Can we all admit now that Blu Ray was a terrible idea for the PS3 to begin with?

I don't even use my Blue Ray Player. I bought my PS3 for games...CleanPlayer

Yeah, that's how I was when I first bought it, but then I watched something on Blu Ray, and I was just like.. ".... w...o...w....."

Sony could have and should have followed MS' example and made the BD player an add-on attachment. Then their gaming system could have been launched 6 months earlier (it was delayed because of the BD diodes) at a much lower price point and it would be a heck of a lot more competitive today.

And they could still have released a BD attachment for relatively cheap for those who wanted it. The attachment would still have been the best BD buy and they would still have won the format war, since all they needed was relative parity in unit/player sales and they won the day through their movie studio strategy anyway (e.g. even if they only sold half as many add-on drives they still would have won)

As well, they made the decision to include a standard HDD so they already had a storage advantage over the 360. And they wouldn't have needed so many installs anyway because most of those are directly related to the BD read/transfer speed.

The only thing they would have given up is the potential multi-disk issue (see my comments on a standard HDD) and the security/scratching aspects of the disks themselves. Minor value reductions compared to what they have given up because of timing and price.

Sony's strategy was disastrous and poorly thought out from the beginning.

SUD123456

So HD-DVD failing and the format dying was not a disaster? You can buy the HD-DVD add on for XBOX 360 brand new for 30 bucks it was $200.00! The PS3 is outpacing the XBOD 360 in sales and will surpass it long before the end of this gen. Blu-Ray won the format war did people forget this fact? I don't care if those of you without Blu-Ray think it's worthl;ess because those of us with Blu-Ray know reality to be quite the opposite.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Sony is loosing so much money that they can't have a price cut for the PS3, so as a result it's getting murdered by the competition this holiday season. It's games are not selling very well either. People seem to think of it primarily as a Blu Ray player based on BR disc sales vs. PS3 game sales.

If the PS3 would have just stuck with plain ole dvds from the start like Nintendo and Microsoft this gen they could have started off on a good foot at say $400. By now they would be selling PS3s at $299 or less and be competitive or even on top right about now.

Does anyone still think Blu Ray was the right move for the PS3?

VanHelsingBoA64

Sony could have and should have followed MS' example and made the BD player an add-on attachment. Then their gaming system could have been launched 6 months earlier (it was delayed because of the BD diodes) at a much lower price point and it would be a heck of a lot more competitive today.

And they could still have released a BD attachment for relatively cheap for those who wanted it. The attachment would still have been the best BD buy and they would still have won the format war, since all they needed was relative parity in unit/player sales and they won the day through their movie studio strategy anyway (e.g. even if they only sold half as many add-on drives they still would have won)

As well, they made the decision to include a standard HDD so they already had a storage advantage over the 360. And they wouldn't have needed so many installs anyway because most of those are directly related to the BD read/transfer speed.

The only thing they would have given up is the potential multi-disk issue (see my comments on a standard HDD) and the security/scratching aspects of the disks themselves. Minor value reductions compared to what they have given up because of timing and price.

Sony's strategy was disastrous and poorly thought out from the beginning.

SUD123456

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"][QUOTE="EVOLV3"]No, Blu-Ray helped the PS3 sell through 2007 and with Blu-ray you dont have to deal with inferior quality multi-disc games.EVOLV3

[QUOTE="sireclaborn"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Yes that is the case now, but I'm saying if Sony didn't included it in the PS3s from the start would they be in this poor situation now?carljohnson3456

I saw someone post about how the blue-ray drive reads slow and the game must be installed, and I just wanted to say orly. Have you played valkyria chronicles? Installing it is only an option if you choose to not install it'll read just fine from the disc and loads fast as **** Maybe somewhere towards the end it'll ask you to install but it hasn't asked me to do **** since the 2mb for game data and like 1.5mb for game save info. So I don't think it'll ever need to be installed it just all depends on the developer. I may be wrong but I think even ut3 the full install is only optional; though its been a while since I've played it on my ps3.

Its almost as bad as the car world like some douche talking crap about an audi or something when he drives a mazda, and he has never even owned an audi yet has opinions about it and the opinions are all wrong or misinformed.

Sony could have and should have followed MS' example and made the BD player an add-on attachment. Then their gaming system could have been launched 6 months earlier (it was delayed because of the BD diodes) at a much lower price point and it would be a heck of a lot more competitive today.

And they could still have released a BD attachment for relatively cheap for those who wanted it. The attachment would still have been the best BD buy and they would still have won the format war, since all they needed was relative parity in unit/player sales and they won the day through their movie studio strategy anyway (e.g. even if they only sold half as many add-on drives they still would have won)

As well, they made the decision to include a standard HDD so they already had a storage advantage over the 360. And they wouldn't have needed so many installs anyway because most of those are directly related to the BD read/transfer speed.

The only thing they would have given up is the potential multi-disk issue (see my comments on a standard HDD) and the security/scratching aspects of the disks themselves. Minor value reductions compared to what they have given up because of timing and price.

Sony's strategy was disastrous and poorly thought out from the beginning.

