Are you happy with Youtube etc's video quality for game videos?

bhavv · 14 Oct 2012 at 22:39

Very good quality for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3YFV2XBeXY

I dont add anything annoying to my videos, just plain pure gameplay, no voice or music change.

yashiro · 14 Oct 2012 at 23:39

That's not 'very good quality' at all.

bhavv · 14 Oct 2012 at 23:56

Maybe you forgot to select 1080p.

Witcher1979 · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:05

~>Dg<~ said:
tbh yes im all for this . i upload at highest possible normally 60 fps 1080p but youtube then messes it up lowers and for certain games like racing for eg it can make it look laggy and so on

with better internet speeds coming through hopefully they can raise the bar a bit soon

Youtube will do its thing and the outcome of the video will only be 30fps

Witcher1979 · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:07

bhavv said:
Very good quality for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3YFV2XBeXY

I dont add anything annoying to my videos, just plain pure gameplay, no voice or music change.

Jesus that looks bad (fullscreen), pretty far from what is seen in-game

~>Dg<~ · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:15

bhavv said:
Very good quality for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3YFV2XBeXY

I dont add anything annoying to my videos, just plain pure gameplay, no voice or music change.

you havent encoded it to fullscreen

james.miller · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:22

bhavv said:
Very good quality for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3YFV2XBeXY

I dont add anything annoying to my videos, just plain pure gameplay, no voice or music change.

If you say so....

ChrisJSY · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:23

yashiro said:
When uploading game footage to youtube it gets mangled beyond belief compared to your local copy of the movie. In addition, youtube does not do 60fps video which is beneficial for some games.

Who gives a **** if it's beneficial, you're not PLAYING the video, you're watching it. Also, if you upload at a high enough resolution you'll exceed the 1080 setting.

Don't blame youtube, blame the uploader.

Kamwah · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:39

1080p is good enough. Most people don't record in high-quality anyway.

MikeHunt79 · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:40

I'm happy with YouTube

Is Onlive any better ?

Strife212 · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:41

Although that example was a fail, you can get high quality 1080p on youtube.

Downloading a gig large trailer isn't totally unheard of either, I did for Battlefield 3, it was a gameplay trailer on Caspian Border, it was stunning. So sometimes they do it!

V4NT0M · 15 Oct 2012 at 00:55

So here is a case in point, I compared frames from the same videos uploaded in 720p to youtube (59MB) and the original file direct from ubisoft press at 720p (1GB), the difference is sometimes like night and day:

Youtube

Original

2x Youtube

2x Original

4x Youtube

4x Original

There's a few more if you want to check for yourself:
http://v4nt0m.com/bits/watchdogs_compare/?C=M;O=A

Best to download and open fullscreen and flick between the two.

Look at all that lost detail, It's just not good enough for me

HangTime · 15 Oct 2012 at 01:08

Online streaming services are fine for my needs in general, it isn't perfect but usually I'm only watching for walkthrough (guidance on how to tackle a particular section of a game) or amusement purposes. If I wanted to see impressive visuals, I'd play the game/demo.

There are a few vids I download if they are of particular interest, for example Quakeworld vids where you need 60fps and high quality to follow the fast action.

ChrisJSY · 15 Oct 2012 at 01:55

Skyfall said:
So here is a case in point, I compared frames from the same videos uploaded in 720p to youtube (59MB) and the original file direct from ubisoft press at 720p (1GB), the difference is sometimes like night and day:

Look at all that lost detail, It's just not good enough for me

You're comparing a video, one at 59MB and another at 1GB and saying it looks better than the other. Could that be any more obvious?
You wouldn't say the same if they put the same (original quality) vid on youtube, it's the bitrate, not the player.

V4NT0M · 15 Oct 2012 at 02:17

My point being that the latter is not widely available.

ChrisJSY · 15 Oct 2012 at 02:24

Skyfall said:
My point being that the latter is not widely available.

That's true, but you made it out to sound like it's inherently a problem with youtube, instead of it's users

I too wish they* would upload higher resolution/bitrate vids, it's not like everyone has an average PC and 768Kbps upload like I to limit that!

* Anyone.

bhavv · 15 Oct 2012 at 02:44

My videos looked fine to me.

linwelin · 15 Oct 2012 at 03:28

bhavv said:
My videos looked fine to me.

They r ok, just very pixelated for 1080p

kkbigal · 15 Oct 2012 at 03:37

I'm pretty satisfied with YouTube's quality.

You can get some good quality video on there if you record using something like the Lagarith codec and then transcode the footage to x.264. 1 hour of footage at 1080P weighs in at around 1.7 - 2gb, which takes about an hour to upload to YouTube. The end result looks pretty decent.

I'm limited by the tools I have available, but I've found that encoding using Virtualdub/x.264 using high profile and Constant bit rate at 6000kbps results in much cleaner footage and smaller file size than, say, Windows Movie Maker 2012 h.264 output at 20,000kbps. The end result of which looks better once it's been processed b YouTube.

jakspyder · 15 Oct 2012 at 03:54

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuY9X2_i3Nc&feature=plcp

One of mine, Its in 16:10 so it may look strange on 16:9 but i think the quality (for just watching) is more than acceptable?

I used FRAPS to record then used Handbreak to encode to x.264 with no editing.