Blockbuster and Blu-Ray - Butt Fucking Friends??

Interesting. Isn't Wal-Mart supposedly showing love to HD-DVD? Now that is what I call a deal breaker.

Sterling = both format bashing.

will the bashing from this man ever end?

Wal-Mart is going to have a price point HD-DVD player available by the Christmas season. HD-DVD FTW

Hmm. I wonder how much longer Blockbuster can continue to exist as a brick and mortar store. Maybe consumers will continue to prefer a "traditional" shopping experience over digital distribution, but I kind of doubt it. If I were in the video rental business, I would be researching getting out of physical inventory altogether.

Honestly, I'm with Mr Sterling. Until I purchase a HDTV neither format means dick.

Why Blu-ray won't win. Also haha.

(doesn't actually care for format wars)

Good thing I didn't buy an HD-DVD drive for my 360...just wait for the BR one!

@JimSterling: May I have your man-baby (not gay)?

HD-DVD got the good porn. 'Nuff said.

@chill: HA porn is free on the internets

@buckf1tches

Because HD-DVDs can be pirated is why they are better, as well as having a lower capacity? Where is the logic there?

@everyone

http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/index.cfm

Hd dvd is nowhere near dead or even dying. Blockbuster will regret this move as many people are already organizing boycotts and other wining mechanisms to annoy blockbuster and make them lose money. Personally Im going in to blockbuster today to cancel my movie membership. Ill admit its not completely because of this move because Ive been using netflix for the past week and have seen the light. However, this switch to only blu ray would have been enough to make me cancel my membership. Ive always hated blockbuster and their membership policies...and their employees and this only proves that the rampant jackassery of the management of the blockbuster near me runs all the way to the top. I can remember leaving blockbuster for hollywood video back when blockbuster refused to upgrade from VHS. Yet now they are taking the jump and investing in a format that if history is any evidence will FAIL. This is SONY. betamax, UMD, etc. I think they had it right before. They didnt have these new formats in their stores (I know a few stores had them. Like 4% of their stores or seomthing). The fact is most consumers arent interested in these new formats.Either due to ignorance, or apathy most people just dont care. They are satisfied with their old mitsubishi CRT 20 inch color tv and couldnt give less of a damn about the new formats. Bad move blockbuster.

May have been a bit long for my first post. O well. Ive been arguing this topic all morning with people.

@brainderailment

I was really hoping your link led to some spec chart or technical breakdown why BluRay's better than HDDVD, but no, it's sales figures. Because sales figures ALWAYS mean better information for all.

::rolls eyes::

Look, both are using the same spec of MPEG-4 on paper. How the data gets from the disc to your TV requires a slightly differently written decompression based on the laser.

Despite my idiotic mumblings on this board, my username actually represents something, I work in video. I've looked at both the specs for both, and neither one "wins" on everything.

In fact, for all the ballyhoo of each platform, it's strikingly similar in the way it works and I promise you, no one's missing out on going with either format if you're an early adopter, other than content.

I won't bore by posting specs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Blu-ray_Disc_.2F_HD_DVD_comparison

I will post that I think that from a developer's standpoint, HD DVD is a better format. I can code menus in freakin' Dreamweaver if I want to.

Image quality is neglibile. If anyone can find a difference between cross-released movie, I'll point you in the direction of an encoder who didn't know how to do their job properly. The playback stream for almost all HDDVD's and BluRays far exceed the minimum data transfer requirements of playback. A good half the market of available BluRay discs don't even use the full available 25GB on single layer discs, while a good number of HD DVD's use their full 30 GB.

From a market standpoint, HD DVD is a better format.
There's porn available. That alone should win. Why? Because despite the failings of porn profits in the internet based 2007, many people do buy porn on disc still. BluRay has no intent on supporting it.

They're also cheaper to produce since anyone that can manufacture DVDs can make HD DVD's.

But, inevitably I think BluRay will win. Why?

Because of Sony's marketing efforts. If they hadn't shoveled the player into every PS3, it'd be a totally different ballgame, despite the failing of the PS3. Putting that in the box put boxes in homes.

People will choose a $600 game console WITH video playback over a $500 video player. Duh.

Claiming disc rot or losing distribution through a B&M store are non-issues. What is an issue is market penetration. And neither format is succeeding in the same way that DVD did in 1997. And it's not due to market fragmentation either. It's simple lack of HD adoption. There isn't any. At all.

Less than 30% market penetration, marginal sales of HDTVs with built in tuners, and the ever shifting transition date from analog to digital have all impeded a high penetration for HDTV. And until market penetration crosses a good 50-60%, video player sales won't matter. We barely have decent content to begin with on HDTV.

I refuse to buy into either format until there's a sub $200 stand alone player on the market. And not as an attachment for a game console. That's busy playing games on mine, ya see.

Or not, as in Brainderailment's case.

@genfunyung

Or do what I do...

Don't rent at all. Just buy the damn thing. If you're nervous about the movie, read a review. Find a critic you like and stick to their gut instinct.

