It's a little strange, really. Profile 2.0, which is currently the most
up-to-date Profile in the world of Blu-ray, launched
months ago. Even still, deck manufacturers insist on pumping out middle-of-the-road players stuck at Profile 1.1. We know, a lot of that has to do with keeping costs to a minimum, but is there really more to it? Are consumers at large really not into interactive content? Is web connectivity not as amazing as backers would have you believe? Do you, in particular, care if your Blu-ray player supports Profile 2.0 / BD-Live? Let us know just what you think in comments below, and tell us if your opinion would change should a $99 Profile 2.0 player hit the market.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
reallynotnick @ Sep 20th 2008 12:30PM
Even if there was a $100 2.0 player and there was an exactly identical player besides being 1.1 for $80, I would get the 1.1 player. I just don't give a crap about extra features, if they are that good put them on the disc, but I rarely watch those. SuperBad had some awesome extra features though that I found worth watching, but usually they suck.
DJ @ Sep 22nd 2008 9:54AM
Why would you not want 2.0?
If a car manufacturer offered you a sunroof for $100 would you not take it?
Wait till an epic title like LOTR Trilogy comes out. That will be an extra $20 well spent.
why are people on a gadget blog if they aren't interested in the latest and greatest?
Might as well wait for USA today reviews.
dagamer34 @ Sep 20th 2008 12:32PM
I might just bend over and get a cheap PS3 but I want to wait and see what Black Friday will bring.
mitchelljd @ Sep 20th 2008 12:47PM
I guess 2.0 is ok, but rarely are the new exploitation of those features worth it.
Do i really want to watch a movie and do trivia against others who are doing same at that moment?
probably not!! but... perhaps some Rocky Horror Picture Show features could be created. maybe there is something i'm missing.
I mainly like the Movie and some extra's like, extended version of film, trailers, behind the scenes footage, director commentary track. music videos. stuff like that.
I won't swear allegiance, but i am open to using it if they create something good. but not some stupid lil java video game
EEL @ Sep 20th 2008 1:53PM
Regardless if you care or not about the special features of Profile 2.0 (or even Profile 1.1 for that matter), it should have been a consumer option from DAY ONE.
A $99 Profile 2.0 player and new release BD titles at a $20 price point on Black Friday would be a welcome boost to anyone that has been on the fence on transitioning to Blu.
Jorge @ Sep 20th 2008 2:33PM
I haven't even used any of the profile 1.1 features on my BD's. I am going to buy a standalone in the future since I only have a PS3 as my BD player and it will probably be a 2.0. I like to have the ability to view/interact with profile 2.0 content, but I might not ever use it. Having an ethernet port will definately come in handy when firmware updates are released.
Justin @ Sep 20th 2008 3:07PM
These 1.1 players are not about keeping the costs down saving $2 worth of flash memory and a ten cent Ethernet port. They are about making sure you come back to buy a 2.0 player later. Already Paramount/Dreamworks is putting out good stuff with Iron Man.
georgi55 @ Sep 22nd 2008 8:11AM
Smart comment and I think you are right....+1
Garst @ Sep 20th 2008 3:28PM
I'm not even sold on blu-ray yet. There really needs to be that option, even if I'm the only one who would pick it. That's still a very valid reason not to be sold on other blu-ray features. Maybe if there was a real benefit from going with blu-ray I would start buying into it, but having a higher resolution and better audio aren't "real" benefits. Sure, having a thinner wallet to sit on can keep you from having back problems, but I don't keep my wallet in my back pocket anyways. Plus, it can't much thinner either, so spending more on movies won't help me.
John @ Sep 20th 2008 3:47PM
I'm personally biased being stuck with my 1.1 player, but I sincerely doubt I'm missing much. Most 2.0 features I've seen are trivia games, "interactivity" with other disc holders, and other more social networking-type features that I think transition poorly to movie watching. Plus, where's the replay value? How many times are you going to complete the same damn trivia game or quiz? I have friends over to watch movies all the time, and I suppose watching with "friends" over the internet might substitute if it was my only recourse, but the intent is almost solely to watch the MOVIE. Not the extras, not the behind the scenes stuff. I appreciate those extras and I find it stingy of studios not to include them, but most of the worthwhile extras are all provided with 1.1. Profile 2.0 benefits are really hard to sell in my opinion, unless they start distributing additional content only through profile 2.0 means. To wrap it up, 2.0 is not worth it in my book.
