[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Batman begins and BSG were the only thing making me want HD-DVD. Now I look forward to them both on BR. I can't wait!

I would have kept my BSG on HD DVD, but it was sub par. The image quality was OK (knowing that the graininess was intentional), but the authoring left something to be desired - audio synchronization problems. I'm still waiting for my refund.

I wonder if they'll have to do a full re-encode of BSG to correct the audio sync problems for their Blu-ray version.

[ort888]

I still think HD DVD can make a comeback.

[Dakar the Fourth]

You always did like rooting for the underdog.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ort888 

I still think HD DVD can make a comeback.

-t

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I would have kept my BSG on HD DVD, but it was sub par. The image quality was OK (knowing that the graininess was intentional), but the authoring left something to be desired

If that is true why did you give me such a hard time when I posted reviews stating the same sub par image quality with loads of the typical bitrate charts and image comparisons.

No doubt it is better than than DVD but compared to what I saw over HD it wasn't so great.

Anyway, I hope they do a better job with it on BR. Batman also looked good but not great on HD-DVD so I hope they polish it up a bit more also.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by ort888 

I still think HD DVD can make a comeback.

Ya now that the players have hit that magic $99 price point which is all that matters.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

If that is true why did you give me such a hard time when I posted reviews stating the same sub par image quality with loads of the typical bitrate charts and image comparisons.

No doubt it is better than than DVD but compared to what I saw over HD it wasn't so great.

Anyway, I hope they do a better job with it on BR. Batman also looked good but not great on HD-DVD so I hope they polish it up a bit more also.

I just said the image quality is OK. Reread my post.

Originally Posted by Eug 

I would have kept my BSG on HD DVD, but it was sub par. The image quality was OK (knowing that the graininess was intentional), but the authoring left something to be desired - audio synchronization problems. I'm still waiting for my refund.

I wonder if they'll have to do a full re-encode of BSG to correct the audio sync problems for their Blu-ray version.

There's lots of grain present. But that's SUPPOSED to be there. The release is sub par because of the authoring - audio synchronization problem. I already said this last time we talked about it in this thread too. Your memory must be failing.

P.S. Here is my Amazon.com review from 5 weeks ago:

Amazon.com: Eug "Eug"'s review of Battlestar Galactica - Season One [HD DVD]

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Predictions for 2008.

Warner will go HDDVD exclusive.

Disney will go format neutral.

More BOGO sales for HDDVD.

The pendulum is going to swing back to the HDDVD side in terms of movies sales.

Wait what?

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I just said the image quality is OK. Reread my post.

There's lots of grain present. But that's SUPPOSED to be there. The release is sub par because of the authoring - audio synchronization problem. I already said this last time we talked about it in this thread too. Your memory must be failing.[/url]

"OTOH, I think the disc packaging is fine, as is the image quality. Yes, the original mini-series pilot is VERY grainy, but the HD DVDs reproduce the grain faithfully. The grain is much more muted in the series itself, which is probably because it was shot on HD video. And yes, the detail present is excellent. I can't compare it to broadcast HD since I've never seen it on TV in HD, but it's quite nice, and a humungous step up from the DVD. Anyone who appreciates this show would love the HD DVD version... except for the lip sync issue at the 55 minute mark on Disk 2."

http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...ho-winning/87/

"Anyone who appreciates this show would love the HD DVD version"
Then today you say: "The release is sub par because of the authoring - audio synchronization problem. I already said this last time we talked about it in this thread too. Your memory must be failing"

To be honest I am not sure what you are saying with that post. Image quality is "fine" or "good" but very grainy but it is supposed to be like that. Then you say we will "LOVE" the HD/dvd but the audio is out of sync and the picture is "ok", then you say you are waiting for a refund.

