Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Blu-ray and multiple discs for movies....why?

So while Internet journalists continue to take the worn out stance that Blu-ray is necessary to reduce disc numbers, I'm looking at my newly purchased Dark Knight disc that has 3 discs in it. WTF.

Two of those 3 discs are Blu-ray. Isn't the whole damn point of Blu-ray to prevent this kind of thing? Shouldn't all of this content fit on their one "massively storage spaced" disc? It just doesn't make any sense. With Kill Bill vol 1 and 2, I understand they are trying to rape our wallets just because they can by making them two unnecessary separate purchases. But the Dark Knight is ONE movie.

So why is it okay for movie studios to pump out unnecessary multiple discs, but not for video games to pump out necessary multiple discs? Sure, the media is different, as-is the method of entertainment. But it seems to me that Blu-ray is NOT being used to its purpose here. Obviously they either want to gorge on price or they think that multiple discs shows more value to the consumer.

Yes, I appreciate the "free digital copy" that comes on the DVD in the set. But even that could have been on a separate layer of the Blu-ray disc so a DVD drive could read it. That's another tech possibility they've wasted even though HD-DVD is unfortunately out-of-the-way.

Consumers get pwned no matter the stance the take.

I guess DVD does win in that I still hear people constantly call BD "Blu-ray DVD", which has got to bother a few execs somewhere.



Post a Comment

<< Home