I don't even remotely believe activision would EVER abandon the ps3 but to be the devil's advocate, you could see them using the 360 more as a proving ground for games they aren't sure will be hits or not... make the game on 360 and if it's popular, make it multiplat kind of like the bioshock route.
I think what people are overlooking is that I think he was talking about the ps3 itself... cost of the packaging hasn't changed, shipping and marketing costs haven't changed, cable costs haven't changed and the controller has gone up in cost now that it has rumble... Not to mention that if the PS3 is going to sell at retail for $299 then Sony has to sell it to the retailer for less than $299. The retailer makes money too... The PS3 itself is probably only about 50% of the entire costs incure...
Well, when I look at the LoT comparison the differences are immediately obvious even though the screenshots are only about 4 inches in size on my monitor and I didn't count any pixels doing it. I'm pretty sure that if I can easily tell the difference looking at 4 inch screenshots then the differences will be eye popping on my plasma and mind blowing on my projector.
Even for the ps3, a 3 million install base is only about 13% of the total ps3 userbase... take out the wii and Japan represents less than 10% of the console market. Even the japanese devs influence in the console gaming world is shrinking... Now, handhelds is a different story...
Wha...? How is halo wars a flop when kz2 is solid and mlb the show has great numbers? halo wars outsold both of them even though the real time strategy genre is probably the least popular genre on consoles. Am I missing something?
Or dual format players will reach a price point that will make the format war meaningless.
2 things:
1. Based on your comment I assume you think one format or the other will 'win' but I am saying that as long as there is exclusive studio support on either side then it is impossible for either side to 'win'. I will not pretend that a movie like 'King Kong' doesn't exist if I only own a Blu-ray player and I will not pretend that a movie like 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' doesn't exist if I only own an HD DVD player. I highly doubt that the general public will...
There's no question that the Warner move was a huge coup for Blu-ray but HD DVD is far from dead. I think HD DVD is in better shape now with Universal/Paramount exclusive and no Warner than they were in the summer with only Universal exclusive and Paramount/Warner dual format. The day that the two formats didn't consolidate into a single unified format was the day that I called a dual-format outcome and even if only ONE studio stays exclusive it's enough to force a dual format outcome. Ear...
HD DVD still has a third of the movie industry releasing exclusively on HD DVD, more than enough to force a dual-format solution which I have advocated since the beginning and still believe to be the ultimate outcome.
The Warner announcement has removed the possibility of a full out HD DVD victory which has always been an unlikely outcome and increased the possibility for a full out Blu-ray victory which was previously as unlikely as a full out HD DVD victory. Toshiba themse...
An awful lot of people on this site are under the incorrect impression that Blu-ray has won and they consistently state their >opinion< of this as 'fact' when it is actually only an >opinion< and, on this site, that opinion is usually fueled by their allegance to the PS3 rather than any actual advantage offered by the format. For these people, consider the following:
1. The install base for HD DVD doubled in the month leading up to Christmas and a large chunk of t...
Prodg52
And the HD-A3 is $165 on Amazon making the cheapest Blu-ray player almost double the price of the cheapest HD DVD player. I don't see your point at all.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/of...
Actually, the HD-A35 can be had for $328 on Amazon making the most expensive HD DVD player about the same price as the cheapest Blu-ray player.
...
DVD was launched with players starting around $1500 back when a dollar was worth more than it is now. DVD players can be bought for less than $30 now and that happened without competition.
Blu-ray players aren't more expensive because they are higher quality, they are more expensive because they are more complex. The data tracks on a Blu-ray disc are smaller and closer together in order to achieve higher disc capacity. This means that the pick-up has to be more accurate and the optical lenses more precisely produced in order to read the data reliably. The higher accuracy and precision required to reliably read the data means the pick-up assembly is more expensive. Additiona...
Don't know if this is true or not, I will wait to see the Nielson numbers first but if it is true then there are a lot of people that will be eating some >SERIOUS< crow on this site.
Peter Jackson's King Kong was released on HD DVD last November, it was bundled with many HD DVD players and is still bundled with the HD DVD Add-on. Jackson has also released The frighteners on HD DVD. I would say he is a strong supporter of HD DVD. I think the question, if one is to be asked, is will he let New Line publish Lord of the Rings on Blu-ray.
Lucas is completely non-comittal on either format:
For perspective, all my music/data/pictures etc on my PC comes to a little over 400Gb. To b...
It took well over 5 years for DVD to usurp CD in the pc market and it didn't have any competitors. Heck, up until about 2 years ago, some games were STILL being published on CD. With backup hard drives being so ridiculously cheap (less than $100 for 500GB backup drives and falling) it's hard to imagine someone really wanting to pay $35-$40 for a 15Gb/25Gb write once blank.
Unfortunately, Blu-ray caters to one demographic ie Male, 18-28 years of age (gamers). Warner is the only one that is releasing anything that has stood the test of time on Blu-ray and likely only because they have already processed it for release on HD DVD. Seriously, Warner seems to be the only company that releases anything that has been made before the 90's.
a 4kx2k image would require 4x the storage capacity, a cable with 4x the bandwidth to transmit the signal and players with 4x more processing power to decode the video. The technology already exists but it will likely come as the successor to Blu-ray/HD DVD due to the exeptional limitations of both standards to process a 4k video stream.
Btw, 4kx2k projectors are already being manufactured for commercial digital theatres and the resolution is considered to be equal in quality ...
The PS3 has always been the value proposition when it comes to features and now it is even more so BUT on the flip side, if someone wants to play a game for the cheapest price possible, the 360 is still that console. These are two entirely different demographics of gamers. The hardcore gamer likely already owns the ps3 and probably the 360 too (like myself) and the casual gamer (most likely not to have a console at this point) is likely more price sensitive. $300 will definitely help the P...