So I don't think my memory is the problem just comprehending your mixed reviews.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

"OTOH, I think the disc packaging is fine, as is the image quality. Yes, the original mini-series pilot is VERY grainy, but the HD DVDs reproduce the grain faithfully. The grain is much more muted in the series itself, which is probably because it was shot on HD video. And yes, the detail present is excellent. I can't compare it to broadcast HD since I've never seen it on TV in HD, but it's quite nice, and a humungous step up from the DVD. Anyone who appreciates this show would love the HD DVD version... except for the lip sync issue at the 55 minute mark on Disk 2."

http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...ho-winning/87/

"Anyone who appreciates this show would love the HD DVD version"
Then today you say: "The release is sub par because of the authoring - audio synchronization problem. I already said this last time we talked about it in this thread too. Your memory must be failing"

To be honest I am not sure what you are saying with that post. Image quality is "fine" or "good" but very grainy but it is supposed to be like that. Then you say we will "LOVE" the HD/dvd but the audio is out of sync and the picture is "ok", then you say you are waiting for a refund.

So I don't think my memory is the problem just comprehending your mixed reviews.

Highlighted for your convenience, since you seemed to be very confused by stuff that others in this thread seemed to have understood just fine.

Cliff notes:

It's grainy, but the HD DVD reproduce the intentional grain faithfully. Image detail is a huge step up from the DVD.

However, the disc was authored incorrectly, as it contains significant lip sync issues.

P.S. I'll add that image grain is actually quite hard to reproduce. In fact, H.264/AVC even has a technology that removes film grain for easier encoding and then re-adds it later.

Thomson's Film Grain Technology Specification Approved by DVD Forum

[OwlBoy]

I have a weird feeling that Blu-ray is winning…

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Highlighted for your convenience, since you seemed to be very confused by stuff that others in this thread seemed to have understood just fine.

Na i get it. Like you said BSG fans will "love it" for the "Ok image quality" but its poorly authored and you returned it.

As I BSG fan I "love" things that are "ok image quality" so I can't wait to get and return mine also!

[starman]

Originally Posted by OwlBoy 

I have a weird feeling that Blu-ray is winning…

Nope. The fight is just beginning! Rawr!

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Na i get it. Like you said BSG fans will "love it" for the "Ok image quality" but its poorly authored and you returned it.

As I BSG fan I "love" things that are "ok image quality" so I can't wait to get and return mine also!

You're stretching. And as long as you keep posting this nonsense, I'll refute it:

Remember, my response about the grain was partially because some out there claimed that somehow Universal had uglified/grainified the release and even went as far to claim it was no better quality than the DVD. The claim was dead wrong of course.

I posted the pictures to illustrate the HUGE improvement in image quality that the HD version offered. Those screengrabs completely nullified any credibility that anyone had claiming that the HD DVD offered no improvement over the DVD, because the improvement was enormous, even vs. the broadcast HD version.

Universal's MPEG2 broadcast HD:



Look at the jacket on the kid at the left, and at the flower bouquet in the middle. They're much clearer in the HD DVD below.
Also note the compression noise around the people in the MPEG2 broadcast image above. It's gone in the HD DVD below.

HD DVD:



And for completeness' sake, here is the DVD:



There is no question at all... The HD DVD version is the best by far. The DVD isn't in the same league obviously, but the HD DVD is still quite a noticeable improvement over Universal's HD MPEG2 broadcast version.

Some may not like the grain, but you can blame the director/cinematographer/producer for their intent. If you don't like it, then don't buy movies with that gritty look.

However, the audio sync issue is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUE. Someone was asleep at the wheel. We have scenes where it's like watching an old dubbed Bruce Lee movie. The video and the audio doesn't match at all. For me, this is a deal killer, and thus I returned the set.

If they use the same flawed encode for the Blu-ray version, I won't be buying that either. I absolutely can't stand audio sync problems. BTW, if they remove the grain on the Blu-ray version, I won't be buying that either.

[Oversoul]

Universal's statement on going Blu:

"The path for widespread adoption of the next-generation platform has finally become clear. Universal will continue its aggressive efforts to broaden awareness for hi-def’s unparalleled offerings in interactivity and connectivity, at an increasingly affordable price. The emergence of a single, high-definition format is cause for consumers, as well as the entire entertainment industry, to celebrate. While Universal values the close partnership we have shared with Toshiba, it is time to turn our focus to releasing new and catalog titles on Blu-ray."

Breaking: Universal Studios Goes Blu | High-Def Digest

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Oversoul 

Universal's statement on going Blu:


Breaking: Universal Studios Goes Blu | High-Def Digest

Yippie! I can't wait to love and return my BSG's!

