Actually I'm pretty sure that's been stated at some point by Sega to be 720p. Don't get me wrong, 1080p would be fantastic, particularly for such a great looking game, but I doubt that will be the case.
"No 1080p For PS3 Games"
- Thread starter Miksu
- Start date
Actually I'm pretty sure that's been stated at some point by Sega to be 720p. Don't get me wrong, 1080p would be fantastic, particularly for such a great looking game, but I doubt that will be the case.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Hmm I kind of knew that if I leave my post like that, there will be misundertanding
Here's what's my O RLY obviously meant. It was a sarcastic remark when a (fake) insider pops in and tell us that omg11!11 there are 1080p games on development, when Sega just announced that VT is 1080p, and surely there are going to be others as well.
edit: Unlike you SonyNinja...
I actually follow the threads here (you seem to start lot's threads that are already covered.)
Last edited by a moderator:
What's with all the negative attitude to this 'obviously' good news?
Go play your 360...and stop constantly downplaying anything positive that's PS3 related!
Anyways, for those who really care, any verification on SEGA's comments? Rendered at, or output at 1080p.
I, for one, do not already own a 1080p TV, but my very next upgrade will be. Luckily for me, I didn't rush out and get a HD set about a year back (when it started really catching on) because I heard about the lack of 1080p sets available (thanx to one scooby for bringing this to my attention).
So, for me, the wait will have paid off handsomely when my PS3 FINALLY arrives! Now, just confirm that Resistance:FOM is 1080p, and that'll be me for March next year!
Go play your 360...and stop constantly downplaying anything positive that's PS3 related!
Anyways, for those who really care, any verification on SEGA's comments? Rendered at, or output at 1080p.
I, for one, do not already own a 1080p TV, but my very next upgrade will be. Luckily for me, I didn't rush out and get a HD set about a year back (when it started really catching on) because I heard about the lack of 1080p sets available (thanx to one scooby for bringing this to my attention).
So, for me, the wait will have paid off handsomely when my PS3 FINALLY arrives! Now, just confirm that Resistance:FOM is 1080p, and that'll be me for March next year!
I heard Fantavision PS3 is 1080p. So there you have it!
I find it quite disturbing when "PS2 assets" is used in a negativ context to describe GT4-HD. Assets are simply resources (i.e. photos or sampled data of the cars) that were created during the development of GT4 for PS2 - obviously "PS2 assets" doesn't mean we'll have a PS2 game running solely at a higher resolution, in fact, from footage I've seen, we can expect the assets that were used in photo-mode at the very least if not even touched up and that in itself would already put it way over PS2 territory. From what I can tell, Polyphony seems to be quite forward thinking and I think it's a given that when they took photos and sampled data of those ~600 cars for GT3/4 did they not make sure that at least some of that data could be re-used for perhaps a PS3 version one day.
It's the same reason why I wouldn't expect the next Getaway on PS3 to have it's own assets created from scratch again... or does anyone think that the team will go back and take pictures of the entire city for the next 3 years again?
There has been no reports of Fantavision for PS3, so unless this is some reliable insider info, stop posting nonsense.
Reading the forum rules might be a good idea too.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
What negative attitude and constant downplaying? was that post addressed to me? if so then you have a MAJOR reading comprehension problem.
No doc, that wasn't addressed at you.
I guess reading over that entire thread, I kinda got the feeling some people (whom I'd expected anyways) jumped in just to sling their piece of dirt...it's no major, just a tad annoying when it pops up in every other SONY thread.
Nevermind.
Anyways, does anyone have a good example of the difference between native 720p output at 1080p, and a native 1080p image?! Just curious as to why, according to previous complaints about wasted resources, anyone should make the effort for 1080p. Doesn't sound like it's really worth the sacrifice! Or is it a sacrifice on PS3?
Given the resolution increase, no matter how good the scaler is there's opportunity for increased aliasing. There's no real point showing differences, since it's enough to know that IQ degredation can occur.
The hard facts of it are that 1080p display owners might end up with worse IQ if the game isn't native to that resolution, and no matter the console either. It's just a fact for any type of image scaling in any direction.
Rys was talking about upscaling to a 1080 display. For 720p set owners, downscaling isn't bad. The question is do you want a 720p set or a 1080 native set connected to your PS3? If you pick the latter, and most games don't support it, will quality suffer? That's an interesting question actually. Movies and TV in 1080i will look better on the 1080 set, but 720p content should be less impressive. If most content is 720p, perhaps it's best to get a 720p set and wait for 1080 content to become popular?
