DVDizzy Forum

Disney's Divinity wrote:

MutantEnemy wrote:It seems to me that the only time Blu-ray vs. DVD wars start are when DVD stans bitch about blu-ray.

The people with Blu-Rays aren't the ones being denied bonus features. So I agree there's a reason for DVD owners to get annoyed.

There are also a lot more titles available on DVD than there probably (unfortunately) will ever be on Blu-ray. It's a trade-off. You might miss some bonus material, but we'll never get the Treasures in HD, for example.
Acting as if the Blu-ray owners get the motherload of bonus features with Tangled is ridiculous, since both are getting screwed because there's nothing worthwhile on either version.

gardener14 wrote:I disagree with your train of thought, and I don't think Luke's comments were out of touch at all. I buy BluRay Combo packs because of the availability to see the bonus features, but I prefer to watch the dvd of the movie because of the ease of loading, navigating, and starting and stopping the movie with the resume feature. I want the bonus features, but I find the cumbersome nature of watching BluRay to be a nuisance, especially the inane inability to start and stop a movie in the same place. Dvd is so much easier to use, loads faster, menues are simpler, loading time is minimal, and I love the resume feature.

It's only cumbersome if you never update your firmware. True, there's still loading screens and many BD people dont like that Java is used for useless stuff as that's the only reason loading screens are there but they take 4 seconds tops. And to say that blu-ray is difficult to navigate is only as valid as the studios who opt to only have one or two features appear at a time in the menu, which is the most useless thing to use Java for and requires the loading screen. There are BDs without it and without them.

Besides, if your watching a movie, you clearly have some time on your hands. people are in too much of a rush these days.

The pros for me were there instantaneously-the picture, at least for animation, is always noticeably sharper and has a lot more color. My equipment upgrade may be to blame, but the sound is definitely more natural and pleasing(though half the time I can barely understand live action dialogue and need subtitles...ugh). The letdown is the bonuses. so few use BD technology because these multibillion $$$ companies cant spend $10 on some decent material. Otherwise, Picture-in-picture commentaries, BD-Live(without ads), and the real-time controls in the games are excellent features. Not to mention the interactive docs that use advanced seemless branching.

KubrickFan wrote:Acting as if the Blu-ray owners get the motherload of bonus features with Tangled is ridiculous, since both are getting screwed because there's nothing worthwhile on either version.

I'm sure you know I was talking in general with most releases, not just this one. In that sense, I don't think my post was "ridiculous."

SWillie! wrote:It's just the natural progression of things - as new, superior technology is developed, older technology is pushed aside and eventually abandoned completely. This argument would be comparable to people who have stuck with CDs in the age of digital music. I haven't heard many complain (at least seriously, like the DVD people do) about the fact they spent all this money on CDs, and now the industry wants them to buy music online!! AND they've cut back on packaging on CDs! AND preordering on iTunes is the only way to get a ton of bonus features with the music?!! (EDIT: Also, I know what argument is coming here, so don't tell me "because you can still transfer your old CDs into digital music." Because a blu-ray player still allows you to play your old DVDs, as well.)

I'm not sure being able to play DVDs in a Blu-Ray player is the same as CDs being able to be transferred to digital, because the main reason to have Blu-Ray is the higher quality, etc. Just because you put the DVD in the Blu-Ray player doesn't make the quality any better--you have to completely re-buy the film in Blu-Ray to have it in the new standard.

Btw, I feel the need to point out, like pinkrenata, that I've already turned to Blu-Ray. But I can still see the perspective of DVD owners, and, no, I don't think it's very fair to them. I also think it's unfair to DVD owners to say they're just "complaining," because Blu-Ray owners would be just as right to complain if all the features were left on a DVD they couldn't watch with a Blu-Ray player. Yet that would never happen because the Blu-Ray owners could just stick the DVD in to watch the features, whereas the DVD owners can't do the same with a Blu-Ray. The fact that DVD owners get screwed over doesn't disappear just because someone says, "That's life." It just makes it easier to ignore and file away the (justified) complaints. If you can't afford to waste income on something like a Blu-Ray player, that's not a "choice." Not everyone has the luxury to switch formats the moment the industry wants to force consumers to re-buy everything. It's not "simple as that" for them.

