HD-DVD 360 confirmed

[Ballz2TheWallz]

Oops, transfer rate is a function of the player, not the format. There's no theoretical maximum transfer rate on either...once you hit the highest rotation speed the disks can physically support, you can always add more read heads.

THERE HAS TO BE A DAMN STANDARD WHEN IT COMES TO VIDEO

OOOPPS
how many dvds out there utilize the 16x transfer speed of DVD


kthxbye, what would happen if you put 2x blue ray movie into the a 1x player, its gonna play choppy at best? thats right THAT CANNOT HAPPEN

 

[masher]

how many 4hour movies are out there

Don't be confused. There's quite a few. I have several dozen in my video library. Most of them are BBC or A&E miniseries. Many of them are 10 hours or more. And lets not forget all the DVD TV series on sale. A single season on some shows can top 20 hours of video.

Maybe you like swapping disks. I don't particularly care for it myself.

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

Maybe you like swapping disks. I don't particularly care for it myself.

how often do you watch a 10hour season of a tv show in a sitting


am i the only one who doesnt have that kinda "free time" here? thats a novelty reason at best

 

[CKMorpheus]

Don't be confused. There's quite a few. I have several dozen in my video library. Most of them are BBC or A&E miniseries. Many of them are 10 hours or more. And lets not forget all the DVD TV series on sale. A single season on some shows can top 20 hours of video.

Maybe you like swapping disks. I don't particularly care for it myself.

Imagine a season of 24 on one Blu-Ray disc. Play all.

 

[masher]

OOOPPS
how many dvds out there utilize the 16x transfer speed of DVD

Take a deep breath and calm down. First of all, you were trying to contend that Blu-ray was someone limited to a maximum transfer rate. I was simply proving you wrong, not trying to promote 16X disks as a reasonable near-term solution.

Second of all, you're forgetting entirely about *data* usage. You can put a lot more than movies on those disks, remember. I'm sure Blu-ray will be no different than CDs or DVDs...it will be the DATA use of the disks that first sees higher speeds.

Will we ever see super hi-res video (say 7680 x 4320) on a Blu-ray disk? Or will some new format come along before that time, and supplant it entirely? I don't know, and I don't care. Its not relevant to the discussion at hand.

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

Will we ever see super hi-res video (say 7680 x 4320) on a Blu-ray disk?

possible, but you will be buying a differnt type of player and this will be called something other then blu ray...because fact is no DVD movie that is compatable with all DVD players exceeds the 10mbps data rate because it is infact a set standard

i personally think blu ray advantages more or less novelty factor when it comes to multiple disk movie/tv shows and that shouldnt put it at an advantage alone

 

[masher]

how often do you watch a 10hour season of a tv show in a sitting

Now you're just being stupid. Regardless of how you choose to watch it, a one-disk product is cheaper to produce, ship, and stock than a five disk set...and it takes a hella lot less space on your shelf. And whether you watch 5 minutes or 50 hours at one sitting...at SOME point you have to stop watching, take the disk out, and put a new one in.

I realize how intensely you want to "win" some mythical argument, but don't let your emotions lead you astray here. Less is more. Even on disks.

 

[Rich Tate]

Relax guys, you got a nice discussion going here. No need to ruin it now, right?

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

real arguement is, do we need america to get even fatter by letting them watch 10straight hours of video and not have to get up once

only place blu rays advantages come into play is in the pc/video game crowd and i highly doubt we need more the 45GB for games any time soon

 

[steviep]

No, they won't. There is a definite trend towards real-time cutscenes, especially if you compare Final Fantasy X to FF7 and 8. But pretty graphics are not the reason why developers use CG (at least, not anymore.) When we've got graphics as beautiful as they are now, the primary reason to use CG is to cut down on development time by giving a CG studio a storyboard and having them make your cutscenes while your development team focuses on squashing those showstopper bugs. This is one of the cited reasons DoA4 uses CG for its endings.

While I doubt developers are going to need a 50GB Blu-Ray disc anytime soon, and certainly most games are just fine on a single DVD, it's a fallacy to say that the trend to realtime cutscenes will eliminate the need for HD-DVD or Blu-Ray as a game medium. Realtime cutscenes can certainly help, but please explain why Xenosaga shipped on a single dual-layer DVD (at a time when a good number of PS2s didn't support dual-layer DVDs!) and why Xenosaga Episode II comes on two DVDs. (Both games are fully real-time, and contain no CG, except for possibly the credits sequences.)

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get at here, besides "Gamecube games are superior because developers can fit more into less space."