[icruise]

Guess I'll be getting Transformers in HD a lot sooner than I thought.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Guess I'll be getting Transformers in HD a lot sooner than I thought.

They announced it already? Link?

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

They announced it already? Link?

it showed up in Best buy stock a couple days ago but it could have been a mistake.

Anywho, Star Trek Season 2 has been canceled obviously. Must suck having 1 season of BSG and 1 season of ST but oh well.

TrekToday - Second Season of HD-DVD 'Star Trek' To Be Canceled.

[Stogieman]

Originally Posted by starman 

Just checkin' out the posts from the past few months.

That reminds me. I need to bump that PSP vs. DS thread. There were a lot of predictions made in there that I want to quote. Better start editing your posts now Starman/Sprinkles.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

let me see, at +/-$20 a LD x 700 ...

$20 my ass, try $30-70.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

it showed up in Best buy stock a couple days ago but it could have been a mistake.

Most definitely a mistake, as Best Buy inventories don't get such releases before they actually get announced.

Anywho, Star Trek Season 2 has been canceled obviously. Must suck having 1 season of BSG and 1 season of ST but oh well.

TrekToday - Second Season of HD-DVD 'Star Trek' To Be Canceled.

As you're so quick to observe, I don't have BSG anymore, because of the audio problems.

And I'm not sure why it must suck having one season of ST, considering it's the only hi-def version available on any format. It's an awesome release too, and one I can watch now. When Season 2 comes out on Blu-ray, I'll buy that too... assuming a good quality inexpensive Blu-ray player actually exists by then.

What I am a little annoyed at though is the fact that it's no future Blu-ray releases (even during this DVD to hi-def transition period) will be on combo discs. It's convenient having the Star Trek release on combo HD DVD/DVD. Star Trek is a great distraction for my home office when I'm doing paperwork, but I don't have a hi-def player there. I might pick one up though if I can find one for $49 on closeout somewhere. (I'd prefer having a upscaling player there anyway.)

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

As you're so quick to observe, I don't have BSG anymore.

And I'm not sure why it must suck having one season of ST, considering it's the only hi-def version available on any format. It's an awesome release too, and one I can watch now. When Season 2 comes out on Blu-ray, I'll buy that too... assuming a good quality inexpensive Blu-ray player actually exists by then.

What you so huffy for? it wasn't targeted at you rather ANYONE who bought just one season of BSG or ST on HD as now the remaining seasons are going to be on BR which isn't the greatest situation no matter how you want to sugarcoat it.

"Oh season 1, ya that has to be played on my HD player, the rest we have to watch on the BR". Plus the boxes will look ugly together

[goMac]

It's strange that Toshiba would just outright end all production of HD-DVD players. You would think that there will still be a few niche markets needing them, like some smaller production houses.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

it showed up in Best buy stock a couple days ago but it could have been a mistake.

Anywho, Star Trek Season 2 has been canceled obviously. Must suck having 1 season of BSG and 1 season of ST but oh well.

TrekToday - Second Season of HD-DVD 'Star Trek' To Be Canceled.

I will say it does suck to have one season of BSG and Heroes. In all honesty they were the reason I went with HD DVD over Blu-Ray initially. But if/when they are announced for Blu-Ray I'll sell my HD copies and buy them on Blu. Other than those two I don't plan on re-buying any HD release, though.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

What you so huffy for? it wasn't targeted at you rather ANYONE who bought just one season of BSG or ST on HD as now the remaining seasons are going to be on BR which isn't the greatest situation no matter how you want to sugarcoat it.

"Oh season 1, ya that has to be played on my HD player, the rest we have to watch on the BR". Plus the boxes will look ugly together

Not the best solution, but then again, it's better than rebuying it, especially since the new version won't include the DVDs. Remember, my copy of ST had one defective disc, so I replaced it instead of returning it for a refund... even though it was after the Warner announcement. Having already seen part of it, I know it's an excellent quality release, and it's very convenient having both the DVD and hi-def version at this time. (It won't be important 5 years from now though, when Blu-ray players are a dime a dozen.)

