OK. I'm a fan of digital distribution, but do I really want to have MGS4, which must be about 10,000Gb with all those cutscenes and 5.1 surround CODEC conversations, to download. It would take forever.
Microsoft Bashes Blu-Ray
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Mikeyfell:
I'll swap you all the movies we collectively have mirror versions of, then. My VCDs and VHSes for your DVDs.
... no, didn't think you'd go for it. Tard.
Though I'm happy with SD on my 32" screen, anything much beyond 40" at normal viewing distances really does start to demand HD because... well, it just looks rough. It's about as pressing as the VCD-DVD jump on a 14-19" display, or VHS-DVD on a 21-28" one. There's a certain minimum per-inch resolution beyond which moving images take on a bit of an impressionist feeling. Which is why good upscalers do more than just line-double, but employ clever interpolation and de-interlacing techniques.
It's also, say, the difference between running your PC games at standard VGA vs WSXGA or the like (or given the relative distances and sizes, SVGA with a 3dfx vs the hybrid VESA-abusing 2D-card 400x300 option you used to get on things like Quake).
Quad HD is taking the piss a bit, as you're then starting to hit the limits of what the eye can resolve with it's view field filled anyway (think iPhone retina-screen) but it may give a useful boost for wall-filling displays. Beyond that probably isn't worth the effort. Imax and the like have topped out at 4000x2000-ish for quite a while now. Can you see the pixels when watching Avatar or Toy Story on that office-block-sized screen?
Plus - though I obviously don't have 1st hand experience - Blu-ray allegedly offers more upgrades over DVD than just the resolution. Better frame rates, better compression quality, better dynamic range, better surround-sound audio, 3D capability built in, java-based interactive features rather than the pretty limited and somewhat unreliable AV-track-and-2bit-pixelated-overlay (with like - literally - 8 bytes of RAM) based ones DVD provided.
I'm not sold that I'd get my money's worth from it, particularly as I have a lot of DVDs to replace, but if I was starting from scratch with a large 1080p screen, I'd certainly invest.
I'll swap you all the movies we collectively have mirror versions of, then. My VCDs and VHSes for your DVDs.
... no, didn't think you'd go for it. Tard.
Though I'm happy with SD on my 32" screen, anything much beyond 40" at normal viewing distances really does start to demand HD because... well, it just looks rough. It's about as pressing as the VCD-DVD jump on a 14-19" display, or VHS-DVD on a 21-28" one. There's a certain minimum per-inch resolution beyond which moving images take on a bit of an impressionist feeling. Which is why good upscalers do more than just line-double, but employ clever interpolation and de-interlacing techniques.
It's also, say, the difference between running your PC games at standard VGA vs WSXGA or the like (or given the relative distances and sizes, SVGA with a 3dfx vs the hybrid VESA-abusing 2D-card 400x300 option you used to get on things like Quake).
Quad HD is taking the piss a bit, as you're then starting to hit the limits of what the eye can resolve with it's view field filled anyway (think iPhone retina-screen) but it may give a useful boost for wall-filling displays. Beyond that probably isn't worth the effort. Imax and the like have topped out at 4000x2000-ish for quite a while now. Can you see the pixels when watching Avatar or Toy Story on that office-block-sized screen?
Plus - though I obviously don't have 1st hand experience - Blu-ray allegedly offers more upgrades over DVD than just the resolution. Better frame rates, better compression quality, better dynamic range, better surround-sound audio, 3D capability built in, java-based interactive features rather than the pretty limited and somewhat unreliable AV-track-and-2bit-pixelated-overlay (with like - literally - 8 bytes of RAM) based ones DVD provided.
I'm not sold that I'd get my money's worth from it, particularly as I have a lot of DVDs to replace, but if I was starting from scratch with a large 1080p screen, I'd certainly invest.
I hate to rain on your parade, but those statistics only apply for the PC platform. Even then, they only represent the state of PC gaming in the US, where retail stores provide very little space for PC games (if at all) . They do not account for Europe, for example, where PC retail is still very much alive.10BIT said:
Anyway, to be honest, I think Microsoft is just bitter they bet on the losing horse. While digital distribution is on the rise and has it's advantages, it also has some major drawbacks. Plus, people are used to physical media and buying things from stores, since that is generally how they obtain most other goods as well. Honestly, I wouldn't be suprised if the future isn't as "all digital" as some people are implying and that retail copies will live on in some form or another.
With that mind, this statement doesn't bode well for Microsofr...particularly their claim that sticking to DVD was a "good decision". While it may have cost less than Blue-Ray, many developers have been upset with the limitations of the storage media on the Xbox 360. It doesn't help that they have a lot of problems with Microsoft itself even on the digital distribution front. If they keep this up, Microsoft's future in the console gaming business doesn't look very good at all.
if Blu Ray isn't relevant than surely trying to compete with it with a similar format wasn't a good move?
Personally speaking I prefer discs to digital distribution as I like games taking up as little space on my harddrive as possible so that I can get more games, the only reason I'm not unhappy with the go is that I don't buy psp games often enough for it to be an issue.
Personally speaking I prefer discs to digital distribution as I like games taking up as little space on my harddrive as possible so that I can get more games, the only reason I'm not unhappy with the go is that I don't buy psp games often enough for it to be an issue.
Digital Distribution wha?
[sup]This is coming from a Sony fanboy[/sup]
I'll drop this here to [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.207475-2-in-3-Gamers-Prefer-Discs-to-Downloads-Says-Survey], just do a google search and you'll find dozens of articles like this. Not everyone has a proper internet connection to download MB or GB of data, some people still like the new game smell.
Digital Distribution will never completely take over Physical Media, they can only compliment each other. The more space a disc can hold, the more you can fit in your game, and thus more data space is needed. When bigger and bigger games come along, I doubt people are going to be open about downloading 10GB+, and having a consistent internet connection just to play it.
I thought we were past this part in history? Before, everyone was all "Oh man, why would you need all that space in Blu-Ray! It's so expensive! It's pointless! Graphics aren't getting any better!" and all that crap. Seriously, why bring up a years old pointless argument? Haven't those wounds healed yet? Guess not.
It would be interesting if Microsoft used HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray for their next gen console.
Think about it:
- Much more space than DVD(8.5 GB --> 30 GB, ~ single layer Blu-Ray)
- Don't have to pay their primary competitor Sony for the Blu-Ray licenses
- Machines are sitting idle that can make these things, no new tech to invent
- Because HD-DVD has gone the way of the dodo, pirates will have trouble burning disk images (burners and media are extremely rare)
Think about it:
- Much more space than DVD(8.5 GB --> 30 GB, ~ single layer Blu-Ray)
- Don't have to pay their primary competitor Sony for the Blu-Ray licenses
- Machines are sitting idle that can make these things, no new tech to invent
- Because HD-DVD has gone the way of the dodo, pirates will have trouble burning disk images (burners and media are extremely rare)
I don't agree with what Microsoft says at all. Digital distribution is great for some things, but I love hard copies of AAA title games. I like having a nice little game collection to show off on my wall.
Meh.
Meh.
eh, the DVD isn't too small....yet.
I could agree with Stephen McGill however why wont MS embrace Steam if Digital distribution is the next step? Seems rather hypocritical to me.
once Blue-ray becomes very common, the drivers and the discs will cost less so really your point is heavily flawed
I could agree with Stephen McGill however why wont MS embrace Steam if Digital distribution is the next step? Seems rather hypocritical to me.
rather one dimensional.TurtleBay said:
once Blue-ray becomes very common, the drivers and the discs will cost less so really your point is heavily flawed
what?