thoughthead


Disc format apathy

Posted in PS3,The Industry,Wii,Xbox 360 by Michael Pica on the December 7th, 2006

There is no arguing that the most popular debate in video gaming over the last five or so years has been Playstation vs Xbox: which one has better graphics, which one has better games, which one has the better controller, ad nauseum. As somewhat of an off-shot of that debate is the debate over “next-gen” disc formats, being HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray Disc. I use the term next-gen loosely because calling it that in any kind of seriousness would imply that storage mediums somehow evolve in easily packaged generations the same way video game consoles do. In-fact just using this term is the first sign that people are approaching this issue all wrong.

Hit up any video game forum and you’re bound to see fanboys lining up and duking it out over this one. Look at at any general consumer and you’re likely to find yourself face to face with a wide mouth and clenched fist … yawning. Seriously, most of the general public see these new formats as little more then a waste of hard earned money, most people, even HDTV owners, claim they see little to no difference between movies released on DVD and movies released on one of the new formats; no doubt because many of these new releases are just upscaled and repressed version non HD masters. The fact that there is more then one format further confuses the issues and drives the avoidance factor that much further home. Most consumers are approaching this issue with about as much fervidity, as they do the debate between who would win in a fight between James T. Kirk and Jean Luc Picard. It’s little more then a nerd fight and to top it off general restrictions on these formats and cost of entry has soured even the most hardcore of enthusiasts, leaving this debate almost exclusively in the hands of video game fanatics.

Earlier I mentioned that to call these new formats “next-gen” was to approach this issue all wrong. The thing is storage formats don’t evolve in easily packaged generational phases every five years the way video game consoles do. Sure there are new bigger, faster, smaller versions that appear every so often, but for the most part there isn’t a best storage medium that automatically becomes the next best thing that everyone jumps on. Storage mediums should be chosen by which format best fits the application. I’m not going to press an HD-DVD to store a file that I can throw on a memory stick, and I’m not going to throw it on a memory stick if I plan in giving it away en masse, in that case I’d use a CD-R. Storage doesn’t progress linearly the same way consoles do, it sporadically evolves and often in different directions. A new hard drive might be dimensionally smaller in size but another new hard drive while staying dimensionally the same will hold more data and access it faster. Even still the old hard drive tech might still be useful for applications where lower cost is a more important factor than being dimensionally small or capacious and speedy. It’s clear to me that some things are not like other things, but apparently that thinking places me in a minority.

Lets assume for a minute that we’re all in agreement that one of these new disc formats is the most appropriate storage medium for HD video. The fact is, it’s still incredibly expensive to get into it $500 to $2000 for a player, and $30 to $40 per disc… and this time next year your choice format could go belly up meaning no more new movies and you’re stuck with hundreds if not thousands of dollars into equipment that can only play a handful of movies for the rest of it’s miserable life; rather reminiscent of Laser Disc. A cheaper option is to buy the HD-DVD add-on if you happen to already own an Xbox 360. Though, without HDMI you can’t play discs in HD that use the Image Constraint Token. Currently no films use it but again, they might enable it and then none of the new releases will play in HD through your Xbox, you’d basically have to front the money for a new stand-alone player. Even if you were buying a PS3 just for the games (or the promise of games, whatever that new BS is) you’d still be investing in the format war by purchasing the discs themselves. Not only do you have to convince yourself that these high prices are worth the boost in resolution, but you have to convince yourself that it’s worth not just spending that money but more-so placing a bet when you make your purchase, upping the stakes with every new disc you buy.

Video games that double as video players for these new formats wind up being the cheaper option, though only if you intend to play games on them as well, then the cost savings goes out the window. The catch here is that video game consoles make horrible movie players. They can do it, but only just so, they pale in quality when stacked against comparably priced stand alone units. This however is counter productive to the goals of these formats because Blu-Ray and HD-DVD don’t offer any benefit over DVD except quality.

Many would make out the jump from DVD to these new formats analogous to the jump from VHS to DVD. Again, I believe that some things are not like other things. This thinking comes from those who want to make storage mediums fit into a cozy generational ladder. Unfortunately the scenarios are not the same. At the core DVD really didn’t offer that much of a benefit in quality over VHS, it did however increase reliability, consistency, functionality, and ease of use. DVDs played the exact same way every time, they didn’t wear out, they didn’t jam, they took up less space, they didn’t need to be rewound, they were able to let you skip around the content with ease, and they were able to deliver superfluous content that was easy to access and view, something that VHS rarely offered due to access being limited in a purely linear fashion. DVD wasn’t necessarily a next generation it was simply a better fit for the purpose of the content. Beyond that it helps show what buyers look for when moving to a new format, generally ease of use, smaller size and added functionality.

