Q3 2009: Xbox 360 owners buying fewer games this year?
Microsoft recently posted third-quarter 2009 financial results and it looks to be a mixed bag. The Xbox division suffered a third-quarter loss after profiting same time last year. It seems that gamers are not buying games this year. However, there is a silver lining in the sky, Microsoft sold an incredible number of Xbox 360s despite the economic recession.
According to Gamespot, recent financial reports from Microsoft reveal that the company’s revenue dropped 6 percent and net income was down 32 percent year over year. The Xbox division also suffered a loss of $31 million compared to the $106 million in profit from last year. Overall software sales were decent as the Xbox 360 maintained an 8.3 attach ratio, which is a slight improvement from 7.5 last year.
However, the interesting bit of news is that the Xbox 360 sold extremely well despite the recession. According to Microsoft, the company sold approximately 1.7 million units during the quarter. The company’s hardware sales are higher than last year’s, which is remarkable. However, the division most likely incurred a loss in $31 million due to weak first party software sales.
I just can’t imagine why games like Ninja Blade and Halo Wars would not sell that much. I do admit it has been a slow year thus far for Microsoft but as I mentioned before it looks like the company is building up its arsenal for 2010. It really has been a while since I purchased a retail game for my Xbox 360. I really don’t have any complaints playing my six month old Gears of War 2 from time to time because its just that awesome.
I suspect that Sony’s financial results might look just as gloomy if not worse off. Actually on second thought, Sony might be better off because the company managed to sell less PS3s than last year.
Related Posts:
75 Responses to “Q3 2009: Xbox 360 owners buying fewer games this year?”
Leave a Reply:
You must be logged in to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register today!
April 24th, 2009
“Actually on second thought, Sony might be better off because the company managed to sell less PS3s than last year.”
haha Mike made a funny!
April 24th, 2009
“I just can’t imagine why games like Ninja Blade and Halo Wars would not sell that much.”
This makes 3 funnies total Harry. For anybody who really can’t imagine (I know Mike is probably joking on this) it is the same reason Godfather II and Civilization Revolution would not sell that much. The first game is only “passable” or mediocre in most reviews from reputable sites (sorry and full disclosure here, I just read the reviews and haven’t played either this or Ninja Blade – yet, so take it with a grain of salt), let alone the fact that it just released, and the second game, while it may be a good game (I have played it and thoroughly enjoyed CR, though not Halo Wars -yet, same rule as above applies), is not in a genre that is in demand by large numbers of console gamers.
April 24th, 2009
I would suspect, however, that the largest reason for their gaming division being down in spite of selling more consoles is the massive amounts they are spending in not only repairing the original consoles with the high failure rates, but all 360 consoles with E74 errors or RRoD (which does include newer models, and even if it is only 3% failure rate for the newer models it would still be expensive) consoles and refunding money if the console goes down again after those three years are up.
April 24th, 2009
Hey Mike, just tell me please:where does your name Ferro come from?
April 24th, 2009
How does this work?
“Q3 2009: Xbox 360 owners buying fewer games this year?”
When you said -
“Overall software sales were decent as the Xbox 360 maintained an 8.3 attach ratio which is a slight improvement from 7.5 last year. ”
and
“The company’s hardware sales are higher than last year’s, which is remarkable.”
I don’t get it.
1st party can dip but surely not overall software sales?
Software sales must be up because the number of Xboxes sold is up and the attachment rate is up on those increased sales.
I can see that a dip in 1st party sales could cause a loss there (especially if they cut prices in this current economic climate) along with all the wider economic stuff that is giving everyone a headache (increased energy prices etc) but how do increased console sales and a higher attachment rate equate to
” Xbox 360 owners buying fewer games this year?”
April 24th, 2009
See guys. Mike finally gave you a 360 article. Yeah, there sparse line up of 2009 games is going to end up hurting them this year.
On the topic of sparse game offerings. Nintendo got beat again in Japan. The PS3 sales bump was mostly due to the demo of FF XIII being released with Advent Children. Keep in mind that the actual game is being released this winter. It’s nice to see that Sony will dominate the Wii this year in Asia. Again lack of quality software is to blame.
kotaku.com/5225368/playstation-3-sales-get-huge-boost-in-japan-thanks-to-final-fantasy-xiii-demo
April 24th, 2009
LOL @ Happyhockum cuz he just can’t “get it”
April 24th, 2009
Well that’s funny because Game Industry dot Biz is reporting that Microsoft company wide 3rd quater revenue is 13.65 Billion which is down 6% in the same period in 2008 despite the fact that the gaming division reported a 16% increase. According to AP this is the first time the company has reported a quarterly drop in 23 years as a pubicly traded company. MS shiped 1.7 Million 360 compard to 1.3 Million in the same period for 2008. According to the report, the loss would have been slightly higher if not for the Xbox and PC game sales.
April 24th, 2009
Jojo29 it looks like you don’t get it.
April 24th, 2009
jojo29:
“LOL @ Happyhockum cuz he just can’t “get it””
Knock yourself out then brains.
