If we stuck with SD this gen...

KittensCake

KittensCake

KittensCake

Permabanned
Joined
26 Apr 2008
Posts
1,390
...how good would the graphics be? Obviously we wouldn't have such a high resolution but probably model detail...etc would be much higher since the system is working less due to rending the game at standard definition.

Do you think the tradeoff is worth it considering it requires quite a large investment in the form of a HDTV to view high definition content?
 
Last edited:
A lot of TV will be HD in the not too distant future, and Blu Ray is mainstream. HDTV's are becoming commonplace... it's not really an issue and tech has to progress sometimes... we've been on SD for decades now.
 
NokkonWud said:
You wouldn't notice model detail, it would be lost in the low resolution.
Click to expand...

Well I don't think that's true, I mean you can easily see that this generation of games looks much better than last gen when viewing them on an SDTV. And even between games of this generation, you can easily see which look better than others whilst viewing them on an SDTV.

I suppose there would be some point where ultimately you wouldn't see a difference without upping the resolution, but I don't think we're anywhere near that point yet.
 
Last edited:
Richdog said:
A lot of TV will be HD in the not too distant future, and Blu Ray is mainstream. HDTV's are becoming commonplace... it's not really an issue and tech has to progress sometimes... we've been on SD for decades now.
Click to expand...

But just before the 360's release, there really wasn't any reason to own a HDTV. Not many people owned a HDTV at all, so most had to invest in one to play games in HD.
 
Last edited:
Richdog said:
A lot of TV will be HD in the not too distant future, and Blu Ray is mainstream. HDTV's are becoming commonplace....
Click to expand...

I'd say the TV's are but how long before Freeview and the channels on it are broadcast in HD. Even on Sky very little is actual in HD.

How many years are we looking at before BBC and ITV are shown by freeview in hd?

The 360 and PS3 are halfway stop gaps. They can't play decent games at decent FPS at 1080. The best games are lower resolution.

No doubt that will be the line they pedal out with the next console generation. That this time they have the power to do what they wanted in the 360 generation.
 
KittensCake said:
But just before the 360's release, there really wasn't any reason to own a HDTV. Not many people owned a HDTV at all, so most had to invest in one to play games in HD.
Click to expand...

I had a HDTV for my xbox, a 50" rear projection and the games looked fantastic in 720p (the little that their was). As you say though, other than that, there was no real reason to have one.

I cant believe i spent £2999 on a 50" Sagem 720p TV :p
 
I regularly play my xbox on a 32" CRT. Graphics are still great and marked improvement but its pretty mcuh as good as your gonna get with SD. The text is the main issue, very blurry. Suprisingly smooth on CRT than my LCD though :p


Richdog said:
Theyre already halfway there... freesat has them both I believe.
Click to expand...

Indeed but only limited programmes at the mo, but i guess the bandwidth is there for them to do what they want, although the euro 2008 and olympics is getting them to stretch their legs. Hopefully we'll have ch4 by october aswell.
 
NokkonWud said:
You wouldn't notice model detail, it would be lost in the low resolution.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely NOT true. Just output Crysis at 640x480 to your TV and you'll see what I mean. There are so much more room for highly visible graphical updates on SD it's not funny. The 360 and PS3 are nowhere near hitting the roof for maximum graphical potential output on SDTVs. I mean, even just watching television alone should tell you this. There are way more room for graphical improvement, even more than we have seen from PS1 to PS3, before we need to increase the resolution as the only way of improving things.
 
i feel lied to about this generation of games. I felt like wow there are these amazing powerful machines and were going to be able to do things that we have never been able to do before and games are going to great. Be really immersive and be something new and exciting. As of yet i feel that isnt the case. Exactly the same stuff is being pumped out just looks a little nicer. So if we were stuck in SD but the power was put to other such maybe exceptionally varied worlds or something. Im no game designer but i just feel like im playing something which i played 6 years ago that just looks a bit nicer
 
Spunj99 said:
It does?

You can get the best 24" LCD monitor money can buy for less than £200. :o
Click to expand...

£200 is still a fairly large amount of money? It's almost as much as the console itself.

And back when the 360 was released the cost would probably have been more.

Also I guess most people would probably want something larger than 24" if they're playing their console in the living room on the sofa like most people do. And as said it's not really a HDTV, and I doubt it's the best money can buy.

Yes you get a higher resolution, but you have to pay more, and you lose out on model detail...etc in comprison to if the games were rendered in SD. Is it worth it? Sometimes I feel like perhaps they brought out HD consoles a generation too early.
 
KittensCake said:
But just before the 360's release, there really wasn't any reason to own a HDTV. Not many people owned a HDTV at all, so most had to invest in one to play games in HD.
Click to expand...

this sort of riles me

i mean i played games in 'hd' seven or eight years ago, mebbe more, on my pc
mebbe not widescreen 'hd' but 1024x768 was the standard gaming resolution
it annoys me that marketing people can claim that modern games are the first in 'hd'

i will concede, however, that gaming on a 37" 1080p screen is much more fun that a 15" monitor whether you are on pc or console :D
 
Until consoles can output real life detail at 'SD' resolutions - like watching a TV programme - at a rock solid 60fps framerate, I would say the move to 'HD' resolutions this generation was premature.
 
dirtydog said:
Until consoles can output real life detail at 'SD' resolutions - like watching a TV programme - at a rock solid 60fps framerate, I would say the move to 'HD' resolutions this generation was premature.
Click to expand...

Yep there's a lot of framerate issues, as well as TEARING which really ruins the experience sometimes.
 
Yoko said:
this sort of riles me

i mean i played games in 'hd' seven or eight years ago, mebbe more, on my pc
mebbe not widescreen 'hd' but 1024x768 was the standard gaming resolution
it annoys me that marketing people can claim that modern games are the first in 'hd'
Click to expand...

'HD' is just an annoying marketing buzzword, to me. As you say, HD has been around for ten years or more. HD doesn't necessarily mean the game will look anything special. SD television still looks ten times more real and lifelike than any console game could dream of looking.
 
So we should be waiting until we have "real-life" detail (which could theoretically take a long while) before upping the resolution? The HD resolutions may be slower in some games with current hardware, but they do look significantly clearer imo. :)
 
Last edited:
dirtydog said:
'HD' is just an annoying marketing buzzword, to me. As you say, HD has been around for ten years or more. HD doesn't necessarily mean the game will look anything special. SD television still looks ten times more real and lifelike than any console game could dream of looking.
Click to expand...


This will still be the case in 10 years time, It's not to say the in-between solutions are no good, maybe just "misleadingly" advertised.


rp2000
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom