Xbox 360 Blu-ray player rumor returns right on cue

Two years and 1 month ago today we saw the kibosh come down on the Xbox 360 Blu-ray player rumor. This morning it returns with the prospect of a Microsoft player as early as May. According to Smarthouse, their "insiders at Microsoft" claim that a standalone Blu-ray player is already working in-house. With the appropriate approvals it could be on sale within 3 months. A 360 with built-in Blu-ray is also being worked on although the possibility of moving it out to retail is less clear with HD downloads on the horizon. Not that any of this is unexpected given the circumstances. We never expected Microsoft to go down with the HD DVD ship -- they're just passengers on this ill-fated voyage, not the captains.

Update: Microsoft carefully responds to the rumor.

[Thanks, Oakie]

[jared @ Feb 18th 2008 5:52AM]

Wouldn't having a BluRay player be bad for Sony? There's not much to differentiate the consoles at that point if they both contain the BluRay drive, other than a few minor exclusives on each.

[Tom Oliveri @ Feb 18th 2008 5:53AM]

a few minor exclusives.. lol yeah

xbox 360 has the exclusive 'kick ass' factor.

[James @ Feb 18th 2008 6:14AM]

Except Sony (and their partners) will get paid big licensing fees.

[James Ollier @ Feb 18th 2008 6:20AM]

xbox 360 HAD the exclusive 'kick ass' factor

Now its the PS3's turn

Lets see:
Blu-ray
Games not limited to DVD9
PlayTV
Internet Browser
Card Readers
No "power-brick"
PSP Remote Play
Ability to upgrade the HDD on the cheap
Tiny failiure rate
Very Quiet even at full spin
Folding@Home
Built in Wi-Fi
Playstation Home (Soon)
Great games (Contrary to popular belief) with more on their way

[Oliver @ Feb 18th 2008 7:04AM]

So with this amazing Blu-ray media why does Devil May Cry 4 require data to be installed to the PS3 hard disk (taking around 20 minutes) so that in can perform at the same speed the Xbox 360 version does running from a DVD? Something to do with not being able to pull data off the Blu-ray disc quick enough maybe?

[corpirate @ Feb 18th 2008 7:17AM]

@ James Ollier


Ha.. I couldn't give half a crap about 95% of the things you just listed.

[Zeus.:God @ Feb 18th 2008 7:39AM]

Oliver, it's because the Blu-Ray drive in the PS3 is slow as Hell (2x) and in order to have even bearable loading times throughout the life of the game, it must cache information onto the drive (install, I suppose you can call it)so it can have quick reference info.

Even then, loading is very slow compared to the Xbox.

[Maestro @ Feb 18th 2008 8:05AM]

OK. Everyone take a deep breath and repeat after me. SONY DOES NOT OWN BLURAY!. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Association

I got news for you. Samsung is huge Sony competitor and guess what they sell...that's right! Bluray players! It was never 360 v PS3 is Microsoft v Sony. BR v HDDVD is many v many. So Sony does not decide who does or does not get to make a BR player. Whoever coughs up the fee gets to make one.

[Static @ Feb 18th 2008 8:19AM]

Zeus.:God, I find that statement funny since many of the games that I have played on the PS3 load faster than on my 360. The exclusives like ratchet and clank and uncharted have invisible loading times, so i guess any loading the PS3 does is thanks to those MP ports that have to compatible with the 360. To be compatible with the 360, devs have to take into account the amount of 360 owners that do not have a harddrive and then load most of the assets into memory. The PS3 exclusive don't need to do that and pretty much embarrass every other game in this generation with their non existant loading screens.

But by all means, if you enjoy spreading your fud around, have fun.

[Liam @ Feb 18th 2008 9:18AM]

staic i beg to differ about the invisible loading times...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa5jg0LgRDI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF7Q0xLRJ-8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb5YJW1UgDc

.....

yeh... invisible times... so much quicker then 360, yup i can really see that.

Now im a fan of both machines but please, stop spreading YOUR fud

[DownwardMonkey @ Feb 18th 2008 9:31AM]

Liam if you're going to call someone on something then at least call him on what he said and post something relevant. He SAID that the ports didn't load as fast, so what do you do? Post videos of ports.