You explain how this could happen.
When Xbox sales are substantially up and the attachment rate is up how can overall software sales be down?
Let’s hear it then genious.
You explain how that works.
(sits down, opens popcorn and waits……
…..expecting to wait a long long time or be presented with some laughably pathetic illogical fanboy nonsense)
April 24th, 2009
Unless the true formulas behind attach rates are known (which they aren’t, lots of variables filled by the companies themselves) NONE OF US can know for sure which way is up or down. I ignore attach rates entirely, because other than being mostly meaningless fanboy fodder, they don’t serve a purpose.
A software company will make money on total units sold, regardless of the ratio to install base. For example, SFIV sold damn near equally on the ps3 and 360, with a slight edge to the 360. That slight edge is not comparable to difference in install base.
Game devs make X dollars per game sold, regardless of all this statistical fluff.
April 24th, 2009
In principle I agree JofaMang, particularly when the overall ‘installed base’ is greatly different.
This is exactly what I was saying to Barnabee & his ridiculous attempt to make a mountain out of the molehill that was the very slight PS3 attachment ‘lead’ over Wii in relation to one game.
However here we are comparing like with like, the same console.
The conclusion being presented is that overall software sales are lower despite a significant rise in the installed base of that one console and a rise in the attachment rate to that one console.
IMO that cannot be logical & does not make any sense.
April 24th, 2009
“Unless the true formulas behind attach rates are known (which they aren’t, lots of variables filled by the companies themselves) NONE OF US can know for sure which way is up or down”
False because NDP can prove it and they have before.
Your Street Fighter claim is baseless because were not talking about games sold between two platforms, were talking about the ratio of total games sold to 360’s
April 24th, 2009
jojo29
Still waiting….. or have you now got your head around this & realised you were wrong?
April 24th, 2009
The SFIV was an example of how meaningless attach rates are. SFIV should have sold much more on the 360, being very similar attach rates between the consoles, but with much higher install base on the 360.
My point is that attach rates are but a single variable, that are only good for fanboys, not a true indicator of how software will move on any particular console.
I agree Carl, on the surface, the math is counter-intuitive.
April 24th, 2009
no Happyhockum
I am still waiting on your various answers to our previous post which you could not provide, so im just playing your game now, which involves me just ridiculing your method of posting, which is quite funny in that you never address the topics at hand
Anyhoo
April 24th, 2009
Attachment rate always should be going up unless it’s recalaculated each year.
Ex. You buy a 360 when it first comes out and for the year following you buy 4 games. The next year you buy three. Your attach rate is 7per yourconsole but annually your ar dropped.
This is more likely happening because ms is making more sales on their arcade model, but the same people aren’t buying that many games, or if they do they’re used games.
April 24th, 2009
Bingo Phranctoast!!
I m leaning more towards the used game ideaology, as i find myself actually picking used versions of the games i miss at release.
My most recent example is RE5…because of Killzone 2, SF4, and being late picking up LBP, that didn’t leave much room for another game, and i was able to snag a used copy of RE5 for about $40 bucks, and i KNOW it can’t that used being a relatively new game and all
April 24th, 2009
Well whatever way you want to look at it, it is pretty clear that 360 sell the most games. Each monthly stat that comes out proves that, NDP proves that, and the stats also show (even though I’m not sure at this point in time) that the PS3 was selling more games then the Wii if you factor out that Wii game that sells with a controller. I think the attack rate is accurate because I have 20+ games and all my friends have a good collection as well and the used games stores that I go to all have a stack of 360 games built up that compared to the PS3 Shelf and the Wii shelf which always has the smallest shelf is no comparison. There is alot of games and variety on the 360, it’s the reason I’ve fallen behind on the games I want to play and I’m afraid some I will never get around to playing.
April 24th, 2009
jojo29
Hilarious.
The expected total fail with weak and feeble excuse.
phranctoast
No matey, the facts (as stated in the article) are that
1) sales of consoles are significanly up and
2) the attachment rate is also up.
HTF does that equate to lower overall sdoftware sales?
It doesn’t make sense.
April 24th, 2009
Happyhockum
you are hysterical
the expected absolute total fail of someone who is called on his bs, again, you failed on the last topic, and you fail on this one, even worse, which i didn’t even think was possible
April 24th, 2009
Woah.
Awesome come-back.
I better not take the pi$$ out of your vast intellect again oh scary gangsta one.
FFS.
Grow a pair and grow up.
April 24th, 2009
O wow nice comeback happy, way to show me, no you won’t affect my vast intellect ( how can a pissant affect an superior being lol ) go ahead and keep trying, at least you are humorous..
Again, go back to the thread where i asked YOU to post facts, but instead you continued this drivel..
April 24th, 2009
jojo29
You ran away.
You got caught posting a quote which didn’t say what you pretended it did.
Completely expected and typical fanboy behaviour, of course.
Fail.
