Joystiq Poll: Pick your next-gen movie preference

past 50 comments so no one will really read this but anyway

you know, in France we have 24MBIT adsl-2 internet, adsl TV, and VOIP for 29 euros a month. this digital TV service comes with streaming VOD movies, series, anime, adult, etc etc. they also have HD streaming VOD. why invest all this money in a new DVD player? tell me why?

Lies all Lies! How can 360 create 1080p on screen when they need HDMI and Microsoft has said repeatedly they dont need HDMI. And they cant come up with a peripheral that attaches to the AV port that converts to HDMI because it requires HDCP!

Come on Microsoft where are you pulling this from ur ass?!

Even though Im buying a Wii, Blu Ray is the way to go, it makes more sense! (30GB or 50GB, do you really need to think about it)

@46
www.oppodigital.com

Yes, its an incredible upscaling dvd player (seriously, give it a shot, its INCREDIBLE the difference of the Faroudja chip) I have the 971H running thru DVI (remember the DVI).

Again, I've seen all 3, and right now, HD-DVD is the best (personally), but newer Blu-ray may change that.

Also, remember RIGHT NOW, blu-ray does not have larger capacity because nobody has got dual layer to work consistantly on the BD discs (yet)

I need HD.

I don't want to swap discs in the middle of a movie.

Blu-Ray it is.

HD-DVD is just a retarded move. Not big enough to fit an HD movie, not big enough to be a nice step up on the data storage front. Just cheaper for the movie studios. As long as Sony doesn't pull any proprietary BS that they're famous for, Blu Ray all the way.

To those that can't understand why anybody would want a game console to play DVD/Movies:
I don't know about you, but I have a limited number of digital inputs on my amp, as in only 2. The 360 gets one, and my HD cable box gets the other. And there's no way I'm climbing behind my setup to swap cables to play a DVD in surround sound. So my standalone DVD player gets analog stereo. Also, even though everybody has a DVD player, hardly anybody has an HD upscaling DVD player.

So, until I purchase a new amp AND an upscaling DVD player, why wouldn't I want to play DVDs on my 360?

I answered the last one (Wii), although I do care about movies. Regular DVDs are working just fine for me. I know it would be handier to have more storage space in one disc, but it's not the time to update.

Silly format wars, after some side (Blu-ray, HD-DVD or some other) wins the battle, I might take the side of the victor. Until that I will stick to DVDs.

I still have a standard definition televesion, so no much use of better image quality. More storage space would be nice, but even if manufacturers could fit the entire season of Babylon 5 (or some other series) to single disc would it be any cheaper to the buyer? Doubt it. It might be cheaper to make a single Blu-ray disc than 5-6 DVD discs, but that money will go to manufacturers pocket.

Honestly, there is another format people are forgetting. Downloading. With both Apple and Amazon fighting it out to see who will be the winner of this new digital format, and Apple making somthing called "iTV" that allows you to send your movies to your HD-TV wirelessly, I think this is the format that will win. Like mp3's killed the CD market, this new digital format might kill both HD-DVD/Bluray simply because it's cheaper and gives you the same quality. Specail features? Most people I know don't watch them, and the few who do can live without them. And who knows? Maybe iTunes will start giving out special features for their movies to be more like actual DVD's.

But I didn't vote. Because "downloads" wasn't an option.

@55

HD-DVD uses 30GB disc with VC-1 Compression
Blu-Ray uses 25GB discs with Mpeg4 H.264 (as of right now)

Blu ray has less capacity and uses a poorer compression method that uses more for same video quality. Now, if Sony can embrace VC-1 and get dual layer working, then BluRay will be more viable.

"HD-DVD is just a retarded move. Not big enough to fit an HD movie"

You've never watched one yet have you. HD-DVD looks better than equivilant BluRay. And HD-DVD has more storage for "Extras".

If you don't believe me (and I'm sure you won't)

See:
http://www.dvdtown.com/article/toshibavs.samsung-hd-dvdvs.blu/3595/
http://www.dvdtown.com/article/warnerbros.hddiscsblu-rayvs.hd/3998/

If you want to pick BluRay, go for it. It might win, but please don't say things like "Not big enough to fit an HD movie"

Where's the option for the people who are happy with DVDs the way they are? I guess you didn't want it to take up the majority of the poll results...don't worry we understand how things work around here.

