Post by: Xbox-Scene on August 14, 2006, 10:24:00 AM
| From digitimes.com: Quote
Read More: digitimes.com |
Post by: bucko on August 14, 2006, 09:35:00 AM
Post by: postaldude25 on August 14, 2006, 09:37:00 AM
Post by: grim_d on August 14, 2006, 09:45:00 AM
Post by: jtom617 on August 14, 2006, 09:51:00 AM
good deal!
Post by: C-5 on August 14, 2006, 09:52:00 AM
Without a price drop on the 360, the PS3 is a better value.. which goes against earlier statements made by MSFT. The only plus is that it IS optional unlike Sony's fuck up.
$399 Premium Xbox 360 with No HDMI, No WiFi, 20G HD, No multi-card reader + $200 External HD-DVD = $598...
Lower spec PS3 with No HDMI, No WiFi, 20G HD, No multi-card reader + internal Blu-Ray = $499...
Personally, I am not buying any of this new tech, until the format war is settlted.
This post has been edited by C-5: Aug 14 2006, 04:56 PM
Post by: twistedsymphony on August 14, 2006, 10:12:00 AM
This comes from the fact that without wifi, HDMI or a larger HDD the Premium Xbox 360 most closely resembles that of the lower model PS3.
Don't get me wrong I STILL think the Xbox 360 is a better deal because you can upgrade over time, I myself am not very interested in the next gen DVD formats until the dust settles a bit, I also have ZERO interest in Wifi on my console. I probably wouldn't have bought an Xbox 360 if it were another $100.
It's just interesting that MS has twisted their definition of what an Xbox 360 console "IS" to meet their needs one way or another
Post by: throwingks on August 14, 2006, 10:14:00 AM
Post by: cxgamer on August 14, 2006, 10:26:00 AM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Aug 14 2006, 05:21 PM) 
I think it is a good price. If you want a home theater/gaming system choose between PS3 or the 360. If you want a gaming console, the 360 is better. It gives you room to upgrade as you see fit. Bloatware is not forced on you.
It's funny..
Isn't MS famous for bloatware?
Post by: skarekr0 on August 14, 2006, 10:31:00 AM
So lets recap. We want these consoles to stand up next to each other so im going to include most of the features they both have.
Sony premium - $600.00
charge and play - included
Blu-Ray - included
Wi-Fi - included
Games (x2) - $140.00 (70.00 a game?)
headset - $20 (based on the ps2 headset)
Total = $760.00
360 premium- $400.00
Charge and Play - $20.00
HD-DVD - $200.00
Wi-Fi - $100.00
Games (x2) - $120.00 ($60 a game)
Head Set - included
Total = $840.00
I left out Homebrew and Live since I have no faith in what Sony is offering in that department. But, Personally, I think MS should have a $100.00 price drop if they want to continue to say that they are the cheapest. Choice is expensive.
Post by: brywalker on August 14, 2006, 10:36:00 AM
I have a 360. I am behind HD-DVD. My only other option is to shell $500 for the stand alone. I dig the interface of the 360. This is a no brainer.
It's not so much to compete with the PS2 on this one, it is about CHOICE. I don't want Blu-Ray. I want a PS3. Um, I am not going to buy a PS3 now because I am forced to a format.
Personally I couldn't care less about resolution - my DLP is 720p/1080i. Good enough.
Done and done.
Post by: Cauhauna on August 14, 2006, 10:49:00 AM
Post by: skarekr0 on August 14, 2006, 10:55:00 AM
Post by: ZildjianKX on August 14, 2006, 10:57:00 AM
If that was the case, would make the drive very versatile.
Post by: Madgame on August 14, 2006, 11:10:00 AM
Post by: redwolf on August 14, 2006, 11:11:00 AM
i'm getting the Wii
Post by: sofa king dumb on August 14, 2006, 11:20:00 AM
Post by: Madgame on August 14, 2006, 11:23:00 AM
QUOTE(sofa king dumb @ Aug 14 2006, 06:27 PM) 
does'nt the wii have a hd dvd player and only $50 more?
I didn't even think the Wii played plain old DVD.
Post by: BasicAir on August 14, 2006, 11:24:00 AM
And for the record, Blu-Ray does not offer "much higher capacity" compared to HD-DVD. HD-DVD offers up to 45GB which is barely behind that of Blu-Ray.
Also, it can support full HD-resolution movies with even 7.1 mixes and extras, etc. Plus it uses red lasers (cheaper) and cheaper media, etc. etc.