My God, enough with the Nintendo stigma! I'm not suggesting that Gamecube games are freaking superior!!! All that I am suggesting is that if developers can find a way to put most multiplatform titles on the 1.5gb of the Gamecube, then developers can stop being so freaking lazy with texture compression, audio codecs, and video compression. Although I can tell the minute difference between DTS audio and Dolby Digital, it's a very small difference. 2 hours of HD cutscene footage using Dolby Digital = 1.4gb, give or take depending on how much compression is applied. Many many hours of compressed audio = 1GB give or take... I don't see 9GB DVDs topping out for games anytime soon, aside from the occasional game that may need 2 discs. Big whoop. The only use for these next gen video formats is for movies, period.

As for real-time cutscenes - you will see... As developing budgets increase, more will be done in-house, and you will see far more real-time cutscenes next gen. Not to say that FMV will disappear (it won't) but there will be more emphasis on real-time stuff, with RE4 being a prime example of how its done. With the graphics capabilities of the new systems, this shouldn't be an issue at all.

 

[NulloModo]

True 1080p, NulloModo?

Yes, the HP Pavillion DLP sets at the top end (the two biggest models) are both true 1080p and will accept the signal via HDMI.

The 37" is the Westinghouse LCD the display forum is going gaga over now.

There is also a Samsung in the mix that takes it via VGA, but I don't know the model or how much it costs... there may be more.

The Sony sets right now are not true 1080p.

 

[overthetop]

I rather stick with iHD than some Java crap that Sony is trying to rootkit us with Blu-Ray.

 

[NulloModo]

No, they won't. There is a definite trend towards real-time cutscenes, especially if you compare Final Fantasy X to FF7 and 8. But pretty graphics are not the reason why developers use CG (at least, not anymore.) When we've got graphics as beautiful as they are now, the primary reason to use CG is to cut down on development time by giving a CG studio a storyboard and having them make your cutscenes while your development team focuses on squashing those showstopper bugs. This is one of the cited reasons DoA4 uses CG for its endings.

While I doubt developers are going to need a 50GB Blu-Ray disc anytime soon, and certainly most games are just fine on a single DVD, it's a fallacy to say that the trend to realtime cutscenes will eliminate the need for HD-DVD or Blu-Ray as a game medium. Realtime cutscenes can certainly help, but please explain why Xenosaga shipped on a single dual-layer DVD (at a time when a good number of PS2s didn't support dual-layer DVDs!) and why Xenosaga Episode II comes on two DVDs. (Both games are fully real-time, and contain no CG, except for possibly the credits sequences.)

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get at here, besides "Gamecube games are superior because developers can fit more into less space."

The PS2 supported dual layer DVDs from the beginning. Mine was purchased launch night, and it has played them since day one (now whether or not it still plays regular CDs is a completely different matter...)

 

[Kitt2003]

that kind of pisses me off that microsoft is doing this. a little more than a month later ms announces an hd-dvd addon that should have originally been placed inside the 360 if they wanted full functionality.

 

[ZX6Master]

has anyone realized what this will mean? it means there's gonna be 2 different versions of each game once this comes out...

No there won't.

No publisher is going to bother printing games exclusively for a peripheral that isn't going to be standard.

 

[Kugar]

on paper it does. In reality to support a native 1080p encoded movie. Nope.

1080i over-the-air broadcasts have a data rate around 15 Mbps. I'd expect 1080p to require double that. USB2.0 has a theoretical max speed of 480 Mbps. Granted one never achieves the theortical max rate, but 30 Mbps shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Terpfen]

The PS2 supported dual layer DVDs from the beginning. Mine was purchased launch night, and it has played them since day one (now whether or not it still plays regular CDs is a completely different matter...)

Really? I was under the impression that the first revision PS2s didn't support DVD9s. Maybe it was just a Japanese launch issue.

All that I am suggesting is that if developers can find a way to put most multiplatform titles on the 1.5gb of the Gamecube, then developers can stop being so freaking lazy with texture compression, audio codecs, and video compression.

Compression is not difficult, so it's not laziness on the part of the developers, unless you consider running your game's music through an OGG encoder to be difficult. Developer laziness would be not wanting to learn how to multithread game code for multi-core processors (a form of laziness found everywhere in software development.) I don't think wanting extra storage space for HD-resolution artwork and surround sound is lazy or unreasonable. Neither do the developers.

 

[tornadotsunamilife]

With the amount of time and money people are willing to spend on blu-ray and 1080p tv sets, I think HVD may not be that far away from the consumer market...

