Future Warner HD DVD releases to be inferior to their Blu counterparts?
By Ben Drawbaugh 
posted January 31st 2008 1:17PM
posted January 31st 2008 1:17PM
Over the past two years Warner has pulled a complete about face. Starting out all red, all the time, then just before the release of HD DVD went dual format. But while Warner pledged to support both camps, many accused Warner still preferred HD DVD because of exclusive titles like The Matrix and the red version of dual release titles included additional features like In Movie Experience. But now that the shoe is on the other foot and HD DVD titles are supposed to be released three weeks after the Blu version, and it also appears that the red version will be the one missing features, as the upcoming release of I Am Legend appears to be missing the Creating I Am Legend Documentary and Cautionary Tale: The Science of I Am Legend featurettes. There's no way to confirm until the movie is released, but hey, at least Warner didn't quit HD DVD cold turkey like when Paramount went red.
Warner is not going to waste the effort of putting features into HD DVD. It's a dead format, simply not worth the money.
Ironic you say this, since most HD DVD releases by Warner to this point have included more special features than the Blu-ray version, due to the crippling inadequacies of 1.0 and even 1.1 spec Blu-ray players compared to every HD DVD player.
TrentD, he said "not going", which imply the future. Your argument would have been valid when Warner was neutral and both formats were battling neck and neck, now that Warner is clearly on Blu's side, your argument is as weightless as Aerogel.
Chilicoke,
My point was that they certainly saw a reason to "waste the effort" before, due to HD DVDs inherent superiorities over Blu-ray.
"at least Warner didn't quit HD DVD cold turkey like when Paramount went red."
Jeez, Ben. Bitter much?
Anyway, is anyone surprised by this? Everyone knows that Warner is leaving and that HD DVD is just about one foot away from "archival status", so why should Warner put more into HD DVD releases than they otherwise would?
They probably rendered the video files (since BD and HD DVD use the same codecs) and realized that they didn't have enough room on the 30 GB HD DVD disc. So, rather than go through a re-rendering process they dropped something to fit the movie onto the disc.
Well, as Profile 1.0 Blu-Ray player owners could tell you, most people don't care about special features, so this doesn't matter. Run right out and buy a player of your choice; everything will be obsolete by the end of the year. Have fun.
Seriously, I just came to EngadgetHD to see if they'd posted anything about Circuit City refuting the rumor that they were dropping HD DVD and, rather than dropping it, saw favorable trends on HD DVD.
Instead, I see a story about eHD's parent company pressing inferior HD DVD discs.
I'm sure it'll hit EngadgetHD sooner or later, and it'll be spun as yet another death knell for HD DVD (easy, of course, since the favorable trend was during a clearance sale and that Blu was still outpacing HD DVD) along with some Gartner or more leaked NPD data skewed to make it look worse than it is.
I'm not denying that Blu is dying; I'm just a little tired of the extreme tactics being used to rush the process. Let the market decide. Or y'all could just go on telling 40% o f the HD disc buying public that they're "stupid." That'll win their hearts...
@regeya
"I'm not denying that Blu is dying;"
Is this a typo? Just want to make sure what you *really* mean here....
Well, like everyone who defends Blu-ray like the BDA is paying them keeps on saying about the whole business about 3 different hardware profiles, who cares about extras, right? HD DVD has had the better extras since the hardware was complete before launch (what a concept...), and everyone keeps saying that the extras don't matter, probably to make themselves feel better about buying a 1.0 Blu-ray player. So this is kind of non-news, right? Just curious. You can't have it both ways. Either the extras don't matter and this story is just words, or extras do matter, and here come all the Nelson-style "ha-ha!" comments. Gee. I wonder what's going to happen...
I won't ever watch them to 1.0 is fine for watching all the movies and for what I need.
Sounds like a pressure tactic to me. At least when Warner does go entirely Blu they can start encoding their movies to take advantage of a full 50Gb rather than gimping the Blu Ray version because the same encode is shared with the lower capacity HD DVD version.
* quote DrXym
At least when Warner does go entirely Blu they can start encoding their movies to take advantage of a full 50Gb rather than gimping the Blu Ray version
=============================================================================
Why do the Blu-ray fans always lie about this?
Almost 50% of all Blu-ray releases are on 25gb discs, not 50gb. 48.1 in fact.
