Originally Posted by Gaco
In some cases it's because the technology was in it's infancy. In most cases though it was because the given titel was also published for HD DVD. The studios (with few exceptions) aren't willing to spend resources on a HD DVD encoding AND a Blu-ray encoding so the HD DVD became the lowest denominator. Luckily this is probably not an issue in the future since more studios are beginning to go Blu-ray exclusive.
This is a complete crock of ****. No one buys the "lowest common denominator" line of FUD. Plenty of BD EXCLUSIVE titles out there on BD25 with asstastic encodes. Plenty of BD EXCLUSIVE titles out there on BD50 with asstastic encodes. Let me guess, they were doing those "just in case" they went neutral, right? Also, why is it BD's BEST EXCLUSIVE TITLES on BD50's look no better than HD DVD's? You have eaten the FUD hook, line, and sinker.
Gaco, this is how I picture you:
Gaco, find me a BD50 from an exclusive studio that surpasses the best HD DVD's. You can't. Oh I know, it's because the technology "is in its infancy" right? I should "just wait" since awesome things are coming, right? BD has had two years to show one single advantage ON THE SCREEN where it counts. If you *could* make a BD outshine an HD DVD, it would have been done. Do you think Sony would NOT do a mega high bitrate encode to blow away HD DVD if they could? No one gives a **** about specs except fanboys. The end result is what appears on the screen. BD holds no advantage. All you want to do is spew talking points and mindless dribble the BDA has fed you. Nearly 500 BD's out there, haven't found a single one that shows BD can do more than HD DVD. My response to your debate is : SHOW ME.
Balls' in your court.