If Microsoft were smart, and did a little more research...

...they would have put on HD DVD drive in the 360.

DVDs seem to do the job, but I can't help but notice that they're starting to show their age. Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD. ID Software wouldn't have the problems they were having with Rage, either. Seems like now days devs don't likeusing more than one disc, unless they absoolutely have to. Back in the day, it was common place.

MS knew Sony was putting a BluRay drive in the PS3. Why didn't MS put HD DVD into the 360? It would have made things a lot easier. MS was already in a partnership with Toshiba; it only makes sense.

Hell, if the 360 had an HD DVD drive, seeing the current sales of the 360 Vs. the PS3, HD DVD might have won the format war. Who knows...

They would have to give it away for free.tehsystemwarior

HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Luigi_The_Pimp

HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Luigi_The_Pimp

[QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. MortalDecay

...they would have put on HD DVD drive in the 360.

DVDs seem to do the job, but I can't help but notice that they're starting to show their age. Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD. ID Software wouldn't have the problems they were having with Rage, either. Seems like now days devs don't likeusing more than one disc, unless they absoolutely have to. Back in the day, it was common place.

MS knew Sony was putting a BluRay drive in the PS3. Why didn't MS put HD DVD into the 360? It would have made things a lot easier. MS was already in a partnership with Toshiba; it only makes sense.

Hell, if the 360 had an HD DVD drive, seeing the current sales of the 360 Vs. the PS3, HD DVD might have won the format war. Who knows...

MortalDecay

I think your missing several parts of the puzzle here.

First off, it was a very risky move by Sony to add the blue ray drive in the PS3. While the gamble paid off, had the HD DVD won the format war it could have put the final nail in the PS3 coffin at a time where it was already at a disadvantage when compared to a X360 released earlier and with a quickly growing game library and the cheap, effective Wii and it's ability to breach the traditional market. Given that the blueray won, the X360 would now have been stuck with an unsupported media format with no movies and an expensive and unique production required for its games.

Both the Blueray and the HD DVD Drives cost a good deal more than a DVD drive, not only that but they are a lot slower. Yes, the blue ray can contain a lot more information than the DVD but the PS3 is unable to read x amount of data nearly as fast as the 360 can. Essentially there's a trade-off between the two.

One of the reasons why the X360 has been doing so well compared to the PS3 up until this year was that it was cheaper than the PS3. While most games were available on both, and both consoles had roughly similar graphics, both could show HD graphics and play online.. the '360 was a quick $100 cheaper. Notice that it wasn't until the PS3 was able to match the 360ies price that it started selling as well or better. Had MS put a HD DVD in the X360 it would most likely have cost more and as a result killing one of the biggest advantage the 360 had over the PS3.

[QUOTE="MortalDecay"][QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Luigi_The_Pimp

[QUOTE="MortalDecay"]

...they would have put on HD DVD drive in the 360.

DVDs seem to do the job, but I can't help but notice that they're starting to show their age. Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD. ID Software wouldn't have the problems they were having with Rage, either. Seems like now days devs don't likeusing more than one disc, unless they absoolutely have to. Back in the day, it was common place.

MS knew Sony was putting a BluRay drive in the PS3. Why didn't MS put HD DVD into the 360? It would have made things a lot easier. MS was already in a partnership with Toshiba; it only makes sense.

Hell, if the 360 had an HD DVD drive, seeing the current sales of the 360 Vs. the PS3, HD DVD might have won the format war. Who knows...

I think your missing several parts of the puzzle here.

First off, it was a very risky move by Sony to add the blue ray drive in the PS3. While the gamble paid off, had the HD DVD won the format war it could have put the final nail in the PS3 coffin at a time where it was already at a disadvantage when compared to a X360 released earlier and with a quickly growing game library and the cheap, effective Wii and it's ability to breach the traditional market. Given that the blueray won, the X360 would now have been stuck with an unsupported media format with no movies and an expensive and unique production required for its games.

Both the Blueray and the HD DVD Drives cost a good deal more than a DVD drive, not only that but they are a lot slower. Yes, the blue ray can contain a lot more information than the DVD but the PS3 is unable to read x amount of data nearly as fast as the 360 can. Essentially there's a trade-off between the two.

One of the reasons why the X360 has been doing so well compared to the PS3 up until this year was that it was cheaper than the PS3. While most games were available on both, and both consoles had roughly similar graphics, both could show HD graphics and play online.. the '360 was a quick $100 cheaper. Notice that it wasn't until the PS3 was able to match the 360ies price that it started selling as well or better. Had MS put a HD DVD in the X360 it would most likely have cost more and as a result killing one of the biggest advantage the 360 had over the PS3.

[QUOTE="MortalDecay"]

...they would have put on HD DVD drive in the 360.

DVDs seem to do the job, but I can't help but notice that they're starting to show their age. Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD. ID Software wouldn't have the problems they were having with Rage, either. Seems like now days devs don't likeusing more than one disc, unless they absoolutely have to. Back in the day, it was common place.

MS knew Sony was putting a BluRay drive in the PS3. Why didn't MS put HD DVD into the 360? It would have made things a lot easier. MS was already in a partnership with Toshiba; it only makes sense.

Hell, if the 360 had an HD DVD drive, seeing the current sales of the 360 Vs. the PS3, HD DVD might have won the format war. Who knows...

I think your missing several parts of the puzzle here.