Check out the site
(it also proves it's a lie that they always use the best audio they can too)
http://www.blu-raystats.com/stats.php
@ TruthTeller
Seriously, are you and Britney sharing the same room at the nut house?
90% of new release BDs are using 50GBs, especially all new WB movies. Hence they should use all that space, instead of crippling the PQ by porting over the HD-DVD 30GB encode.
TruthTeller: "Why do the Blu-ray fans always lie about this"
Ahahaha, lies, lies, hahah, everyone lies, ahaha,
I don't know Baghdad Bob, hahaha, why is everyone
else telling lies, ahahahahahaaaaaa
Gimped like Corpse bride, TMNT & Black Snake Moan? All Warner movies that are listed as tier 0 on HDD & AVS forum's tier lists?
48.1% of Warner's blu-ray titles use 25GB blu-rays as well. Something I bet changes now that they are not restricted by HD DVD's 30GB discs for encodings.
Truth Teller...
As you say..."Why do the Blu-ray fans always lie about this?
Almost 50% of all Blu-ray releases are on 25gb discs, not 50gb. 48.1 in fact."
Perhaps it is because of the other side of the coin where HD-DVD fans say how wonderful the PiP and Web features when less then 10% of the titles even take advantage of this.
Seems like 50% of the disks using 50gig is quite a bit better then 10% using special features.
Man, Truth Teller ought to get a much more appropriate nym, like "Convenient Omission Teller". Fact is, from the very site he pointed out, for releases since 11/6/2007:
BD25: 9 releases
BD50: 67 release
See a trend here? Blu-ray is allowing content providers to maximize the quality of their releases, rather than constraining them to the bandwidth and capacity cap of a doomed format. HD DVD, give up now!
Is there no end to your idiotic bullshit "Truth Teller"? Yes 50% of discs use 50Gb. And a simple sort by date on your own link shows that the large majority of discs in the last 12 months are using 50Gb discs. Why don't you compound your stupidity by claiming Blu Ray is "inferior" because 34% of discs use MPEG2? Even though again a simple sort by date shows virtually every new disc uses AVC or VC-1.
Your denial and spin of every piece of bad news is immature and quite pathetic.
A bigger bitrate encode does not necessarily translate into a "better" encode.
to to to to to?
HaHa, you beat me to to it.
Sigh, to everyone saying this has ended: I do think the format war is going to carry on for at least another year.
Well, whatever. All I know is that I want Blu-ray BOGOs. I don't care if the war lasts for another 3 years. Just keep on feeding us BOGOs and I'd go along with it.
Is it just me or do HD-DVDs seem to be a bit more extra interactive content on them than Blu-Ray discs?
The stuff on the Transformers disc really blew me away. But I have yet to see that level of interaction with Blu-Ray's releases on my PS3. They seem more like standard DVDs to me. Obviously not in video quality. The video quality is amazing, but the features aren't all that great.
Seriously...the least of an HD-DVD owners problems right now are a few missing features off "I am Legend".
i'm glad warner is continuing there planned releases and if they want to chop some features (which i think is another tactic to get people on the fence to go blu instead) it doesn't really bother me. what bothers me is $34.99 for "the invasion" i seen that yesterday at bestbuy and almost swallowed my face i don't understand how anybody in there right might would pay that much for a friggin movie!
Interesting enough, some stores put out the HDDVD version even though it was not supposed to be released until later. Amazon still has it as "pre-order". I was at Meijer which is like Walmart for those who don't know what they are, and they had Invasion HDDVD on the shelf....seems like retailers must have missed the memo....
transformers extras/menu is incredible and same with 300's
Crippling inadequacies? Like 20GB extra space, 60% more bandwidth?
When Warner releases its first Blu-ray exclusive major title, 10,000 B.C., you will see just how much better their product looks when it finally takes advantage of the capacity and bandwidth of Blu-ray.
Hi, my name is Ben, I say... bla bla bla bla bla.
Your blog posts are getting more and more UNinteresting.
"-Fresh Scoop Gives Warner Bros. "Worst Company Of The Year Award." (1/28/07)
"Because of Warner Bros. decision to exclusively back bluray in an attempt to force people to spend $400 for a High Def player, instead of $150 for (HD DVD), Fresh Scoop has given Warner Bros. the award for "worst" company of the year. Fresh Scoop points out that if WB had stayed neutral or had gone HD DVD exclusive, many consumers would be rushing out to buy HD DVD players at the very attractive $150 price point. (Many consumers are, by the way)... But instead, Fresh Scoop points out that most people will delay buying bluray since the price is so out of reach. It seems that Warner Bros. decision to back bluray will prolong the format war, not end it."
