Gamescom 2011 : Sony conference discussion

[-tkf-]

I love how many people were snookered by Sony redefining "HD". HD, until Sony got their grubby mitts on it, was 720p60 and 1080i60 (Both resolutions supported by the Gen1 Xbox360). This is because HD was developed for broadcast television using a 20 megabit QAM channel. You'll note that 720p60 and 1080i60 are actually pushing about the same amount of pixels per second.

The original 360 was software updated to support 1080p60 over component for the very few televisions that supported that.

When Sony came around and started harping on their "True HD" 1080p60, they were ignoring established standards to try give themselves an advantage. It worked, to a point. I had many many arguments at the time from people who believed 1080p60 was better for movies than 1080i60, despite the fact that the information content was identical, and the 1080i stream could be dejuddered by a good TV, but the 1080p60 one could not.

The XBOX was developed with a early release forcing(?) them to go for Component. Sony did it´s usual thing and went for to the limit with new hardware and added HDMI 1.3

This was a wise choice for the millions of PS3 owners that today just can hook up a modern TV with a cheap HDMI cable and enjoy High Quality Audio and all the modern HDMI features.

The old 360´s, if they still work requires Component which by todays standard is "old".

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That's marketing for you. And the greatest irony is not only the lack of true HD games on PS3, but the fact many games struggle at lower resolutions and Sony didn't even support decent upscaling. I'll grant MS were a little bit off launching a new-wave HD console without HDMI, but claiming Sony had some HD gaming highground is definitely reaching.

Although I don't understand what you mean regards 1080i being better for movies. At 24fps, 1080p60 is 5 refreshes per frame. There shouldn't be any juddering at all. Whereas 1080i60 should have interleaved frames every 5th refresh which is technically incorrect even if imperceptible.

 

[tuna]

When Sony came around and started harping on their "True HD" 1080p60, they were ignoring established standards to try give themselves an advantage. It worked, to a point. I had many many arguments at the time from people who believed 1080p60 was better for movies than 1080i60, despite the fact that the information content was identical, and the 1080i stream could be dejuddered by a good TV, but the 1080p60 one could not.

You do know that a 1080i60 stream is equivalent to a 1080p30 stream right?

 

[tuna]

Oh, that's true and something I grumbled about at the time. TBH I'd like to see some movies try post-effect frame interpolation to generate really smooth footage (capturing and processing higher framerates is costly and problematic). I think the ideal for 3D might be to think of it more as a stage production, where the 3D is kept in the range the viewer expects it save a few special effects here and there (imagine normal perspective for much of a film, only to suddenly warp distance in something like Inception to show a fantastic transition), and the framerate is kept very high to make things look realistic. That'd add to the immersion I think, contrary to my current response to 3D.

Ummm, this is getting way OT!

OT, but 'The Hobbit' will be shot and (where available) projected in 48 fps 3D. Should be really cool!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This was a wise choice for the millions of PS3 owners that today just can hook up a modern TV with a cheap HDMI cable and enjoy High Quality Audio and all the modern HDMI features.

The old 360´s, if they still work requires Component which by todays standard is "old".

Are there any modern TVs that don't support component? And what's the advantage of PS3 working with any cheap HDMI cable when 360 came with HD cable included??

 

[ERP]

I use my gen1 Xbox 360 (yes it still works) pretty much everyday with my 2010 Panasonic Plasma in 1080P over component.
All you really loose with component is HDCP.
In fact I used to choose to use component to connect my cable box to my projector, because half the time the HDCP negotiation would fail over HDMI.

 

[mrcorbo]

You do know that a 1080i60 stream is equivalent to a 1080p30 stream right?

According to -tkf- this is not quite accurate. His distinction being, as I understood it, that 1080i60 is still 60 frames (even though they are half frames) and therefore contains more temporal information than 1080p30. That having been said, bkilian was referring to movies which are usually 1080p24; so even if equivalent to 1080p30, 1080i60 can represent it properly.

 

[mrcorbo]

Although I don't understand what you mean regards 1080i being better for movies. At 24fps, 1080p60 is 5 refreshes per frame. There shouldn't be any juddering at all. Whereas 1080i60 should have interleaved frames every 5th refresh which is technically incorrect even if imperceptible.

I think your math is off. You need 120fps to allow for 5 refreshes of all 24 frames.

 

[function]

The XBOX was developed with a early release forcing(?) them to go for Component. Sony did it´s usual thing and went for to the limit with new hardware and added HDMI 1.3

This was a wise choice for the millions of PS3 owners that today just can hook up a modern TV with a cheap HDMI cable and enjoy High Quality Audio and all the modern HDMI features.

The old 360´s, if they still work requires Component which by todays standard is "old".

The old 360's also work with VGA, which is about as good as HDMI if set up well.

As a monitor user (still no HDTV!), I'd take VGA output above HDMI that requires HDCP even for games. Hooray for high quality legacy options!