As a side note, I've been of the opinion that there haven't been many 2.0 players out there primarily because there are not that many 2.0 discs available. Of course manufacturers will save cost by not including the necessary specs to support 2.0, plus the consumer is likely to never use 2.0 features if they're unaware of them. Frankly, I also think BDA might charge more for profile 2.0 licenses to further promote the PS3 preference in the Blu-ray marketing scheme. That's why I think the "cheaper" Blu-ray players are all 1.1 or less, cuz Sony won't allow a 2.0 player to undercut the $400 PS3. Food for thought here, just my speculation.
wreckedchevy @ Sep 20th 2008 5:06PM
can't speak for profile 2.0 myself buy i sure enjoyed some of the online content on my hd-dvd's (flame on!)
MadMike @ Sep 20th 2008 5:49PM
I have a PS3. But I could care less about 2.0 and interactive content.
mikeyrogers @ Sep 20th 2008 7:48PM
Couldn't care less.
Jason @ Sep 20th 2008 8:13PM
I dont think the extra features are going to help sell any additional players. To be honest, I don't think it is the high price of the players that are hindering sales either. I think the average Joe (or Jane, to be PC) would shell out the $300 - 400 for a player if they weren't going to be gouged for the movies to play on them. $25 -30 average for a movie is outrageous, I own 2 Blu-ray movie. I own 40+ HD DVD's but bought nearly all of them after the format died and the movies were sold dirt cheap. If the BDA folks wanted to move more players, lower the price of the movies to around $15. I own 4 HD TV's but only one Blu-Ray player. I wont consider buying any more until the disks are a bit more reasonably priced. With DVD's selling regularly below $10, the average person is not going to pay nearly triple for the same movie, even if it is in higher quality.
Randall Lind @ Sep 20th 2008 8:49PM
Why do I want my Blu-Ray player to call home? It is dumb to me I rather see them make players people can afford.
If I have to pay for internet service to have Blu-Ray then they need to lower prices of disc.
WebDev511 @ Sep 20th 2008 9:07PM
Profile 2.0 is a must have if you happen to enjoy Fox titles. There's no telling when you're going to need a firmware update so you can watch a Fox release, so all the better to have it connected to the net.
I have yet to see any of the studios that were only blu release anything close to compelling for BD-Live. They know they CAN do just about anything, but haven't got a clue on what they SHOULD do.
Of course all this is moot because no one cares about special features. They just want the same functionality as DVD, but with a better picture.
zargon @ Sep 21st 2008 8:02PM
I agree that a ethernet port for updates is a must with Blu-ray (or HD-DVD even), but there is at least one non profile 2.0 player that supports this, the Samsung 1400... which should be able to be had for $170 to $200 for a refurbed unit.
JoN @ Sep 20th 2008 9:56PM
don't care at all about the 2.0 profile... but would prefer player with network jack for firmware updates.
chefgon_ign @ Sep 20th 2008 10:38PM
It made a lot more sense with HD DVD, where those features were present in every single player so those publishers who wanted that functionality could justify doing something with it. In the case of Blu-ray, where they expect the customer to pay extra for a compatible player, it's completely worthless. The fact that not all players support it will prevent publishers from doing anything cool with it, and the lack of cool content will prevent customers from paying extra for it.
h0mi @ Sep 21st 2008 1:12AM
The problem is, the studios need to come up with compelling 2.0 content. The only features I've seen to date are:
- Buy ringtones and other stuff for your phone (300 HD DVD, starship troopers blu-ray)
- Watch movies with friends online (harry potter, HD DVD and some blu-rays that arent out yet)
- Rearrange scenes in the movie and upload to a web site to share (Pan's Labyrinth HD DVD, Rambo Blu-ray, other titles)
None of these features are compelling or interesting. The rearrange scenes function is incredibly stupid. And as long as this is what we have to look forward to in features, the profile business is not going to matter.
Every 1.1 profile player should have ethernet for firmware upgrades tho and for use for other features.
Jeff N. @ Sep 21st 2008 1:38AM
I want a great picture and great sound from a Blu-ray player. The rest is really just extra stuff that I care little for. I think most people are looking for great picture & sound quality as the main reason to buy a Blu-ray player.