If the PS3 runs a badly ported game then the loading will be there because it's a port and the devs have had to take into account the lack of HDD on some 360 and the BD slows up the loading. When the game is native and written for the PS3 properly like R&C or Unchartered there is next to no loading at all. Hell the 360 can't even get its native titles down to decent loading times, I was watching most of the ending of Mass Effect with no textures because they wouldn't load fast enough.

Anyone that runs Uncharted next to Mass Effect can clearly see the 360 is starting to slip in terms of hardware, the PS3 is only going to get better right now.

Your videos are of old ports, and are nothing to do with the situation on the PS3 right now.

[jacquerr @ Feb 18th 2008 9:35AM]

That is so funny, that when ever someone supports a microsoft anything, you guys rank it low. sheesh. talk about fanbois. It's like 1984 in here.

[jacquerr @ Feb 18th 2008 9:35AM]

LOL and what's funny a few posts later is a pro sony fanboi. and wouldn't you know it, highest ranked. hmm.

[John @ Feb 18th 2008 9:44AM]

I still only care about the games

[Marc @ Feb 18th 2008 10:09AM]

wow... these replies are gone way off the initial post. i'd have to disagree with you jared. even if xbox gets a blue ray drive it still needs to ship its games on DVD. the idea of a console is that it remains compatible with all new software and hardware during its life.
the fact that dedicated BD players are starting to hit the market at under 300 is a sign that you don't just buy a console for a cheap HD player anymore

[Boostjunkie @ Feb 18th 2008 10:37AM]

How can you use Mass Effect as an example of 360 loading times! That game is famous for tons of technical issues, it's a great game, but certainly not what you want to compare loading times or anything else with. Anyway, it's not some imaginary difference between PS3 and 360 loading times. It's a fact that the 360 has a overall faster drive, but again, loading times are usually the developers fault. They can be hidden if coded for properly.

[Mark @ Feb 18th 2008 12:02PM]

I find it hillarious the programed Microsoft FUD that Xbox owners spout. How much are Microsoft paying you for that...

Blu-ray is indeed 2x, but it's not on the same scale as 8x DVD, 2x DVD transfer rates roughly equates to 8x DVD, meaning when on the same scale, they are the same HOWEVER, Blu-ray is CAV, meaning the data transfer rates are always 2x (or DVD 8X if you want to talk like for likes), the 360 DVD9 drive is CLV, meaning it drops as low as 3x on the inner of the disc, as it only actually 8x on the outer part.

Why DMC4 needs installation? Lasy developers springs to mind, and a platform that's been out a year shorter than the 360. The benefit however, is level load times are non-existant on the PS3 version, and become tiresome very quickly on the 360 version.

[roach @ Feb 18th 2008 2:38PM]

Oliver:
Why does Devil may cry need an update to run the same speed as 360? Because 360 being released early is development platform for next gen console. Which means all testing and streamlining is initially done on 360 and later ported to other consoles. Reason some of EA's game can't match 360 frame rate. And if time permits, companies might take advantage of PS3 special feature...which is not likely the case. I work in the industry and I don't know one company that uses PS3 as their main debugging kit.

[Tom Oliveri @ Feb 18th 2008 5:52AM]

not all of us have the bandwidth for HD movies, i never thought i'd say this but.. bring on the internal Bluray drive or internal betamax drive, we still havnt given up on you betamax!

[AJ in the East Bay @ Feb 18th 2008 5:59AM]

Hey, Microsoft, you might as well do this. More $$$ coming your way, for sure!

[Sukhminder @ Feb 18th 2008 2:19PM]

Totally agree. I was debating between Xbox 360 (I like the games) or PS3 (Blu Ray). If MS came out with a Blu Ray add on for 360 I wouldn't buy a PS3.

[Gremlin @ Feb 18th 2008 6:02AM]

This one makes a lot of sense. Heck, I wouldn't be all that surprised if Microsoft came out with a new high-end SKU that has blu-ray built in to help prevent PS3 from surpassing it in sales.

Engadget is cool.

[Zak @ Feb 18th 2008 6:03AM]

Well my 360 just froze up and is now showing the 3 rings of death! Looks like I will be getting a ps3, unless I get my 360 fixed for free. Its just over 15 months old.I refuse to buy the same thing twice after one broke through no fault of my own.

