|
|
Posted by Doug Jacobs on 04/13/06 21:05
In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 ~P~ <bmxtrix2005@cox.net> wrote:
> iHD is known to be less interactive - personally I don't care about any of
> those features, but if it's cool enough, it could have a certain amount of
> appeal, especially when hitting the video game crowd. Decent implementation
> could generate some serious buzz. How it compares to iHD? I have no
> answer, I'm not a developer for either.
Why would the video game market care about either of these? Maybe those
interactive DVD games, like Scene It, might have use for these features,
but traditional video games (like for the Playstation3) won't.
> MPEG2 vs. VC1? Have you done a head-to-head shootout at HD disc bitrates or
> are you just guessing? Professional broadcasters went with the older MPEG2
> audio over MPEG3 despite MP3 being a better/newer technology. Why? Because
> at higher bitrates, MPEG2 performed better with audio. Don't discount it
> until head to head comparisons are made with the same movie. I'm not
> knocking VC1, just waiting to see.
Considering that MP3 is quite lossy, I don't blame the decision.
> A DVD can store HD video and audio... it doesn't mean that it can do it to
> the best possible capability of the format. DTS HD and Dolby HD both have
> bitrates that are enormous on the high end and when combined with the
> highest quality HD materal, HD-DVD can't keep up. I'm not talking about
> compressing stuff to a point where it fits - or is just 'really, really
> good' - I'm talking about bit-for-bit copies of studio masters. The math
> doesn't add up for HD-DVD without compression.
Aren't you confusing content with medium? As far as I can tell, the only
real difference between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray is raw data capacity. Both
have mentions of "added interactive features" - but realistically that's
just some extra bits of software that can be interpreted by the player.
After all, is there any reason why you couldn't use iHD or iJava content
on today's DVD?
> Oh - and PS3 wasn't even mentioned - which I consider the biggest market
> advantage point for Blu-ray.
Putting blu-ray into the PS3 is a huge gamble on Sony's part. It is going
to make the PS3 more expensive, and there is no guarantee that blu-ray
will win the format war. This wouldn't make blu-ray on the PS3 totally
useless, since Sony intends to use it for all their PS3 games. The upside
of doing this is that it could help blu-ray adoption by the market but the
downside is that the console will be more expensive - which may hurt the
gaming side of the PS3 in the long run.
Even then, there are still a number of uncertainities about blu-ray and
the PS3's capabilities. It very well could end up that even if you do
have a HDTV you still may not be able to display blu-ray movies at their
full resolution unless your TV has a proper HDMI port. This might also be
true for HD-DVD as well. Seems to me that the whole DRM thing is still up
in the air.
At any rate, based on what I do know about the next generation of DVD, I
can't really say that I'm all that excited. The majority of content that
I'm interested in collecting is from TV and was never recorded in HD, much
less widescreen. While I'm aware you could certainly take a blu-ray or
HD-DVD and shove a season of, say, Buffy onto a single disc I doubt we'll
see the studios doing such things for the simple reason that that'd be a
smart thing to do.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|