Unconfirmed this far though...
Isn't Fresh Scoops a cat litter brand?
As uncredited as this source is, they're so right. If WB would have went Red and if Toshiba would have still dropped hardware prices, and the Super Bowl commercial would have still been made, I think it would have been a better landscape for the red camp this year. Whoever is the author of this article is right in crowning WB as the worst company of the year. The very fact that WB said the move to Blu exclusive would kill the format and sure enough 3 weeks later as I predicted, things are back to where they were before the WB announcement just goes to show how wrong WB was in their decision.
If the latest figures become a trend (very likely), I think WB might have to reconsider their decision come May. But it is hard to turn down $500 million isn't it? And we all know who's gonna sign that check...hey is Sony listed as the second worst company of the year?
It's fresh step.
And I don't think WB deserves "worst company" for going blu. They can do what they want.
I DO think they deserve "worst company" for lying about it 3 weeks before they did it.
TruthTeller: "TL HD DVD is a real 51gb "
Ahahahahahaha, hoho, yeah-hahaha
Hey Moe, let's add some layers,
nuhk, nuhk, nuhk,
Hahaha, truthtwisterrr, hahaha
Let's layer it up till it's as fat
as a VHS tape, that'll sell
Ahahahahah, hohoho
@aplen22
"sure enough 3 weeks later as I predicted, things are back to where they were before the WB announcement just goes to show how wrong WB was in their decision."
Just what exactly is "back to where they were before"? Just curious, hardware sales? software sales? Surely support has definitely dwindled with several outlets dropping HDDVD, so I am a little puzzled at how we could be "back to where they were before". Please explain....
Thanks.
I Am Legend sucks anyway. I'm surprised Richard Matheson didn't have a heart attack after see that garbage.
Agreed. I don't feel too bad about Blu-Ray winning since neither format seems to have any good films on the horizon. In fact, Sunshine and the Simpsons movie are the only Blu-sclusives that I am sad about not having that I can think of off the top of my head.
The Criterion collection needs to go HD before anyone should really care, IMO.
oops, need to learn how to read my comments before i post them
Your comments about Warner not quitting HD DVD cold turkey like Paramount did are totally uncalled for and childish. The facts are (and please try and stick with them), Paramount made their decision while there was no contractual commitment to continue releasing on Blu-Ray. Warner spent the entire Xmas season reassuring HD DVD fans that they were committed to both formats. Then a week or so after all of a sudden announces they will no longer support HD DVD while the HD DVD camp is on a plane heading towards a press event they expected Warner to participate in. Not even having the courtesy of forewarning them. And people are just supposed to believe that all those reassurances of continued support were true and they just overnight had some sort of epiphany. That was dirty. That said business is dirty. But let's not get so childish.
Indeed. The usual cast of trolls on this 'site started in on how "stupid" HD DVD adopters were almost from the moment WB made their announcement. You'd think they all came in their pants when that happened.
I'm glad to see that people are keeping this in perspective and seeing it for what it is: a heavy-handed, yet misguided, attempt to short-circuit the capitalist process. I really feel that what WB did was to SLOW DOWN adoption. DVD is still a high-speed freight train, and most of us early adopters likely wouldn't have given a rip about the cost of new players...some of us are just anti-Blu out of pure stubbornness or (for people like me) because we forsee the Blu camp pulling off a caper of magnificent FAIL (I foresee, though have no evidence of, a new incompatible profile before year end; hey, that's how Beta died) before the year is out.
Had it gone the other way, you'd likely see people like JimC starting up internet petitions and trying to sue companies to try to "force" companies to go Blu. But yeah, we were all stupid for thinking that the early-adopter numbers really didn't matter and that Warner Brothers would stick to what they said just two weeks before their Blu-exclusive announcement *rolls eyes* And I was stupid for thinking that HD DVD had a chance when their numbers were that close to even despite heavy-handed attempts by retailers to make Blu look like the only HD format.
I honestly wouldn't have cared, and would have just kept using my HD DVD player as an upconverter, which was, again, priced in upconverter territory, though if I had bought the right TV I could have gotten a Profile 1.1 player FOR FREE, which is NOT a sign of desperation, right, and nobody cares about those 2.0 features anyway, right, and would have been blissfully using it until Profile 2.0 players were affordable if it hadn't been for all the name-calling all over the Internet. I don't like being called stupid, even if it's just because I bought a product that retailers and videophiles consider "wrong."