Randall Lind @ Sep 21st 2008 6:55AM
I wasn't thinking of firmware updates. That's makes more sense to me now. They also need to make firmware like Asus and MSI does have a auto download and update mode with idiot proof install.
marbanno @ Sep 21st 2008 8:36AM
I still think HD DVD was better. But I guess that's the way the cookie crumbles (please add obnoxious sarcastic laugh). BD Profile 2 kinda brings it up to where HD DVD was originally less people forget. With Black Friday quickly approaching we'll see how lower BD players effect sales of PS3. Sony might have won the HD battle but did they sacrifice their position as gaming guru? Discuss amongst yourselves...
Mr_Fizzlepop @ Sep 21st 2008 5:25PM
If you read the comments here maybe you noticed that those features that Blu-ray added for the 2.0 spec to fully compete with HD DVD aren't in fact very high on anyone's list of "essential" things that a player needs.
I agree that the ethernet port is great for getting firmware updates in a timely and convenient manner, but the online content is not considered by most a great innovation that they must have in their player.
As for the PS3, the Blu-ray player being installed has helped PS3 game sales(albeit only a minuscule amount) much as it helped Blu-ray sales and will likely be a factor for the PS3 winning this round in the end since there will be people that opt for the PS3 simply for the reason that it's the game console that also has a robust Blu-ray player.
The PS3 ended up being one of the smartest moves Sony has made in a long time, helping to bolster both their Blu-ray and Gaming markets by crossing target demographic lines, in one fell swoop.
Still behind in the Online community area, they are catching up, and hard as MS tries, unless they add a Blu-ray player to the 360, that is one advantage Sony will always have.
Everything else MS does with the 360, Sony can do as well, and when you consider the price, for a HD, Wifi enabled box, Sony is actually as low in price and it has a Blu-ray player to boot.
For 399.00 you can get a 120 gig XBOX360, or an 80 gig PS3 with Blu-ray. You can not however upgrade your HD on the 360 without voiding the warranty, which you can do on the PS3.
Before the PS3 was finalized I read many a post by 360 fans saying there was no way the PS3 would compete, but I argued that releasing your product second was the more powerful position as you saw what you were competing against and could adapt your product accordingly before final release.
Unlike MS, Sony also has something else making it easier to compete, they didn't short their old customers and revenue stream near as much. PS2s are still available and profitable, helping the gaming division not bleed so much as the PS3 gains market share. MS, with it's narrow sited "windows upgrade" mindset, cutoff XBOX sales and games, effectively severing what could have been a good continuing revenue stream these past 3 years. Based on this "Forced upgrade" mindset we can expect the 360 to become a paperweight much sooner than the PS3, that alone would be enough reason for me to choose the PS3.
blakninja @ Sep 21st 2008 10:19AM
Well..
Look at LOTR: EE editions. The extra were worth it!!!!!!
blak @ Sep 21st 2008 10:30AM
What i mean is, don't blame BD-Live.. blame it to the makers of the disc to not provide competent contents..
BlakNinja @ Sep 21st 2008 10:24AM
Most people don't even know how to go to the special features menus..
blakninja @ Sep 21st 2008 10:27AM
And most people don't even know that a special features menu exist..
steve @ Sep 21st 2008 2:11PM
I don't care about the extra crap, but do insist that the player contain the latest, up to date specs. That is why I bought two ps3's. They can be updated to whatever comes down the pipe. If the players cost $50 to $$100, I might not care (it would be a throw away player), but with what they cost today, I can't see buying a player that does not handle current specs.
Denis @ Sep 22nd 2008 11:21AM
I am gonna pass on Blu-ray. I have no interest in it at all............
kevin p @ Sep 22nd 2008 12:49PM
Whats the point of a having a disc player that can store and play a huge amount of data quickly and then go on line (Which here is South Africa is Slow and Expensive). Surley its better to put the extra features on the disc to at least partly justify their overblown prices.
Ok might be useful for upgrades but surley these (also overpriced) players should be upto scratch out of the box.
BluFan @ Sep 30th 2008 8:13PM
I think we'll see greater adoption of 2.0 profiles principally in the larger theatrical releases, especially as 2.0 capable players become the standard. Prices are going to continue to drop as the holiday season comes up, so I think we'll definitely have more 2.0 content soon! I've actually been working with Warner Home Video on some projects and they're totally commited to the format.
LonnieDvD @ Nov 2nd 2008 11:18AM
To heck with the stupid interactive content, I just want to wach the movie. Even with DVD, I usually never watch the "special features" crap.