April 24th, 2009
I’m going to go out on a limb and say the attach rate for games per 360 sold is less this year than last year but overall the attach rate is higher.
More people buying used games could definitely be a factor in ms making less.
Ms taking a bigger loss on their must popular 360 sku could factor in to their losses as well.
April 24th, 2009
my quote did say what it was supposed to, it was a researched test, made by a highly reputable website, you just can’t handle the truth blindboy.
And even still you did not post any hard evidence other than your own meaningless words even when asked…
Again, im tired of owning you
I will allow you to run free and rampant now, but thats because i’am just letting you 
April 24th, 2009
Phranctoast
Well I would agree with you on that point except for the fact that it’s only April and we just started the 2 quater so it to soon to say the attack rate this year is less then last year. But you are right there are plenty of used games to pick from that I want to play. I mostly buy used games except for the Blockbusters that deserve the $.
April 24th, 2009
I do believe Wresteling and UFC and Boxing will sell well along with Prototype and there is no doubt in my mind that Halo ODST will be hugh and maybe Teken. If Allen Wake, Forza or Splinter Cell show their face this year they will also be Big Sellers. Eventually though I will buy Halo Wars as I find that the game is a lot of fun.
April 24th, 2009
I believe what we’re seeing is the 360 becoming more popular with the casual crowd due to it’s lowest price but at the same time gaining the genre of user who really doesn’t go out and buy lots of games.
April 24th, 2009
“…it to soon to say the attack rate this year is less then last year.”
I’d say the ATTACK rate goes up every month…
-Arvis
April 24th, 2009
phranctoast:
“I believe what we’re seeing is the 360 becoming more popular with the casual crowd due to it’s lowest price but at the same time gaining the genre of user who really doesn’t go out and buy lots of games.”
Except the text in this article states that not only has there been a significant (ie large) shift upwards in Xbox ownership – a full 1.7 million increase in the number of consoles out there – but that the attachment rate (ie games per console) has also gone up.
How can that possibly square with any idea that overall Xbox software sales are down?
April 24th, 2009
I see were your going with this and mike is contributing this to software when hardware more than likely is the culprit.
Attach rate always goes up. The longer the console exist the higher the attach rate goes up. Even if taken on an average. The existing users buy more games making up for the low number the newer users have.
The amount the attach rate went up may be lower that quarter than the 08 one.
Also keep in mind. We are in a recession and people are buying less games. All my reasons listed before could have significance.
I’m not sure whats happening with the 360 but as far as i’m concerned the ps3 is in a slump for a couple of months between Killzone 2 and infamous. There’s really not to much I want. Riddick looks like a rental at best. I may not even get infamous. Ghostbusters looks like a buy for me.
Thank god it’s baseball season.
April 24th, 2009
Was an Xbox 360 never heard of that…
I can’t wait to play inFAMOUS i also want Ghostbusters for PS3 and PC. MAFIA II this fall can’t for that and UNCHARTED: Among Thieves also i want Motorstorm: Arctic Edge, Rock Band Unplugged, LittleBigPlanet for PSP, and Assassin’s Creed. I want Ratchet and Clank Future: Crack In Time.
PSP and PS3 are getting so many amazing games is gonna be hard to buy games for those consoles.
April 25th, 2009
I will agree with HH, I don’t know how that works. It’s like saying 2+2=1 ??
But then again, I don’t know the business. Maybe we need Kev to come in here and explain to us!! He knows the business.
I am interested in seeing what Halo ODST is like. Looks cool.
April 25th, 2009
Spideydog:
Halo 3: ODST is a standalone expansion for Halo 3, based in the fictional Halo universe. In the game, players will take on the role of a UNSC Orbital Drop Shock Trooper (ODST) during the events leading up to Halo 3.
M.A.G is going to be awesome forget Halo.
April 25th, 2009
I will not choose to not like Halo purely because it is a ms exclusive game. I do happen to like the series. I like games that appeal to me, regardless of the format. I will give M.A.G a look.
You guys need to remember that 3 consoles on the market is GOOD for us. Competition is good.
April 25th, 2009
“You guys need to remember that 3 consoles on the market is GOOD for us. Competition is good.”
@Spideydog
It sure is, will always agree with that. I’m sure Kev/Ivan/Con will never agree to that. However if their was no competition, who would they bash? Poor things might have to resort to playing video games instead of bashing them all the time! lol
April 25th, 2009
Spideydog:
I love competition but this generation has been pathetic Wii is wow just so damn useless. As for Xbox 360 the only shit i like about it is that i can flash it to play backups. I got all Xbox. PLAYSTATION 3 just has more exclusives plus better better. And it has more features and free. Plus Xbox 360 is the worst most unreliable piece garbage i have seen is a nightmare come true. Microisoft has avoided doing a mass recall wonder. Selling Xbox 360 should be illegal by law the failure rate is mind blowing jaw dropping.
kev and con can go dick ride Microsoft garbage all the way to HELL there are the true fanboy here. They need to be like me and have both consoles twice to brag.