 

[Bad_Boy]

kthxbye, what would happen if you put 2x blue ray movie into the a 1x player, its gonna play choppy at best? thats right THAT CANNOT HAPPEN

I'm pretty sure there wont be a 1x blu-ray player.

 

[Neurofreeze]

7. No one knows how much Sony will lose per console, but it's well known that Microsoft is losing money on each console sold. In fact, every console maker loses money on each console sold; it's been that way for several generations. Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft all lose money per console sold, and they make it back with accessory and video game sales

Nintendo at worst breaks even and usually makes a small profit from each console sold, including Gamecube. That's thier thing: they are the profit margin leaders perennially.

No, Microsoft has stated that they make money off the 360

Microsoft gave a bold projection of making money off of the 360 far, far ahead of schedule. I believe it was July. This projection also took into consideration that their console will still sell at a loss. They are, as of right now, losing money. They only predict that their software sales profits will overtake their console sales losses. Xbox1's game sales did not ever recoup Xbox console losses, which was a planned gamble and, if their July projection turns out to be true, a good gamble at that.

(Did a little google and found: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051228-5862.html )

No one's saying that (or if they are, they're idiots.) Not liking the regular DVD drive in the 360 amounts to a belief that it simply won't be enough to store HD content, 5.1 surround, and the regular requirements of a modern video game. Xenosaga, without a single pre-rendered sequence, without even progressive scan support, was shipped on a DVD9 years ago. The storage requirements exist, especially for Japanese developers, who prefer CG over real-time cutscenes.

Here's something else to think about: consider how much disc space PS3 games will take up compared to 360 games, or even 360 ports of PS3 games.

Oh, and, about this HD-DVD drive? I was right.

Actually there was like a ~30 second pre-rendered video segment at the end of Xenosaga I. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it did not take the ~4GB of space difference between a single layer and a dual layer DVD.

To add to that, Xenosaga II comes on TWO DVDs, each without progressive scan and had about as much pre-rendered video as the first.

GTA and Metal Gear franchises all use non-prerendered scenes and use DVD9.

Regardless, the point of having next-gen disc players on the system is to sell more units. You don't think people bought Xboxes or PS2s because they can both play games and play DVDs? A massive chunk of their sales go to consumers with exactly that mentality. Some people even went so far as to buy Xboxes over PS2s simply because they played DVDs better. Having next-gen optical drives come standard is a big seller, especially if the PS3 is cheaper than a standalone BluRay player (which looks perfectly plausible, although I've heard 3rd party BluRay players are generally far, far cheaper than Sony's POS media stuff).

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

I'm pretty sure there wont be a 1x blu-ray player.

why not dvd players use native 1x dvd speeds(11.08 Mbps)im pretty sure blue ray and HD-DVD will to, HD tv broadcasts are in 24mbps whats wrong with 36mbps?

 

[Wondernerd]

(Did a little google and found: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051228-5862.html )

That doesn't mean Microsoft is losing money. It says to me that if they are expecting it to be profitable they are saying they plan to sell enough units to cover all the costs to make, promote and support the 360 by Q2/Q3.

That doesn't mean they are expecting the Magic Cost Reduction Fairy to lower the price of production.

 

[Bad_Boy]

why not dvd players use native 1x dvd speeds(11.08 Mbps)im pretty sure blue ray and HD-DVD will to, HD tv broadcasts are in 24mbps whats wrong with 36mbps?

Because HD-DVD and DVD's can run off 1x, not Blu-ray. The slowest players you will see will most likely be 2x, I'm sure of it.

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/

How fast can you read/write data on a Blu-ray disc?

According to the Blu-ray Disc specification, 1x speed is defined as 36Mbps. However, as BD-ROM movies will require a 54Mbps data transfer rate the minimum speed we're expecting to see is 2x (72Mbps). Blu-ray also has the potential for much higher speeds, as a result of the larger numerical aperture (NA) adopted by Blu-ray Disc. The large NA value effectively means that Blu-ray will require less recording power and lower disc rotation speed than DVD and HD-DVD to achieve the same data transfer rate. While the media itself limited the recording speed in the past, the only limiting factor for Blu-ray is the capacity of the hardware. If we assume a maximum disc rotation speed of 10,000 RPM, then 12x at the outer diameter should be possible (about 400Mbps). This is why the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) already has plans to raise the speed to 8x (288Mbps) or more in the future.

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

Because HD-DVD and DVD's can run off 1x, not Blu-ray. The slowest players you will see will most likely be 2x, I'm sure of it.

