ThunderPeel2001

This could be true, I'm just not convinced (it seems to contradict what we do know, for one thing), and I don't see how anyone else can claim to be absolutely sure why MS does what MS does. It makes more sense to me to try and take a slice of Sony's pie, rather than refuse it completely.

Now who's elevating the discussion ¬ ¬ (For the record, I'm not saying I know better than MS, I'm just saying I don't understand their previous decisions.)

Seems like a fair first-impression to me.

I'm sorry, but it was getting frustrating having to explain every single thing. I've hopefully illustrated in my reply to Thrik's post why the first year's sales didn't prove anything about the viability or consumer response to either format. Given that you clearly don't have much knowledge of what happened during the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format wars, I have to wonder: Why do you keep trying to prove me wrong?

I was directly responding to what you were saying. Even if the average Joe didn't care that the PS3 had Blu-ray capability, it doesn't make any obvious sense that MS didn't get on the BD band-wagon in 2008. Considering the success of the HD-DVD add-on (which I've clearly illustrated), and the gigantic jump in sales after the format war ended. That's my point. But also, I think it's silly to insist that Blu-ray capabilities didn't improve the PS3's sales. The PS3 regularly topped the charts of Blu-ray players in A/V magazines for the first few years, and I know it was a factor for me, and other people I know. http://www.idlethumb...140#entry220348

It did sell relatively well. I've proven that conclusively. It accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD sales -- the fact that the format wars were still going on, and therefore inhibiting sales of BOTH Blu-ray and HD-DVD is completely besides the point. You keep arguing that people didn't buy PS3's to watch Blu-rays, and I'd agree with that during 2007, while the format war was still being decided. During that period there were only 300,000 stand-alone Blu-ray players in the US. That's the same number of HD-DVD 360 add-ons, and doesn't even include the 400,000 stand-alone HD-DVD players that had been sold. So in 2007 there were 300,000 stand-alone Blu-ray players sold. How many do you think that went up to after the format war ended in Jan 2008? If HD-DVD had won the format war, it's conceivable that the HD-DVD add-ons would have been responsible for a large portion of the players in people's homes. As recently as last year I was looking for a cheap, but high quality, Blu-ray solution. I even posted here asking if they sold Blu-ray add-ons for my 360. I ended up buying a PS3 because it would also act as a games console, and it was pretty cheap. The 360 was not "on its way out" in January 2008!

You don't know what you're talking about.

Why would Microsoft being a major proponent of HD-DVD mean an add-on for the 360 would sell nearly as well as Toshiba's stand-alone players (which were far cheaper than Blu-ray players, and of which Microsoft was subsidising the cost of, incidentally)? On the one hand you're saying that HD movie support was secondary to gaming, but on the other you seem to be saying that gamers wanted HD movies. Which is it? The poor sales didn't sink the format, Warners did when they announced in January 2008 that they were supporting Blu-ray. That only left Dreamworks and Paramount, which both switched sides by the end of the month. Here's the marketshare before and after their announcement: Except for me.

The PS3 was the cheapest Blu-ray player for quite some time.

The HD-DVD 360 add-on accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD player sales.

Woah... Our brain can create charicatures?

Wow.

Except for the sales they lost to Sony. And the fact that the HD-DVD add-on sold relatively well. And the fact that they'd only need to sell the actual drive, since everyone already owned the processing power in their 360s. (It only had to be significantly cheaper than a PS3.) So aside from all that...

Yes, I was wondering...!

No good studies doesn't equal no connection. Science takes down "science"!

The only game of theirs not to have DLC is Psychonauts.

Yes, the SE is great! Unlike the first SE.

Well, they would be different, because *I* wouldn't have bought a PS3 if there was an external 360 BD drive!

Yeah, I guess that's true. I'm sure MS are pretty unhappy that Games on Demand hasn't taken off, though.

Nope. The PS3 outsold the 360 in 2012.

I don't know what it's like in the US, but here in the UK, I don't believe there's any major highstreet game retailers left. Game went into administration last year, and HMV are just about gone. Is there anyone else?

Using computers at a weird angles definitely causes carpal tunnel in my experience. Thankfully I've usually been able to get rid of it. Either by the use of raised mouse-pads, or just re-positioning myself, and the pain goes away in a few days. I now know from experience how not to position my body.

Eh? Many retail PC games are already just boxes with Steam/Origin download codes in them.

Nope, although I accidentally typed that initially (oops), I hope it's obvious that I was talking about the past. Here's an interesting piece (it's a little too anti-MS, but it has many interesting points in one place). For those who don't know (and it seems many don't, considering the resistance I've had to my simple observation): Toshiba was going to give up on HD-DVD back in 2005, before it had even been released, but Microsoft got behind them and "incentivised" them to continue. Microsoft tried like hell to kill Blu-ray. They gave $150 million to DreamWorks and Paramount to keep them HD-DVD exclusive, and are suspected to have subsidised Toshiba's manufacturing costs for their stand-alone HD-DVD players -- god knows how much they spent in total over those two years. As TheDigitalBits wrote at the time: Microsoft were pretty much responsible for the format wars ever happening, or at least for making them last as long as they did, and they fought like bitter hell. When Blu-ray finally won, they probably could have swallowed their pride and taken some of that BD pie. They could have released a cheap stand-alone drive for the 360 (just like they did for HD-DVD -- which sold pretty well for the time), offering a viable alternative to the PS3 for those who were swayed by such things. It always baffled me as to why they didn't... I figured they would never go down that route (possibly holding out for online to take over) but now, almost 10 years later, they're going to release hardware with Blu-ray. If they were going to support it eventually, why didn't they do it sooner? I'm guessing it's with great reluctance that they're including it now.

The format war ended in 2007 -- in all that time MS hasn't bothered to release a BD add-on. It's the very fact that they didn't release one after they lost the war, even when they were losing buyers to Sony because of the lack of one, that makes it such a big deal today. It would have made perfect sense, but they still didn't want to back Blu-rays... possibly out of spite, possibly because they had their eyes on another horse. The fact that they've now taken onboard Blu-rays, and not, for example, pushed the online service they've been developing, must be a bitter pill indeed -- and makes all those sales they lost to Sony completely pointless. That's why it's a big deal.