I hate everything Nintendo but GameCube seems better to me then the Wii at least is a gaming system with real games.
April 25th, 2009
^
Ah, it’s all your opinion, I do agree with some of what you say. Wii has so much shite shovelware on it it’s sickening! Yes the 360 failure rates were pretty bad, but not too much any more. I’m on my 3rd 360 and have not had to pay a cent for repairs, so I just don’t see why so much hate for Microsoft! You hate everything Nintendo? Wow, I think Nintendo has made some of the greatest games ever made! However you do have a point, I did enjoy the gamecube more then I have so far the Wii. Not that games like Zelda or Metroid for the Wii are not awesome, they are just way too far and few between. The vast majority of 3rd party games are crap IMO on the Wii. Devs just looking for a quick cash in. I really only buy 1st party games on the Wii.
April 25th, 2009
“As for Xbox 360 the only shit i like about it is that i can flash it to play backups… Plus Xbox 360 is the worst most unreliable piece garbage i have seen is a nightmare come true… should be illegal by law…”
It will be even more unreliable (and not covered by Microsoft) if you try to hook up to Live with a hacked 360. At least your brother is happy with his legal one.
(now playing Nuka-Cola Challenge)
April 25th, 2009
It hard to believe that the PS3 or 360 sell more games than the Wii.
If you look at the top ten selling games this gen it’s dominated by Wii.
April 25th, 2009
Thats true too ???
April 25th, 2009
CarlB:
I go on Xbox Live nothing happens all my games are stealth. That what cheap software security gives you.
April 25th, 2009
And using media that doesn’t cost like $15 a pop for a blank disc O_o
April 26th, 2009
Actually on that topic, I’ve been looking at the Wii emulator. I’m visiting my parents at the moment, but I’m going to try this out when I get back home.
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_(emulator)
April 26th, 2009
I can’t see that being all that good …… the only appeal of the wii is it’s controllers ?? Using a emulator without it’s swanky controllers would be just like playing …….. well I suppose a gamecube !!
April 27th, 2009
As for Xbox 360 the only shit i like about it is that i can flash it to play backups.
And the reason no one does that on the PS3 is because 1 Bluray disk cost like $30
April 28th, 2009
“I go on Xbox Live nothing happens all my games are stealth.”
“all your games”… sounds like you are having fun with XBox 360 on XBox Live… Congratulations Ivan!
April 28th, 2009
CarlB:
Collecting dust check my profile haven’t log on since years.
April 28th, 2009
CAD
Don’t forget the ridiculous expense of any of the Blu-ray burners out now too.
April 28th, 2009
“Collecting dust check my profile haven’t log on since years.”
If it has been “years” since you last logged on Ivan, then I suppose it is safe to say you have no idea what you are talking about, as many games and capabilities have been added in recent “years”.
April 28th, 2009
See what I mean about the “attack rate?”
-Arvis
April 28th, 2009
Are you kidding HH …. I remember when CD burners first came out and they were around the 1k mark. Then DVD came out and the price plummeted. “ALL” new tech is expensive.
Piss poor point m8, when it’s well known new tech costs.
April 29th, 2009
Exactly Spidey.
Adjust for inflation, and what you see is that BD has, year to year, come to market as cheap (and in some areas cheaper) as DVD, with very marginally smaller adoption rates.
I guess I will have to bitch about the cost of HOD, as those burner drives are still 15,000+ right now.
April 29th, 2009
Jofa and Spidey,
I see your points and agree, new tech is generally expensive. If it stays expensive it becomes marginalized. Blu-ray drives have come down in price significantly, as have discs, but they are still much more expensive than DVD while having the disadvantage of being slower at the same time.
On another note, and switching gears to the present and future of BD, while the rate of adoption may even match or beat DVD’s right now, they are looking at different competitors and a much faster tech advancement rate that DVD didn’t necessarily have back in it’s day.
DVD didn’t have to contend with TB+ hard drives for less than $100 (1TB WD MyBook -just saw it in Dell’s mailer w/free shipping today). 2 TB is less than $250.
Some examples of memory “competition” for DVD in it’s third year or afterwards?
“RAM (random-access memory) is now
at record low prices, with many vendors
offering 256-megabyte modules for U$50 or less.
San Francisco Chronicle, 27 September 2001″
16GB flash is now $30 and 32GB is $70.
The cost of a 10G hard drive in 2000 was about $170.
alts.net/ns1625/winchest.html
Combine this with HD downloads, HD streaming, and upgraded DVD (the difference is not as great in capabilities as it was between VHS and DVD) and there is a ton more competition from other sources.
I’m not doomsaying blu-ray, I just believe there is a good possibility it may not be around as long, or become as popular as, DVD. Give Blu-Ray another eight or nine years to catch up to DVD’s lifespan now and I guess we will see.
As for HOD, I am guessing you are talking about Holographic drives Jofa.