So HD-DVD failing and the format dying was not a disaster? You can buy the HD-DVD add on for XBOX 360 brand new for 30 bucks it was $200.00! The PS3 is outpacing the XBOD 360 in sales and will surpass it long before the end of this gen. Blu-Ray won the format war did people forget this fact? I don't care if those of you without Blu-Ray think it's worthl;ess because those of us with Blu-Ray know reality to be quite the opposite.

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"] Please name these "inferior games" evolv3 :roll:Bigboi500

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Sony could have and should have followed MS' example and made the BD player an add-on attachment. Then their gaming system could have been launched 6 months earlier (it was delayed because of the BD diodes) at a much lower price point and it would be a heck of a lot more competitive today.

And they could still have released a BD attachment for relatively cheap for those who wanted it. The attachment would still have been the best BD buy and they would still have won the format war, since all they needed was relative parity in unit/player sales and they won the day through their movie studio strategy anyway (e.g. even if they only sold half as many add-on drives they still would have won)

As well, they made the decision to include a standard HDD so they already had a storage advantage over the 360. And they wouldn't have needed so many installs anyway because most of those are directly related to the BD read/transfer speed.

The only thing they would have given up is the potential multi-disk issue (see my comments on a standard HDD) and the security/scratching aspects of the disks themselves. Minor value reductions compared to what they have given up because of timing and price.

Sony's strategy was disastrous and poorly thought out from the beginning.

Gaming_Guru_Guy

So HD-DVD failing and the format dying was not a disaster? You can buy the HD-DVD add on for XBOX 360 brand new for 30 bucks it was $200.00! The PS3 is outpacing the XBOD 360 in sales and will surpass it long before the end of this gen. Blu-Ray won the format war did people forget this fact? I don't care if those of you without Blu-Ray think it's worthl;ess because those of us with Blu-Ray know reality to be quite the opposite.

Sure it was a disaster for HD-DVD. But that has nothing to do with MS and has had no impact on the 360. This is exactly why MS chose an external add-on strategy, because it wouldn't affect the gaming console at all. Indeed, it allowed MS to launch at a lower price and if HD-DVD failed it would be no big deal.

And if you haven't caught up with the times, the PS3 will not gain on the 360 this year. Indeed, on Jan 1st 2009 it will be farther behind than on Jan 1st 2008.

I like my PS3, but I would have liked it more for $200 less. And it won't be long before a $100 BD player is available. Just like the last gen. The format player only has a couple year lifespan before standalone units catch up in price.

Also I want more flops like LO then.too_much_eslim

I'm glad you're enjoying the feature but wouldn't you give it up for the betterment of the company overall? Bigboi500

[QUOTE="too_much_eslim"]dude SOny didn't care about gaming. They wanted the format to win against HD DVD and basically be the last video format. It worked. Now they just have to hope dvds die and HDTV really take off. This happens the money lost this gen will be small in the gains they make in the future.Bigboi500

Yeah I think the PS3 including a blu ray player was just ahead of its time and a victim of wrong timing. They should have waited until HDTVs were standard. With that said it's kinda hard having HDTVs standard with the way things are going right now. So when buying a PS3 with a built in blu ray player, you just have to always think about upgrading to an HDTV to fully benefit from it. And I think there's still a large number that's not in the situation to do so right now.

DVD's are going to be phased out eventually. The major movie studios made an investment on Blu-Rays and they're not going to all of a sudden jump ship now. They're already heavily advertising Blu-Ray versions of movies over the DVD versions.bs0ng

Werd. When a freaking disc is outclassed in storage by a little tiny usb thumb drive its time for it to go. Bam http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3479272&CatId=3786 32gb corsair usb thumb drive. At least that like 20 layer pinoneer blue-ray disc can hold more than a damn usb thumb drive. That is impossible for a dvd9 disc its time for it to go.

Dvds are like businesses that have old win95 machines in like shipping sure its cost effective cause the machine works and does its job but really its time for it to go. Cost effective is only short-term. The freaking economy needs to put some contacts on and see father than a month ahead.

I've never really understood how people can be so amazed by how Blu-Ray movies look. Sure, they look amazing, but it's a movie. For me at least, I could care less how the video quality looks as long as it's not so grainy that you can't make out objects or faces. Yeah, I'd prefer to watch a Blu-Ray movie, but even so, after the 2 hours of the film are finished it's just getting tossed in the pile of films I'll never watch again, just like the DVD would.LittleHands134

so you rather have a 10 year old format instead?

i dont understand.....

i really dont care if Sony is not selling as many consoles as nintendo wii and neither is Sony, once ps3 gets a price cut next year the sales will take off.

Sony is loosing so much money that they can't have a price cut for the PS3, so as a result it's getting murdered by the competition this holiday season. It's games are not selling very well either. People seem to think of it primarily as a Blu Ray player based on BR disc sales vs. PS3 game sales.

If the PS3 would have just stuck with plain ole dvds from the start like Nintendo and Microsoft this gen they could have started off on a good foot at say $400. By now they would be selling PS3s at $299 or less and be competitive or even on top right about now.

Does anyone still think Blu Ray was the right move for the PS3?