Also, if the "old technology" were really out at this point, they wouldn't be selling DVDs anymore, or creating combo packs to convince the average consumer to eventually upgrade (when they finally find the money to do so).

Im sure someone else has probably complained about this but....

WHERE IS THE AUDIO COMMENTARY????

dvdjunkie wrote:Again, do you have a special player that plays the cover too?? As long as the product inside is good, the cover can be blank as far as I am concerned. What do the non-artists on this forum think they are crying about? I have never worried about the cover of a DVD or Blu-ray as long as the product it advertises is in the case and plays in my player.

With over 6,000 titles, I would be up a creek if I didn't buy a DVD or Blu-ray because I didn't think the cover art was "pretty", or depicted the product inside correctly.

Look, I never said that I wouldn't buy a DVD or a Blu-ray just because of a bad or an ugly cover. If that were the case, I wouldn't be buying any Disney DVDs/Blu-rays.

But since I have an option to choose from the two combo packs, the cover is a consideration. Not the only one, mind you, but it is a factor in my final decision, nonetheless.

dvdjunkie wrote:If you think you could do a better job than the current people are doing, get an application and send it in to the company with samples of your art and see if you can get a job.

That's a ridiculously naive statement. Like that is so simple and easy to happen.

For those interested in purchasing the Blu-ray/DVD combo pack with or without the 3-D Blu-ray, Target is selling it for $19.99 with The Golden Book of Tangled as the bonus.

Best Buy has a Plushie when you buy any Blu-ray version of "Tangled". The Blu-ray/DVD Combo pack is also $19.99 and the Best Buy ad even says they will only honor the $5 coupon for the 3-d Blu-Ray Combo Pack.

Wal-Mart has the Blu-ray/DVD combo pack with a Hairbrush and Mirror for $19.96, plus they have several other buy separately items with the Disney Tangled logo.

Or you can all wait and get it used in just a couple of days for $13.99 at CD Tradepost dot com.

www.cdtradepost.com

Hmm.... since the 2-disc combo pack is available for $19.99 and the 4-disc combo pack will be $24.99, but after the $5 coupon being most likely making it $19.99....

Will it really matter either way, being that, technically, the 4-disc combo pack will be the same price as the 2-disc one with the coupon?

Well, the four-disc set would still be MARGINALLY more expensive because I'm pretty sure tax is applied to the $24.99 price, but I mean... it's like pennies.

And why would you buy a 3-D Blu-ray if you don't already have or intend to have (against all eye doctors orders) a 3-D HD system?

Remember the covers don't play............at least on any of the players I have seen, they don't play. So don't buy the disc for the cover please.

dvdjunkie wrote:And why would you buy a 3-D Blu-ray if you don't already have or intend to have (against all eye doctors orders) a 3-D HD system?

Remember the covers don't play............at least on any of the players I have seen, they don't play. So don't buy the disc for the cover please.

I'm not going to buy the 3D combo pack after all, mainly because it's more expensive (i'm ordering my copy from amazon.com so no discount or coupon for me).

Are you happy now?

Speaking of covers, I preferred the DVD cover for Snow White but bought the combo pack instead.

But with that being said, Disney could be doing a much better job on them.

...but why do you care if someone buys a disc for the cover? Especially seeing as how it's probably going to be almost identical in price at Target.

Technically, from what I calculated, with the coupon, you'd only have to pay about thirty-four more cents for the BD 3D/BD/DVD/DC combo pack,

dvdjunkie wrote:And why would you buy a 3-D Blu-ray if you don't already have or intend to have (against all eye doctors orders) a 3-D HD system?

Remember the covers don't play............at least on any of the players I have seen, they don't play. So don't buy the disc for the cover please.

It's merely cautions and warnings of possible effects. No one ordered anything.

That said, I probably will be getting the 3D combo pack just to future-proof.

MutantEnemy wrote:I mean how hard is it to use a remote control. I worry about the future (more) if using a remote control is considered "hard". Blu-ray is extremely easy to use. Squabbling over a resume feature is such a try-hard way to diss Blu-ray. I mean really...