Quality really ranks fairly low with the unwashed masses when compared to these other factors. You might be crying out that people are buying more and more HDTVs for their added quality but I’d have to disagree with you there as well. They might see the added resolution as a benefit but if they were really after quality people would be buying CRT based HDTVs which offer superior picture quality and resolution over the likes of other technologies. Rather people are opting for technologies with larger screens, more attractive designs, and slimmer footprints as opposed to those with actual superior picture quality.

I think a more suited analogy would be that of CDs compared to DVD-A and SACD. Most people haven’t even heard of DVD-A or SACD. Essentially it’s high definition audio pressed to a DVD like disc. They don’t really offer any more features but they have substantial added quality. Sound familiar? These formats have been out for years in the same way HD-DVD and Blu-Ray have been for months, heck they even have similarly restrictive DRM “features”. When you consider that getting into those high definition audio formats is expensive, adds nothing in the way of conveniences or features, and is based around nothing more than higher quality it starts to show where the market’s priorities lie. Instead we see the market driven to portable MP3 players, The quality of most MP3s and other audio files are drastically below that of even CDs, and laughable when compared to the likes of DVD-A and SACD. What they do offer is much greater convenience, they offer portability, vast space savings, ease of use in managing your collection and finding the music you want, and even in buying the music you want.

We’ve already started seeing the alternatives popping up in the video world and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they begin to overshadow the blue laser format war before too long. Products like TiVo and other DVR devices have made their way into homes all over the place, in many places they already support HD content, and in a few areas they are able to deliver downloadable content on demand. This is essentially the portable MP3 player to the high def audio CD. Lots of services are popping up that would allow people to leverage their existing computers to get this content. Downloadable video content is cheaper per video, offers better flexibility, less shelf space, cheaper (or in some cases free) equipment, in addition to much better ease of use in terms of managing your content as well as purchasing it. Though unlike the MP3 it has the added advantage of actually being in HD and of superior quality in comparison to DVDs. Interesting enough this service is already available to gamers who own an Xbox 360. Since it leverages the existing hardware it doesn’t add any additional user costs, unlike the $200 HD-DVD add-on, not to mention movies only cost $10 to download, which makes them even cheaper then DVDs and a whole world cheaper then the new $30 to $40 discs. I’m quite sure a similar service will become available for the PS3, and possibly other devices.

So if HD video content delivery will come through downloads where does that leave these new disc formats? And better yet, why should gamers care? This all leaves us with one important question: Is Blu-Ray or HD-DVD the most appropriate media to be delivering game content on? In terms of the gaming world these formats only really bring one benefit to the table; extra disc space, which means it will give them more room for game content. The real question of contention is if that extra space is really needed. If you look at game developers it’s easy to find opinions on either side of the fence, rumor has it that Microsoft polled the developers as to whether they’d rather have better read access times or more disc space and the results they got back were near unanimous for better read access times. That’s not to say that more disc space isn’t benificial just that there are more important factors. By going with one of the new formats you have longer access times and slower transfer rates, you also have added manufacturing cost in terms of both the hardware and the media which indirectly effects the end consumer’s price, being that the formats were delayed in reaching the market it substantially contributed to the delayed release of the PS3, not to mention shortages of the parts for these drives, such as the blue laser diode has contributed to the market shortages of the console.

If Those are the benefits and pitfalls of the new disc formats then which one outweighs the other? And does it impact the end user? Most certainly release delays, shortages, higher prices, and longer load times effect the end user, but how about the benefits of more storage space? So far we’ve yet to see any games that really utilize the capacity benefits of the Blu Ray in the PS3. Similarly in the year it’s been out there hasn’t been an Xbox 360 game that has required more then one disc, nor has there been any reports of games that “would have been better if…” Most games so far have even come in well under the capacity of standard DVD media. This isn’t surprising when you consider that the current graphical capabilities dramatically reduce the need for full motion video cut-scenes. Cut scenes can now be created on the fly by the consoles which removes one of the most space intensive aspects of video games, not to mention advances in compression techniques which not only save space but reduce load times. I’m sure we’ll see at least a few games this generation that will need to spill out over onto more then one disc, but the Xbox 360 has made it over a year without that need and it’s looking like such a thing will be a rare occurrence if it ever even happens at all.

Added content basically means more stuff but that doesn’t necessarily translate directly to longer games or even better games. The bulk of games is the code that makes up how it works this is a one lump amount of space that never needs to be duplicated no matter how long the game is. More space might however mean a game with more video cut-scenes to watch, more music to listen to or more varied graphics, such as each tree in the forest being unique rather than the same tree a few thousand times. But developers still have to create that content, which means to get a game done in the same amount of time companies would need to hire more developers and games get more and more expensive to make, this also means some games will take loading breaks more frequently because rather then re-using the content it already has loaded it has to fetch new content off the disc. Even with the extra space many developers will opt to re-use things in games just to save them time and help reduce development costs. New techniques also allow the consoles to generate mundane objects on the fly using procedural synthesis, so rather then hiring an army of artists to make 1000s of unique trees for a forest and sucking up disc space one developer writes up a description of a tree and the console makes 1000s of unique trees based on the description. This technique is already in use and is being improved and expanded to other areas in gaming.

