I say Yes and Yes to your question.

PCs will be 1600p and next gen consoles will be 1080p

1080p is tooooo small a resolution.

Try using a computer for programming/photoshop etc. effectively at 1080p, its an abomination of crunched screen.

ehussein1379

"Do you think the next consoles will be 1080p standard, and PC at something higher than 1600p?"

Yes and yes.

mitu123

Clear and sensible logic would agree with you. Kind of a pointless question to ask, as our tech will always grow and evolve past current limits.

Higher resolution hurts frame rates, I'd like to keep my 1080p for the rest of next gen, cheaper that way. An ugly game looks ugly, regardless of the resolution, like that game, what ever it is.

[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]720p will always be the console standard.Inconsistancy

I doubt that for next gen.

It looks like the Pip Boy screen from Fall Out- but the Pip Boy looks different- probably a mod.

[QUOTE="Remmib"]Lettuce beef cereal, most console games look like crap.IronBass

I think the industry has decided on 16:9.

So, the next step will probably be XHD which is 1440p - 2560x1440.

Furthermore, anything beyond that might be pointless, because, to see any difference you would have to sit too close to the display (due to the limitations of the human eye).

.

In fact, you could probably even benefit from 1440p. If you haven't heard of 1440p, you will. Here's a link to some info on Audioholics.com. It is part of the HDMI 1.3 spec, along with 48-bit color depth, and will probably surface for the public in 2009 or so. You'll partially be able to see the benefits of 1440p at the THX Max Recommended viewing distance and the resolution benefits will be fully apparent if you are just a little closer. I've read of plans for resolutions reaching 2160p but I don't see any benefit; you'd have to sit too darn close to the screen to notice any improvement. If you sit too close, you can't see the far edges of the screen.

Source

Consoles are played on TV's which support up to 1080p. The End.

I think the industry has decided on 16:9.

So, the next step will probably be XHD which is 1440p - 2560x1440.

Furthermore, anything beyond that might be pointless, because, to see any difference you would have to sit too close to the display (due to the limitations of the human eye).

.

In fact, you could probably even benefit from 1440p. If you haven't heard of 1440p, you will. Here's a link to some info on Audioholics.com. It is part of the HDMI 1.3 spec, along with 48-bit color depth, and will probably surface for the public in 2009 or so. You'll partially be able to see the benefits of 1440p at the THX Max Recommended viewing distance and the resolution benefits will be fully apparent if you are just a little closer. I've read of plans for resolutions reaching 2160p but I don't see any benefit; you'd have to sit too darn close to the screen to notice any improvement. If you sit too close, you can't see the far edges of the screen.

Source

KiZZo1

1440p, I think, would be a very tough sell to anyone who isn't an extreme enthusiast gamer or movie watcher. And if they're that much of an enthusiast, they probably own a 1440p or 1600p computer monitor anyway.

[QUOTE="dxmcat"]

2560 x 1600 monitors easily cost over $1000.

ehussein1379

HPZR30W - plastic wrapped heaven

Cost of entry: $950 - buy.com sale

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

Higher resolution hurts frame rates, I'd like to keep my 1080p for the rest of next gen, cheaper that way. An ugly game looks ugly, regardless of the resolution, like that game, what ever it is.

[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]720p will always be the console standard.Inconsistancy

I doubt that for next gen.

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

Giant_Panda

I have debated the same thing time and time again to people. MOST as in almost everyone can not tell the difference in 720 or 1080 and half dont know what HD even is or looks like..

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

Giant_Panda

[QUOTE="Giant_Panda"]

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

RyviusARC

I would say it depends on the tv you have, and what you are viewing

[QUOTE="RyviusARC"][QUOTE="Giant_Panda"]

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

gamer-adam1

I would say it depends on the tv you have, and what you are viewing

I guess, but only if you're several feet away and on a decent TV.

Also, to the TC, are you using any AA?

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

Giant_Panda

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

Giant_Panda

To clarify a bit, all those resolutions are distinguishable only if you meet certain criteria about the viewing distance, on given display size. Here's the chart (it's for a 20/20 person I think):

considering TV's are capable of only outputting 1080p as of current due to the likes of bluray and the actual television broadcasts i ddont see how 1600p could be a new standard apart from PC's.

This would require all programmes/films to be produced in a higher resolution aswell to actually make in a complete new standard for televisual broadcast and then hardware manufacturers would then caatch up.If they make the game in 1600p for said console they are just gonna have to lower it to 1080p for the actual TV display would they not.

It wont happen with TV's until broadcasters and tv providers decide to step up a gear,HD took a LONG time to become standard its been around since the 90's but its only really being adopted now.

To clarify a bit, all those resolutions are distinguishable only if you meet certain criteria about the viewing distance, on given display size. Here's the chart (it's for a 20/20 person I think):

KiZZo1

For normal television watching and game playing, 1440p will simply provide no noticeable benefit at all.