I've rented DVD's 9 times in 10 years since I got my first DVD player. I own over 450 of the best damn movies you've ever seen, and I don't regret purchasing any of them. Including Joysticks.

I get flak all the time from people, but I promise you, you're not missing anything by skipping out on Final Destination 3, Outbreak, The Hills Have Eyes 2, Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning, etc. They all suck. If the sequel doesn't end in Wars, Trek, Of the Rings, -erminator, or -ambo, chances are highly against you that it'll suck. Bad.

This methodology has spared me from all Steven Segal movies and most Van Damme movies.

Don't support rental stores period. Also, don't support shitty movies. Asked to be challenged every once in awhile. You deserve better than Shrek 3 or House of Wax.

And there aren't any Paris Hilton tits in House of Wax so double shame on you if you paid to see it.

Horror movie tips:

Stage 1 test: If the film doesn't take place on a college campus or there are no co-eds in the film, skip it outright. SKIP IT!

Stage 2 test: If the film doesn't take place over a holiday or with some sort of slumber party taking place, you're wasting your time. No one wants to watch stoners die. They won't feel it anyway. We want to watch the horny couple trying to screw get killed because premarital sex is "teh bad!"

Stage 3 test: If there are no boobs in the movie, you wasted cash and are due a refund for both your money and your time.

@genfuyung

Well, that's the unique feature of HD DVD. And if you're into special features, that's your pot of gold.

I could care less about special features. I want high quality video. Most people never realized it but a good number of original DVD's on the market were done at sub-par DVD standard encoding rates. They skimped a lot on video quality because people were asking for special features that many people only ever looked at one or two times total. Those behind the scenes docs and commentary tracks from the production assistant's gopher ate up a lot of space that I would've preferred to see higher quality video or audio.

@dvddesign

Ive yet to see a blu ray movie that looks better than any movie in my hd dvd collection. And all releases Ive seen that were released on both fofrmats always look better on hd dvd. I see it as hd dvd for quality and blu ray for quantity.

Doesn't anyone else find it pathetic that the PS3's only shot at being a successful product is due to it's ability to play HD movies? Personally I feel sorry for anyone who currently supports blu-ray (or hd-dvd, even). It's not like going from VHS to DVD. The upgrade in quality is minimal to most people. But most importantly, there's that whole DRM fiasco. I'm not supporting either format. And when I buy a PS3 (for Ico 3), I don't plan on getting any movies for it. Ever.

blockbuster is huge in europe and the middle east. nuff said. you guys can't think of america as the only place in the world. the european market alone is much bigger than the american one. and if you consider all PAL territories + canada/south america... yup... blockbuster is quite important.

oops sorry for the error. * Dont't know what your talking about.

I don't rent movies so this means nothing to me. I still go to the theater when I want to see something new, or wait a while and buy it for 5 or 10 bucks from Best Buy.

However, I believe that Blu-Ray's lack of support from the porn industry as well as from Wal-Mart will have a huge (albeit ironic, as well) impact on the final resting place for both formats in the annals of history.

My real question, one I've been pondering for quite some time, is why can't the movie industry support two formats? I mean, the gaming market we are all a part of currently supports 9 separate formats if you count Nintendo's 4 consoles (GC, GBA, DS, Wii), Sony's 3 (PS2, PS3, PSP), and Microsoft's 2 (if their lack of support for Xbox1 even counts and clearly the 360). Now granted that may be a bit of a stretch, but honestly. Essentially we're supporting at least 6 solid totally separate formats (Wii, DS, PS2, PS3, PSP, 360). Why can't the movie industry handle 2?

"Essentially we're supporting at least 6 solid totally separate formats (Wii, DS, PS2, PS3, PSP, 360). Why can't the movie industry handle 2?"

I'm doubtful anybody would suggest it's a good thing that gamers are dealing with 6 formats right now. In fact, I'm doubtful that game corporations can afford to develop and sell so much competing hardware for much longer. At some point the pie will be divided so much with each piece becoming so expensive that at least some players won't be making money any more.

There's no way in hell the movie industry is going to support multiple formats long-term. The average movie renter doesn't know what the hell is going on when they rent and watch a movie. They know that they're putting a shiny thing into a magic box and they get to see Shitty Marvel Comics Adaptation 2007. DVD has major benefits over VHS, and they're easily explained. DVDs and VHS cassettes are easily differentiated from each other. This is why DVD has been so successful; it was time for a change, and that change was relatively easy for consumers to understand. For the average consumer, HD-DVD and BluRay do not offer a major benefit over DVD, and they certainly aren't easily differentiated from each other.

In my estimation, studios and related electronics manufacturers do not want multiple formats. More formats means more expenses for less profit. It means more confused consumers who may become adverse to all of the products involved. It just doesn't make sense. Quite honestly, I think the fact that both sides allowed this HD-DVD/BluRay war to occur on store shelves just reflects how little respect and consideration these corporations have for their customers. A whole bunch of people are going to end up with very expensive paperweights and coasters; a whole lot of stores are investing all sorts of resources into products with no chance of long-term success.

In short, multiple physical formats, at least on the movie side of things, is a bad situation for everyone involved.