DVDs were around a couple years before Blockbuster started carrying them at all. If you were buying a $35 DVD player then you were a late adopter. When I bought my first DVD player - and even I wasn't a true early adopter - it was the cheapest I could find: A Zenith for over $200.
In my opinion, all of the types of TVs have some fatal dealbreaker that's keeping me from adopting. Plasmas use up all the plasma. Projection types have a poor viewing angle. LCDs have been showing signs of burn-in. CRTs burn in and are pretty bulky and heavy, to boot, and have (from what I've seen) a much less sharp picture.
Wow, it's really cool that you have an opinion, but what does that have to do with reality? Plasma TVs do have a drop in quality over years - YEARS. Rear-projection TVs do have a relatively limited viewing angle but it has improved immensely and most people don't watch their television at extreme angles anyway. Modern CRTs do not burn in except under the most extreme circumstances. You'd have to leave a static picture on a modern CRT for weeks, or even months, before it could even possibly burn in (this goes for current rear-projection CRT sets, too). Oh yes, and many people like the picture on a CRT better than on a fixed-pixel display (that issue has more to do with the internals of particular sets). And, finally, LCDs do not experience burn-in.
It also means that there is planned obsolescence with an upgrade path. Right now, Joe Consumer buys an HDTV that looks nice. In a few years, when "super-HD-DVD discs" start coming out with 1080p resolution, there's something for Joe Consumer to upgrade to. Otherwise, he has no reason to upgrade his TV unless it fails.
First off, all HD-DVD movies so far are already 1080p (and Blu-Ray movies will be the same) - neither of the two HD-DVD players so far output that resolution but 1080p-capable models will appear down the line (assuming HD-DVD sticks around). And where is the "obselescence" of which you speak? Just like DVDs, HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs aren't just going to suddenly stop working because the industry finds a new format down the line. Even if they did, whatever becomes the next big resolution will be made compatible with preexisting sets, just like the current two competitors (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) are compatible with sets from NTSC composite to 1080p HDMI (for that matter, so is DVD).
You need to find some new justifications for your crankiness. The ones on which you're currently relying are just bogus.
Actually, I think you might be a little off on the motivation. After all, Rockstar has never been a company that cares about working out the kinks in their engines/games (GTA:VC was filled to the brim with annoying bugs but still sold insane numbers). No, I think it's more likely that Take Two, because of their financial troubles, asked Rockstar to give them a game for a particular release period (helping to fill the gap until GTA4) and they came up with Table Tennis. Let's face it: Rockstar doesn't need proof of anything to sell millions of GTA4 discs.:)
So, in that case, does blu-ray have anything going for it?
Well, Blu-Ray does have something going for it: It has a size advantage of 10 GB (25GB versus 15GB) per layer over HD-DVD. The thing is, this advantage is deprecated somewhat in both the movie and gaming environments by the fact that 15GB/30GB (single-player/dual-layer) is typically more than enough space for this kind of pre-recorded material, as HD-DVD is proving by putting 1080p movies on their discs. Admittedly, this can be argued a bit by folks who would point out that full seasons of HD TV shows, for example, could fit on fewer Blu-Ray discs - but most people don't find the multiple-disc DVD releases too constricting in that regard.
Where Blu-Ray shines a little brighter in the capacity area is, of course, for PC storage use as a recordable medium. As it stands, even a dual-layer HD-DVD couldn't back up a full 40GB hard drive (which is pretty minimal these days), while a dual-layer Blu-Ray recordable could back up that same drive with 10GB to spare (or fewer depending on how much disc overhead there is, like on DVDs where dual-layer recordables are around 8.5GB instead of the pressed 9.4GB).
On a semi-related note, I was browing the HD-DVD section today just for kicks, and every movie I looked at said it was 1080p. Is it safe to assume that there's just a first-gen player limitation, rather than everyone just assuming that we can't fit 1080p stuff on to 15GB (or 30GB, if DL)?