Bigboi500

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Sony is loosing so much money that they can't have a price cut for the PS3, so as a result it's getting murdered by the competition this holiday season. It's games are not selling very well either. People seem to think of it primarily as a Blu Ray player based on BR disc sales vs. PS3 game sales.

If the PS3 would have just stuck with plain ole dvds from the start like Nintendo and Microsoft this gen they could have started off on a good foot at say $400. By now they would be selling PS3s at $299 or less and be competitive or even on top right about now.

Does anyone still think Blu Ray was the right move for the PS3?

djsifer01

been saying this since they announced it was going to have br... said it would make it tough to lower prices... everyone said it wouldn't matter, ps3 would sell like hotcakes. people were wrong.3picuri3

No. *finishes enjoying Dark Knight on Blu Ray.

Yes, Blu-Ray picture is nice. Yes, if you have a high-end sound system, your bass will be booming for sure. For a small minority of consumers who are electronics enthusiasts these are important features. To the mass consumer? Not so much.

The fact of the matter is, Blu-Ray does not hold a wide array of advantages over DVD like DVD had over VHS. DVD was a total upgrade over VHS and many of these upgrades were big conveniences and not simply luxuries. The advantages were numerous: far better picture quality, far better sound, no more rewinds, interactive menus, multiple-language tracks and subtitles (if available), commentaries, special features, ability to quickly skip to your favorite chapter/scene, etc. And you didn't need to upgrade your TV to enjoy all these features. Heck, DVD also took up far less shelf-space than VHS. Like I said, TONS of advantages.

If you want to enjoy Blu-Ray, you are going to need an HDTV and a good sound system.

Lots of consumers have movies that they already bought on DVD. Are they going to replace these movies with Blu-Ray? I think it's important question. It really has everyting to do with how much they value HD over upscaled SD, and if it worth the hundreds upon hundreds of dollars to replace their current library. If the mass market consumer discerns not much difference between Blu-Ray and DVD, they are going to be less willing to convert.

Well, i dont really like that sony pushed a new format on us but in the end it worked out. although it could of been worse. HD DVD could of won and blu-ray would be dead. Sony took a big chance with blu-ray in the ps3. but the PS3 acted as a trojan horse for blu-ray.

So, all in all, it was pretty bad idea but it worked out in the end.

No I don't think Blu-Ray was a terrible idea for the PS3...

The cell on the other hand... now that was not so smart of a move.

Sony is loosing so much money that they can't have a price cut for the PS3, so as a result it's getting murdered by the competition this holiday season. It's games are not selling very well either. People seem to think of it primarily as a Blu Ray player based on BR disc sales vs. PS3 game sales.

If the PS3 would have just stuck with plain ole dvds from the start like Nintendo and Microsoft this gen they could have started off on a good foot at say $400. By now they would be selling PS3s at $299 or less and be competitive or even on top right about now.

Does anyone still think Blu Ray was the right move for the PS3?

No, no it does not. It uses "wii optical discs" which actually have less space than a DVD9.TheGrat1

Sony had to to complete with HD-DVD in the format war. Plus, every Sony system post-PSOne has debuted a new media standard.SpruceCaboose

i agree, although blu-ray tehnically isn't the new media standard sony was definately hoping it would be. the blu-ray player sold me on my PS3 though, I started with the HD DVD add-on with the 360 (still have it and use it :)) but i bought a PS3 the day after warner announced they were going blu. and it definately is nice to have a blu-ray player as well as a gaming machine. Sony is definately taking a beating this gen though

I own 1 bluray movie and 15 PS3 games.

Without bluray alot of these games wouldn't be what they are so, No, Bluray was not a terrible idea. Perhaps a little bit premature but a terrible idea? No. They were planning for the future videogame development.

For Sony's entertainment divisions I would assume it was but for Sony's PS3 it was a hell no. Blu-Ray serves no purpose in gaming on the PS3 with standard HDD's especially when the majority of the games have installs anyways. PC games use DVD9 and installs so what the hell was the point of Blu-Ray if it also is using installs? It basically makes the benifit contradicting. Blu-Ray was meant to be a bigger storage medium but if you're already installing games on the HDD then like PC it doesn't need Blu-Ray.

Sony is loosing so much money that they can't have a price cut for the PS3, so as a result it's getting murdered by the competition this holiday season. It's games are not selling very well either. People seem to think of it primarily as a Blu Ray player based on BR disc sales vs. PS3 game sales.

If the PS3 would have just stuck with plain ole dvds from the start like Nintendo and Microsoft this gen they could have started off on a good foot at say $400. By now they would be selling PS3s at $299 or less and be competitive or even on top right about now.

Does anyone still think Blu Ray was the right move for the PS3?

[QUOTE="LittleHands134"]I agree. Not to mention Blu-Ray reads games a bit slower, making us need those installs. Blu-Ray movies are nice, but I would prefer my games without the installs.110million

Are they going to replace these movies with Blu-Ray? I think it's important question. It really has everyting to do with how much they value HD over upscaled SD, and if it worth the hundreds upon hundreds of dollars to replace their current library. If the mass market consumer discerns not much difference between Blu-Ray and DVD, they are going to be less willing to convert.thinicer