Oh, and your little dig at the Wii is actually quite pathetic...joystiq is turning into a joke.

"If you don't believe me (and I'm sure you won't)"

Woody, you're comparing a dual-layer HD-DVD to a single layer Blue-Ray... Let's keep it honest, buddy.

And Blue-Ray is using MPEG-2, NOT H.264, but it will soon. If it was using H.264, I doubt people would be saying it 'looks inferior," as that is an excellent compression codec. The compression method is solely a matter of choice, not limited to either format. Both formats can hold the exact same file. Yes, Blue-Ray is using a compression system that some think is inferior, but that can be changed at a moment's notice.

Woody "HD-DVD uses 30GB disc with VC-1 Compression
Blu-Ray uses 25GB discs with Mpeg4 H.264 (as of right now"

Aparently your not paying attention to detail, HD-DVD is 15GB single layer and 30GB dual layer! Blu Ray is 25GB single and 50GB dual! Within 2 years Blu ray will have 100GB Quad layer.

Your comparing a single layer Blu Ray with a Dual Layer HD-DVD!

So far the Quality of HD-DVD looks like an upconverted DVD. Blu Ray so far has been the Quality it promised.

Yes, I'm comparing Single Layer vs dual, mostly because, thats what the productions discs currently are using (notice in my post "right now").

So far, "in my opinion", HD DVD looks VERY good (and I've seen it). Blu Ray doesn't look 'as good' from what I've seen.

As for the codec, *I* really haven't been able to tell the difference, but at hometheatrehifi forums they had a study and comparison between VC-1 and Mpeg4H264, and 'they' came to the conclusion that for equivilant video quality, VC-1 created small files (if you will). So you would need more space to store similar picture quailty, and right now, since bluray is smaller it could pose a problem.

So, *right now*, HD-DVD has a capacity of 30GB, and BD 25GB. Also, HD-DVD is using a superior compression with VC-1 as compared to Mpeg2 (and comparison to Mpeg4H264 is up for debate) .

That being said, I do believe BD could produce much better HD but, so far, in my experience, it hasn't (but it is still VERY EARLY).

My issue mostly was that HD-DVD couldn't store an HD picture, which it does, and currently better.

For the nerds in the group a few points

H.264/MPEG-4 AVC looks to be a new emerging Codec standard (sigh)

As well, both Disney and Warner Bros are possibly adopting VC-1 compress on their BluRay discs. So the whole codec point goes out the window.

An interesting dicussion at:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=114928

HD-DVD is winning the poll?
How do you guys sleep at night? I like my new formats to actually be a new format.

Wheres the Bluray/HDDVD combo player option? I ain't buying any nexty gen player until I'm sure its future proof!!

"Blu-Ray because unlike HD-DVD or upscaled DVD, the original signal is in 1080p already"

HD-DVD is encoded in 1080P. Toshiba's player's chipset limited it's output to 1080i, but HD-DVD is full 1080P inside.

Thank you Evan!

1. On the PS3 Blu-Ray plays games and movies
2. One the Xbox-360 HD-DVD will only play movies
3. If Blu-Ray dies, it will still play Blu-Ray games
4. If HD-DVD dies, it would be useless
5. Xbox-360 with the HD-DVD is more expensive than the core PS3
6. Nevertheless, people favor Microsoft because Sony is foreign

I am hoping Nintendo releases an HD-DVD add-on so they can tag team Sony. HD-DVD would also be my format of choice. Nintendo could get it into dominance in Japan, while 360 leads the way in the US. (Wii will make an HD impact as well in the US, of course.)

This IS possible, now that component cables are verified for Wii.

I would rather get HD quality visuals out of my current DVD library than have to start over with Blue Ray or HD-DVD. So, if up-scaling DVD players can truly achieve HD quality levels, then I am all for that.

Having said this, I am supporting HD-DVD in the next format war. Primarily because I have owned a number of Sony products over the years, and except for my CLIE PDA and my wife's Mini-Disk player (yes, we have one and we love it more than our battery eating MP3 player), they have all given me trouble well before what should have been the end of their lifecycles (Sony Trinitron Computer Monitor, PS1, Sony standalone DVD player, Sony Car Stereo CD player/changer). Thus, my confidence in Sony's quality is not as strong as it could be.