“When Blu-ray was introduced in late 2006, a 25-gigabyte disc cost nearly $1 a gigabyte, though it is about half that now. G.E. expects that when they are introduced, perhaps in 2011 or 2012, holographic discs using its technology will be less than 10 cents a gigabyte — and fall in the future.”
nytimes.com/2009/04/27/technology/business-computing/27disk.html?scp=1&sq=G.E.%EF%BF%BDs%20Breakthrough%20Can%20Put%20100%20DVDs%20on%20a%20Disc%20&st=cse
Holographic Drives are where Blu-ray was in it’s prototypical stage back in 2000, and extremely expensive (interestingly enough, HDD storage is at “less than 10 cents per gigabyte” now, and HD streaming and downloading is free to relatively affordable).
April 29th, 2009
Spideydog:
“Are you kidding HH …. I remember when CD burners first came out and they were around the 1k mark”.
And so what?
We live in a market now well used to disc media for video and where the cost per gb makes HDD (by far) the cheapest storage solution.
Blu-ray as a data storage media has priced itself out of the market and rendered itself nothing but the tinniest niche.
Here we are 3 years in and still they are nowhere even close to becoming adopted in the mass-market.
Optical drives are going to go the way of the floppy……but for now DVD is so cheap & convenient it’ll be around as the last one for some time yet.
The unfortunate truth for the Blu-ray evangelists is that BD left it all far too late.
April 29th, 2009
Holographic optical drives at 10c a GB would be a 50 dollar disc (500gb x$.10 = 50.00) at launch. There is no room for increased size on an HOD, as the nature of its data writing (in 3d across all available layers, instead of multiple layer 2d) means that re-engineering for larger data space would require new players. The current design is BC with BD players, further developments would remove that necessary convenience for adoption.
The price of BD per gb will drop, as it already has, and with pioneer claiming up to 20 layers on a BD (500gb) I really don’t see how HOD can make inroads into the market. Right now you can obtain an HOD burner for about 15 grand. It is being use primarily for commercial back up systems. Will 3 years of development leapfrog the BD in affordability? I have reservations, to say the least.
April 29th, 2009
“The current design is BC with BD players”
And DVD/CD. Add to this internet capability and built in HDD or USB for external and BD is only a small fraction of that pie.
“Will 3 years of development leapfrog the BD in affordability?”
HDD is now less than 1 cent per gigabyte, DVD is 16 cents and BD is about 70 cents. 10 cents per gigabyte is what GE was hoping to “start” at in 2012. How could they reach this point faster than Blu-ray? Well, certain technologies are more affordable and capable right out of the gate, the trick is, will they be marketed correctly and have a good enough adoption rate?
I have no doubt it could be 10 cents per gigabyte out the gate, but maybe by that time BD will have dropped in price significantly as well. Beyond this, what would be compelling reasons to own a Holographic Drive vice BD/DVD beyond more storage per disc? 100 DVD or 20 BD movies is alright, I guess, but I imagine it would have to be something like holographic movies/games themselves to be truly compelling and sell on a mass market level.
In the meantime HD streaming and downloads will have become even more mass market than they are now, and HDD’s will still likely be the cheapest, most capable form of storage.
April 30th, 2009
I’ll ignore the HD streaming and downloading arguement for now, as I am referring purely to the optical market, regardless of its size or market share.
Pioneer’s multi-layer BD will play on any player since the release of BD. It has to be considered in the long run as BD may actually rival HOD capacity, as any increase to HOD’s 500gb model would require dedicated players, effectively taking it out of the running.
Data transfer rates are to be taken into account, as well. HOD might have the edge, as the 3D data landscape is accessed in its entirety on each pass. This as opposed to reading multiple layers at once in BD. Again, without dedicated players, HOD will be bottlenecked to the BD transfer rates.
It is a conundrum. But perhaps an answer to a question no body is really asking.
April 30th, 2009
Sorry for double post. Hit submit too early ~
The cost per gig of BD will drop dramatically as multiple layers are added. The cost of HOD is not necessarily static, but purely derived of basic manufacturing economy. Unless they have dedicated players, and successfully displace BD from the home media market. Then who knows how cheap it can get.
Perhaps M$ could take a page out of $ony’s book and make the 720 the trojan horse for HOD. I’m sure they could work a deal out with whoever owns it~
April 30th, 2009
“I’ll ignore the HD streaming and downloading arguement for now”
Yeah, I think that’s what the BDA is doing now, interesting to see how it pans out in a few years. I may have seen a disc used for memory once or twice in the last couple of years, and that was only as a security measure. Everything else has been thumbdrives, sd cards, and HDD’s.
April 30th, 2009
I wouldn’t be banking on more than 2 Blu-ray layers appearing.
Doing it in the lab is one thing (and untested claims about BC with existing Blu-ray devices is quite another.
Let’s be serious & honest here; they can’t even get every retail (ie high production quality & pressed) movie disc to be guaranteed to play on every existing Blu-ray player nevermind a 20 layer disc!
It took them long enough to ‘perfect’ 2 layers (and even then it’s widely believed to only be with relatively poor production failure rates).
