So there's no way PS3 CPU is getting more than one PE~Cell?

[sir doris]

ok 640x480 to 1600x1200 is a big leap...
but to take D3 again I can see very little difference between 1024 and 1600 (only got a 19" monitor).

What I ment was if you play low poly games (CS) in 640 the jaggies are very apparent, all objects have dead straight lines and whenever they are not vertical and hoirontal the steps are clear. However move on to farcry and objects don't have dead straight edges, subtle transistion of colour make polys blend into one another. The high number of polys and effects (+lighting) hide the stark polygon edges of CS, when both are the same res. This is something I can see continuing to happen with the more "real" worlds created with PS3. And hopefully we'll get AA

 

[BOOMEXPLODE]

Resolution is just not the panacea it's made out to be. A 640x480 digital photograph is still infinitely more realistic than any game at any resolution.

 

[pahcman]

Resolution is to make up for bigger display. Play your VHS Toy Story on 42" Flat panel.

Resolution is just not the panacea it's made out to be.

Home videos should stay at VHS. Why is there need for BR?
What PC u using to play what game? A capture at 640 and 1600 perhaps. We can help u troubleshoot since i think its a problem with u pc not performing optimally.

 

[sir doris]

Quick question, what is the resolution of Region 2 DVDs? - not special HD DVDs or whatever but the one you would hire from Block Buster?

 

[ChryZ]

Quick question, what is the resolution of Region 2 DVDs? - not special HD DVDs or whatever but the one you would hire from Block Buster?

RC2 NTSC (Japan)

Up to 9.8 Mbps* (9800 kbps*) MPEG2 video
Up to 1.856 Mbps (1856 kbps) MPEG1 video
720 x 480 pixels MPEG2 (Called Full-D1)
704 x 480 pixels MPEG2
352 x 480 pixels MPEG2 (Called Half-D1, same as the CVD Standard)
352 x 240 pixels MPEG2
352 x 240 pixels MPEG1 (Same as the VCD Standard)
29,97 fps*
23,976 fps with 3:2 pulldown = 29,97 playback fps (NTSC Film, this is only supported by MPEG2 video)
16:9 Anamorphic (only supported by 720x480)

RC2 PAL (Euroland)

Up to 9.8 Mbps* (9800 kbps*) MPEG2 video
Up to 1.856 Mbps (1856 kbps) MPEG1 video
720 x 576 pixels MPEG2 (Called Full-D1)
704 x 576 pixels MPEG2
352 x 576 pixels MPEG2 (Called Half-D1, same as the CVD Standard)
352 x 288 pixels MPEG2
352 x 288 pixels MPEG1 (Same as the VCD Standard)
25 fps*
16:9 Anamorphic (only supported by 720x576)

 

[cthellis42]

Resolution is just not the panacea it's made out to be. A 640x480 digital photograph is still infinitely more realistic than any game at any resolution.

It doesn't have to be a panacea, but for chrissakes 640x480 is not a grand ol' station that everyone will always be happy about and couldn't possibly tell much difference between it and something with 6-7 times its resolution.

Heck, just switching back and forth between The Simpsons on a normal channel and an HD channel? Night. And. Day. Same with Law & Order and basically anything else being presented right now that's done properly.

Now imagine what people will think when we get used to it!

 

[Phil]

Seriously, I don't know on what you guys are playing on and how many milimeters you are used to playing infront of it, but I'm definately in agreeance with BOOMEXPLODE.

If resolution was really an important factor, I would have stopped playing my PS2 even just after launch when PCs already had 1024x768 and higher going for it. Even with most PC games today that have amazing great graphics, high resolution graphics and resolutions that are high and above anything available on consoles - Gran Turismo 3: Wet track still owns it all and resolution certainly isn't an issue there.

Of course I'm looking forward to higher resolution next gen as the next guy, but I'm very happy to make due with 720p AND an incredible boost in effects. I wouldn't want to waste any performance on anything larger than that personally, as it's not going to be played on a PC and within milimeters infront of it.

 

[DemoCoder]

CGI rendered with 64xAA at 640x480 rez looks worse than CGI rendered at CGI at 64xAA on a 720p display. That is, Toy Story2 or Shrek converted and remastered to 720p looks much better than the 480p DVD version.

There is a big difference between SDTV and HDTV when viewing HDTV content. If you watch HDTV for 1 hour, and go back to SDTV, it will look blurry, much like looking at a VCD after watching DVD. When you watch HDTV, there is much more detail, you can see scratches on the walls, pits and pimples on people's faces, all much clearer.

And if you play say, HL2 or CS2 at 640x480 with hi-AA, or at 1280x1024 with medium or low (2xAA), it will look way better. You can see details at a distance better, especially important in Counter-Strike Source when you want that headshot, and everything just looks sharper.