1080p moves can easily fit on HD-DVDs (even with extras included, though nearly all HD-DVD extras so far are the old 480i/p ones found on DVDs), and that's what most of the studios are doing. I suspect that the limitation to 1080i in the current Toshiba and RCA players is simply a matter of those companies deciding that a) not many people have 1080p displays (even most people with PCs max out at 1600x1200) and b) they could keep costs down by using slightly less capable internals. If the latter is true, then it's an excellent move since, until the PS3 comes out, there don't seem to be any Blu-Ray players on the immediate horizon which can compete with HD-DVD in terms of price.
Shorter answer (since I rambled): Yes, the 1080i limitation is a situation specific to the two currently available HD-DVD players and not a problem with the technology overall.:)
Each HD-DVD and Blu-Ray player comes with magical fairie dust pre-installed (HD-DVD players use a lower grade of dust, explaining the $500 price differential). When the magical fairie dust mingles with the laser beam during playback, it creates a psychic connection to the mind of the director of the movie, which allows the players to then output what s/he actually saw during filming.
Unfortunately, there are still some problems with boom mikes, crew members and buffet tables being visible in some scenes because the director wasn't paying close enough attention to the action. But, it's okay since all of it is in 1080p.
Forget the RIAA, Weird Al's record label is definately the entity in charge.
It's kind of funny that the names of the companies involved haven't been mentioned, so I'll go ahead and do that: Al's current label is "Volcano" which is owned by "Zomba" which is owned by "BMG" which, of course, is part of the "Sony/BMG" ubercorporation...OMGWTFBBQ, I just realized! This is yet another anti-Sony story!
Actually, I thought the analysis seemed to blame everybody: iTunes for charging 30+ cents per dollar for their web services (that surely does seem high, which makes me wonder if the mentioned 80/19 split isn't more accurate), the record company for not splitting their cut more fairly with the artist, and the implied blame of Al for signing what seems on the surface to be a pretty lousy deal.
He should be complaining...to his lawyer/agent/manager who, presumably, looked over the deal and let that slide by. I would think that one or more of those people would be dealing with the recording executives long before it ever lands under Al's schnoz, and would do the math so that they could tell Al whether it was a good deal or not. Getting 4-5 cents on the retail dollar for his music sounds like a pretty crap deal, whatever the medium of distribution.
The Xbox 360 has a similar advantage, at least for people who never owned an Xbox. There are many good games already on the backwards compatibility list. While it's obvious that there were far more PS1 titles, you could still get several months of good gaming (assuming one playing a relatively reasonable number of hours per day) out of the current list.
Of course, the truth is that had I never owned an Xbox I wouldn't even consider buying a 360 right now (I still haven't) and would instead just buy the Xbox. While it doesn't have the lineup of the PS2 (what could?), again, there are more than enough good Xbox games to keep a gamer busy for a long time.
You should really re-gift the thing to somebody else then. Anyone who bitches about their free game console online (unless the thing is broken) should be living the old tool drawer.
As far as native games go, if I don't want to have a chick fight, drive, or play a sport, I don't have much reason to turn on my 360 at all.
I hear that. If only they'd release games like Oblivion, Condemned: Criminal Origins, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter or Hitman: Blood Money. Maybe they just need to come out with something like Kameo, Gun, Final Fanasy XI or a Tomb Raider game.
For anyone without a nice PC gaming rig, the Xbox 360 probably has something to make a gamer turn it on. For the people WITH a nice PC gaming rig, there will probably be many more good reasons to do so coming during the remainder of the year.
Compared to the PS2 at the same point in its life, the 360's game lineup is kick-ass...
Judging from how the XB/PS2/GameCube games progressed, getting more optimised and looking even better as developers figured out how to optimise the console, I'm inclined to agree with the developer's final conclusion - multi-DVD XB360 games are coming, and sooner than you think.
Wow, that does make a lot of sense, especially since there were many games whose sequels actually took up less disc space than the previous games.
I'd buy into this concept if there were a ton of PC games (with their attendant high-resolution textures and such) that installed to more than 8.5GB (the apparent limit, considering overhead, of a dual-layer DVD game on Xbox 360) on a PC's hard drive, but that's just not the case. I might even buy into it if, even with FMV, more than a handful of Xbox games even went to the second layer of DVD, but very few did.
