MS game exec John Schappert talks about Live, Netflix deal, and Blu-ra Options

[Xbox-Scene]

MS game exec John Schappert talks about Live, Netflix deal, and Blu-ray Posted by XanTium | August 1 11:24 EST | News Category: Xbox360

From venturebeat.com: [QUOTE] * VB: Will you have micro transactions with the avatars? * JS: That may be in the future. In the near term, we want to launch these with great customization and a great library of accessories this fall. I think there is a lot more we can do with them. You will see us continue to add experiences that make use of the avatar. Our goal is not to create a sterile environment where you move furniture around. It's about how can we make our gaming experiences better. That is why you see the first usage of avatars will be in games on the Xbox Live Primetime channel like 1 vs. 100, Scene It? (pictured above) and Uno Rush. What's nice about the avatars is they can be your gamer persona for your online profile picture or your in-game person. Your avatar can be your in-game person. * VB: There were other rumors of things. A motion-sensitive controller. Did you study that? * JS: You know our answer but it's good of you to ask. We would be remiss if we did not invest in new technologies. We are always doing that. We were proud at this show that we had great games for our core audience. We had a brand new Xbox interface. New casual games, new video partners, and the Netflix partnership. That's what our focus is on now. * VB: The Netflix deal stands out as more important. Like maybe it will be the end of Apple TV. Why would you want other boxes for movies? * JS: Through the power of software, we can change the functionality of the Xbox 360. That's the beauty of it. We saw Netflix had a cool new feature that could go with our box. Our job is to provide as many entertainment options as we can to our consumers. * VB: And you aren't that interested in a Blu-ray player on the Xbox 360? * JS: Sony announced they're going to have their own video store on the PlayStation Network. That validates our own view that the future is not about an optical-format battle. It's about having movies delivered to you digitally. They announced seven partners. We have 45 today. We think that digital distribution is the way to go. [/QUOTE] Full Story: venturebeat.com

[PaddyPat]

With respect to his statements about Blu-Ray and digitally delivered movies, he could not be more wrong. ISP's are restricting the amount of data you can receive and are charging more if you want unlimited broadband internet. Nobody wants to first pay for a movie, then pay their ISP for the ability to download it when they can easily go rent or buy it. The only reason they're pushing it is because they have the hardware and the technology so why not give it a go and break into the industry. If they had retail stores in every city they might get into renting movies, but they don't. Also, if you have high-speed internet then you probably have a movie store nearby, too. So, I don't see any advantage to this.
I just can't see "digitally delivered movies" making a dent in this industry.

[ekruob]

With respect to his statements about Blu-Ray and digitally delivered movies, he could not be more wrong...

I remember 8 years ago my quota was 3GB/month... now in 2008 it is 150GB/month... so by the time DVD dies out (about 2012) I'll have at least 500+GB/month to play with - more than enough for a new high-def. movie every night of the week.

This post has been edited by ekruob: Aug 1 2008, 06:16 PM

[Chancer]

We think that digital distribution is the way to go.

And that would not have been the party line if HD-DVD had succeeded.
Personally I think both will co-exist.
I don't want worse quality streamed movies that end up costing me more in charges for use of the bandwidth provided by my ISP. I want HD and I want to be able to re-watch a film whenever I like by simply getting from the collection I have and sticking it in the player.

I remember 8 years ago my quota was 3GB/month... now in 2008 it is 150GB/month... so by the time DVD dies out (about 2012) I'll have at least 500+GB/month to play with - more than enough for a new high-def. movie every night of the week.

That may be true where you reside but it is not the case in the UK. I am aware many places that have unlimited downloads but that does not apply across the board. Unlimited here used to mean unlimited. Suddenly it is subject to fair usage. Once the ISPs tried to drive down monthly costs to the customer they had to find a way of cutting their costs.Peoples Caps have gone down in most cases not up.
The "HD" download quality will not match the optical formats of HD-DVD or BR

This post has been edited by Chancer: Aug 1 2008, 06:43 PM

[HotKnife420]

I don't want worse quality streamed movies that end up costing me more in charges for use of the bandwidth provided by my ISP. I want HD and I want to be able to re-watch a film whenever I like by simply getting from the collection I have and sticking it in the player.

