Arstechnica: Resolution isn't a big deal at all

  • 124 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Edited by KHAndAnime (13913 posts) -

@treedoor said:

@KHAndAnime said:

Looks like the typical Lemming response is: "omg ur just a pixel counting troll". Appears lemmings have stopped caring about videogame graphics. Just like the Wii, they've completely lost the graphics war and are forced to simply give up on any hope. It's amazing and awesome.

Every console has lost the "graphics war".

Why can't people argue about anything else on this board?

PCs aren't included in the console graphics wars - PC has always been king of game gfx.

#102 Posted by glez13 (8876 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@jhcho2 said:

The graph from that link is highly theoretical. So you need a 30" desktop monitor (2' away) to notice the benefit of 2560x1440 (Ultra HD)? LMAO

If he posted this graph in the PC benchmark threads, he will be ripped to shreds. I can say with certainty that 2 feet away, even with 22" monitor, you can definitely see the difference between 1920x1080 vs 2560x1440.

The problem is that 90% of the system wars posters have not done a single benchmark in their lives. Nobody knows better. The thing to say would be that the benefit of increased resolution is highly subjective. It all boils down to visual and personal perception. Someone who does benchmarks often and scrutinizes visual quality is far more likely to notice the increase than someone who doesn't. The same goes for framerate. If you have done benchmarks often with FRAPS, you will be able to tell the difference between 45fps and 60fps. Someone who hasn't can easily be fooled into thinking 45fps is 60fps.

Bottom line, said perception is something that can be trained.

Said it before, will say it again: All these charts and references to "viewing distance" is assuming the television is outputting lossless video content. 3D Rendered games and lossless video content isn't the same thing. 720P video content isn't filled with jaggies lines -> 720P videogames on the other hand are a big jaggy, blurry mess.

Nope. It's the same thing. At a certain far away distance jaggies won't be noticed because you will simply won't be able to resolve them. It's like when you use a bigger resolution and the jaggies become so little that you don't notice them(yet the "warping" effect will probably still be there for you to notice but not the sawtooth), it's the exact same thing but instead of manipulating the distance you manipulate the resolution.

Also UltraHD isn't 1440p(QHD) it's 4K.

#103 Posted by treedoor (7648 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@treedoor said:

@KHAndAnime said:

Looks like the typical Lemming response is: "omg ur just a pixel counting troll". Appears lemmings have stopped caring about videogame graphics. Just like the Wii, they've completely lost the graphics war and are forced to simply give up on any hope. It's amazing and awesome.

Every console has lost the "graphics war".

Why can't people argue about anything else on this board?

PCs aren't included in the console graphics wars - PC has always been king of game gfx.

Oh yes, I forgot.

The console graphics wars

#104 Posted by GioVela2010 (4018 posts) -

Resolution, TV Size and viewing distance are important when they all match up optimally. They are irrelevant specs without knowing all 3 factors

#105 Posted by GioVela2010 (4018 posts) -

I'm 8 ft from my 60" 1080p HDTV, so I would tell the difference.

Although the upscalling capabilities of Xbone or my TV will help offset that difference a bit

#106 Edited by SuperCowElitist (730 posts) -

I concur, it doesn't matter. Lemmings are using 720P HDTV, while us cows are balling in 1080p HDTV. Have fun with 720p lemmings.

#107 Posted by loosingENDS (11826 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

its not a big deal. its only a big deal to fanboys who need to make their epenis feel big.

Exactly, have been saying that for years

Only crazy developers would destroy the games graphics to have 1080p that noone would ever notice

#108 Posted by the_bi99man (11047 posts) -

@FinalFighters said:

i think its pretty obvious the people saying they dont see much of a difference have never actually experienced a game in 1080p before.

Exactly. And before the fanboys get all up in arms about it: No, seeing a 1080p youtube video is not the same. Scrubs need to actually see 1080p. Of course, they'll still deny it. Denial of irrefutable, endlessly proven facts is what makes them fanboys in the first place.

#109 Edited by loosingENDS (11826 posts) -

@the_bi99man said:

@FinalFighters said:

i think its pretty obvious the people saying they dont see much of a difference have never actually experienced a game in 1080p before.

Exactly. And before the fanboys get all up in arms about it: No, seeing a 1080p youtube video is not the same. Scrubs need to actually see 1080p. Of course, they'll still deny it. Denial of irrefutable, endlessly proven facts is what makes them fanboys in the first place.

That is a big assumption, i mean noone has experiened 1080p ?

It is a big planet

#110 Posted by Phazevariance (10981 posts) -

720p -> 1080p is a noticible difference. 720p -> 900p however is hardly noticible if at all. its literally only 180 lines difference which equates to (screen size depending)_ less than an inch difference on a mid sized tv.

#111 Posted by _Matt_ (8924 posts) -

What I and others have said before:

The resolution itself doesn't matter,

it's the fact that one console can push twice as many pixels in the same game that's more concerning. Imagine how much more it could do at the same resolution?

#112 Posted by loosingENDS (11826 posts) -

@Phazevariance said:

720p -> 1080p is a noticible difference. 720p -> 900p however is hardly noticible if at all. its literally only 180 lines difference which equates to (screen size depending)_ less than an inch difference on a mid sized tv.