If you actually believe that there are a bunch of developers out there working on games that need disc space for over 20GB of real, in-game assets, then do please enlighten us with some details. While I'm sure such assets exist during the early stages of development where artists are working in TIFF or an equivalent, that in no way represents the size of what will eventually be shipped, even if the space is available to do so (such as on Blu-Ray). A game using those kinds of assets would need a huge frame buffer to render a scene and there are only 256MB available for that purpose on a PS3 - even if one includes main memory, everything rendered on the screen at any given moment on a PS3 can only use 512MB of memory.
I'm not such a hater that I actually think Blu-Ray is a bad thing, in and of itself. The assertion, though, that it's necessary now (or in the next few years) for console gaming stretches the limits of credibility. Maybe, by the time the PS3 is $300 or less, there will be some games that really use the space of Blu-Ray for something more exciting than a cutscene, but I won't be holding my breath.
PS- Here's at least one interview where a developer (Mark Rein of Epic, the Unreal people) claims that next generation games are going to be 20+GB in size. He also claims that they're going to be using the majority of space on a BR disc, though he never gets into specifics as to what they're actually going to use that space for. Personally, I just don't buy it - not for the vast majority of next generation console games, anyway.
Late reply, but you may indeed be right. It's hard for me to think about DVD-R and DVD+R because at the time when non-combo players were the norm I had zero interest in recording DVDs.
The thing is, if enough people do not buy equipment that supports the ICT flag then later in the future the same equations will apply for the studios - if enough people are effected by the ICT flag then they can't ship movies with it enabled. It's that simple.
Unfortunately, it's not that simple. It's fast becoming impossible to buy a new HDTV/HDTV-ready set without an HDCP-capable DVI/HDMI input. This is particularly true with the big brands where even their cheapest digital sets are now shipping with HDMI input(s).
I hope, like everyone else, that the MPAA comes to its collective senses and gives up on this particular protection. But, the only way it will happen is if they activate it and people stop buying the discs. They're not going to give it up on spec.
You're right, but only to a point. In this case, a parent could find a game with stealing, murder and drugs "appropriate" for their child but draw the line at sex - in fact, unfortunately, this is exactly the way many parents feel. The issue, therefore, is the rating and its attendant descriptors. For example, the ESRB could find the sexual content to fall within the parameters of an "M" rating but they'd still put a descriptor on the box indicating the presence of that content. That they didn't have the opportunity to do so because the content wasn't disclosed is the problem, and that's why the FTC got involved.
I think the reason that the FTC didn't do anything serious this time is likely because they were told that leaving unused content in games has been going on for a long time. For example, developers will leave unused models and textures on a disc just in case an obscure line of code exists that makes reference to a file that is no longer truly part of the game (i.e., I've read that there were extra mechs in Mechassault 2 that had models on the game disc but never appear in the game). Rockstar will just have to be more careful next time and if they are then they won't have to deal with the FTC on this issue again.
I just think that the question still still remains "are they beginning to censor their material?" and if so "by how much?"
They already do censor their material. Hot Coffee was functional but probably removed from the game proper because they already knew it would push the ESRB (and other ratings groups) into the 18+ category. It seems to me that the one positive thing to came out of that for Rockstar (besides a free publicity push for the game) is that they now know just about exactly where the line is between M and AO.
If Rockstar is intimidated now to the point that it cancels a game for the explicit reason of its content, are we going to see an extremely cut down and censored Grand Theft Auto 4?
Well, there hasn't been any evidence that this is the case. In fact, the evidence would seem to go the other way since the GTA games have made tons of money and continue to sell - even in "censorship-friendly" stores like Wal-Mart.
If Rockstar was "intimidated" by the ESRB re-rating of GTA:SA based on Hot Coffee, it's that they need to control their assets better, taking things off the disc that aren't still part of the game.
Considering that GTA:SA already filled an entire DVD on current-gen consoles...