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/

dude im pretty sure players are already done ready for production and on that note im sure the set standard for blu ray speed has been set

and i doubt HD-DVD is gonna let sony get away with have twice the transfer rate of itself

 

[masher]

The Sony sets right now are not true 1080p.

They're 1080p wobulators...which is true 1080p as far as I'm concerned. They don't downscale the signal.

 

[masher]

No publisher is going to bother printing games exclusively for a peripheral that isn't going to be standard.

Publisher's don't give a crap whether or not a format is a 'standard' or not. They simply care how many people are using it. If they can make money selling games in the format, they will.

 

[masher]

Regardless, the point of having next-gen disc players on the system is to sell more units. You don't think people bought Xboxes or PS2s because they can both play games and play DVDs? A massive chunk of their sales go to consumers with exactly that mentality.

When the XBox and PS2 was released, there were **already** a lot of DVD titles out there. There aren't going to be many people buying a console _now_ with no titles out and the format war still undecided. Some possibly...but not many, especially when you consider what adding HD-DVD support would add to the unit price.

Second of all, did you ever consider that MS way not *want* to court people with "exactly that mentality", as you put it? If you're buying a console for anything but games, you're costing them money.

A year from now, you'll probably be able to get either HD-DVD or Blu-ray on an XBox 360...and at a far more attractive price than it could be done today. Existing users will be handled by add-on drives, whereas new units will eventually have the support built in. That's a pretty damn good solution in my book. People just like to whine.

 

[masher]

During CES 2005, Sony was telling us the PS3 would be "all over" CES 2006. And now, next year's show is upon us...and where's the PS3 presence? None. Nada. Zip. Not even an announcement or two? It doesn't bode well for the April launch date. I suspect we're looking more to a fall release of the PS3.

Sony: No PS3 announcement at CES 2006?

 

[eblislyge]

During CES 2005, Sony was telling us the PS3 would be "all over" CES 2006. And now, next year's show is upon us...and where's the PS3 presence? None. Nada. Zip. Not even an announcement or two? It doesn't bode well for the April launch date. I suspect we're looking more to a fall release of the PS3.

Sony: No PS3 announcement at CES 2006?

The rumors of problems with the PS3 appear to be true, I look for a Holiday launch for the PS3 here in the states.

 

[ZX6Master]

A year from now, you'll probably be able to get either HD-DVD or Blu-ray on an XBox 360...and at a far more attractive price than it could be done today. Existing users will be handled by add-on drives, whereas new units will eventually have the support built in. That's a pretty damn good solution in my book. People just like to whine.

Won't happen. Including an HD-DVD drive a year from now would be shitting on all the early adopters, and Microsoft isn't stupid enough to do that. As for Blu-Ray...Sony owns the license, so they wouldn't allow Microsoft to use it even if they tried to buy the rights to produce the technology.

Add-ons for game media don't work. Sega proved that quite some time ago.

 

[masher]

Won't happen. Including an HD-DVD drive a year from now would be shitting on all the early adopters, and Microsoft isn't stupid enough to do that

Sorry, but history proves you wrong...the integrated network card in recent PS2's is just one of many examples. It's not "shitting on early adopters" to upgrade a console. And-- since MS has already said they plan to do this-- you're doubly wrong.

As for Blu-Ray...Sony owns the license, so they wouldn't allow Microsoft to use it

Oops, the Blu-Ray Disc Association owns the license, actually. And while Sony obviously has strong pull, the association, couldn't deny MS the ability to manufacture drives for legal considerations. Futhermore, even if they could do this, MS could still purchase OEM drives from anyone already licensed to manufacture them.

Add-ons for game media don't work.

We're talking about add-on drives for playing video, not for delivering game content.

 

[figgie]

"Compressing beyond the codec" is a meaningless phrase. I can compress a jpg photo so much its just a few colored blocks. Its still not compressed "beyond" the codec. I just chose to give up quality in exchange for storing a 4 million pixel image in a measly 300 bytes.

Look, its pretty simple. ANY lossy compression scheme introduces artifacts. Period. Beyond that, its a tradeoff of size vs. quality. Anyone creating compressed video is going to shoot for a "sweet spot" in that tradeoff. Which means just because Joe Sixpack can't see artifacts on his 30" TV, they'll assume I won't be able to on my 109" FP screen.

Will HD-DVD match Blu-Ray in quality? Not even the HD-DVD makers claim that...they're simply saying "most consumers will percieve no difference".

to you it is meaningless but not the sat companies. See the MPEG 4 is the codec of choice for HDTV. Here is the part YOU are not getting. Satellite and cable providers COMPRESS the MPEG4 stream even MORE with hardware compression based on a TOTALLY SEPERATE AND INDEPENDANT COMPRESSION ALGORITHM.