Anyways, as for looks, I hope somebody comes out with a nice slimline BD 1.1 player this year, that will fit in the shelf right below my HD DVD player. That would be the perfect solution and they should look good together.

Originally Posted by jokell82 

I will say it does suck to have one season of BSG and Heroes. In all honesty they were the reason I went with HD DVD over Blu-Ray initially. But if/when they are announced for Blu-Ray I'll sell my HD copies and buy them on Blu. Other than those two I don't plan on re-buying any HD release, though.

I don't think I'll buy Heroes Season 2 on any format. I bought Season 1 on HD DVD, but mainly because I hadn't seen it yet. It was great, but season 2 on TV has been less than impressive. Not worth a purchase and rewatch. It's sort of like 24 for me. I'll watch it once and never watch it again.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

PS3 reaches 10 million four months sooner than Xbox360

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?con...=All&weeks=100

Now that BR has won expect it to take off even more.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

PS3 reaches 10 million four months sooner than Xbox360

VG Chartz | Hardware Sales From Launch

Now that BR has won expect it to take off even more.

Yeah, the BR win will definitely boost the PS3.

However, IMO it's a mistake to believe this will ensure an unmitigated PS3 success. It's still in last place, and there's absolutely nothing stopping MS from continuing to undercut the PS3's price, by not including a hi-def optical disc player. I suspect they'll release a Blu-ray add-on for the 360, and if it's uber cheap, maybe I'll add one to mine (although I'd much prefer a standalone). And by the time Blu-ray ROM drives are cheap commodity units, MS could easily include one in a new verson of the 360, at a similar price to the PS3. Meanwhile, the Wii will continue to dominate in hardware sales.

Basically what the Blu-ray win means is that the PS3 won't be an utter failure as a console. Remember, the 360 has 170% of the units out there, and the Wii has 215%, compared to the PS3.

In fact, I think one big reason why Sony was more willing to pull out all the stops for Blu-ray was because it had so much riding on it (games, movies, and players). OTOH, it seems Toshiba, despite their huge investment in the technology, was less dependent on HD DVD than Sony on Blu-ray.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Well I know you thought the cost of the HD players was a major deciding factor but now that the PS3 is only $400 WITH A BR player, bigger HD and wifi it is much better value (and quality) than the 360.

Just like with the format wars it is content that will bring the victors and since PS3 is catching up with the 360 with some awesome games I'll make you a bet the PS3 system is either #2 or #1 by the time the next gen rolls around.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

PS3 reaches 10 million four months sooner than Xbox360

VG Chartz | Hardware Sales From Launch

Now that BR has won expect it to take off even more.

Meh, I still don't own a single PS3 game. The only one that interests me at all right now is Ratchet and Clank, but I'm waiting to pick it up for under $30 (like I have for every single R&C release).

The 360 simply has the games right now. It will continue to do better in the US unless the PS3 can get some high profile exclusives. Uncharted was a step in the right direction, but it's just not there yet...

[goMac]

Archiving my DVD collection today. I got my Mac Pro yesterday, and have it's dual drives both ripping DVD's right now. Looks like it's going to take twenty minutes a disk. After that, I'll have MP4 files I can stream to an AppleTV or my XBox 360, and I can throw the discs in a bin somewhere.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Archiving my DVD collection today. I got my Mac Pro yesterday, and have it's dual drives both ripping DVD's right now. Looks like it's going to take twenty minutes a disk. After that, I'll have MP4 files I can stream to an AppleTV or my XBox 360, and I can throw the discs in a bin somewhere.

I'm getting ready to do that too, but I'm waiting for the next release of Handbrake that will support 5.1 audio on the new AppleTV.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Well I know you thought the cost of the HD players was a major deciding factor but now that the PS3 is only $400 WITH A BR player, bigger HD and wifi it is much better value (and quality) than the 360.

Except that it's still $100-200 more expensive than what a large portion of the the NON-GAMER mainstream wants.

Hell, I won't even buy a PS3 at this point, and I'm at least a light gamer, cuz I'm not a fan of consoles for my movie players.

Just like with the format wars it is content that will bring the victors and since PS3 is catching up with the 360 with some awesome games I'll make you a bet the PS3 system is either #2 or #1 by the time the next gen rolls around.