No, it really didn't. Admittedly, the only Xbox size I could find was a PAL version, but it was a whopping 2.85 GB. The NTSC version of GTA III was a whopping 733MB (even the Dreamcast GD-ROM could have accommodated that on one disc) and GTA:VC was 1.20GB. Relatively few games even made it past the first layer of DVD. It's no wonder that Microsoft didn't feel a next-gen disc drive was necessary for the 360.
especially now that the image constraint token is dead
Okay, people have to stop saying this. While it's true that there is currently a moratorium on the use of this "feature" (for both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray), it's only temporary. Supposedly, most of the studios have opted to hold off on its use for a while (Warner is apparently considering using ICT for particular movies) but all of them would like to. The "security" consultants have gotten the executives to believe that the "analog hole" is the primary risk in terms of piracy, despite the fact that most movie piracy is fully in the digital domain, ripped straight off DVDs, and the same will happen with the new formats once the protection is busted. As long as the studios believe in the evil of analog, they're going to want very badly to use the ICT.
At best, ICT is in a state of hibernation, and when it wakes up it's going to tear the arms off of anybody who has an HDTV with no digital input who bought an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player.
It is possible for MS to start shipping 360s with HD-DVD (or Blu-Ray if they wanted to) built in if that's what the market decides is necessary, you know. Of course, they wouldn't be able to put games on the new format unless they wanted to say "screw you" to the previous 360 owners, but I doubt people would be saying "Xbox 360 sucks because its games are on DVD!"
MS won't ship 360 games on HD-DVD for precisely the reason you give. And you're right that people won't dismiss 360 games because they're on DVD, but that's not really the point Sony's trying to drive home here. They're trying to push the idea that the PS3 is more "future-proof" than the 360 because of Blu-Ray. They're kind of right and kind of wrong.
They're right in the sense that, yes, games continue to expand in size, so if the PS3 sticks around for more than 5 years then Blu-Ray's capacity advantage may shine.
Where the theory goes wrong, however, is that it focuses entirely on the storage medium and ignores the rest of the system. If MS releases a followup console 4-5 years from now while Sony continues pushing the PS3, the new Xbox 1,440 (going with "720" is just boring) will, presumably, have a much more capable graphics solution and much greater processing capability (eight cores all running at 6GHz, or more). It would also contain a high-capacity disc drive which, by that time, will cost as much as a fast DVD-ROM drive does today. As a bonus, if the PS3 turns out to be successful at its high price point, MS will be able to charge more for their next console without setting a new pricing precedent.
All that said, if folks actually believe that Sony won't have a PS4 hitting the market in 5-6 years, then they're more gullible than I think.:)
I hope that at some point you folks get a print version going, even if it's just some kind of "newsletter" format. While it's [obviously] nice to get good content for free, I'm one of those near-Luddites who appreciates the look and feel of the real printed page (I also rejoice in the destruction of trees!). For some reason, I have trouble keeping my concentration when I'm reading long-form writing on the Interweb.
Oh, and before anyone says I could just print the thing out, my nose is just too far in the air to sit and read homemade output from my printer for pleasure.;)
Slashdot Mirror
DVDs were around a couple years before Blockbuster started carrying them at all. If you were buying a $35 DVD player then you were a late adopter. When I bought my first DVD player - and even I wasn't a true early adopter - it was the cheapest I could find: A Zenith for over $200.
Wow, it's really cool that you have an opinion, but what does that have to do with reality? Plasma TVs do have a drop in quality over years - YEARS. Rear-projection TVs do have a relatively limited viewing angle but it has improved immensely and most people don't watch their television at extreme angles anyway. Modern CRTs do not burn in except under the most extreme circumstances. You'd have to leave a static picture on a modern CRT for weeks, or even months, before it could even possibly burn in (this goes for current rear-projection CRT sets, too). Oh yes, and many people like the picture on a CRT better than on a fixed-pixel display (that issue has more to do with the internals of particular sets). And, finally, LCDs do not experience burn-in.
First off, all HD-DVD movies so far are already 1080p (and Blu-Ray movies will be the same) - neither of the two HD-DVD players so far output that resolution but 1080p-capable models will appear down the line (assuming HD-DVD sticks around). And where is the "obselescence" of which you speak? Just like DVDs, HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs aren't just going to suddenly stop working because the industry finds a new format down the line. Even if they did, whatever becomes the next big resolution will be made compatible with preexisting sets, just like the current two competitors (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) are compatible with sets from NTSC composite to 1080p HDMI (for that matter, so is DVD).