[QUOTE="Giant_Panda"]

Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on normal sized screens. So have fun arguing over a resolution that most consumers won't be able to tell apart from 1080p. It is a non-factor and you know it TC.

ocstew

The difference is, people don't sit three feet away from their huge television screens like they do with monitors. The closer you are to a screen, the easier it is to discern pixels. Also, when you change to a lower resolution from the NATIVE on a flat-screen LCD, or plasma, it will, of course, look a lot worse. LCD's and plasmas have a fixed raster, and thus don't do a good job of displaying a lower resolution from their natives like, for example, a CRT does.

I have a 50-inch 720p screen, that sits 10 feet away from my couch; I have a friend that has a 1080p screen that also sits 10 feet away from his couch. My television looks better when watching Blu-Ray because it produces better color reproduction and its contrast and black levels are superior. Simply put, at a certain distance the human eye just can't tell the difference.

Yeah, like 200 megapixel cameras. Only, not a human eye in the world can tell the difference, so who cares !!!! Or do you have a Holo Chamber the size of a swimming pool?

"Originality is the one thing which unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of."

Maybe one day you could aspire to that TC...

In 10 years, when I'm at 7600x2600 on a wrap-around monitor, the consoles will most likely still be at 1080p because of TV manufacturers.

So between locked hardware generations, and artificially limited resolution as an artifact of the consoles essentially being family TV media devices, the consoles will look dreadful indeed in the coming years.

How long will it take to overcome the 1080p limitation? A long time is my guess.

Pixel count is all relative to screen size.

1600p on a 32" or smaller TV is a waste of time. You won't notice any significant difference.

1600p is pointless unless you have a large monitor/tv screen (as in 52" or larger), and visually all it will do is bring it to the same level as 1080p on a 32" screen.

Bigger screens = more pixel stretching.

Smaller screens = more pixel squeezing.

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]Considering resolution of consumer TV's is now 1080p standard, coupled with further distance from screen with consoles - 1080p as a standard next gen would be fine.ehussein1379

That is the saving grace for consoles, you are usually 5ft away from the screen, so the fact that pixels are the size of your finger isn't as apparent.

Move up close to a console game on a 55" LCD, you'll see that console games actually look a lot worse than you would think.

Sitting with your face pressed up against the screen at a desk is the standard for pc gaming. Relaxing on a couch back a ways from the screen is the console standard. If it really takes having your eyeballs glued to the screen to make out the differences...you have a very odd sense of gaming enjoyment.

LOL at HD graphics 480p is fine

I play my PS2 every week and games looks awesome

LOL at HD graphics 480p is fine

I play my PS2 every week and games looks awesome

Zurrur

THIS..heck I have a 110" screen and I play 480 up to 720p just fine and could care less. The older resolutions are not quite so bad like people make it out. HECK im a gear head and could care less. You have too many people reading too many magazines worring about "whats coming up" or "what might happen" instead of just enjoying what you have.

Is there a difference in 480 and 1080p? YEP...but it does not affect your tv viewing or games what so ever..

In 10 years, when I'm at 7600x2600 on a wrap-around monitor, the consoles will most likely still be at 1080p because of TV manufacturers.

So between locked hardware generations, and artificially limited resolution as an artifact of the consoles essentially being family TV media devices, the consoles will look dreadful indeed in the coming years.

How long will it take to overcome the 1080p limitation? A long time is my guess.

ehussein1379

and how much extra are you gonna pay for that monitor?

i'd much rather walk into a shop like asda get a decent brand TV like a Samsung like the 32" which does me fine for watching tv and playing games for a couple hours every day.Why am i going to buy a wrap around monitor with higher res's when the things i do arent going to entirely take advantage of it?

I know you will say im jelous or something but to be honest i couldnt actually give a damn bout how many pixels are output on the display.If a games good i'll play it regardless of what "hinders" it in other gamers eyes and if i enjoy it all the better, thought gaming was mainly bout gameplay not how much pixels or how much power i have with my hardware.

Good games overcome technical boundaries in more ways than one, once gamers and especially hermits on System wars well the ones like yourself learn that when it comes down to gloating bout pixels instead of games then its a sad day for gaming and you've just become as bad as the consolites proclaiming graphics kings.

Thats my 2 cents on this whole thing to be absolutely blunt.

[/QUOTE

Pixel count is all relative to screen size.

1600p on a 32" or smaller TV is a waste of time. You won't notice any significant difference.

1600p is pointless unless you have a large monitor/tv screen (as in 52" or larger), and visually all it will do is bring it to the same level as 1080p on a 32" screen.

Bigger screens = more pixel stretching.

Smaller screens = more pixel squeezing.