No one is saying that AA, and shading aren't vitally important for realism, after all, a 320x240 photograph on a cell phone looks "real" whereas a 1600x1200 3d rendered scene looks fake. But we don't go around satisifed with 320x240 photographs do we? You wouldn't be able to see the individual bush on your p0rn photos at that rez.

The extraresolution adds detail. Even if you don't have an HDTV, go look at one setup, and switch between HD content like ESPN sports or Discovery HD, or Terminator 2 HD edition if they have it, and regular SD content.

 

[London Geezer]

Guys... No need to argue over this, next gen machines will support almost certainly any resolution up until 1080p (probably, not all games, but if a few current gen games support 1080i...)
Whether u like it or not.
So stop whining, and enjoy high resolutions when we get the new platforms!

 

[Megadrive1988]

just give me 720p and 1080i games with 8x FSAA, and no less. hell, I would love to see 16x FSAA but that would probably kill performance

 

[Acert93]

I can understand why some of you do not care about high res, but do you care about HDTV then? Same difference.

I have played console games on a standard TV and at progressive scan and the difference is mindblowing. Sharper image where detail is much more clear, clean text, and overall a more stable image. Everyone I know who has compared the stuff I have side by side at 480i to 480p is shocked. Obviously that is a limited survey but the people I know who have done both, side by side (not just someone saying, "I have a PS2 and it is fine on the TV") for a true comparison thought the progressive scan was a lot better. Enough for some of them to save up for HDTVs

As for PC games, comparing D3 is a joke. Get real. D3 has limited texture variety (I assume because they do a lot of texture layers and normal maps) and really low poly characters. I am sitting here looking at the 6600GT box (brother left it here) with a D3 screenshot on it and the head has 5 distinct straight lines from the ear to ear forming the dome of the skull. All high res does on a game like that is show off how low detail stuff is. Basing the impact of resolution on Doom 3 is like basing color pallete impact on Super Mario World! They are not accurate measuring sticks for all games. e.g. If we said "SMW only needs 256 colors so I see no need for 32bit color because I am happy with 256 colors" how would this affect a game like GT4? Bigger screens, more geometry, and more detailed textures shine with higher resolutions. Not to mention ingame huds can take up less of the screen and look better. And lets not forget the slew of game genres (like RTS) that really need the high resolution for gameplay purposes. True, not all gamers are affected by these issues--but we would be closing our eyes if we did not realize the high resolutions help in a lot of areas. Heck, ever try to browse the net at 480p? Even basic tasks like browsing, email, and so forth are much better with high resolutions.

I play 1600x1200 on most of my games with a 6800GT. While some of you may not care for that resolution is makes gaming a lot of fun for me because there is a ton of detail. Basically there is over 6x (2.5x2.5) as much detail between 640x480 and 1600x1200. That means a character way off being 2 pixles by 2 pix is 5 pixels by 5 pixels on my screen--which is MUCH easier to hit At range things look cleaners, and up close you see a lot more detail. It is a win win situation.

Everyone is different but people in general do want HD movies and HD TV for a reason. May not appeal to everyone (like some of you said you cannot see the difference... to that I say go see your optomitrist!) but many of us want it and can see a clear difference. As for the Ps2 low rez... that is exactly the reason I do not have one. Having a clean and sharp image is important to me because I cannot stand blurry games. That is just me of course, but the HD TV craze shows people can see the difference and are willing to pay for it.

 

[wco81]

I thought Doom3 was suppose to be a graphics showcase (that is what we're talking about when we say "D3" right?).

Why was it in development so long to be dissed for shoddy graphics?:?

 

[Acert93]

I thought Doom3 was suppose to be a graphics showcase (that is what we're talking about when we say "D3" right?).

Why was it in development so long to be dissed for shoddy graphics?:?

Doom 3 has great shadows and has nice tech. But if you are looking for a large variety of high resolution, high constrast textures then look elsewhere. Also, due to the shadow technology used the characters are lower poly count. D3's tech and art direction is not the best measuring stick of how resolution in my book (just look at the character models). This is not to say D3 looks bad at high resolutions or you cannot see the difference--because you can. But it is not the best example in my book for said reasons.

As for shoddy graphics, I would say D3 has good graphics, but it is not a good measuring stick for resolution. Actually, D3 is not a good game to talk about AA either because my experience (and that of others) is that if you had to choose between 10x7 with AA or 12x10 without AA, I would take the 12x10. Now in many other games AA seems to make a bigger difference and AA has a bigger impact on the image quality than a resolution bump. It is really a game-to-game thing.