So why did Sony decide to go with Blu Ray discs? Some might point out that there is more to the issue considering Sony has a substantial financial stake in the Blu Ray format they’re using, including promises to movie studios that their [projected to sell as the PS2] PS3 would carry that disc format which in turn would help secure them the victory against HD-DVD (ever wonder why they had more movie studio support). Meanwhile the other camps have chosen sides but their choices certainly wont make or break their banks; they have but a fraction of Sony’s vested interested in the format war which leads many to believe that Sony’s decision comes from more of a conflict of interests and corporate inbreeding than anything else. Someone is going to have a really bad day if it turns out that the PS3 doesn’t sell up to projection and help move the Blu Ray format forward.

It doesn’t really matter what you believe is better, you shouldn’t be choosing your video game console based on the discs storage capacity. You should be choosing your console based on which one has the games available that you want to play. If the extra happens to help a title or two an advantage that makes you believe it’s better then the alternatives then go that way, but you should look at the games themselves and not how they got there, and definitely not how they might get there. As for the “next-gen” disc formats I’d recommend saving your money. Keep your eyes open for some content delivery services that fit your needs and don’t bother placing bets on a war that will likely end in stale mate.

digg:Disc format apathy del.icio.us:Disc format apathy Slashdot:Disc format apathy Technocrati:Disc format apathy RawSugar:Disc format apathy spurl:Disc format apathy furl:Disc format apathy reddit:Disc format apathy fark:Disc format apathy Y!:Disc format apathy Google:Disc format apathy

3 Responses to “Disc format apathy”

  1. poppe Says:

    Long too long article this time Twisted. However you somehow miss to pint out that even thought compression and such things are making stuff smaller its still isn’t keeping up with the need for space, Now I’m not talking game space or video space I’m talking in general. We/I want bigger storage mediums a 4.5gb dvd 5 isn’t big enough anymore, and dual layer dvds aren’t taking off a new medium is needed. Its just sad that toshiba and sony decided to duke it out instead of going together like they did on previous formats.
    And the format war comes down to this hd-dvd will prevail if the name matters which it very much does everyone can understand what highdef dvds are but hardly any one nows what blureray discs are. BD will win if space is what consumers want.

    And twisted paying 10$ for rentals isn’t how I’d want my dl service to be. The 20-25$(don’t now where you get the 30-40$ figure from) for hd-dvd or BD movies is pretty cheap considering you at least get what you pay for.

  2. twistedsymphony Says:

    To be perfectly honest I hate the idea of downloading my movies (and it’s $10 to OWN not rent, downloaded rentals are closer to $2 or $3) I’d my personal preferences is to have my movies on a disc. Unfortunately that’s not the direction I see the market moving. Download services be it through a computer or you local ISP are picking up steam at a far greater pace then either HD-DVD or Blu Ray, and many haven’t even been availble as long. I believe it’s mostly due in part to the convenience but the prices of discs and equipment doesn’t help either. If your local cable company will give you a DVR that can download HD movies and TV shows for $10 and $4 a pop respectively why would you go out a spend a few hundred dollars on a Blu Ray player? What benefit does it actually offer over the download service other then a physical item? As for the $30 to $40 tag, that’s MSRP Street prices obviously vary with stores, sales and time of year. though I don’t understand your logic of you get what you pay for. If the downloaded movie is recorded in the same codec at the same resolution, uses free equipment and costs half or less per disc. I still ask what benefit they actually provide over the download?

    As for video games, you can sit there and say we need more space, but I’m still not sold, as I said we haven’t seen any games span more then one disc, nor have we seen any games that supposedly might have been better if there was more space availble. Even most PS3 games so far are small enough that they could have fit on a DVD. And suppose for a moment that we do have a game that needs more space is having to swap discs, so bad that it’s worth all of the negatives associated with the newer disc formats? Lots of people can pour on their opinions but I’ve yet to see anything hit the market that makes me think more disc space is somehow vital to how much enjoyment I get out of my games.

  3. Foe-hammer Says:

    Good point on older movies (1993 and earlier) just upscaling the image for HD-DVD and BR, and slapping 1080p on it to justify the extra $10 for the movies, and the price of the player.

    I did purchase the 360 HD-DVD player, but soon realized that all my older DVD collection was just fine as they were, and there was no need to repurchase these movies on HD-DVD when they came out because they wouldn’t look any better. The main advantage for HD-DVD/BR is the new movies being released, because they will take advantage of the true 1080p/720p resolutions.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.