Samisin - many consumers are not rushing out to buy HD DVD players.
They only sold 8,000 players in the first full week of price cuts!!
Warner made the smart move, as HD DVD is not a format capable of ramping up to DVD like release schedules, not without going down to 720p and DOlby Digital.
Yes, that's what HD DVD was originally designed for. That's why there are so many soft VC-1 encodes on HD DVD.
Blu-ray IS capable of mass market release schedule at 1080p with lossless audio tracks. That's why it is 50GB and 48 Mbps.
HD DVD is inferior. The only reason it costs less is because only one company is making the players (yes, Toshiba made the Venturer and Onkyo players too) - at those prices it's not profitable for any other company to consider making the hardware.
It's desperation. Wake up and smell the coffee.
($400? I see a few players at $300, why are you misleading people? Typical HD DVD fanboi behaviour)
"...typical HD DVD fanboi behaviour"
Excuse me while I stop laughing, let me point out to you that not only did all the key players in the HD DVD association green light the new triple layer 51GB disc, one of your most loyal BDA companies showed interest as well by voting for it too. Who? If you don't already know, well you'll have to keep reading. Anyway, your post couldn't show us more how ignorant you are. Lets not forget that not only will ALL HD DVD players be guaranteed to play the new triple layer format (quote from Toshiba and NEC who developed the new disc), lets not also forget that the majority of HD DVD players can play lossless audio tracks, if not all of them and most for cheaper than the "all mighty" entry level PS3. So just who voted for the new 51 GB disc, none other than disney. Interesting eh? Why would one of the most loyal BDA companies vote for something that helps HD DVD in the war? Just something to think about.
And Steven, next time do your homework.
aplen22
Naturally the Blu-ray liars don't want to admit that 51gb TL HD DVD is a real 51gb (unlike the 50gb BD DL disc which runs into huge fail-rate problems if they try and put more than 47gb on it).
So it's a not just 1gb difference, it's more like a handy DVD5 sized 4gb.
They'll also not be admitting that if the 51gb TL (if it kept the 1.5x spin speed that the original 45gb TL HD DVD discs had - a not unreasonable assumption) actually gives HD DVD the higher raw bit-rate too.
1.5 x 36.55 mbps = 54.825mbps compared to the Blu-ray max = 53.95 Mbit/s raw max
There is no practical advantage to the Blu-ray format over HD DVD.
No TV company or Movie studio is interested in 100gb or 200gb discs so they will never get produced in sufficient numbers to be affordable on the mass-market; they are a typical Blu-ray day-dream for spec-sheet obsessives.
O RLY? And are any of those sub-$300 BD players profile 1.1 compliant and profile 2.0 ready or are they (as I expect) all non-upgradeable, profile 1.0 players?
Say what you want, the best BD player option for the general populace is the PS3, which currently is $400 minimum. Hopefully, that will drop now that Sony's manufacturing of the PS3 is supposed to be rather efficient. But until then, no, thanks.
Pushing a profile 1.0 BD player is no different than pushing HD DVD -- they're both formats that will certainly work into the future, but not for the full functionality of future releases (not that HD DVD will be getting many future releases). So, acting like a $300, BD 1.0 profile player is a viable option is just as misleading (if not more) in my opinion.
To "Aplen"
"Excuse me while I stop laughing,"
Me thinks you shouldn't be laughing, but we'll see...
"let me point out to you that not only did all the key players in the HD DVD association green light the new triple layer 51GB disc,
one of your most loyal BDA companies showed interest as well by voting for it too. Who? If you don't already know, well you'll have to keep reading. "
We all know it's Disney, but we also all know that given the companie's history in the DVD Forum (it was a vote of the DVD forum, led by Toshiba btw, not the HD DVD group. Hence Disney voting) it was no surprise at all. Disney has always voted for bigger and better, whatever the format, "just in case".
"Anyway, your post couldn't show us more how ignorant you are."
If he is, let us just say that you are far more apparently :)
" Lets not forget that not only will ALL HD DVD players be guaranteed to play the new triple layer format (quote from Toshiba and NEC who developed the new disc),"
Mind giving us that quote? The only info that had been released about the TL-51 was that it had been approved by the DVD forum, and that compatibility was stil "under review". Since then, big silence.