Netherscourge

[QUOTE="Zurrur"]

LOL at HD graphics 480p is fine

I play my PS2 every week and games looks awesome

VanDammFan

THIS..heck I have a 110" screen and I play 480 up to 720p just fine and could care less. The older resolutions are not quite so bad like people make it out. HECK im a gear head and could care less. You have too many people reading too many magazines worring about "whats coming up" or "what might happen" instead of just enjoying what you have.

Is there a difference in 480 and 1080p? YEP...but it does not affect your tv viewing or games what so ever..

If you don't enjoy the ability to read non-massive text, then resolution doesn't matter all that much, but once you want to see fine details, even at a distance, and be able to read crap, I think it matters,

You can care less? Why state that, you obviously care to some degree. ::cough:: I COULDN'T care less.

Also, @TC, yes, it's nice to have crazy high resolutions, but paying for it isn't all that nice, and you pay for it in more than just on the display, but you need to buy crazy hardware to push those extra 2 million pixels at a decent frame rate, I say, buy crap when it's cheap, and I'd wait 'til 2160p, not go up in increments.

[QUOTE="Zurrur"]

LOL at HD graphics 480p is fine

I play my PS2 every week and games looks awesome

VanDammFan

THIS..heck I have a 110" screen and I play 480 up to 720p just fine and could care less. The older resolutions are not quite so bad like people make it out. HECK im a gear head and could care less. You have too many people reading too many magazines worring about "whats coming up" or "what might happen" instead of just enjoying what you have.

Is there a difference in 480 and 1080p? YEP...but it does not affect your tv viewing or games what so ever..

So you care somewhat, then? :P

Well that was rude.

Do you have any logic/data/argument to add to that?

Unless you play on a humongous screen you don't really need more resolution, besides, the typical console games isn't such that it really needs super high resolution.

[QUOTE="ehussein1379"]

Well that was rude.

Do you have any logic/data/argument to add to that?

hoogiewumpus

Being mean to strangers is rude, I would check that behavior personally.

So you are in the camp that 480p is 'good enough' for the next X years?

Unless you play on a humongous screen you don't really need more resolution, besides, the typical console games isn't such that it really needs super high resolution.

yellonet

Typical console games would cause RROD or YLOD at anything more than 720p; which doesn't matter since TV manufacturers won't go beyond '1080p' for a LONG time.

It seems there are two camps in this discussion:

The 'good enough' crowd, and the 'bring advancement Larry' crowd.

[QUOTE="yellonet"]

Unless you play on a humongous screen you don't really need more resolution, besides, the typical console games isn't such that it really needs super high resolution.

ehussein1379

Typical console games would cause RROD or YLOD at anything more than 720p; which doesn't matter since TV manufacturers won't go beyond '1080p' for a LONG time.

and do you have proof, or is that just another one of your very petty attempts at PC is better propaganda?

So your saying if i play Virtua Tennis 4 or Wipeout my console will pretty much fail...ok thats logical.

[QUOTE="ehussein1379"]

[QUOTE="yellonet"]

Unless you play on a humongous screen you don't really need more resolution, besides, the typical console games isn't such that it really needs super high resolution.

hoogiewumpus

Typical console games would cause RROD or YLOD at anything more than 720p; which doesn't matter since TV manufacturers won't go beyond '1080p' for a LONG time.

I'm sorry. I don't intend anything more than a tech/fact discussion of why 1080p is where consoles will be 'locked' for years to come; and why higher than 1080p is a major benefit of the PC.

[QUOTE="ehussein1379"]

[QUOTE="yellonet"]

Unless you play on a humongous screen you don't really need more resolution, besides, the typical console games isn't such that it really needs super high resolution.

razgriz_101

Typical console games would cause RROD or YLOD at anything more than 720p; which doesn't matter since TV manufacturers won't go beyond '1080p' for a LONG time.

and do you have proof, or is that just another one of your very petty attempts at PC is better propaganda?

So your saying if i play Virtua Tennis 4 or Wipeout my console will pretty much fail...ok thats logical.

My video card increases in temp exponentially the higher resolution I select. The same would likely apply to console.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="ehussein1379"]

Typical console games would cause RROD or YLOD at anything more than 720p; which doesn't matter since TV manufacturers won't go beyond '1080p' for a LONG time.

ehussein1379

and do you have proof, or is that just another one of your very petty attempts at PC is better propaganda?

So your saying if i play Virtua Tennis 4 or Wipeout my console will pretty much fail...ok thats logical.

My video card increases in temp exponentially the higher resolution I select. The same would likely apply to console.

riddle me this, how can some games run at 1080i or is it P i cant remember on PS3/360 and above 720p on consoles.Being serious here or you just spouting PC propaganda.

By your statement your saying my PS3 is more likely to die if i play virtua tennis than a game at a lower resolution sorry but that doesnt compute at all.Sounds like silly propaganda and misinformation and lack of knowledge to me.