I highly doubt it, at least for #1.

#2 maybe, but that's not much of a "win", especially if the 360 remains relatively close.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Except that it's still $100-200 more expensive than what a large portion of the the NON-GAMER mainstream wants.

Hey if you the NON-GAMER bought a 360 + Wifi + HD-DVD for $700+ I don't think selling a PS3 with BR for $400 is going to be a problem.

And when I say #2 I mean by a large margin over the 360.

The 360 has some plus' coming out early but it also bit them in the ass in a number of ways. Shitty, buggy, loud, clunky hardware, no motion controls, no next gen optical.

Trust me, the PS3 will beat the 360 hands down by next year at most.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Trust me, the PS3 will beat the 360 hands down by next year at most.

I should really print this out and post it on my wall somewhere. That way your quote will be available when I need it.

How much is hands down going to be? Two million unit lead? Five million? Ten million? Just trying to get an idea for when you wiggle out of that one too...

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I should really print this out and post it on my wall somewhere. That way your quote will be available when I need it.

How much is hands down going to be? Two million unit lead? Five million? Ten million? Just trying to get an idea for when you wiggle out of that one too...

I say 3-5 mil. Put that one recored right next to your "I expect the 360 to win this generation", and "Warner will never go BR as it costs more for them to author it cuz they can't do it inhouse".

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I say 5 mil. Put that one recored right next to your "I expect the 360 to win this generation",

Heh.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

and "Warner will never go BR as it costs more for them to author it cuz they can't do it inhouse".

Unlikely is a different word than "never." I'm not sure you really want to go there, considering Warner tried as hard as they could to go HD-DVD...

Regardless, the problem with your line of thinking is you're assuming that they won't add Bluray to the 360. Microsoft isn't stupid, if they start to lose marketshare they'll throw on a Bluray drive.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Trust me, the PS3 will beat the 360 hands down by next year at most.

Considering the only console with last-gen graphics and no HD support is spanking both the 360 and PS3 I'll have to disagree with you there.

PS3s sales being bolstered because of Blu-Ray isn't a win, either. It would have to win the GAME market in order to assert it's dominance and it'll need more than a few titles to do so.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Hey if you the NON-GAMER bought a 360 + Wifi + HD-DVD for $700+ I don't think selling a PS3 with BR for $400 is going to be a problem.

1) I'm a gamer. Not a hardcore gamer, but a gamer, and now I already have a console. The 360 has my favourite game of all time, which is Robotron. (Dunno if the PS3 does, but I don't need two copies of the game. The 360 also has a bunch of current gen games too I like of course.)
2) I paid too much for my 360, I agree, and I won't do the same for another player, despite being a (relative) early adopter. I will note though that a fair chunk of that price came from electronic store gift cards which I got on my birthday. (I likely wouldn't have bought the 360 otherwise.)
3) I liked the fact I could stream iTunes AAC on the 360 from my iMac too... cuz well I'm a computer geek. AFAIK, this type of usage is not high up on the average person's list for movie player.

In other words, neither you nor I represent the mainstream movie player market. At this point I suspect Blu-ray will be a success, but I'm not yet convinced it will replace DVD. I think we may end up having DVD as the dominant format, with Blu-ray being the luxury version, adopted by a good chunk of the population but not by everyone. DVD replaced VHS, but I'm not 100% sure that Blu-ray is going to replace DVD. Well, maybe by 2015, but by that time it will be a whole new world order.

And when I say #2 I mean by a large margin over the 360.

The 360 has some plus' coming out early but it also bit them in the ass in a number of ways. Shitty, buggy, loud, clunky hardware, no motion controls, no next gen optical.

Trust me, the PS3 will beat the 360 hands down by next year at most.

I'll take that bet. I will bet that 360 will still have a larger installed base out there by the end of 2009.

The loser of the bet has to buy the winner a Blu-ray movie.

Even if I turn out to be incorrect, I'd be shocked if the PS3 had a significantly higher installed base than the 360 by the end of 2009.

P.S. I wouldn't be surprised if they add Blu-ray to the 360 by 2009. Or even Xmas 2008 as an add-on.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Considering the only console with last-gen graphics and no HD support is spanking both the 360 and PS3 I'll have to disagree with you there.