Everyone here needs to stop whining.
Oh and if you want the TRUE FACTS on HD-DVD, instead of hearing these "rumors" just check recent news articles or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD
I REST MY CASE.
"HD DVD can be mastered with up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD. Currently, most DVD movies are made with 5.1 channels of surround sound. There are relatively few titles that offer 6.1 channels of surround sound. On HD DVD the Dolby formats are mandatory, meaning that a Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, or Dolby TrueHD track may be used as the sole soundtrack on a disc, because every player will have a decoder that can process any of these three bitstreams.[4] For lossless audio in movies in the PCM, Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD formats, HD DVD discs support encoding in up to 24-bit/192kHz for two channels, or up to eight channels of up to 24-bit/96kHz encoding.[5] For reference, even new big-budget Hollywood films are mastered in only 24-bit/48kHz, with 16-bit/48kHz being common for ordinary films.
The HD DVD format supports a wide variety of resolutions, from low-resolution CIF and SDTV up to HDTV formats such as 720p, 1080i and 1080p.[6] All movie titles released so far have had the feature encoded in 1080p (although the currently available HD DVD players do not have a 1080p output option), with supplements in 480i or 480p."
Post by: MN-Mod-Man on August 14, 2006, 11:31:00 AM
Post by: twistedsymphony on August 14, 2006, 11:39:00 AM
QUOTE(BasicAir @ Aug 14 2006, 01:31 PM)
$200 is worth it.
And for the record, Blu-Ray does not offer "much higher capacity" compared to HD-DVD. HD-DVD offers up to 45GB which is barely behind that of Blu-Ray.
Also, it can support full HD-resolution movies with even 7.1 mixes and extras, etc. Plus it uses red lasers (cheaper) and cheaper media, etc. etc.
Everyone here needs to stop whining.
Oh and if you want the TRUE FACTS on HD-DVD, instead of hearing these "rumors" just check recent news articles or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD
...
1. HD-DVD IS a "media"... unless you're refering to the material as the "media" in which case both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD use similar plastic and metal foil.
2. HD-DVD, like Blu-Ray uses a BLUE/VIOLET laser, not a red laser.
You would have known those things if you'd read the article you yourself linked to:
The very first paragraph of the article
QUOTE
HD DVD (High Density Digital Versatile Disc or High Definition Digital Video Disc) is a digital optical media format which can hold high definition video or other data. HD DVD is similar to the competing Blu-ray Disc, which also uses the same CD-size (120 mm diameter) optical data storage media and 405 nm wavelength blue laser.
*emphesis mine
Post by: BasicAir on August 14, 2006, 11:57:00 AM
QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Aug 14 2006, 06:46 PM)
1. HD-DVD IS a "media"... unless you're refering to the material as the "media" in which case both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD use similar plastic and metal foil.
2. HD-DVD, like Blu-Ray uses a BLUE/VIOLET laser, not a red laser.
You would have known those things if you'd read the article you yourself linked to:
The very first paragraph of the article
*emphesis mine
1. Are you lacking IQ? Of course I meant the actual physical media and was referencing the fact that it's cheaper to make/press and therefor market HD-DVD discs vs. Blu-Ray.
2. I was meaning that HD-DVD *also* can use a red laser. Obviously you didn't even read the whole article:
"The HD DVD format also can be applied to current red laser DVDs in 5, 9, 15 and 18 GB capacities which offers an even lower cost option to content owners wanting to sell short form content."
(And for the record, I didn't read the ENTIRE article until today because I've been researching both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD for years. So many years ago that a google search for either term 'blu-ray' or 'hd-dvd' would only have 2-3 hits TOTAL and NO I'm *not* exaggerating)
Post by: sicknasty413 on August 14, 2006, 12:30:00 PM
Ill take my 200 and buy a wii (which is a very stupid name).
Post by: nickthegreat on August 14, 2006, 12:39:00 PM
to be fair, lets get a grip here - if you can afford the set up to take full advantage of HD tv and the sound the media offers (or even care about the difference between upscaled DVD and HD-DVD/blu ray) then you can afford $200 (or perhaps even a PS3). ffs, imagine if you lived in the uk......$200 my arse, that would fill up my car with petrol 3 times
nick
Post by: Ranger72 on August 14, 2006, 12:48:00 PM
this is very disappointing. I was hoping the price would be closer to $125 to $150 range.
