ps3 or 360

[BrisRecky]

commodore 64

 

[serious14]

Floss - HD DVD was backed by Toshiba and Microsoft, whereas Blu Ray is backed by Sony.  Their technical specifications were very similar..... the only differences were the types of codecs used to compress the audio and video onto the discs, HD DVD was region free and Blu Ray wasn't, as well as the amount of storage available.  For a while, HD DVD was superior, but then Blu Ray got their act together and got most of the movie studios on board.  Toshiba officially withdrew support for HD DVD back in February/March.

I am the proud owner of a player of both types, although I was HD DVD exclusive for the longest time.  I must say I cleaned up in the HD DVD fire sales that Amazon and EzyDVD had.  ;D ;D ;D

 

[Gopher of Pern]

commodore 64

Great system! Some of the best games ever made on that!

In regards to 360 v ps3, it has to be 360. I don't care about specs, i care about the games! And there are so many games on the xbox that i can't get on the ps3, including Halo3, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Oblivion (on both systems, but was available when 360 was released.) Blu-ray does nothing for me, as i don't have a HDTV (yet!)

In regards to HDDVD v Bluray, i thought the biggest difference was storage. Blu-ray could hold alot more than HDDVD.

 

[serious14]

In regards to HDDVD v Bluray, i thought the biggest difference was storage. Blu-ray could hold alot more than HDDVD.

This is true - a dual layer Blu Ray disc can hold 50Gb, whereas a dual layer HD DVD could hold 30Gb.  The reason for this thought was because up until recently Blu Ray used an inferior method of video compression (MPEG-2) whereas HD DVD used a method known as VC-1, which could deliver identical results, but in a manner than used far less space.

</nerd speak>

 

[Jimmy]

In regards to HDDVD v Bluray, i thought the biggest difference was storage. Blu-ray could hold alot more than HDDVD.

This is true - a dual layer Blu Ray disc can hold 50Gb, whereas a dual layer HD DVD could hold 30Gb.   The reason for this thought was because up until recently Blu Ray used an inferior method of video compression (MPEG-2) whereas HD DVD used a method known as VC-1, which could deliver identical results, but in a manner than used far less space.

</nerd speak>

Im pretty sure that HD DVD is now hanging out with BETA tapes.
Where as Blu Ray is living it up with VHS.
Another victory for Sony, isn't it wonderful.

 

[MrCelery]

i have a 360 purely because it was cheaper
if i had the money at the time i probz wouldve gotten a ps3

Are you sure you're not a Jets supporter?

 

[loyalist]

i have a 360 purely because it was cheaper
if i had the money at the time i probz wouldve gotten a ps3

Are you sure you're not a Jets supporter?

more so an 18 year old hovering around the poverty line

 

[Ranyen]

This should clear up a few things to do with technology & gadgets...

http://www.youtube.com/v/w-N2VNyl-Xg&hl=en&fs=1

 

[dru]

Floss - HD DVD was backed by Toshiba and Microsoft, whereas Blu Ray is backed by Sony.  Their technical specifications were very similar..... the only differences were the types of codecs used to compress the audio and video onto the discs, HD DVD was region free and Blu Ray wasn't, as well as the amount of storage available.  For a while, HD DVD was superior, but then Blu Ray got their act together and got most of the movie studios on board.  Toshiba officially withdrew support for HD DVD back in February/March.

I am the proud owner of a player of both types, although I was HD DVD exclusive for the longest time.  I must say I cleaned up in the HD DVD fire sales that Amazon and EzyDVD had.  ;D ;D ;D

Bring back beta