Meaningless my ass.

 

[figgie]

The Sony sets right now are not true 1080p.

umm Sony Quaila

1080p out of both rear PJ and Front PJ. Of course the price.. oh the price.

 

[masher]

Meaningless my ass...

You've lost the original meaning of the thread in some sort of rant against cable providers.

Let me repeat what I said, in simpler terms:
> Lossy codecs cause quality loss.
> Lossy codecs are normally tuneable to the extent of that loss.
> Content publishers using those codecs usually tune for a point where the 'average' consumer will not notice a substantial degradation.
> The corollary of that statement is SOME consumers WILL notice it.

Now which one of these statements do you have a problem with?

 

[figgie]

You've lost the original meaning of the thread in some sort of rant against cable providers.

Let me repeat what I said, in simpler terms:
> Lossy codecs cause quality loss.
> Lossy codecs are normally tuneable to the extent of that loss.
> Content publishers using those codecs usually tune for a point where the 'average' consumer will not notice a substantial degradation.
> The corollary of that statement is SOME consumers WILL notice it.

Now which one of these statements do you have a problem with?

all of them

Once again all codec to include "lossy" codecs MAY cause quaility loss but they all don't

Take DTS and DD for audio or even MLS that the SACD or DVD-A uses. Funny that they call THAT compression algorithm LOSSLESS even though in the end it is STILL a compression algorithm See where I am getting at? Average user? I doubt even the so called "golden ear audiophiles" could dicern a difference between the two. Yes even on thier 100,000 equipment. Some, only way to actually tell is by double blind test. Anything else is just the mind doing what it does best.

 

[masher]

Once again all codec to include "lossy" codecs MAY cause quaility loss but they all don't

Wrong. Every lossy algorithm causes lost information. Every one. Hence the name. That loss of quality may not be distinguishable...but its still there.

This is pretty basic stuff, and if you can't even get past this first step, there's no point in debating with you.

Funny that they call THAT compression algorithm LOSSLESS even though in the end it is STILL a compression algorithm

Why do you think this is funny? There are lossy compression schemes and lossless ones. Do you think the phrase "compression algorithm" in itself somehow implies data loss? It does not.

I doubt even the so called "golden ear audiophiles" could dicern a difference between the two. Yes even on thier 100,000 equipment

A moot point. Simply because the quality difference isn't discernable doesn't mean its not there. And simply because its not discernable in the case of one compression scheme says nothing whatsoever about other schemes. We're talking about HD-DVD remember? One of the supported codecs for HD-DVD is plain ol' Mpeg-2, the same old algorithm used on current DVDs...and I can see compression artifacts on those easily.

 

[NulloModo]

umm Sony Quaila

1080p out of both rear PJ and Front PJ. Of course the price.. oh the price.

From what I understand the Qualia FP is true 1080p, the RP set is not.

The new SXRD sets are definately not displaying true 1080p. Besides, I thought wobulation was a DLP thing, and SXRD is based off of LCoS (which has it's similarities to DLP I will admit... but still). There have been tests on the SXRD sets, read up on it over at AVS.

 

[GT98]

Anyone want to take a SWAG on how much the External drive is going to be? It might be worth getting if its cheaper then a first gen Stand Alone HDDVD player.

 

[masher]

Its my understanding the SXRD sets are true 1080p resolution-- they simply lack support for 1080p signal input. This may seem like a silly omission...but if you've ever seen 1080i line-doubled to 1080p, you'll realize its not. There are lots of high-quality 1080i and 720p sources available today. But for the next few years at least, the only 1080p material that'll be available is just upconverted anyway.

You're right on the wobulation thing, I was thinking of the HP set when I typed that.

 

[NulloModo]

Its my understanding the SXRD sets are true 1080p resolution-- they simply lack support for 1080p signal input. This may seem like a silly omission...but if you've ever seen 1080i line-doubled to 1080p, you'll realize its not. There are lots of high-quality 1080i and 720p sources available today. But for the next few years at least, the only 1080p material that'll be available is just upconverted anyway.

You're right on the wobulation thing, I was thinking of the HP set when I typed that.

Ah, that is what I meant to say, yes, they can display 1080p truly, but have no ability to input the signal, so, they can't display a true 1080p signal, as they can't recieve one.

You can do 1080p off of a HTPC with WM9 files right now.