You need to find some new justifications for your crankiness. The ones on which you're currently relying are just bogus.
I guess it's a good thing the game sells new for $40 ($39.99) then.
Oh yeah, and DOA Xtreme Beach Volleyball wasn't a tech demo - it was fan service.
Actually, I think you might be a little off on the motivation. After all, Rockstar has never been a company that cares about working out the kinks in their engines/games (GTA:VC was filled to the brim with annoying bugs but still sold insane numbers). No, I think it's more likely that Take Two, because of their financial troubles, asked Rockstar to give them a game for a particular release period (helping to fill the gap until GTA4) and they came up with Table Tennis. Let's face it: Rockstar doesn't need proof of anything to sell millions of GTA4 discs. :)
Well, Blu-Ray does have something going for it: It has a size advantage of 10 GB (25GB versus 15GB) per layer over HD-DVD. The thing is, this advantage is deprecated somewhat in both the movie and gaming environments by the fact that 15GB/30GB (single-player/dual-layer) is typically more than enough space for this kind of pre-recorded material, as HD-DVD is proving by putting 1080p movies on their discs. Admittedly, this can be argued a bit by folks who would point out that full seasons of HD TV shows, for example, could fit on fewer Blu-Ray discs - but most people don't find the multiple-disc DVD releases too constricting in that regard.
Where Blu-Ray shines a little brighter in the capacity area is, of course, for PC storage use as a recordable medium. As it stands, even a dual-layer HD-DVD couldn't back up a full 40GB hard drive (which is pretty minimal these days), while a dual-layer Blu-Ray recordable could back up that same drive with 10GB to spare (or fewer depending on how much disc overhead there is, like on DVDs where dual-layer recordables are around 8.5GB instead of the pressed 9.4GB).
1080p moves can easily fit on HD-DVDs (even with extras included, though nearly all HD-DVD extras so far are the old 480i/p ones found on DVDs), and that's what most of the studios are doing. I suspect that the limitation to 1080i in the current Toshiba and RCA players is simply a matter of those companies deciding that a) not many people have 1080p displays (even most people with PCs max out at 1600x1200) and b) they could keep costs down by using slightly less capable internals. If the latter is true, then it's an excellent move since, until the PS3 comes out, there don't seem to be any Blu-Ray players on the immediate horizon which can compete with HD-DVD in terms of price.
Shorter answer (since I rambled): Yes, the 1080i limitation is a situation specific to the two currently available HD-DVD players and not a problem with the technology overall.
Each HD-DVD and Blu-Ray player comes with magical fairie dust pre-installed (HD-DVD players use a lower grade of dust, explaining the $500 price differential). When the magical fairie dust mingles with the laser beam during playback, it creates a psychic connection to the mind of the director of the movie, which allows the players to then output what s/he actually saw during filming.
Unfortunately, there are still some problems with boom mikes, crew members and buffet tables being visible in some scenes because the director wasn't paying close enough attention to the action. But, it's okay since all of it is in 1080p.
It's kind of funny that the names of the companies involved haven't been mentioned, so I'll go ahead and do that: Al's current label is "Volcano" which is owned by "Zomba" which is owned by "BMG" which, of course, is part of the "Sony/BMG" ubercorporation...OMGWTFBBQ, I just realized! This is yet another anti-Sony story!
Actually, I thought the analysis seemed to blame everybody: iTunes for charging 30+ cents per dollar for their web services (that surely does seem high, which makes me wonder if the mentioned 80/19 split isn't more accurate), the record company for not splitting their cut more fairly with the artist, and the implied blame of Al for signing what seems on the surface to be a pretty lousy deal.
He should be complaining...to his lawyer/agent/manager who, presumably, looked over the deal and let that slide by. I would think that one or more of those people would be dealing with the recording executives long before it ever lands under Al's schnoz, and would do the math so that they could tell Al whether it was a good deal or not. Getting 4-5 cents on the retail dollar for his music sounds like a pretty crap deal, whatever the medium of distribution.