In theory we could have had more than 2 layer DVD and look how that turned out
(and look at how low DL DVD take-up is).
HDD & DVD has this covered in every meaningful way for now.
According to the ‘road map’ the next big move in the coming 2yrs will be the 2tb flash drives
(with transfer speeds of 300mbps = 6 x what Blu-ray can manage).
Small, huge & very fast.
Of course the bigger any of this gets the bigger the PITA any individual failure becomes.
Unfortunately that’s just the nature of the beast.
April 30th, 2009
The player doesn’t have to do anything special whether it be single or 20 layers. Just like HOD, the data is obtained by the laser reflecting off the layers, but reconciling through the lense that is the surface of the disc. This means that conceivably, data transfer rates from multiple layer discs would multiple with the layers. BD players were designed for this capability long term (increased data transfer off of static drive speeds.) HOD is a non malleable design without its own players to rely on.
Any BD will work with any BD player; not every player can access all the fluff features of BD. I think this is what you were refering to HH.
April 30th, 2009
“HDD & DVD has this covered in every meaningful way for now”
Well said HH, I would only add streaming and flash.
May 1st, 2009
Oh get real HH. BD will come down just like the media versions before it. It already has. I can go to the computer market and pick up a BD read drive very cheap. Burners will follow.
It took years for DVD to start to get a hold of the market. BD will be the same. When more and more people purchase HD TV’s (which are pretty much mainstream now) HD content will become mainstream too.
Yes hard drives and other storage media are cheap now, but people still buy/rent content. Streaming/downloaded content is still a long way off becoming content of choice.
You just got a gripe with anything Sony.
May 1st, 2009
“It took years for DVD to start to get a hold of the market. BD will be the same… Streaming/downloaded content is still a long way off becoming content of choice”
Or put in another way… “It took years for DVD to start to get a hold of the market.” Streaming/downloaded content “will be the same”… BD is still a long way off becoming content of choice.
May 2nd, 2009
Each to their own Carl. I dislike the quality of streamed content and downloading is too slow, usually compressed and too expensive.
I like BD because it is high quality and reliable, doesn’t swallow bandwidth.
BD tech is already here. Downloading and streaming is not (for EVERYONE)
But I respect your opinion.
May 2nd, 2009
“I dislike the quality of streamed content and downloading is too slow”
Do you have a slow connection? Right now I get about 15-25 Mb/s wired and about 12 wireless (speedtest.net). I may be in the minority with those speeds, I admit, but streamed content is only as good as the source and your connection.
I find the HD selections on 360 Netflix to be very high quality and reliable, while most of newer SD selections are around DVD quality. I would agree though, PlayOn, Hulu, YouTube and other streaming services you may be more familiar with are of very poor video quality at present.
HD downloads usually take less time for me to download than it would to pick up a disc from a store/rental place nearby, once purchased I can download them again for free if lost/deleted, they do not have the danger of format hardware obsolescence, do not take up hardly any physical space, are quicker to read from the HDD or flash, and they do not degrade as optical discs do, all for a price less than BD.
Personally I prefer to rent movies or shows that I am only going to watch once… but another benefit with Netflix watch instantly is you can have hundreds of titles in your library at any given time and watch them (or favorite parts) as many times as you wish, within seconds, without having to change a disc, and without taking up space on your hard drive.
Now that FiOS is giving the cable companies a serious run for their money, prices have decreased and speeds have increased respectively. I imagine this trend will only continue in the future, though I could be wrong.
As I have gone through the last three decades I have seen people spend vast amounts on building tape, VHS, CD, and DVD collections. I am now seeing this trend repeat with some on BD collections and just do not see the logic in it.
HD streaming and downloading tech is already here. BD is not (”for EVERYONE”).
But I respect your opinion.
May 3rd, 2009
HD streaming and download in not here NOW for everyone Carl. You said yourself that the quality is restricted by the connection. Many countries in the world don’t have a speed or reliability to run your “revered” netflix.
BD “IS” available now to EVERYONE. All you need is a BD player which is alot cheaper now. Your netfilx is dependent on internet connection which the majority of the world simply does not have at speed and reliability to rival BD. BD is upgradable with firmware updates, by the way and not one of my discs have been scratched like my DVD’s have. BD is far superior quality, so they don’t degrade as you said. (HD failures don’t happen eh Carl ?? then you lose everything, unless you make a backup of your backup)
There is the rest of the world you know Carl, not just your little fishbowl.
I agree, I prefer to rent the shows that I will watch once, but unlike you I want a good copy (BD version) of the movies or content that I want to keep (as I did and still do with DVD, compatible with BD by the way)
As it stands, downloading for the majority of the world is still not of high quality and is dominated by having download quotas, except the hugely expensive quota free plans.
In the end we will disagree till we are blue in the face. At this time, I prefer BD real content over dodgy streaming/download content and you can keep netflix all to yourself
May 3rd, 2009
“HD streaming and download in not here NOW for everyone Carl.”