Something else I have yet to see posted anywhere, surprisingly, is the fact that Sony manufactures the Blu-Ray hardware, and licenses it out to other manufacturers. How will it make a standalone Blu-Ray maker (like Samsung) feel when they are paying for the hardware from Sony, making a big gamble on Blu-Ray, only to have Sony undercut their prices with the PS3? I would think this would tend to alienate a number of their hardware purchasers in the near and distant future, and flat out infuriate past purchasers of the Blu-Ray drives. Ultimately, the winner of the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray battle will be determined by the amount of support for the particular format, and if hardware manufacturers stop purchasing the Blu-Ray components from Sony, and instead jump ship to the HD-DVD camp, where will most of the studio support come from then? If the availability and pricing of HD-DVD is superior to Blu-Ray, consumers will buy HD-DVD, and that is who the studios will cater to.

I think the big advantage that Blu-Ray has is the Sony/Columbia Pictures studio. Toshiba doesn't have that kind of guaranteed studio support. Despite what many people think, the actual storage capacity between the two formats is negligible, as HD-DVD has upped the storage capacity of the HD-DVD discs to 45 GB on their triple layer discs. I know that the Blu-Ray capacity is still greater, but how much capacity is really necessary? 45GB will certainly be MORE than sufficient, especially since Blu-Ray has only released movies on their 25GB disc up to now. I read a post where a guy said he would like to be able to have an entire season of a show on a single disc. I agree that this would be more convenient, but really, is anybody going to sit down and watch 25 episodes of Seinfeld without ever getting up to get a drink or go to the bathroom?

It will be interesting to see what happens in this format war thing, but I expect to see HD-DVD come out on top when it is all over, due to the reasons above, as well as the fact that it is a less expensive product to produce, and almost all of the current HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movies look better on HD-DVD, according to reviews (I haven't personally compared them). And I appreciate Microsoft's concept of consumer choice in this matter, with their ideology of an add-on player for the 360 rather than a forced purchase (as with Sony's PS3--before you start in on me, Windows OS and other MS software is an entirely different issue).

But if I had my way, all of our current DVD libraries would be up-converted to produce a 1080i or 1080p signal, and this would save all of us the cost of a new player (or players, if you have multiple TVs in the house) and a whole new movie library.

For all of you debating stand-alone DVD players vs. console DVD players--everybody would like the convenience of having a high quality all in one unit. Whether or not a console is capable of producing as high quality an image as a high-end standalone DVD player is another issue, but if the option is there, then absolutely people want it, especially if the additional price is negligible or non-existent. We are a consumer driven country, and we all want convenience, so if this can be achieved, why not?

In addressing the idea of movie storage on hard drives in the future rather than using discs, I agree that this would be great. But consider the ridiculous amount of storage space you will need to keep even your current DVD collection on hard drive--the cost will be very high to do so, in my opinion, at least with current compression technology. However, a disc changer, such as Sony and Pioneer offer, will likely be a more cost-conscious alternative for the future, storing 400-500 of your HD-DVDs or Blu-Ray discs in a carousel, with quick and convenient access to them on demand.

And one last thing, from what I have read, both the HD-DVD and especially the Blu-Ray drives are WAY slower in accessing disc data than a current gen standard DVD drive is, so I hope Microsoft keeps the standard DVD player in future iterations of the 360 hardware for this reason alone.

Thanks for letting me rant, and I hope this post makes sense!

Most people here must be wealthy, or they still live at home with their parents. I, for one, live in the expensive New York City metro area. I have rent and bills to pay. I do have two DVD players though that work just fine playing DVDs on my non-HD TVs. I have no intention of replacing all my DVDs any time soon, especially with the growing collection I have now. It's bad enough they release 'special edition' DVDs after releasing the 'plain' one.

I find it interesting that people are so excited about this HD-DVD/Blu-ray stuff, and willing to rush out and pay through the nose. And for what really, to see the individual nose hairs of every actor?

Sony joint developed the DVD, (which then kind-of went to HD-DVD), before the PS2 people were seriously doubting whether or not the DVD would live. Check the Oct OPM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvd

That's like asking what do you prefer "future boxers" or "future briefs?"...I don't know i haven't been to the future yet

That's funny. lol.

You can still watch movies on Wii if they are on the SD card.