+1

The quality of these 'so-called' HD movies is the new 'bootleg'

I thought MS was pro-choice? I suppose they're only in favor of the consumer having choice when it's to describe their products that are currently in market.

[ekruob]

I thought MS was pro-choice? I suppose they're only in favor of the consumer having choice when it's to describe their products that are currently in market.

They are pro-choice - they don't stop you buying a Blu-ray Disc player.

In fact the new stand-alone models (e.g. S350) are far superior to the PS3 (and can be modded to play all regions - unlike the PS3).

Stand-alone players are better than an expensive Blu-ray add-on for the 360 - so it makes perfect economic sense (for both consumers and Microsoft) not to have the Blu-ray 360 add-on.

This post has been edited by ekruob: Aug 1 2008, 07:45 PM

[Devedander]

And that would not have been the party line if HD-DVD had succeeded.

I think that's some pretty bold speculation... entirely possible, likely even, but hardly something I think anyone can say with certaintly.

My feeling is that had HD DVD won, we MIGHT have seen an HD DVD 360, but more than likely MS would have gone digital distro anyway. Take the HD DVD market while it can, but parallel market the digital so that if (and I feel it's a question of when, not if) it takes over they will also be firmly rooted to take advantage of it.

That may be true where you reside but it is not the case in the UK. I am aware many places that have unlimited downloads but that does not apply across the board. Unlimited here used to mean unlimited. Suddenly it is subject to fair usage. Once the ISPs tried to drive down monthly costs to the customer they had to find a way of cutting their costs.Peoples Caps have gone down in most cases not up.

Fortunately I am in an area that I don't think caps have come into play significantly yet, and that is factoring largely into my feeling that digital distro is the way of the future... but if bandwidth curbing does become more predominent then it might just kick the teeth in on this wave of digital distrobution. In the long run I don't see how digital won't be the way to go (one day we will be able to stream BR quality movies onto our cell phones as a normal service I am sure) but if it does come down that way, it might be just the windfall BR needs to really get a foot hold.

I have to hope that the current bandwidth issues will be a passing issue and we will get back to either unlimited, or such high caps that our general useage is still feasible.

[ekruob]

The "HD" download quality will not match the optical formats of HD-DVD or BR

You are aware that many Blu-ray Disc (and HD DVD) titles have video bit-rates of around 12mbps?!

This post has been edited by ekruob: Aug 1 2008, 07:48 PM

[chorizo1]

And that would not have been the party line if HD-DVD had succeeded.

EXACTLY.

But you have to admit that $ony would be saying the same thing if bluray lost.

All these "suits" should just shut the fuck up, and give me some games to play, LOL.

This post has been edited by chorizo1: Aug 1 2008, 07:57 PM

[Devedander]

You are aware that many Blu-ray Disc (and HD DVD) titles have video bit-rates of around 12mbps?!

That always seemed strange to me as:

12mbps * 60 is 720 mbpminute

720 * 60 is 43200 mbphour

1.5 * 43200 = 64800 mbpmovie

68400 / 8 (MB mb conversion) 8100MB

So by that rational doesn't an entire movie at that bitrate just about fit on a regular DVD9?

[Chancer]

You are aware that many Blu-ray Disc (and HD DVD) titles have video bit-rates of around 12mbps?!

So at the lowest then, I would still be looking at 7.5Gb to 10Gb for anything like the quality I would want. 4 of those and I am at the max for a months downloads.

I think that's some pretty bold speculation... entirely possible, likely even, but hardly something I think anyone can say with certaintly.

My feeling is that had HD DVD won, we MIGHT have seen an HD DVD 360, but more than likely MS would have gone digital distro anyway.

