same time but blu ray was not only better it was used by eg ps3 and xbox360
no, xbox had an hd-dvd add on you had to buy separately.
PS3 had a BRD drive in the launch console and even came with Talladega Nights on blu-ray, I remember because I got a PS3 at launch.
Ironically, my parents had an HD-DVD played they paid like a thousand bucks for at home, as their video guy convinced them HD-DVD was the future and to get one. They bought a few dozen HD-DVD movies before the format expired.
The main reason blu-ray won was because the studios choose it as the format they were going to release their media on though, PS3 definitely contributed to it too.
I had quite a few HD-DVDs too, stuff like battlestar galactica season 1 and batman begins and a bunch of other movies.
>The main reason blu-ray won was because the studios choose it
You mean Sony paid the studios to choose it
You mean Sony pictures is literally a studio and the other studios knew most people wouldn't buy hddvd but they would buy ps3s and so it was an easier way to sell a higher makeup product to a wider array of consumers with less barriers to consumption.
Midwit reply
Sony managers were well aware of the long battle they lost against VHS with Betamax and paid other movie studios to go with Bluray. Warner was the largest at the time but Sony also got Disney, 20th Century Fox, MGM, and some others on board. And unlike jannies, they didn't do it for free.
Paramount, universal, and dreamworld chose hddvd. It's not as simple as you claim, 'midwit'
Once Sony got Warner on their side, along with the other studios in their fold, they accounted for about 70% of the home entertainment market. I think even a dummy like you can subtract 70 from 100
The one good thing about the Xbox drive is that they still support the thing. You can plug it into any Windows machine's USB port and use it.
If I remember correctly, Paramount and Warner bros were the only movie distributors that supported this format. Everyone else chose blu ray. And we must remember that movie distribution isn’t like how it is today.
This is the correct answer. I actually remember unlike the zoomers who say PS3 PS3 PS3
Because porn went bluray, according to Tropic Thunder at least.
I thought it was this to
Especially because porn was a physical media people actually bought when movie rental outpaced VHS/DVD sales, and it was all gonna go digital anyway
Porn determining format wars is a meme - especially for something as late as BD vs. HD-DVD. Downloading/streaming existed in 2006 and was shit, but that ensured most of the people buying porn were older guys who weren't staying on top of tech trends. Outside of hentai, it doesn't look like porn's released on BD anymore. There are still new DVDs being put out, presumably for the olds. No UHD discs at all.
>Outside of hentai, it doesn't look like porn's released on BD anymore.
There was a long period where BD was the only option in Japan. And while the west has moved into purely digital, Japan still maintains the physical releases.
It would be easy to assume that Americans saw the much larger sales of BD in Japan and assumed that this was going to be the dominant format. The PS3 was also a guarantee that more households had a BD player than HD-DVD.
I doubt American movie studios were really looking at Japan. That market is very much its own thing, with lots of tech popular there that didn't catch on elsewhere (or to the same degree). More importantly, this wasn't a staggered format war either. They had their own sales data in western countries.
PS3 and Sony Pictures being a movie studio are the biggest reasons HD-DVD flopped. The former brought the format into millions of households HD-DVD wouldn't reach. The latter made it easier to convince the other major studios.
the whole rrod thing probably didnt help hd dvd either
lol I had at least 8 red rings. Even did the towel trick several times
some sources estimate that the failure rate was over 50%. pretty insane.
Ylod was just as bad, those launch consoles were all terrible
not as common but yeah im surprised the console did as well as it did after that shitshow. great games i guess
I never had the red ring once.
did you buy the console at launch?
Twice out of three machines. Still have the good one.
>convince the other major studios
Toshiba and Sony were paying studios millions and millions of dollars to go with their respective format. Sony won on that alone
>Outside of hentai, it doesn't look like porn's released on BD anymore. There are still new DVDs being put out, presumably for the olds. No UHD discs at all.
Vinegar Syndrome has released loads of porn on blu-ray and even 4K UHD
Because thats what was decided to be adopted as the standard through corporate shenanigans. Early blu rays ware actually inferior to hddvd in quality.
360 didn't have it built in. That's it.
>that friend that bought the add-on
The classic argument I saw at the time was that porn picked blu-ray.
