1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

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

Discussion in 'PC Games' started by V4NT0M, 14 Oct 2012.

  1. bhavv

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 14 Nov 2009

    Posts: 13,639

  2. yashiro

    Mobster

    Joined: 9 Dec 2003

    Posts: 3,553

    Location: UK

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

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 14 Nov 2009

    Posts: 13,639

    Maybe you forgot to select 1080p.
     
  4. Witcher1979

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 20 Apr 2011

    Posts: 7,375

    Location: Suffolk

    Youtube will do its thing and the outcome of the video will only be 30fps
     
  5. Witcher1979

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 20 Apr 2011

    Posts: 7,375

    Location: Suffolk

    Jesus that looks bad (fullscreen), pretty far from what is seen in-game
     
  6. ~>Dg<~

    Caporegime

    Joined: 1 Jun 2006

    Posts: 33,006

    Location: Notts

    you havent encoded it to fullscreen :p
     
  7. james.miller

    Capodecina

    Joined: 17 Aug 2003

    Posts: 19,488

    Location: Woburn Sand Dunes

    If you say so....


    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: 15 Oct 2012
  8. ChrisJSY

    Soldato

    Joined: 16 Jul 2006

    Posts: 6,552

    Location: Jersey, Channel Islands

    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.
     
  9. Kamwah

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 24 Nov 2011

    Posts: 3,570

    1080p is good enough. Most people don't record in high-quality anyway.
     
  10. MikeHunt79

    Capodecina

    Joined: 4 Jan 2004

    Posts: 20,803

    Location: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    I'm happy with YouTube

    Is Onlive any better ?
     
  11. Strife212

    Capodecina

    Joined: 15 Dec 2007

    Posts: 16,574

    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!
     
  12. V4NT0M

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Jan 2007

    Posts: 19,708

    Location: Land of the Scots

    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
    [​IMG]

    Original
    [​IMG]

    2x Youtube
    [​IMG]

    2x Original
    [​IMG]

    4x Youtube
    [​IMG]

    4x Original
    [​IMG]

    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 :(
     
    Last edited: 15 Oct 2012
  13. HangTime

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 25 Oct 2002

    Posts: 29,418

    Location: Hampshire

    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.
     
  14. ChrisJSY

    Soldato

    Joined: 16 Jul 2006

    Posts: 6,552

    Location: Jersey, Channel Islands

    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.
     
  15. V4NT0M

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Jan 2007

    Posts: 19,708

    Location: Land of the Scots

    My point being that the latter is not widely available.
     
  16. ChrisJSY

    Soldato

    Joined: 16 Jul 2006

    Posts: 6,552

    Location: Jersey, Channel Islands

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

    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.
     
  17. bhavv

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 14 Nov 2009

    Posts: 13,639

    :( My videos looked fine to me.
     
  18. linwelin

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 16 Dec 2009

    Posts: 1,531

    Location: Belfast

    They r ok, just very pixelated for 1080p
     
  19. kkbigal

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 24 Jul 2003

    Posts: 1,420

    Location: West Mids

    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.
     
    Last edited: 15 Oct 2012
  20. jakspyder

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Aug 2008

    Posts: 3,043

    Location: London