As Nintendo themselves have said several times they aren't even compeating with the other 2 and now I see it is true. The wii is just that cheap kariokie system or the game system you buy your GF.

But in the end when even more than the current 75% of Wii owners that have it hooked to an HD set but games still look like meh they will start to look other places.

And since the PS3 is doing better than the 360 in the first year even with its bad press is nothing short of remarkable.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

PS3 reaches 10 million four months sooner than Xbox360

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?con...=All&weeks=100

Now that BR has won expect it to take off even more.

Are you sure about that? Didn't the 360 hit 10 million after a year?

Slashdot | Xbox 360 To Have IPTV, 10 Million Sold

The 360 had 10 million sold after 13 months. The PS3 took the exact same amount of time to hit the number.


The really important number in the video game world is software sales, and 360 games still sell 2 or 3 times as much as PS3 games.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

As Nintendo themselves have said several times they aren't even compeating with the other 2 and now I see it is true. The wii is just that cheap kariokie system or the game system you buy your GF.

I love this defense.

"Uhh well, TECHNICALLY it's not winning because, uhhh, uhhhh, UHHHHH, it's a kiddie system"

The Wii is the undisputed master of consoles right now, deal with it.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

ABut in the end when even more than the current 75% of Wii owners that have it hooked to an HD set but games still look like meh they will start to look other places.

The exact number is actually 65%.

(And again, you're assuming Nintendo doesn't come out with an HD Wii in the next few years...)

[sek929]

I also thoroughly enjoy people being smug about winning in a 50/50 argument.

I could have thrown a dart at a red and blue circle (ven diagram, maybe?) and had the same 'expert insight'

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

The exact number is actually 65%.

(And again, you're assuming Nintendo doesn't come out with an HD Wii in the next few years...)

Well pardon me... 65% then.

OK so you and Eug got your track record and predictions for it so lets talk in a year but I am not going over the same argument.

[sek929]

Track record? WTF are you on about?

Man, I can almost smell your pretentiousness from here in the States.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by sek929 

I love this defense.

"Uhh well, TECHNICALLY it's not winning because, uhhh, uhhhh, UHHHHH, it's a kiddie system"

The Wii is the undisputed master of consoles right now, deal with it.

Actually i never said kiddie. I said cheap, girl and karaoke. There is a dif.

I have no prob dealing with the sales of it. I got my Wii on the week it came out. I want to use it but never do as the games are way too simple and the Wii doesn't do anything outside play games while costing almost as much as my PS3 and Xbox that so some amazing things.

If people want the Wii for the available games more power to em. Everyone I know that has one has a inch layer of dust on it and is itching for a PS3 or xbox.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Track record? WTF are you on about?

Eug and GoMac's track recored of REALLY off predictions which has been outlined here.

But any pretentiousness you smell is originating within the US anyway

[sek929]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Actually i never said kiddie. I said cheap, girl and karaoke. There is a dif.

Who are you? Kevin now?

Semantics, my friend.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

As Nintendo themselves have said several times they aren't even compeating with the other 2 and now I see it is true. The wii is just that cheap kariokie system or the game system you buy your GF.

But in the end when even more than the current 75% of Wii owners that have it hooked to an HD set but games still look like meh they will start to look other places.

I remember way back when, when an article said that women make up a huge portion of gamers. A lot of people immediately said they were out to lunch, forgetting that hardcore PC and hardcore console gaming are not the only forms of gaming.

Even though men spend more time on the Internet each week than women (23.2 vs. 21.6 hours), female game-players over 40 spend the most hours per week playing online games (9.1 hours or 41 percent of their online time vs. 6.1 hours - 26 percent of their online time - for men). These women were also more likely to play online games every day than men or teens of either gender.

And since the PS3 is doing better than the 360 in the first year even with its bad press is nothing short of remarkable.

?

It's nothing short of remarkable that the uber-hyped PS3 is only doing as well monthly on average as the 360 despite being a better "value" because includes a "free" Blu-ray player?

Personally, I think it's nothing short of remarkable that the Wii is destroying the monthly sales numbers of both the 360 and the PS3, despite all the naysayers.