 

[-tkf-]

The old 360's also work with VGA, which is about as good as HDMI if set up well.

As a monitor user (still no HDTV!), I'd take VGA output above HDMI that requires HDCP even for games. Hooray for high quality legacy options!

There is games that requires HDCP?

News to me, got a link?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I think your math is off. You need 120fps to allow for 5 refreshes of all 24 frames.

Ah, you're very right there sir! Hence the reason non-120Hz sets sometimes incorporated a true 24Hz mode.

 

[-tkf-]

Are there any modern TVs that don't support component? And what's the advantage of PS3 working with any cheap HDMI cable when 360 came with HD cable included??

In terms of the old classic setup, Console --> TV very few advantages maybe sound, but since the 360 is limited on that department anyway maybe HDMI doesn´t make any difference.

In terms of the modern style, HDMI a Plenty --> Reciever --> TV nothing but advantages

Good point on the included component with the 360 i hope there is a HDMI in my Starwars edition

 

[patsu]

I completely agree your assessment of the state of 3d movies. Movies with good 3d usage are far and few between. Further I think 24Hz for 3d movies is too little. Any fast movement almost always causes flicker, loss of focus and whatnot leading to eye strain and frustration. I think we need both directors who understand 3d better and also better technology for shooting and displaying the films.

The fact that users expect in your face effects for 3d and diss movies like avatar which has subtle use of 3d doesn't help. In fact I think avatar was one of the better 3d movies. I didn't have eye strain even though the movie was fairly long.

I think this might be the movie that sets the bar for 3d movies and convert quite a few people who say current tech/movies are not good enough.

http://worldwidegadget.blogspot.com/2011/04/3d-movies-avatar-2-and-3-coming-j.html

What does higher framerate mean for home blu-ray players which are not compatible? Perhaps home releases will be inferior or perhaps we will see 100GB+ disc with higher framerate content and 1 layer for 2d movie for backwards compatibility.

edit. Btw, tumble already has 3d support

My top love goes to all underwater documentaries in 3D and Sports Illustrated 3D. ^_^
I'm going to check out a 3D pr0n next if it's available.

For the most part, I'm still fooling around with 3D games and my own 3D videos so far.
Killzone 3 and Super Stardust are amazing in 3D. Will try MotorStorm Apocalypse and some Move games next.

 

[patsu]

Haven't tried Media Go. I think it's an okay piece of software. For users it's no different to transfering music or vids onto an iPod or similar, so I don't consider it awkward nor see wireless as essential. The downside is no multiplayer, which is kinda odd. You'd think they'd want to promote multiplayer as it encourages friends to pressure friends into buying into the same platform and games. It's also an area the mobiles aren't hot on yet.

The latter version of MediaGo is alright. The bundled software with 3D Bloggie is also pretty cool. But I think Sony should have one framework for all its apps, kinda like iTunes but designed differently so it's not bloated and confusing.

The WiFi-free PSP is for a different segment anyway. Guess people like cheap and great games. ^_^

EDIT:
For component connection, I think you may not be able to stream HD movies to them because of the lack of HDCP.

 

[patsu]

OT, but 'The Hobbit' will be shot and (where available) projected in 48 fps 3D. Should be really cool!

Hah, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info. I am waiting for StarWars in 3D Blu-ray at the moment (and GANTZ from Japan).

My casual gaming friend plays CoD in 3D (I didn't know CoD has 3D too). He complained that the latest Harry Potter movie has bad 3D. The life characters are filmed in "paper 3D" but the CG are in real 3D. It irritates him. ^_^

 

[mrcorbo]

There is games that requires HDCP?

News to me, got a link?

PS3 requires HDCP for all digital outputs. I remember lots of people complaining when they tried to connect the PS3 to (non-HDCP) DVI monitors using an HDMI->DVI cable and it wouldn't work. You could buy a VGA cable for the PS3 too, though.

 

[patsu]

No, my first PS3 monitor is connected via DVI-HDMI. It works. It's the monitor that is not HDCP compatible I think, not the connector.

 

[mrcorbo]

In terms of the modern style, HDMI a Plenty --> Reciever --> TV nothing but advantages.

Meh. Analog to HDMI conversion has worked it's way down to even budget receivers. Your advantages really boil down to decreased cable clutter.

Not that that's a bad thing. Nobody was happier than me when HDMI finally delivered on the promise I had hoped FireWire would deliver on.

 

[mrcorbo]

No, my first PS3 monitor is connected via DVI-HDMI. It works. It's the monitor that is not HDCP compatible I think, not the connector.

I know. Some DVI monitors did support HDCP. Not many, though, hence the issues.

I still can't really think of any reason why Sony didn't support this other than it was easier from a development/support standpoint to not support it at all than to selectively enable/disable the display output depending on what the user was doing.

 

[patsu]

Support what ? ^_^

DVI works but you will need a second audio connector. Sony and other content folks mandate HDCP support to protect their IPs.