When did I say it was here for “everybody”? I only said the tech was here as well and BD was not for everyone either. By your line of reasoning (i.e. those countries that are not developed enough to have broadband internet), BD is not here for “everybody” as streaming is not. I did say quality was restricted by connection and that I was probably in the minority with my speeds. Many countries in the world do not have the market, government, or wealth per capita to make your “revered” BD widely available to their people either. So no, “BD ‘IS’” not “available now to EVERYONE.”
We are in the minority, wealth wise, of the world’s population my friend. What I did see in some of the poorer parts of Iraq was more HD downloads being sold or distributed on hard drive to those who could afford them than BD’s, but I also admit that is just one part of the world. In fact, I didn’t see one blu-ray being sold, while I did see widespread use by the majority of military and foreign nationals (including Indians and Pakistanis) there of HD downloads (which had already been purchased by the community) for general morale.
And as far as I know, Netflix is only available in the states, and as such I only spoke from my relatively pleasant (and added free to my already existing account) experiences with it, which you may not have had the privilege of as yet.
“BD is far superior quality, so they don’t degrade as you said. (HD failures don’t happen eh Carl ?? then you lose everything, unless you make a backup of your backup)”
All I said about optical discs was that they degrade over time… are you saying they do not? HD downloads, at least the ones I am speaking of, are downloaded from a retailer (say… like Microsoft or Amazon) and if it ever degrades over time you can always download it again for free… so no need for backups. I know Sony also sells HD downloads through the PSN Store, but not sure if they offer the same deal… maybe you could fill me in on that.
“There is the rest of the world you know Carl, not just your little fishbowl.”
Um, actually, I never pretended to speak for the world, just my own experience and how I saw a good chance of certain technologies inevitably spreading and becoming more popular than others for several reasons. Are you saying the “rest of the world” is purchasing BD over all other options right now? I would say the “rest of the world”, in other words, the majority of the earth’s population, is having a hard enough time trying to survive, let alone buy a blu-ray drive and discs to boot. Neither are they all sporting expensive laptops, though I would say that if they could afford a technology and wanted the more useful one, they would get a cheap laptop over a blu-ray drive anyday.
While streaming quality is dependent upon your own personal connection’s speed and reliability, HD downloads, or even SD downloads, are not, as they can be transported anywhere in the world and be shared many times from a single HDD to give copies to the entire community. BDD can have this ability as well, but at a higher price; of course those “firmware updates” you spoke of earlier might not be so ideal for community sharing of content.
“want a good copy (BD version) of the movies or content that I want to keep (as I did and still do with DVD, compatible with BD by the way”
See, this is where I have my own personal qualms, but can still respect your desire to have actual discs on hand for whatever reason. If I can watch any given movie within a relatively short period of time for one flat monthly fee (rental), I see my desire of watching it again being fulfilled relatively cheaply over time. I couldn’t negate that savings if I were going to have the same rental service anyway, no matter how many times I watched the same movies over and over again (unless all I watched was the same few movies over and over again).
I am guessing you already agree that BD is better quality than DVD, but do you really not see (I am talking just for you now, not “the rest of the world”) how the format will just advance again in a relatively short time? Are you so hardcore about having an optical disc that you still buy music on CD’s?
Again, I do not pretend to speak “for the majority of the world” but I can say there is a good chance that those parts of the world that cannot afford a good internet connection (landline/wifi – for free to relatively cheap broadband wi-fi to millions see Korea, Japan, Sweden, and Mauritius- this last one is a 1.2 million inhabited island) the majority there cannot afford a Blu-ray player over a DVD player either. If they can, chances are even smaller that they are building personal libraries of BD’s, let alone DVD’s.
I would also venture to guess that there is a good chance there are more broadband connections existing in the world than BD players at present, but again that is just a guess of a chance.
I really don’t know (or maybe forgot), where do you live Spidey? I am guessing netflix is not available there?
In the end you prefer to pay a premium for a degradable, temporary, limited format (DVD also has all these aspects) to have the convenience of a physical disc nearby. You have the surplus funds to do this with, are not willing to save money in buying DVD’s over BD (because of the degraded picture) and perhaps this is the best option you have for your audiophile/videophile tastes where you live. In any case, enjoy your purchase(s)!
By the way, if you do live in the states, netflix also rents blu-ray discs for only $2 more per month than DVD’s… the streaming is only considered an “add-on”/supplement to the DVD/Blu-ray rental service, and as such, there is no additional charge for it. Not bad, and they are probably contributing a significant chunk to blu-ray sales, which may just keep the format going that much longer- however temporary it may be.
May 3rd, 2009
You didn’t have to write a novel.
There is more to the world than the US m8. You say that you didn’t speak for the rest of the world which is entirely correct. I never said you spoke for the rest of the world. You were speaking on behalf of your experience in your little fishbowl saying how wonderful streaming/download content is and forgetting that alot of other places don’t have good quality fast broadband. This brings me to another point were you made the point that there is more braodband connections than BD…..Der. SO WHAT….. The majority of these broadband connections WORLDWIDE are not good enough to host HD high quality streamed content and/or suck up all the bandwidth and cost a fortune taking up download quota.