Post by: nickthegreat on August 14, 2006, 01:20:00 PM
QUOTE(JimmyHACK @ Aug 14 2006, 08:00 PM)
yet give you HD movies instead of 600 for 360 premium + addon
- if you care enough about HiDef you will either:
a)spend $200
or
b)buy a PROPER drive (after all, chances are youve spent alot so far and therefore probably have a job. those going for option 'a' probably also have a girlfriend and thus are happy but financially crippled at the same time.)
either way I don't see why the PS3 should come into it; if anything this merely gives the ability to turn around to the fanboy and state that HD doesn't come into it, 'its just about the games.'
nick
edit: why would you keep the 360 and get aPS3 based upon HD???? I would keep the 360 and spend the $500 on a standalone (in fact id sod the HD and buy both consoles but if i loved spending $30 on a movie thats what id do), then wait until the PS3 comes down in price and if you prefer the games sell the xbox and buy the PS.
Post by: tutu on August 14, 2006, 01:45:00 PM
They can have there little war.
Besides, consoles are usually too noisy for playback of movies. I know my 360 is!
Post by: AngelBallz69 on August 14, 2006, 02:17:00 PM
Post by: 0794 on August 14, 2006, 02:24:00 PM
MS has played it well this Generation by basically allowing you to design your console to your needs instead of forcing technology (and cost) onto those who don't need it like Sony is doing with the PS3.
Anyone with a true "home theater" will not be using a gaming console as their video/audio source and thus won't care about add-on drives for either high-def formats - MS and Sony know this. So their market is for those who would like to play the new Hi-Def movies using a device they already own (or plan on buying soon)...like a gaming console. Thus, the MS add-on drive gives those more flexibility (and a reduced cost) in their choice. Plus, we all know what happens if/when drives go bad...making an internalized drive more difficult to replace.
As for me, I don't care about Wi-Fi nor Hi-Def on a gaming console and so the 360 is perfect for me. However, if the PS3 were to have homebrew first with any formats playable like the current XBMC, then I would also buy a PS3 without hesitation.
Post by: achilles614 on August 14, 2006, 02:36:00 PM
QUOTE(794 @ Aug 14 2006, 09:31 PM)
$200 is not only a good but fair price as well.
MS has played it well this Generation by basically allowing you to design your console to your needs instead of forcing technology (and cost) onto those who don't need it like Sony is doing with the PS3.
Anyone with a true "home theater" will not be using a gaming console as their video/audio source and thus won't care about add-on drives for either high-def formats - MS and Sony know this. So their market is for those who would like to play the new Hi-Def movies using a device they already own (or plan on buying soon)...like a gaming console. Thus, the MS add-on drive gives those more flexibility (and a reduced cost) in their choice. Plus, we all know what happens if/when drives go bad...making an internalized drive more difficult to replace.
As for me, I don't care about Wi-Fi nor Hi-Def on a gaming console and so the 360 is perfect for me. However, if the PS3 were to have homebrew first with any formats playable like the current XBMC, then I would also buy a PS3 without hesitation.
mmmhmm
Post by: whytellyou on August 14, 2006, 02:51:00 PM
QUOTE(C-5 @ Aug 14 2006, 11:59 AM)
I have to say that I am disappointed that they are going to price it that high.
Without a price drop on the 360, the PS3 is a better value.. which goes against earlier statements made by MSFT. The only plus is that it IS optional unlike Sony's fuck up.
$399 Premium Xbox 360 with No HDMI, No WiFi, 20G HD, No multi-card reader + $200 External HD-DVD = $598...
Lower spec PS3 with No HDMI, No WiFi, 20G HD, No multi-card reader + internal Blu-Ray = $499...
Personally, I am not buying any of this new tech, until the format war is settlted.
Yeah but too bad sony has a awsome track record of their formats failing!! and $200 is cheap!!!!
Post by: KUNFUCHOPSTICKS on August 14, 2006, 03:21:00 PM
and HD DVD uses violet/blue not red as some dumbass argued.
for the person that want the wii- here:
Post by: Devedander on August 14, 2006, 03:43:00 PM
QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Aug 14 2006, 06:46 PM)
1. HD-DVD IS a "media"... unless you're refering to the material as the "media" in which case both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD use similar plastic and metal foil.
HD DVD is a medium...
Post by: 123qazx on August 14, 2006, 04:04:00 PM
Post by: jtom617 on August 14, 2006, 04:14:00 PM
QUOTE(123qazx @ Aug 14 2006, 11:11 PM)
just buy a stupid ethernet bridge and wifi is $20...not 100
ha, hes going by genuine 1st party goods there, cant you see that?