Yes, I mean really...I think my concerns about the limitations of navigating a Blu-ray disc is legitimate and deserved. I rarely have time to watch a movie in its entirty. Not having the resume feature is a major downfall of Blu-ray. The fact that I must wait what sometimes feels like forever and a day to restart a movie each time I stop it (1-3 times per movie perhaps) is an aspect of the technology that bothers me. There is so much downtime in starting play on a Blue-ray disc compared to a standard dvd combined with the fact that it must occur every time you restart the movie. It's just a nuisance that I wish they'd change about the technology. Someone else here said the slowness isn't an issue if you have the latest firmware, but I do. Like I said, I usually watch the dvd for the movie and the Blu-ray for the bonus features.

I agree, gardener14. Whenever I watch Blu-rays at my parents' house, it always takes forever to load. I think we waited like 5 minutes for Princess and the Frog to start lol, and their Blu-ray player is very very new.

I don't know how well they work, but some of the newer players I've seen are labeled as "fast loading." I really haven't had an issue with mine though, I often put a disc in while running off to the restroom or the kitchen, and by the time I get back things are ready to go.

monorail91 wrote:I agree, gardener14. Whenever I watch Blu-rays at my parents' house, it always takes forever to load. I think we waited like 5 minutes for Princess and the Frog to start lol, and their Blu-ray player is very very new.

You still need to update your firmware. Who knows how long that blu-ray player was on the shelf/in the warehouse and how many updates have been sent out since then.

As always, nice review, Luke!

SWillie! wrote:

Disney's Divinity wrote:The people with Blu-Rays aren't the ones being denied bonus features. So I agree there's a reason for DVD owners to get annoyed.

It's just the natural progression of things - as new, superior technology is developed, older technology is pushed aside and eventually abandoned completely. This argument would be comparable to people who have stuck with CDs in the age of digital music. I haven't heard many complain (at least seriously, like the DVD people do) about the fact they spent all this money on CDs, and now the industry wants them to buy music online!! AND they've cut back on packaging on CDs! AND preordering on iTunes is the only way to get a ton of bonus features with the music?!! (EDIT: Also, I know what argument is coming here, so don't tell me "because you can still transfer your old CDs into digital music." Because a blu-ray player still allows you to play your old DVDs, as well.)

I don't think that's a perfect analogy, as "digital download" music is hardly "superior technology" to CDs. CDs have better sound quality, packaging, artwork, etc. I don't have an "I-Pod" and have no desire to ever get one. CD is fine for me.

A better analogy would be comparing CD to Super Audio CD, which clearly does have superior technology and sound quality to CD... and has failed to take over the physical market from CD.

It's the same battle (yes, I understand the shift from CDs to digital is a bigger one than from DVDs to Blu-ray), but for some reason DVD people just won't accept that blu-ray is on it's way to being the new standard.

Yeah, like SACD became the new standard for physical audio releases! Just because something has the "latest and greatest" technology and an improvement in quality, it does not mean the public will embrace it as such. If they did, BetaMax would have defeated VHS and then LaserDisc would have destroyed them both!

I admit BD is slowly gaining ground, but the last I checked, a few weeks ago, DVD STILL has 80 percent of the physical sales, and that's WITH 100% of ALL Combo Pack sales counted as "Blu Ray sales". Despite the fact that many of these are deceptively packaged in DVD packaging, stocked in the DVD section, and bought by many people for the DVD inside the package and not the BD. Some of these people buying it for the DVD are going "combo" because they feel its a better value if they ever get a BD player, others don't even realize or care the package has a BD inside. Yet ALL these sales are counted as BD sales. A fair way would be to count combos as 50/50, or count them as BD sales if they are in BD packaging, and DVD sales if they are in DVD packaging.

Also, at last count, less than 5 percent of the titles in my DVD collection (representing my favorite movies that I cared about enough to own) have been released on BD. At this time in DVD's history, more than half of my favorite titles were already available. Kind of hard to get excited about a new format that so much is missing from, and makes up only 20 percent of sales (with the inflated numbers discussed above).

New technology in, old technology out. Simple as that.

It wasn't that "simple" for Laserdisc vs VHS even before DVD came around, even though it was CLEARLY superior to VHS.

Well, I think the load time on Blu-rays varies at my place. Whenever I play a Blu-ray on my PS3, it usually only takes about two to seven seconds to load, but that's probably because it has wi-fi. On my first Blu-ray player, it takes ten to twenty seconds.