"Les B. Labbauf" <broeht@netscape.net> wrote in message 
news:pan.2005.05.15.04.44.17.96727@netscape.net...
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 11:25:25 +0000, Richard Strong wrote:
>
>>
>> "Fry" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:3ekt85F3msd0U1@individual.net...
>>>> Bit of a missed opportunity if it is using DVDs but not playing movies.
>>>> You just know that if MS and Nintendo only use DVDs that Sony are going
>>>> to pounce all over them for it by pointing out how inferior they are.
>>>
>>> DVD Playing isn't exactly a selling point anymore, most people have a
>>> standalone DVD now, but didn't when PS2 was released. I doubt many 
>>> people
>>> bought a PS2 or Xbox to play CDs like they might have partially bought a
>>> PS1/Saturn to.
>>
>> I disagree; it is a selling point. If the Xbox 360 and PS3 can play DVD's
>> but the Revolution can't... that isn't a good thing.
>>
>> Personally, I only have an Xbox attached to my TV, and even though I 
>> haven't
>> played an Xbox game for a while, it still sits there because of the 
>> ability
>> to playback DVD movies.
>>
>>>
>>> A good selling point would be if it played BRD or HD-DVD, I'd wager Sony
>>> will definately feature at least one of those formats on PS3. If they 
>>> only
>>> support one of the two formats, it could spell disaster for the other 
>>> one.
>>
>> Just because the PS3 is using one format and not the other? I don't think
>> so.
>>
>> It'll be decided when standalone HD-DVD and blu-ray players appear on the
>> market, the consumer will pick and choose.
>
> More people have DVD players then have consoles, they have become the VCRs
> of the new age.  You can't cram in all the technology of a good DVD player
> into a game console, and still keep it cheap enough to sell.
>
>

You can get an above average DVD player for a little more than $50.  Believe 
me, the functionality of DVD in a console is just a fraction of that cost.