I think both companies would still have run Digital downloads alongside. But the article seems like he is dismissing optical as a "never would be". This would not have been the statement had HD-DVD succeeded.
I agree they would have promoted it in parallel.

Stand-alone players are better than an expensive Blu-ray add-on for the 360 - so it makes perfect economic sense (for both consumers and Microsoft) not to have the Blu-ray 360 add-on.

Not if the consumer you are pitching at wants a machine to serve up Br and games. The fact the PS3 has both will sway that section.

In fact the new stand-alone models (e.g. S350) are far superior to the PS3 (and can be modded to play all regions - unlike the PS3).

Have you compared side by side? Superior in what way? Multi region may sway some but I bet it is not a huge deal for most people as far as Br is concerned at present. The BD live feature of the 350 is not yet operational. The differences in features are not the chasm you indicate with the wording "Far Superior".The PS3 is a fine and capable BR player with upgrades through firmware and the playback quality of the 350 will likely be almost identical. I won't know until I compare side by side.

This post has been edited by Chancer: Aug 1 2008, 10:23 PM

[halcyonx12]

So if Sony does it, it makes it valid? What an odd red herring. Renting & owning aren't the same thing, these are two different markets. Maybe Sony wants to make some extra money, but I don't think anyone thinks low bit rate movies are the future and nobody's going to buy a movie anymore.

[ekruob]

That always seemed strange to me as:

12mbps * 60 is 720 mbpminute

720 * 60 is 43200 mbphour

1.5 * 43200 = 64800 mbpmovie

68400 / 8 (MB mb conversion) 8100MB

So by that rational doesn't an entire movie at that bitrate just about fit on a regular DVD9?

Close - but you forget I mentioned it is the video bit rate, you have to add in the audio tracks, mux overhead, extras etc.

But yes - that is how I 'back-up' my Blu-ray Discs onto DVD9 ;-)

This post has been edited by ekruob: Aug 2 2008, 01:00 AM

[ekruob]

Have you compared side by side? Superior in what way? Multi region may sway some but I bet it is not a huge deal for most people as far as Br is concerned at present. The BD live feature of the 350 is not yet operational. The differences in features are not the chasm you indicate with the wording "Far Superior".The PS3 is a fine and capable BR player with upgrades through firmware and the playback quality of the 350 will likely be almost identical. I won't know until I compare side by side.

Firstly, BD-Live firmware will be out before you need that feature - very few discs so far have anything worthwhile online (players have only supported BD-Live for a couple of months now). Sony will release the firmware within 2 months. Another advantage the S350 has is its 'quick-start' mode - allowing it to boot three times faster than the PS3.

Other reasons not to buy a (current model) PS3 as a Blu-ray Disc player:

1. Power consumption.
Technical reviews have shown it to use an average of 183 Watts during Blu-ray Disc playback.
The S350 uses about 25 Watts.
2. New models.
New PS3 models are due out before Xmas and will use about half the power of the current model (new 45nm chips).
3. Price.
There have been no real PS3 price drops for a while now. The recommended retail price will drop significantly by Xmas.
4. Laser.
The earlier PS2 lasers tended to last less than 2 years. Laser quality tends to improve in later console models.
5. Drive mechanism.
The slot-in drives are much harder to keep clean than the tray loading drives. This could also affect lifespan.
6. Lack of IR remote.
So you can't use a universal remote.
7. Dimensions.
Another, cosmetic, problem with the current PS3 model is that it resembles an anvil in both appearance and weight.

This post has been edited by ekruob: Aug 2 2008, 01:41 AM

[Giga_Death]

"
Sony announced they're going to have their own video store on the PlayStation Network. That validates our own view that the future is not about an optical-format battle.
"

So if Sony does it, it makes it valid? What an odd red herring.

heh. Personally, online vids will, at best, have moderate success in America. Definitley not in the UK anytime within the PS3 or 360 life cycle.