That was back in September 07.
" lets not also forget that the majority of HD DVD players can play lossless audio tracks,"
Too bad there's not enough space on the disc then eh? Go check Paramount's comments about the TF release, that'll calm you down.
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1110/transformers.html
" if not all of them and most for cheaper than the "all mighty" entry level PS3."
Too bad that it's costing major money to Toshiba to subsidize its players eh? What kind of market are you building when you are discounting your machines so much that you can't get anyone to produce them? Onkyo gave up, and now Venturer is on clearance at Walmart. Toshiba, given the Q4 results, had to admit to losing a lot of doublons on HD DVD.
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=22380
vs Sony
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080131/japan_earns_sony.html?.v=1
And frankly, at this point, if you have to literally give away your players to make half the weekly sales of your competition (and only 20% or less of the money for standalones market), it's called desperation.
"So just who voted for the new 51 GB disc, none other than disney. "
/Yawn. Bore. Old news, and nobody cared then, and much less even now.
"Interesting eh? "
No. Was to a few HD DVD fanboys back then, now it's totally irrelevant, to anyone but you it seems.
"Why would one of the most loyal BDA companies vote for something that helps HD DVD in the war? Just something to think about."
We already know why, read a few lines up.
"And Steven, next time do your homework."
He's fine. But if I were you, I'd apply that advice to myself.
TruthTeller: "TL HD DVD is a real 51gb "
Ahahahahahaha, hoho, yeah-hahaha
Hey Moe, let's add some layers,
nuhk, nuhk, nuhk,
Hahaha, truthtwisterrr, hahaha
Let's layer it up till it's as fat
as a VHS tape, that'll sell
Ahahahahah, hohoho
So, when am I getting The Matrix in blu-ray?
Why didn't Sony just take losses upfront on players and lower prices instead of paying all that money to studios for exclusivity? Please, stop with the bribes and lower the DAMN PRICE OF THE PLAYERS!!! That would have made me go out and buy a BD player right away and I know that I would not have been in the minority here.
Until the hardware comes down, I don't think there is a compelling enough reason for most consumers to go out and shell out $300 for the player, and then more than double the price ($30) for the media. I don't care about 1080p, lossless audio, and online features that not many people use. No one cares about that shit. Only the small population of geeks and enthusiasts do! And those people do not make the majority, nor are those people the real target of these CE companies. If they made a BD player that was 1080i, and didn't have lossless audio that costs $99 I would get it in a heartbeat.
Price is probably the only reason HD DVDs even sell. The difference in performance is negligible to 99.9% of the consumers out there. I also don't think there is that much of a discernible difference between the two at all. I have been to all the retailers, and see no difference in performance. They both look great!
Price is the only thing that is keeping BD from putting that final nail in the coffin, so why don't they hurry the hell up and lower the damn price? or do they just want to HD DVD around for a bit longer?
I have to say, everyone moaning about Blu-ray hardware prices really cracks me up. Were you guys all in diapers when DVD was released? The inital wave of DVD hardware in 1996/1997 ranged from $600 to $1,000. It took several years before I could afford a player.
As I recall, I got my first DVD player in 1999 for around $250. Remember that these are prices unadjusted for inflation, so a Blu-ray player that's $300 today is probably cheaper overall then that $250 DVD player I bought. By this time next year, Blu-ray pricing will be a complete non-issue. In fact, I'd argue that since Blu-ray standalone player sales are STILL outpacing HD DVD, even with the Toshiba desperation price cuts, I'd say that hardware price is already effectively a non-issue. As volumes go up, both hardware and software prices will begin to drop, guaranteed. It's basic economics.
"Why didn't Sony just take losses upfront on players and lower prices instead of paying all that money to studios for exclusivity?".
Because Sony is just one member of the BDA, and I doubt very much that the other members would appreciate Sony undercutting sales of their players. I expect that Sony made a gentleman's agreement not to undercut the others.
Toshiba on the other hand is virtually on its own so it can slash players as it likes. As indeed it has done.
It didn't seem to work though as people are still buying more blu ray players than HD DVD despite the price difference. And that's even without considering the PS3. So clearly people interested in an HD player are prepared to pay the current prices, or wait for prices to drop. cost of it. Anyway I expect you'll see the prices drop substantially this year. I think there will be at least one sub $200 player to choose from and plenty in the $300 range.