| reply to imrf
Re: ? 'What are you talking about? Arbitrary numbers don't mean a thing. Going by the way you think, I'm sure there are 3.5 or less BR releases as well.'
There were a lot of 3.5 releases... last year when it was all new. But it's unexcusable for a non-catalog title to look so poor in HD. |
|
 imrfPremium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI | said by bogey780:There were a lot of 3.5 releases... last year when it was all new. But it's unexcusable for a non-catalog title to look so poor in HD. Again, what are you talking about. Show some proof of all these 3.5 or less titles like you claim. Otherwise, you're just pulling things out of your backside, like you always have when talking about HD DVDs or BR. |
|
| »www.hddvdstats.com/index.php
»www.blu-raystats.com/
Blu-ray wins on audio.
For a slightly HD DVD biased review site try this:
»hddvd.highdefdigest.com/reviews.html
And even then you still don't see much that's impressive. |
|
imrfPremium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI | said by bogey780:And even then you still don't see much that's impressive. I guess if you're completely biased to one format sure. Ignorance is bliss.
I, personally, don't care who wins. Once the BR camp pulls their heads out of their butts and realize that they need sub $200 players their format will not be the dominant one. Once they do have a sub $200 player, then I'll get one and be format neutral. Until then I'll enjoy my HD DVD discs, and enjoy watching you spread FUD about a format that you seem to know nothing about. |
|