Honestly, it's a difficult question. Neither format did well, I think HD-DVD just gave up first and Sony didn't mind losing money on movies when they were making a decent amount on games.
Five fricking syllables
>the storage format of a video won because a game console could play it
How does that make any sense? I don't remember laser disc dying because some atari played vhs
Would have been cool if first consoles were vhs tapes. Press buttons to move over or through video. Pretty arcadey and actually real graphics. Lightgun shooting would be even cooler. Flight sims. Think Rebel Assault. Fricking university students. No imagination.
C64 had a tape reader.
Because people weren't going to buy two devices when dvds were sufficient
Because none of the home console Ataris played VHS, moron. Besides, consoles back then sold peanuts compared to juggernauts like PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.
>Because none of the home console Ataris played VHS
That was my point, I've had a bunch of vcrs and dvd players but 0 consoles in my life
Sony had already done this with DVDs in the PS2. The PS3 was the follow-up to the greatest selling console of all time. If everybody owns a PS3 they're probably going to buy some Blu rays for it down the line
People literally bought a PS3 as a bluray player that has the added benefit of playing games.
The MOVIESMOVIESMOVIES thing wasnt just a meme.
It doesn't, especially because no one had a ps3 for the first few years. Sony just forced studios to use bd cause they didn't want to lose another format war
>How does that make any sense? I don't remember laser disc dying because some atari played vhs
Laserdisc died because both the players, and the discs,
Were expensive as frick,
And limited as far as selection went.
I recalled being amazed when I saw an ad for a Laserdisc player that was around $500, because before that Laserdisc players were usually close to $900 for the cheapest model, and in many cases over $1000.
The Laserdiscs that Blockbuster rented were actually kept in a separate section, right by the cash register, and cost a couple dollars or more per rental compared to VHS.
You may have also had to put down an actual deposit if you wanted to rent the Laserdiscs.
It should also be remembered, that this was the 1980s-mid 1990s, when $1000 is easily several thousand dollars nowadays.
The Laserdisc format died when the DVD format came out, (or at least started to).
DVDs were priced at around $25 or less when the format was initially released, at least for most major US studio releases.
The players started at $400 or so upon release, and quickly (within a few years) came down to $200 or less.
DVD drives that could play the movies were also common in computers and video fame systems, including the iMac.
Once the DVD cane out, there was little use for the Laserdisc format, except as a legacy system, or if you wanted the really high definition Muse Laserdiscs and players, which I believe were very expensive, and very niche.
bluray isn't exactly a success either
Sony: Losing video format wars since the dawn of time. Single handedly killed the movie industry.
The industry wanted it to fail because the region protection wasn't strict.
HD-DVD was promoted as a “simple upgrade” to the DVD format, that would be less expensive for DVD producers to upgrade their equipment to produce.
This was literally how the HD-DVD was promoted to the public.
Blu-ray kept getting mentioned in the press as having a better picture, but being more expensive to produce for both the players, and discs.
Rhe Blu-ray format also had higher data storage capacity, which was important, since most if not all computers at the time had a laser disc drive.
HD-DVD used an interlaced video format, whereas Blu-ray used a non-interlaced format (1080i vs 1080p), and most people who had played VHS movies knew how annoying interlaced images could be for picture clarity, and for scenes with things like window blinds or other slightly off axis horizontal lines.
The public didn’t really give a crap if it cost DVD producers money to upgrade their equipment, since it cost money to purchase new video players and new movies on discs, and the public had just had to spend money to upgrade from VHS players to DVD players.
The only reason Blu-ray would have failed compared to HD-DVD, is if the Blu-ray discs or players had been significantly more expensive compared to the HD-DVD players,
but they weren’t.
Also, if HD-DVD was a “simple upgrade” to the regular DVD system, then players that could play both Blu-ray discs, and HD-DVDs should have been producible, saving the extra cost and space of buying two separate players, since both Blu-ray and HD-DVD players could also play regular DVDs as well as CDs for music.
For whatever reason, the HD-DVD format was never built into Blu-ray players though for legacy compatibility, so if you want to play HD-DVDs, you have to purchase a separate HD-DVD player.