[MR @ Feb 18th 2008 6:07AM]

Do you realize that MS extended the warranty to 3 years?

[kaotic @ Feb 18th 2008 6:09AM]

360s have 3 year warranty now, u shouldn't have an issue getting it repaired.

[Vergs @ Feb 18th 2008 6:12AM]

Don't feed the PS3Fanboy Troll.

[Zak @ Feb 18th 2008 6:25AM]

Thanks for the warranty info. Its just died like 10 minutes before I posted, so I haven't rung any numbers yet. As for feeding the fanboy stuff? Nah I was just kinda bummed out it died.

[James @ Feb 18th 2008 6:45AM]

@Vergs,

Right, because who ever gets a RRoD?

[mike @ Feb 18th 2008 8:05AM]

your 360 breaks so you buy a ps3? thats the stupidest thing I ever heard. what do you do with all your games? sell them? Then what do you do when your ps3 breaks, buy a wii? and then your wii breaks, stop gaming all together? lol.

[r3loaded @ Feb 18th 2008 8:14AM]

Microsoft fixed my RROD'd 360 in less than a week, no questions asked, and gave me a free 1-month pass for Xbox Live Gold for my trouble. If that isn't service, I don't know what is.

[Static @ Feb 18th 2008 8:29AM]

r3loaded, its called a CYA policy. MS themselves confirmed that 100% of 360's have this defect and are liable to go at any time. Because of that they extended the warranty because it would give you less of a leg to stand on if you try to sue. And they started giving out live passes as a result of those who were complaining about losing a service they payed for.

MS didn't do you any favors. They just try to cover themselves for a defect that shouldn't be this bad in the first place.

[tcc3 @ Feb 18th 2008 9:19AM]

What you call "not doing any favors", some call owing up to a mistake and taking responsibility.

No it probably wasn't pure altruism, but they did the right thing in the end. No need to spin it.

[Alex R @ Feb 18th 2008 9:46AM]

@ Zak
There is a 3 year warranty and free repairs on 3 red lights. mine did it too.

[Matt B @ Feb 18th 2008 10:20AM]

Or your machine could, you know, not break. 3 year warranty still only covers half the problem. What about DRE errors and it ruining game disks. Not covered.

[decompiler @ Feb 18th 2008 10:50AM]

@Static: wow, did you get your user name right...

anyway, i too got the rrod, and like r3loaded mine was back in less than a week. yeah, micro$oft messed up; the failure rates are higher than usual, and it probably comes from rushing the 360 to get it out in time for xmas a year before the competition. these are not new ideas.

i don't care if sony "owns" bluray or not, they're invested heavily. and don't try to tell me they didn't jam the bluray drive into the ps3 to try to advance the bluray agenda. they knew everyone else's bluray drives would cost nearly twice the ps3's price at launch, making them look good to non-gamer hd-ophiles, and they knew that there are plenty of gamers blinded enough by fanboyism to pay any price for the next version of the playstation. (right, static?)

i used to love the sony, particularly playstation, but after the psp sucked for the first year it was out, after the rootkit debacle on sony cds, and after the mandatory inclusion of the bluray drive in the over-priced ps3 (a feature i didn't want), i've gone on a little hiatus from purchasing sony gaming products.

when they show me more games that i can't live without but can't get on my 360, i'll consider buying a ps3; but that ain't happened yet.

[mrblack @ Feb 18th 2008 2:38PM]

One thing you can't say about the PS3 is that it was overpriced. Hell, it was outrageously UNDERPRICED for the hardware it has. If you remember, the original manufacturing cost was over $800, most of which went towards the blu ray drive. Blue lasers (405.5 nm) were incredibly expensive to produce in 2006 and if the 360 came with an internal HD drive (doesn't matter which format, same technology) it would have cost as much or more than the PS3 did.

[DarkLightConnection @ Feb 18th 2008 6:09AM]

Internal Blu-ray? Way to piss off early adopters... If they do it, I will sell my (2005 manufactured and still kicking) XBOX 360 "Premium" and buy a PS3... One thing is to make it thinner and more power-saving, but changing the optical drive is totally another story, especially since they promised they won't do it (yes, I still remember 2006)

Now a Blu-ray add-on, that's something I wouldn't mind buying (if they get 2.0 and the price right, that is)

[Zeus.:God @ Feb 18th 2008 7:41AM]

So you would sell your Xbox if they added a Blu-Ray drive into newer consoles, and had a Blu-Ray drive dongle for those with older Xboxes? Of course, these Blu-Ray equipped consoles wouldn't be as cheap as one that was equipped without.