But if you have thousands of dollars to waste on unlimited download quota, with unlimited bandwidth (so everyone else in the house can still use the internet while your watching netflix) buffered low quality content, enjoy your purchase/s.
Yes I do get cd music anymore, but the size of music is nothing compared to a HD movie nor does the music need to be streamed to be viewed/heard.
I will agree with you, that when HD movies are as convenient and easy as online music, I will go with that. But it isn’t and I don’t see it happening in the near future or until at least the current generation has ran it’s course.
IN SAYING THIS….. I do purchase alot of my games now via download, Steam(shock horror…). But it is convenient and is not limited (much) by the bandwidth or broadband speed. Additionally, I can still back it up on disk and the downloads from steam are unmetered with my ISP.
Will BD be successful and last as long as DVD (or even eclipse DVD for that matter) Who knows??
Anyways, enough of this, i think the points have been made from both sides of the fence and we will have to agree to disagree.
Nothing in my posts said anything about
May 3rd, 2009
I have no idea what that last line is about ……
May 3rd, 2009
“There is more to the world than the US m8.”
Really? I thought that was just some dustbowl in the U. S. I had just been quarantined to for 7 months… not.
_____________
“You were speaking on behalf of your experience in your little fishbowl saying how wonderful streaming/download content is and forgetting that alot of other places don’t have good quality fast broadband.”
First off, “download content”, or digital copies, do not necessitate internet capability as it can be mailed to anywhere in the world on a hard drive. Second, what part of “we are in the minority,” or “I speak only from my own experience,” is not registering with you Spidey? How am I forgetting that “a lot of other places don’t have good quality fast broadband” when I have lived outside the U.S. in many countries for the better part of a decade within my career? When the country and region and combat zone I just spent over a half year in does not have broadband available?
Once again, I am not saying that “everyone in the world” has broadband, nor am I “forgetting” about those places that don’t, as I just spent a significant portion of my life in one. I am merely saying just as many people do not have, nor can they afford, nor do they have the government infrastructure to purchase BD as well.
________________
“This brings me to another point were you made the point that there is more braodband connections than BD…..Der. SO WHAT….. The majority of these broadband connections WORLDWIDE are not good enough to host HD high quality streamed”
Fine, I was not specific enough for you the first time, so let’s put it in another way for you:
“I would also venture to guess that there is a good chance there are more broadband connections (’high quality’ HD streaming capable) existing in the world than BD players at present, but again that is just a guess of a chance.”
_______________
“when HD movies are as convenient and easy as online music, I will go with that. But it isn’t and I don’t see it happening in the near future or until at least the current generation has ran it’s course.”
Personally I would start with: when HD movie downloads and or streaming is as convenient, reliable, long lasting, affordable, and not facing obsolescence as much as BD investment, I will go with that. Which I am.
I am not sure what you mean by “near future” or “current generation” in terms of years, could you specify? I would hazard to guess that within 5-10 years there is a good chance it will meet the above criteria (affordability, convenience, ease of use) where you live (as it does here now), but I could be wrong. And that may seem like too long to wait to save money for your lifetime media library. Or maybe the discs you will have spent a good sum of money on will have sentimental value after blu-ray has inevitably (barring self-destruction/world cataclysm/regression) ran it’s course and been replaced?
Anyway, you still haven’t answered my most important question, which is, where do you live?
May 3rd, 2009
Also, this is from last year, listing the top 30 countries for broadband, penetration, speed, and price per Mbps, with South Korea and Japan being number one and number two respectively:
blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?p=12874
As you can see by the chart the U. S. is ranked 15th in the world, with another 15 developed countries coming in after. For the sake of this discussion, I think it would be best to talk developed countries/nations only, as they seem to be the major drive behind technology (well… cellphones and budget laptops aside… which would also be digital downloads, though not likely HD…)
Anyway, they list the U. S. at about 5Mbps average (I get up to 25 at times, maybe 10-15 on average through the router) at $2.83/Mbps (I pay about $50/mo unlimited – comparable to basic cable, which I refuse to pay for at this time, considering the available options with streaming and renting). So, even in my own country I have well above average speeds here in Cali, though I am not sure what the minimum is for an HD download.
So where do you fall in, or are you even on the chart?
May 3rd, 2009
Also, here is what I am thinking will become more popular in the near future (5-10 years), at least in the majority of developed countries:
www22.verizon.com/Residential/FiOSInternet/FiOSvsCable/FiOSvsCable.htm
As you can see, FiOS offers 50 MBps vice cable at 10+ (I am presently getting only 8.46 MBps via wifi on this laptop), but the price is equivalent to a premium cable tv plan with no internet. 20 MBps is actually cheaper than present cable internet. I imagine the price will only continue to decrease significantly over time in the near future (as defined above: 5-10 years), though I could be wrong.