Blu-ray Outselling HD-DVD: PS3 Component Costs To Drop?

Figures for format take-up indicates the war is entering a new phase

Posted by Staff
Blu-ray Outselling HD-DVD: PS3 Component Costs To Drop?
Home Media Magazine is reporting that "Of the high-definition discs consumers bought in the first quarter of this year, 70% were Blu-ray Discs and just 30% were HD DVDs... eight of the 10 top-selling high-definition titles in the first quarter of this year were on Blu-ray Disc."

According to the magazine's research unit, between January 1st and March 31st in the United States, 1,191,830 high-definition discs were sold, of which 832,530 were Blu-ray and 359,300 were HD DVD. This means that, since the launch of HD-DVD in April 2006 (compared to Blu-ray's June '06 debut) 2,137,500 HD discs have been sold. Of this number, 1.2-million have been Blu-ray Discs and 937,500 HD DVD.

The difference in sales could, of course, simply be down to the fact that there are more Blu-ray movies than HD-DVD available. This appears to be at least partially discounted, according to the magazine's findings, "Warner Home Video released The Departed the same day, February 13, on both formats. Between then and March 31, consumers bought 53,640 copies of the film on Blu-ray Disc and 31,590 units on HD DVD (based on studio estimates and Nielsen VideoScan point-of-sale data)".

So, what does this mean for the gamer? If nothing else, the success of the Blu-ray will incline more studios and content producers to create more content for the format. This in turn will increase demand for Blu-ray players - and this (according to Economics 101) increase in demand will mean more units being manufactured. This will lower the cost of the components - bingo! Lowered cost of PlayStation 3.

As we say, this is the theory. Right now, however, the fact appears to be that one format in the media wars is pulling ahead.
Companies:

Comments

InsaneJonny 25 Apr 2007 18:14
1/14
Doesn't surprise me, the average movie quality on blu-ray is far lower then HD-DVD, but of course the public aren't not known for their taste.
Bob Fossil 25 Apr 2007 18:26
2/14
"Aren't not known" - hmmmm, that glaring spelling error somewhat tones down the power of your incredibly elitist, sweeping generalisation you just made there. Donchathink?
more comments below our sponsor's message
alexh2o 25 Apr 2007 20:16
3/14
Technically theres nothing wrong with his spelling there... though the double negative does seem to defeat his own argument!

That said, I think Blu-ray is being driven by gimmick purchases at the moment, people who have a PS3 and want to see what its all about.

Anyway, the war has already been won by HD-DVD! Wal-Mart's order of 2 million chinese HD-DVD players that they plan to sell dirt cheap has pritty much sealed the deal. Never underestimate the power of the worlds largest retailer...
InsaneJonny 25 Apr 2007 20:23
4/14
I'm just playing the role of elitist, comparing the top blu ray selling titles to the top HD- selling titles I know which I would rather have in my collection.

Though I'd really prefer DVD prevailed.
Joji 25 Apr 2007 21:07
5/14
When there's a HD-DVD player that can play my NTSC dvds, I'll invest in one. Maybe one of those chinese players might get to me eventually.
chris 26 Apr 2007 02:58
6/14
Weird two previous posts.

1. Blu-ray has superior image compression technologies than HD-DVD, it is well known and not up to debate.

2. Blu-ray stores more. What is to argue with this point?

3. 80% of the medium content owners/companies are supporting Blu-ray, much larger committed support than HD-DVD.

4. Why would anyone not want Blu-ray? It is the superior format, the disks are almost identical in their costs for HD movie releases.

If you were forced to make a call about the future standard you would have to be totally ignoring all of the above information to not select Blu-ray.
Ethan Duffy 26 Apr 2007 05:29
7/14
chris wrote:
Weird two previous posts.
1. Blu-ray has superior image compression technologies than HD-DVD, it is well known and not up to debate.
2. Blu-ray stores more. What is to argue with this point?
3. 80% of the medium content owners/companies are supporting Blu-ray, much larger committed support than HD-DVD.
4. Why would anyone not want Blu-ray? It is the superior format, the disks are almost identical in their costs for HD movie releases.
If you were forced to make a call about the future standard you would have to be totally ignoring all of the above information to not select Blu-ray.

Blu-Ray often uses MPEG 2 at the moment, HD-DVD uses VC-1, rendering the image quality actually worse despite the higher capacity. However, they both support the same codecs, so to say it has 'superior compression technologies' is spouting rubbish to say the least.

HD-DVD players are cheaper, the players out there sport the more advanced features, such as java and a connection to the internet, Blu-Ray often has neither. Disk quality will be fairly similar in a month or two, and it makes sense to not buy either and wait.
OptimusP 26 Apr 2007 07:28
8/14
And since when does the average joe care for well-reasoned arguments why he should buy a Blu-Ray player?

It's somewhere between "never" and "cheaper!!"
tyrion 26 Apr 2007 07:28
9/14
alexhooren wrote:
Anyway, the war has already been won by HD-DVD! Wal-Mart's order of 2 million chinese HD-DVD players that they plan to sell dirt cheap has pritty much sealed the deal. Never underestimate the power of the worlds largest retailer...

If that's winning the war, what effect do the over 3 million PS3s sold have? They are all capable of playing Blu-ray disc based movies.
config 26 Apr 2007 07:38
10/14
Ethan Duffy wrote:
HD-DVD players are cheaper, the players out there sport the more advanced features, such as java and a connection to the internet, Blu-Ray often has neither.


This is purely a hardware issue and nothing to do with the actual medium. Besides, there's a Blu-ray player that sports an Internet connection, could easily support Java and comes with a PS3 bundled inside it - right now it doesn't get more advanced than that.

Ethan Duffy wrote:
Disk quality will be fairly similar in a month or two, and it makes sense to not buy either and wait.

Aye. I'd follow what that man said - unless you're buying a PS3 for games, in which case you'd be mad to not support Blu-ray from that point on.
hollywooda 26 Apr 2007 09:43
11/14
This is still waaaaaay to early to call, the average joe hasnt even heard of Blu-ray or Hd-DVD..... or cares?.
Ivan_PSP 26 Apr 2007 16:10
12/14
We all know by now that HD-DVD will fail. Blue-ray Disc have better quality more data capacity and way more supporters. And HD-DVD has less amount of data to store movies which means less quality or less bonuses Blue-Ray is the future.
Moschops 26 Apr 2007 20:12
13/14
how comes hd-dvd or bluray aren't using h264/avc?

the both support it yet theyre paying microsoft licensing feed to use vc1 - very stupid for sony
FPS 27 Apr 2007 12:20
14/14
alexhooren wrote:
Technically theres nothing wrong with his spelling there... though the double negative does seem to defeat his own argument!

That said, I think Blu-ray is being driven by gimmick purchases at the moment, people who have a PS3 and want to see what its all about.

Anyway, the war has already been won by HD-DVD! Wal-Mart's order of 2 million chinese HD-DVD players that they plan to sell dirt cheap has pritty much sealed the deal. Never underestimate the power of the worlds largest retailer...


They tell a lie to make HD DVD supported.
Wal-Mart Shoots Down Cheap HD DVD Rumor.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2122715,00.asp
Posting of new comments is now locked for this page.