This is something reviews of TVs should tell us. I don't think anyone shoud make a purchasing decision without that hands-on info and it's nigh on impossible to guess what the actual results will look like, especially across different models and brands. Are there any devs here using 1080p sets who can comment? Surely this won't be under NDA, as it's a matter of the TVs and the consoles. Have you tried 720p and 1080 on 720 and 1080 native sets, and can comment on the difference in quality?
For half or quarter step supersampling it's not always the case, depending on the source image. High frequency areas can show extra aliasing if the scalar is rubbish. You can see it with a simple test yourself in Photoshop. Create a 1920x1080 image with white background and then raster some large black text and a couple of black tris. Then resize to 1280x720 with nearest neighbour filtering (point sampling). It'll invariably look a fair bit worse since the filtering doesn't cope well.
1080p to 720p is tough for a scaler, or even doing it inside the game before doing 720p output where you can programatically filter and downsample as you choose (for a cost, assuming the scaler is 'free').
1080p to 720p is tough for a scaler, or even doing it inside the game before doing 720p output where you can programatically filter and downsample as you choose (for a cost, assuming the scaler is 'free').
The fuss is that with native content they'll look excellent. Most are fixed pixel devices though, so it's kind of obvious they might not look great depending on the combinations of scalers (there's sometimes two involved remember, and no guarantee of quality) and the content they're asked to display.
Why would anyone use nearest-neighbour sampling and discard half their rendered information? Downsampling I'd expect at least a straight bilinear that helps reduce aliasing. Take your Photoshop example (doesn't need a whole 1080p screen. Just downsize to 66% of whatever size original you start with) and use bilinear sampling, and the results are better than a straight 720p render.
In fact I'll do it for you, seeing as I'm so generous
'1080p' source vector graphics
'720p' source vector graphics :
Downsampled 1080p using point sampling :
Downsample 1080 using bilinear sampling :
The pointwise downsampling is horrific, and I can't imagine anyone, whether on the TV or the game output, would use it. I know the earliest LCD monitors did, but no-one still uses point-sampling, do they? In contrast the bilin sampling is a marked improvement over rendering to 720p without AA. Given a choice between 720p no AA, or 1080p no AA downsampled, I know which I'd choose! And yes, instead of rendering to 1080p and downsampling you could render at 720p and get more efficient AA, but as a quick fix to cater for all resolutions downsampling seems an okay tradeoff.
This shows the worth of 1080p downsampled to 720p, but this isn't an indicator of output quality on the final TV which is dependent on screen size. IMO there's no point discussing this on paper. The only way to say whether supporting 1080p is a 'bad thing' is to have two similar TVs, same screen size, one 720 native and the other 1080 native, and render 1080 and 720 screens to the both of them. There's no other way to compare different native fixed-resolution displays, and know if 720p screens upscaled to 1080p is particularly bad or not.
Assets mean models and textures. At least in all the places I've heard about or worked at.
Regarding upscaling 720p to a 1920x1080 display I can share my experience. I have a 42" 1080p60 LCD display with a native resolution of 1920x1080. There's no noticeable loss in quality when wieving 720p video or playing xbox 360 which output 720p when the display itself does the upscaling.
I can't imagine the PS3 scaler doing a worse job than my display (it's not an expensive one, €1990) but if it is I can just set the PS3 to output 720p on 720p games and let my LCD display do the upscaling instead. However, I do believe the PS3 scaler is better and will set output in the PS3 settings to 1080p so 720p games will be upscaled by the PS3 and 1080p games will be displayed natively on my display.
I can't imagine the PS3 scaler doing a worse job than my display (it's not an expensive one, €1990) but if it is I can just set the PS3 to output 720p on 720p games and let my LCD display do the upscaling instead. However, I do believe the PS3 scaler is better and will set output in the PS3 settings to 1080p so 720p games will be upscaled by the PS3 and 1080p games will be displayed natively on my display.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Can you share which model and maker your tv is?
Last edited by a moderator:
Probably either Westinghouse or Sceptre (same Chi-Mei panel in either case). I have the Westinghouse (LVM-42w2).
Similar threads
- Locked