This is a good thread, but i think i will get a PS3 also to stand next to my X360
Post by: KILLplaystation on August 14, 2006, 04:17:00 PM
QUOTE(ejb2227 @ Aug 14 2006, 05:44 PM)
correct me if im wrong, but i thought i read that one of the provisions for obtaining a blu ray license was that you couldnt develope a dual format drive like the one you mentioned
There was one developed, and there was an article about it here on X-S
Post by: Foe-hammer on August 14, 2006, 04:21:00 PM
Post by: coconutlover on August 14, 2006, 05:06:00 PM
Post by: Kira Yamoto on August 14, 2006, 05:18:00 PM
On the Blu-Ray side, the PS3 is a real bargain too. A 500 dollar blu-ray player compared to a thousand? Not to mention the PS3 is versatile in the area of components and such, so digital audio is a +, hdmi output for current, up to date hdtv's. Once blu-ray studios find a way to use better codecs (or at least drop to 1080i to use VC-1/H.264) they'll be able to deliver us truehd dolby, dolby dig + and all that other good stuff.
Post by: 123qazx on August 14, 2006, 05:22:00 PM
Post by: infamous_Q on August 14, 2006, 06:22:00 PM
also, the ps3 blue ray player, i heard that it just upconverts to 1080p and doesn't display "true" 1080p, thus the 360's hd-dvd may also be capable of this. dont take my word for it tho...
Post by: tutu on August 14, 2006, 06:53:00 PM
QUOTE(infamous_Q @ Aug 15 2006, 01:29 AM)
hmm...weren't there rumours about this having an hdmi output?
A HDMI output would require a new console, as the addon drive only consists of just that - the drive, and no internal video processing, it just passes the data stream to the 360 to handle.
Unfortunately they failed to offer a HDMI or DVI with HDCP when they released the original 360, adding such a connection might annoy people who have already purchased a 360. I believe the reason for this is that it only has analogue video output, not digital. A mistake, but HDMI doesn't differ much at all from component in terms of quality.
Post by: Woore on August 14, 2006, 06:54:00 PM
Post by: KUNFUCHOPSTICKS on August 14, 2006, 07:12:00 PM
look at the source of the news clip? its undependabale
Post by: hamwbone on August 14, 2006, 08:30:00 PM
Post by: Spodie on August 14, 2006, 10:28:00 PM
QUOTE(trey85stang @ Aug 15 2006, 05:17 AM)
at a $200 price point; I will not be buying in. I will wait for a standalone player to hit the $300 range.
you might be waiting awhile I would like to watch HD content of my choosing on my LCD sometime soon. Thank god for Netflix, I hope their HD DVD & Blu-ray transition is smooth & there are disks available for everyone (hard to get popular new titles)
Post by: maxpower2001 on August 14, 2006, 11:41:00 PM
Sure you can argue that you're getting more than just a stand-alone player... you're getting a complete gaming/multimedia/hd-dvd machine. But this machine still comes out more expensive than a ps3. All i hear everyday about ps3 is that it's just way too expensive... and i agree it is pretty expensive. But looking at MS's $200 price tag for their hd-dvd I don't see how you can say it's cheap. If you think that this add-on is cheap then sony's ps3 is a bargain.
Post by: skarekr0 on August 15, 2006, 12:55:00 AM
QUOTE(maxpower2001 @ Aug 15 2006, 12:48 AM)
For those of you saying that $200 is cheap, i can't agree. How can you say it's cheap? When you add the cost of the xbox360 plus the hd-dvd add-on, this hd-dvd player will end up costing more than a stand-alone player. How is this $200 add-on considered cheap?
Sure you can argue that you're getting more than just a stand-alone player... you're getting a complete gaming/multimedia/hd-dvd machine. But this machine still comes out more expensive than a ps3. All i hear everyday about ps3 is that it's just way too expensive... and i agree it is pretty expensive. But looking at MS's $200 price tag for their hd-dvd I don't see how you can say it's cheap. If you think that this add-on is cheap then sony's ps3 is a bargain.
Thats exactly what ive been trying to say. I dont think that $200 is that bad if you already have a 360, but my point was the whole "flinging shit" thing. I personally feel that the 360 is a rip off considering what they gave us with the original xbox, they basically created the ps3 (with the assistance of the mod scene of course) and then they turned around and took away all of those features just so they could save money and then say its about choice. Thats what irritates me. They should have waited, kept the hdd standard, put the HD-DVD, Included DVI and/or HDMI and Included Wi-Fi with the package. In other words, they should have produced exactly what Sony is producing.