[Sean @ Feb 18th 2008 6:09AM]

Microsoft doesn't lose at the end.

HD DVD and BluRay uses their codecs.
Digital Distribution uses their codecs.
Its Microsoft that wins at the end of the day through licensing of the codecs they made.

[jared @ Feb 18th 2008 6:16AM]

They only get money from BluRay if using the VC-1 codec. I think that they have switched over to using the AVC codec for the majority of new releases.

[James @ Feb 18th 2008 6:18AM]

Eh?! Well what about licensing for the overall format?! Likely to be much more than a codec which is not always used (and decreasingly so too).

[Ryan J. @ Feb 18th 2008 6:17AM]

Microsoft MUST do this to remain competitive in the console market. Once Blu-ray is the absolute winner, many people are going to choose the PS3 over other consoles because it comes with a "free" Blu-ray player.

[Blake Bowen @ Feb 18th 2008 7:43AM]

The next xbox is expected to be released in 2010, whereas Sony claims a ten year lifecycle for the playstation 3. That puts the next playstation to be released late in 2016. Microsoft could decide to just eat the loss for now, then release a device loads more powerful than the PS3 a whole six years before the playstation 4 comes out. Sony will in all likelihood move up their schedule, but combining microsoft's year head start with the intended longer lifespan of the PS3, and microsoft could gain back any ground they lose in the meantime and more.

[Dan @ Feb 18th 2008 11:21AM]

Blake

A ten year life-cycle doesn't mean a 2016 PS3. The PS2 has not yet reached the end of its life-cycle - the different versions overlap.

[Coolone3000 @ Feb 18th 2008 11:41AM]

I have news for you, there is nothing "free" about the Blue-Ray player in the PS3, ever wonder why its starting price was $600. The only reason it costs less now is they cannibalized the machine and are probably still taking more of a loss then they were before. Trust me you are paying for Blu-Ray capabilities.

[Daniel D @ Feb 18th 2008 6:18AM]

woo nice picture change

[chumney_warner @ Feb 18th 2008 6:25AM]

its truely incredible to see how much influence the gaming world has had on the format war. I hope if Microsoft do add a BluRay drive to the arsenal of the Xbox 360 (be it internal or an add-on), it forces Sony to focus more on the PS3's gaming side.

[Static @ Feb 18th 2008 8:37AM]

Sony has been focused on the gaming side. Pay attention to the first party titles that have been released and that are about to be released this year. Then look at the applictions. Sony has had nintendo and MS beat in developing games (not just publishing) so this game arguement is wasted. Sony hasn't been wasting time on BR (other than to get it working on their consoles and stand alone's because they are not in charge of Blu ray, they are not the head of Blu ray, they do not have to pony up the resources to advertise Blu ray (unless it is directly related to sony) and they are not the Head of the BDA. Please let this "focused on blu ray" myth die.

[Oliver @ Feb 18th 2008 6:29AM]

They'd be stupid not to bring out a Blu-ray add-on for the 360. I'd certainly buy one and would prefer it over buying a PS3. Although it will be interesting to see if it will work along side the stand alone HD-DVD drive which I intend on keeping. What would be even better would be a Blu-ray/HD-DVD combo add-on, there are already PC drives out there and considering they would be sourcing the drives from a 3rd party like they do with the HD-DVD add-on, it would be plausible.

This could also explain why they never brought out a 360 with HD-DVD, waiting to see which format one the day. I can see PS3 sales increasing a lot with Blu-ray winning as it's currently the safest Blu-ray machine to invest in. If Microsoft want to steal some of these sales a 360 with built in Blu-ray would be a good way to go.

I'm still considering buying a PS3 just for Blu-ray, so if Microsoft did either of the above they would get a few more of my penny's.

[Dave @ Feb 18th 2008 6:32AM]

The only way I can see Microsoft winning here is to go with an internal dual blu-ray/hddvd drive on new units and offer the external blu-ray drive as an inexpensive option for current 360 owners.