He was trolling and he said it twice! Good God, man! If a tree falls in the forest and you're there to hear it, do you stand under it?
I thought the South Korean population was higher than that...
The Xbox 360 has a similar advantage, at least for people who never owned an Xbox. There are many good games already on the backwards compatibility list. While it's obvious that there were far more PS1 titles, you could still get several months of good gaming (assuming one playing a relatively reasonable number of hours per day) out of the current list.
Of course, the truth is that had I never owned an Xbox I wouldn't even consider buying a 360 right now (I still haven't) and would instead just buy the Xbox. While it doesn't have the lineup of the PS2 (what could?), again, there are more than enough good Xbox games to keep a gamer busy for a long time.
You should really re-gift the thing to somebody else then. Anyone who bitches about their free game console online (unless the thing is broken) should be living the old tool drawer.
I hear that. If only they'd release games like Oblivion, Condemned: Criminal Origins, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter or Hitman: Blood Money. Maybe they just need to come out with something like Kameo, Gun, Final Fanasy XI or a Tomb Raider game.
For anyone without a nice PC gaming rig, the Xbox 360 probably has something to make a gamer turn it on. For the people WITH a nice PC gaming rig, there will probably be many more good reasons to do so coming during the remainder of the year.
Compared to the PS2 at the same point in its life, the 360's game lineup is kick-ass...
Wow, that does make a lot of sense, especially since there were many games whose sequels actually took up less disc space than the previous games.
I'd buy into this concept if there were a ton of PC games (with their attendant high-resolution textures and such) that installed to more than 8.5GB (the apparent limit, considering overhead, of a dual-layer DVD game on Xbox 360) on a PC's hard drive, but that's just not the case. I might even buy into it if, even with FMV, more than a handful of Xbox games even went to the second layer of DVD, but very few did.
If you actually believe that there are a bunch of developers out there working on games that need disc space for over 20GB of real, in-game assets, then do please enlighten us with some details. While I'm sure such assets exist during the early stages of development where artists are working in TIFF or an equivalent, that in no way represents the size of what will eventually be shipped, even if the space is available to do so (such as on Blu-Ray). A game using those kinds of assets would need a huge frame buffer to render a scene and there are only 256MB available for that purpose on a PS3 - even if one includes main memory, everything rendered on the screen at any given moment on a PS3 can only use 512MB of memory.
I'm not such a hater that I actually think Blu-Ray is a bad thing, in and of itself. The assertion, though, that it's necessary now (or in the next few years) for console gaming stretches the limits of credibility. Maybe, by the time the PS3 is $300 or less, there will be some games that really use the space of Blu-Ray for something more exciting than a cutscene, but I won't be holding my breath.
PS- Here's at least one interview where a developer (Mark Rein of Epic, the Unreal people) claims that next generation games are going to be 20+GB in size. He also claims that they're going to be using the majority of space on a BR disc, though he never gets into specifics as to what they're actually going to use that space for. Personally, I just don't buy it - not for the vast majority of next generation console games, anyway.
Late reply, but you may indeed be right. It's hard for me to think about DVD-R and DVD+R because at the time when non-combo players were the norm I had zero interest in recording DVDs.
I hope, like everyone else, that the MPAA comes to its collective senses and gives up on this particular protection. But, the only way it will happen is if they activate it and people stop buying the discs. They're not going to give it up on spec.
You're right, but only to a point. In this case, a parent could find a game with stealing, murder and drugs "appropriate" for their child but draw the line at sex - in fact, unfortunately, this is exactly the way many parents feel. The issue, therefore, is the rating and its attendant descriptors. For example, the ESRB could find the sexual content to fall within the parameters of an "M" rating but they'd still put a descriptor on the box indicating the presence of that content. That they didn't have the opportunity to do so because the content wasn't disclosed is the problem, and that's why the FTC got involved.
I think the reason that the FTC didn't do anything serious this time is likely because they were told that leaving unused content in games has been going on for a long time. For example, developers will leave unused models and textures on a disc just in case an obscure line of code exists that makes reference to a file that is no longer truly part of the game (i.e., I've read that there were extra mechs in Mechassault 2 that had models on the game disc but never appear in the game). Rockstar will just have to be more careful next time and if they are then they won't have to deal with the FTC on this issue again.