First off, it was a very risky move by Sony to add the blue ray drive in the PS3. While the gamble paid off, had the HD DVD won the format war it could have put the final nail in the PS3 coffin at a time where it was already at a disadvantage when compared to a X360 released earlier and with a quickly growing game library and the cheap, effective Wii and it's ability to breach the traditional market. Given that the blueray won, the X360 would now have been stuck with an unsupported media format with no movies and an expensive and unique production required for its games.

Both the Blueray and the HD DVD Drives cost a good deal more than a DVD drive, not only that but they are a lot slower. Yes, the blue ray can contain a lot more information than the DVD but the PS3 is unable to read x amount of data nearly as fast as the 360 can. Essentially there's a trade-off between the two.

One of the reasons why the X360 has been doing so well compared to the PS3 up until this year was that it was cheaper than the PS3. While most games were available on both, and both consoles had roughly similar graphics, both could show HD graphics and play online.. the '360 was a quick $100 cheaper. Notice that it wasn't until the PS3 was able to match the 360ies price that it started selling as well or better. Had MS put a HD DVD in the X360 it would most likely have cost more and as a result killing one of the biggest advantage the 360 had over the PS3.

HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Luigi_The_Pimp

They would have to give it away for free.tehsystemwarior

[QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. WilliamRLBaker

HD DVD flopped and 360 would have flopped with it so i think MS made the right decision with DVD

...they would have put on HD DVD drive in the 360.

DVDs seem to do the job, but I can't help but notice that they're starting to show their age. Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD. ID Software wouldn't have the problems they were having with Rage, either. Seems like now days devs don't likeusing more than one disc, unless they absoolutely have to. Back in the day, it was common place.

MS knew Sony was putting a BluRay drive in the PS3. Why didn't MS put HD DVD into the 360? It would have made things a lot easier. MS was already in a partnership with Toshiba; it only makes sense.

Hell, if the 360 had an HD DVD drive, seeing the current sales of the 360 Vs. the PS3, HD DVD might have won the format war. Who knows...MortalDecay

Yea, you right... and wrong in same time

MS propriety no.1 is not games it's to eliminate concurrency, they probably knew that Sony will hit with BluRay and they newit will cost much, but on other side Sony had nothing to lose with BluRay since they can produce by them selfs they produce tons of BDs right now anyway, MS is software developer that is 90% reliable on other hardware producers and surly those would dany to produce obsolete format discs for very cheap. So this was only way, if there was only BluRay or vice versa they maybe hit with it.

Other than the initial cost of putting a HD-DVD drive into the 360 Microsoft would have not lost anything. People seem to think if MS had done that and HD-DVD would have lost the format war MS would have been screwed. How? It would have still functioned as a dual layer DVD no different than todays drives.

What Microsoft would have done by adding the HD-DVD drive to the 360 is almost insured that the HD-DVD format would have won the format war. It already had quite a sizeable lead over Blu-ray, before the PS3 came out and tilted the battle the other way.

Even if HD-DVD had failed MS could have still used the larger capacity discs as their own propriety storage device, sort of like a gamecube disc, but of course alot bigger and better.

I personally think it was a giant mistake for MS to not include a HD-DVD drive in the 360 from day one. Of course Redmond never called and asked my opinion.

I think a multi billion dollarcompany is pretty smart and made the right decision

microsoft is an american company, and anyone whos driven an american car knows they make cheap products.rock_steady_bla

microsoft is an american company, and anyone whos driven an american car knows they make cheap products.rock_steady_bla

The only problem with that logic is that a sizable chunk of "American" cars are actually built in Canada and Mexico, while a sizable chunk of Japanese cars sold in the US are made in the US.

MS sacrificed a lot to have the first mover advantage.

MS sacrificed a lot to have the first mover advantage.

skektek

...they would have put on HD DVD drive in the 360.

DVDs seem to do the job, but I can't help but notice that they're starting to show their age. Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD. ID Software wouldn't have the problems they were having with Rage, either. Seems like now days devs don't likeusing more than one disc, unless they absoolutely have to. Back in the day, it was common place.

MS knew Sony was putting a BluRay drive in the PS3. Why didn't MS put HD DVD into the 360? It would have made things a lot easier. MS was already in a partnership with Toshiba; it only makes sense.

Hell, if the 360 had an HD DVD drive, seeing the current sales of the 360 Vs. the PS3, HD DVD might have won the format war. Who knows...

MortalDecay

It would have put HD-DVD in a much more competitive areea against Blu-Ray, as there have been more 360's sold, and that would have equalled more HD-DVD drives in the market, meaning that a lot more companies may have sided and stuck with HD-DVD.

[QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. WilliamRLBaker

microsoft is an american company, and anyone whos driven an american car knows they make cheap products.rock_steady_bla

.Games like Dragon Age wouldn't look so bad, if the dev had more space to work with, instead of having to compressing everything down to fit on one DVD.

MortalDecay

Sorry, but you have no idea what you are talking about.

Space on a dvd is NOT the problem.

HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Luigi_The_Pimp

[QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Nedemis

[QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Nedemis

No. Blu-ray is technically superior (more storage and bandwidth) and had more studio support including two huge studios (Sony and MGM) that would never support HD-DVD. If MS had waited and included HD-DVD it would only have hurt 360 sales and prolonged the war. Inevitably Blu-ray would still have won.

[QUOTE="Nedemis"][QUOTE="Luigi_The_Pimp"]HD-Dvd failed just like this thread's point. so no it would'nt have been smart. Javy03