mckmas8808 said:
And this should end the "Is HD really needed in the next-generation consoles." See how fast a trailer can shut that arguement up.
Beyond what LB said, I think HD can be overemphasized. If standard resolutions, which are 1/3 the pixels, were aimed for that means there could be 3x as much detail and work done for each pixel.
Think of it this way: 2 games. One that runs at 640x480 and one at 1600x1200. Both push the hardware to its max and run at 60fps. What will look better? Certain limiations aside, the smaller image will look better because it is doing more work per pixel. Another way to think of it is to compare HL1 @ 1080p to HL2 @ 480p. HL2, even at the lower resolution, is going to look a lot better. So there may be cases where having 3x as much resources per pixel will result in a better looking game at 480p than at a HD resolution.
Real life versus a game is another example. One has "infinite geometry and detail" and the other does not. Take the real life image and put it at a low resolution and take the game image and put it at hi definition. Which looks better? Well the real picture of course! Compare:
I, Robot
99Nights
That is not to knock HD--only the claim that HD is in some way "needed". HD is a "cheap" way to get more clarity and thus most frequently image quality *on the same image*. But if the underlying art is of low quality it will only pronounce imperfections. If you can see polygons on a 425x240 screenshot, imagine how pronounced they will be at 1920x1080!
And for people with standard TVs they will be getting a huge picture supersampled down. Not only does this help clean up aliasing, but it also *concentrates* detail
I recently watched I, Robot (the movie above) on a 48" HDTV. And I can assure you it looked better than any game running at 1080p will this gen. Resolution cannot replace detail. So while the pixels were stretched on the I, Robot image the original image was of such high quality and detail the 480p widescreen image would rock a 1080p game image--even though the 1080p game has 4.5x as many pixels.
I think in some specific cases the arguement could be made that a game targeting 480p with more detail could look better than a 1080p game. This would not be true of all games of course, especially since the consoles have spent valuable silicon realestate to hit HD resolutions, but I do not doubt the possibility. id Software has actually gone on the record as having this position.
Anyhow, non-HD users are not missing out on much. Namely
-Resolution clarity
-Clear text
Low Def users get better AA, supersampling of all the detail, and in some cases possibly better framerates! Besides small detail not being quite as crisp (but having more detail per pixel!) and blurry text--which is annoying--I think most STV users will be fine. They will be able to tell the difference in games.
Actually, the biggest loss will probably be widescreen. IMO, widescreen > HD. If I had to choose between widescreen 480p or 1080p 4:3 I would take the supersampled widescreen image at 480p!
Ps- I am a HD mark. I am not bashing HD. I plan to play in HD. But it is not necessary. This should shut that arguement up