They already do censor their material. Hot Coffee was functional but probably removed from the game proper because they already knew it would push the ESRB (and other ratings groups) into the 18+ category. It seems to me that the one positive thing to came out of that for Rockstar (besides a free publicity push for the game) is that they now know just about exactly where the line is between M and AO.
If Rockstar is intimidated now to the point that it cancels a game for the explicit reason of its content, are we going to see an extremely cut down and censored Grand Theft Auto 4?
Well, there hasn't been any evidence that this is the case. In fact, the evidence would seem to go the other way since the GTA games have made tons of money and continue to sell - even in "censorship-friendly" stores like Wal-Mart.
If Rockstar was "intimidated" by the ESRB re-rating of GTA:SA based on Hot Coffee, it's that they need to control their assets better, taking things off the disc that aren't still part of the game.
Considering that GTA:SA already filled an entire DVD on current-gen consoles...
No, it really didn't. Admittedly, the only Xbox size I could find was a PAL version, but it was a whopping 2.85 GB. The NTSC version of GTA III was a whopping 733MB (even the Dreamcast GD-ROM could have accommodated that on one disc) and GTA:VC was 1.20GB. Relatively few games even made it past the first layer of DVD. It's no wonder that Microsoft didn't feel a next-gen disc drive was necessary for the 360.
especially now that the image constraint token is dead
Okay, people have to stop saying this. While it's true that there is currently a moratorium on the use of this "feature" (for both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray), it's only temporary. Supposedly, most of the studios have opted to hold off on its use for a while (Warner is apparently considering using ICT for particular movies) but all of them would like to. The "security" consultants have gotten the executives to believe that the "analog hole" is the primary risk in terms of piracy, despite the fact that most movie piracy is fully in the digital domain, ripped straight off DVDs, and the same will happen with the new formats once the protection is busted. As long as the studios believe in the evil of analog, they're going to want very badly to use the ICT.
At best, ICT is in a state of hibernation, and when it wakes up it's going to tear the arms off of anybody who has an HDTV with no digital input who bought an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player.
It is possible for MS to start shipping 360s with HD-DVD (or Blu-Ray if they wanted to) built in if that's what the market decides is necessary, you know. Of course, they wouldn't be able to put games on the new format unless they wanted to say "screw you" to the previous 360 owners, but I doubt people would be saying "Xbox 360 sucks because its games are on DVD!"
:)
MS won't ship 360 games on HD-DVD for precisely the reason you give. And you're right that people won't dismiss 360 games because they're on DVD, but that's not really the point Sony's trying to drive home here. They're trying to push the idea that the PS3 is more "future-proof" than the 360 because of Blu-Ray. They're kind of right and kind of wrong.
They're right in the sense that, yes, games continue to expand in size, so if the PS3 sticks around for more than 5 years then Blu-Ray's capacity advantage may shine.
Where the theory goes wrong, however, is that it focuses entirely on the storage medium and ignores the rest of the system. If MS releases a followup console 4-5 years from now while Sony continues pushing the PS3, the new Xbox 1,440 (going with "720" is just boring) will, presumably, have a much more capable graphics solution and much greater processing capability (eight cores all running at 6GHz, or more). It would also contain a high-capacity disc drive which, by that time, will cost as much as a fast DVD-ROM drive does today. As a bonus, if the PS3 turns out to be successful at its high price point, MS will be able to charge more for their next console without setting a new pricing precedent.
All that said, if folks actually believe that Sony won't have a PS4 hitting the market in 5-6 years, then they're more gullible than I think.
I hope that at some point you folks get a print version going, even if it's just some kind of "newsletter" format. While it's [obviously] nice to get good content for free, I'm one of those near-Luddites who appreciates the look and feel of the real printed page (I also rejoice in the destruction of trees!). For some reason, I have trouble keeping my concentration when I'm reading long-form writing on the Interweb.
;)
Oh, and before anyone says I could just print the thing out, my nose is just too far in the air to sit and read homemade output from my printer for pleasure.