HD-DVD Death Made Official!

[pedroh 21]

well, my hd player was a gift, and it was about 170.. so no biggie

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Now the question is:

PS3 or Xbox 360.

[mRx 16]

Boy I lost pretty big on this. Although I knew it was coming once WB retreated to Blew Ray.

I really thought HD-DVD had a good chance. Their players were less problematic and more affordable than Blu Ray.

I have a 800 dollar HD-DVD player. I learned my lesson. The only loser in a format war is the comsumer.

I cannot believe Blu-ray won. Sony are such rip off artists. They make Apple look cheap..

It's a better technology, plain and simple. It's more expensive because it's better.

Better simply because it can hold more data?

In regards to movies, the difference in disc space means nothing. Since a film will only be a max of 1080p resolution, there is absolutely no need for that extra disc space. A full length movie including extras and fillers will fit nicely on either an HD or BD disc. FWIW I have a PS3 and a HD DVD player.

No format is superior to the other.

Sony was greedy. They disagreed to supporting iHD in favor of a java interactive program.

The format war was ended when Sony bought the loyalty of WB. Since the head of WB denied being "bought", I assume its a matter of semantics. WB recieved some form of payment. And a large one. Whether it be exclusive rights, kickbacks, etc.

I am glad that a winner emerged. Now the manufacturers can compete with each other on the same format, which in turn means lower prices for the consumers.

[mRx 16]

Now the question is:

PS3 or Xbox 360.

I say PS3. Xbox runs on DVD, which can hold a max 8.5GB. PS3 can hold 50GB. As games get bigger and prettier, developing teams will need to make compromises to release games on the more space-restrictive 360. (Unreal Tournament 3 is a perfect example.)

Those who think 360 will prevail, fail to realize that PS3 hasn't really had anything fully test it's capabilities yet.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Now the question is:

PS3 or Xbox 360.

PC

[pedroh 21]

ps3 has really good technology, but sometimes high tech isn't all..the Wii kicked both 360 and ps3's arses for a couple of months, and wii is not even a next-gen console.. I know that developers hate making games for the ps3, because their software is so hard to work with, plus I know sony is really picky and they demand a lot of quality in a hard system... 360 might use less things, but, they have been back to the best formula for videogames, making fun games rather than all HD-surround sound photorrealistic games which suck

[DeadPoolX 9]

Now the question is:

PS3 or Xbox 360.

If you want to look at both systems in-depth, you should probably stop over at their Wikipedia entries. Here's the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360.

My advice? If you have a relatively powerful PC, I'd use that to play games instead. Practically every single game on both of these systems is on the PC -- and if it's not right now, it will be soon. The one console that has truly unique titles is the Nintendo Wii, so if you're set on purchasing a console, I'd look at that instead. I'm not saying this as some "Nintendo fanboy" either. I haven't owned a Nintendo console since the SNES in the early 1990s (I've considered most of Nintendo's offerings since them to be either moronic or inferior), so for me to seriously look at a Nintendo console is pretty amazing.

Edited February 18, 2008 by DeadPoolX

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

While I agree a more powerful computer handles games better. The problem for many is that means you can't use the computer when someone is playing games. I purposely bought an Xbox 360 so my children can play their games while I'm using the computer.

Now the question is:

PS3 or Xbox 360.

If you want to look at both systems in-depth, you should probably stop over at their Wikipedia entries. Here's the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360.

My advice? If you have a relatively powerful PC, I'd use that to play games instead. Practically every single game on both of these systems is on the PC -- and if it's not right now, it will be soon. The one console that has truly unique titles is the Nintendo Wii, so if you're set on purchasing a console, I'd look at that instead. I'm not saying this as some "Nintendo fanboy" either. I haven't owned a Nintendo console since the SNES in the early 1990s (I've considered most of Nintendo's offerings since them to be either moronic or inferior), so for me to seriously look at a Nintendo console is pretty amazing.

[mawilson 2,133]

Better simply because it can hold more data?

In regards to movies, the difference in disc space means nothing.

There are other things besides movies -- TV series, for example.

Since a film will only be a max of 1080p resolution, there is absolutely no need for that extra disc space.

For now. A dual layer Bluray disc can store up to 54 GB of data which can be used for higher res in the future.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Better simply because it can hold more data?

In regards to movies, the difference in disc space means nothing.

There are other things besides movies -- TV series, for example.

Since a film will only be a max of 1080p resolution, there is absolutely no need for that extra disc space.

For now. A dual layer Bluray disc can store up to 54 GB of data which can be used for higher res in the future.

Yes, in the future that means porn in 3D. That equates to mass amounts of spankitude. The sex industry will be booming like never before! :energetic:

[pedroh 21]

ps3 fanboys LOL

360>ps3

LOL

[DeadPoolX 9]

ps3 fanboys LOL

360>ps3

LOL

Four little words: "red ring of death."

[pedroh 21]

not with the new chip and heatsinks

[mRx 16]

Yes, in the future that means porn in 3D. That equates to mass amounts of spankitude. The sex industry will be booming like never before! :energetic:

I don't think high-def 3D razor burn will appeal to the masses.

Better simply because it can hold more data?

In regards to movies, the difference in disc space means nothing.

There are other things besides movies -- TV series, for example.

HDDVD had the ability to go up to 54GB with a 3 layered disc. But that's besides the point. I'm only trying to point out that they had more similarities than differences.

[mawilson 2,133]

HDDVD had the ability to go up to 54GB with a 3 layered disc. But that's besides the point. I'm only trying to point out that they had more similarities than differences.

No, that's Bluray (double-layered). HD-DVD doesn't go higher than 45GB, even with 3 layers. 15GB per layer.