Post by: infamous_Q on August 15, 2006, 04:31:00 AM
Post by: sicknasty413 on August 15, 2006, 04:52:00 AM
Thats right, i went there.
But hell, ill probably pick up a ps3.. just to say i have one...even though i despise ps1 and ps2
Post by: Unregistered007 on August 15, 2006, 05:55:00 AM
Post by: KUNFUCHOPSTICKS on August 15, 2006, 08:16:00 AM
QUOTE(infamous_Q @ Aug 15 2006, 06:38 AM)
you guys don't seem to get why they didn't include HD-DVD in their console. the reason for this is because then the console becomes part of the media war. and if blue-ray wins, then it SERIOUSLY increases the chances of the xbox360 failing. the 360 is sold as a console (now with the option of being a larger part of your home theatre experience). the ps3 is sold as an all around entertainment center (console and hd movies in one) a reason it is more expensive. the reason sony is likely including blue-ray in their console is because they know they dominated the market last gen, and if they do it again this year then blue-ray will win outright. M$ not being the actual creators of hd-dvd and just standing by its side at this point smartened up and offered it externally. which means that if blue-ray wins the battle they can offer an external one as well (although that'll be unbelievably expensive). THAT is why they're offering it externally, this way if hd-dvd wins, toshiba gets screwed and doesn't take M$'s new baby down with it. so deal w/ the $200 price tag, or don't.
good explianation.....
but we all know blu-ray is gonna fail, so its gonna be: betamax/umd/blu-ray trash. and we all thought sopny learned its lesson from betamax, even umd
Post by: SSChevy2001 on August 15, 2006, 01:29:00 PM
QUOTE
but we all know blu-ray is gonna fail, so its gonna be: betamax/umd/blu-ray trash. and we all thought sopny learned its lesson from betamax, even umd
Don't forget about sony's MiniDisc
Post by: IAmCanadian on August 15, 2006, 06:45:00 PM
What about this? The 360 doesn't have DVI or HDMI, so how do we get the HDCP?
Post by: KUNFUCHOPSTICKS on August 15, 2006, 07:29:00 PM
QUOTE(IAmCanadian @ Aug 15 2006, 08:52 PM)
HD DVD players must follow AACS guidelines pertaining to outputs over analog connections. This is set by a flag called the Image Constraint Token (ICT), which restricts the resolution for analog outputs without HDCP to 960×540. The decision to set the flag to restrict output ("down-convert") is left to the content provider.
What about this? The 360 doesn't have DVI or HDMI, so how do we get the HDCP?
no need to worry about that yet, all the inital moveis on BD and HD DVD will not implement this.
peace
Post by: iforbes on August 16, 2006, 07:03:00 AM
QUOTE(IAmCanadian @ Aug 16 2006, 01:52 AM)
HD DVD players must follow AACS guidelines pertaining to outputs over analog connections. This is set by a flag called the Image Constraint Token (ICT), which restricts the resolution for analog outputs without HDCP to 960×540. The decision to set the flag to restrict output ("down-convert") is left to the content provider.
What about this? The 360 doesn't have DVI or HDMI, so how do we get the HDCP?
Two things;
Of topic.
The xbox 360 is perfectly capable of displaying 1080p as stated by ATI, and MS. The problem is, 1080p is locked to 25fps, 1080i can display 60fps which is better for fast motion picture (a reason why most HD-DVD movies @ 1080i currently looks better then Blu-ray movies @1080p) and of course 720p is the best for the frame rates needs for most video games.
Back on topic.
What's so bad about 960x540? It's better then DVD. CRT HD sets can only display up to that high anyway and expensive plasmas only display a tad above that.
I say, if you have a 50" set or less, and/or you sit further then 10 feet away to watch movies, don't worry about HDMI - it's nothing more then a marketing/licensing gimik to get you to spend much more for nothing.
Besides that and back to the first point, the console/player will have to putput digital to display 1080p. and this is why MS will releasing a HDMI/DVI dongle by the end of the year which wil bypass the TV encoder analog signal.
So don't worry, and just be......
Post by: KUNFUCHOPSTICKS on August 16, 2006, 04:50:00 PM
QUOTE(iforbes @ Aug 16 2006, 09:10 AM)
The problem is, 1080p is locked to 25fps,
huh?