How can this be ?

If half the difference is not noticable, then double that will still hardly be any noticable

#113 Posted by _Matt_ (8924 posts) -

@loosingENDS said:

@Phazevariance said:

720p -> 1080p is a noticible difference. 720p -> 900p however is hardly noticible if at all. its literally only 180 lines difference which equates to (screen size depending)_ less than an inch difference on a mid sized tv.

How can this be ?

If half the difference is not noticable, then double that will still hardly be any noticable

Twice as noticeable I guess.

#114 Posted by Caseytappy (2151 posts) -

@Sushiglutton said:

If resolution is not that big of a deal for you I recomend going with the cheaper console.

Wii-U ?

#115 Edited by _Matt_ (8924 posts) -

@Caseytappy said:

@Sushiglutton said:

If resolution is not that big of a deal for you I recomend going with the cheaper console.

Wii-U ?

PS2?

#116 Edited by Caseytappy (2151 posts) -

Best for Lems would be to keep the 360 instead of going for the Xbone .

480P vs 720P is a smaller difference and even less noticeable than 720P vs 1080P, if they are right going back from 720P to 480P will give them still those perfect graphics and the trade off could be used for better physics, A.I. and stuff .

Free next gen for Lems !!

#117 Edited by 35cent (916 posts) -

Have these guys seen something 1080p? The difference is easily noticable unless there's something wrong with your eyes.

#118 Edited by tdkmillsy (1402 posts) -

@Caseytappy said:

Best for Lems would be to keep the 360 instead of going for the Xbone .

480P vs 720P is a smaller difference and even less noticeable than 720P vs 1080P, if they are right going back from 720P to 480P will give them still those perfect graphics and the trade off could be used for better physics, A.I. and stuff .

Free next gen for Lems !!

This is a perfect example of people quoting numbers and not actually looking at the evidence.

Go have a look at current and next gen videos and then claim they are similar. There's a lot more to it than resolution.

If you want only a games machine that you play with a controller and cant afford a PC then PS4 is for you.

If you can afford a PC (and it wouldn't cost much more if consider the cost of games) you should get a PC and not even consider a PS4.

If you want a decent games machine that almost competes with PS4 but offers a lot more in overall experience, online, integration, entertainment and diverse gaming then Xbox One is for you.

The fact I can walk into the room say Xbox on, and my TV, Xbox and entertainment system comes on, followed by play Forza 5 and then snap skysports news and play racing and watch TV and snap other apps with updates far out ways the resolution difference, especially when in real world it doesn't look that different.

#119 Posted by MajesticShea (695 posts) -

@tdkmillsy: saying Xbox on won't turn your TV and theatre system on.

And why the fuck would you want to watch tv , read sports news, and play a racing game at the same time.

#120 Edited by SolidTy (43869 posts) -

lol, I've had a 720p HDTV since 2004, so I'm happy the Xbone does 720p, so I can max out my current TV!

Any more power is a waste because of my old ass TV I've used since Xbox 1 (The original)! I'm just glad M$ is saving me money from upgrading my HDTV because I need that money to buy the $500 Xbone anyways. :)

Xbox 720, here I come (yeah, that old Xbone codename was more accurate than we knew!)

#121 Posted by Slashkice (13241 posts) -

These resolution defense pieces are so weird.

#122 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@Murderstyle75 said:

@Cyberdot:

Only more clear if you sit extremely close or have a gigantic display. At normal viewing distances and normal screen sizes, 1080p is nothing but snake oil. Anybody who says otherwise is fooling themselves. If the box tells you it looks better, it must look better. Right?

The problem is that normal viewing distance is good for watching tv but way too far for playing games. Playing closer to the screen is more immersive and it's easier to make out details in the distance.

The whole distance thing is the weakest argument.

#123 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@Murderstyle75 said:

@Dreams-Visions:

I've done side by side comparisions and own both 720p and 1080p sets. What is very apparent though is the fact that you are a marketing victim. On a PC monitor, you will see it great as will you on a gigantic set. On logical HDTV sizes though, you are full of shit if you think you can see the difference. Think I'm wrong? Go on AVS or someplace and pull up a size/distance chart for 1080p. If I'm wrong, prove it with some expert data.

Watching prerendered video and playing a game are two very different things. Prerendered video has no aliasing. So all these comparison charts are useless when it comes to gaming.

Higher res is an automatic form of antialiasing and of making higher res textures more discernable. If your sitting too far away to see the difference then your simply sitting too far away period.

#125 Posted by Krelian-co (11238 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

So much DC in this thread. Lems are really on life support lol

epic denial from lems xD

#126 Edited by danabo (2474 posts) -

Arguing about resolution seems ridiculous to me. If I want to count pixels, I'll do that on my PC.

My issues are that the Xbox One's inferior hardware costs $100 more than it's superior competitor, (even if the difference is marginal) and that MS tried to get away with a 24 hour check-in for physical media. I'm already sold on the Xbox One launch line-up when compared to the PS4's, so they've got that much right, but if they want my money I need to see $100 (or £75 in my case) worth of extra value. Right now, I don't see it.

MS' PR statements during and since the reveal, basically calling their customers backwards idiots, haven't helped either.