Arstechnica: Resolution isn't a big deal at all

Once again, gaming sites are seeing rather than just reading specs. Differences are minimal at best thus far. Sony tDefense Force, activate!! lol :)

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/10/op-ed-why-im-not-too-worked-up-about-the-next-gen-console-resolution-wars/

A certain corner of the game-focused Internet has been busy counting pixels this week, scrutinizing statements, screenshots, and videos for evidence that either the PlayStation 4 or Xbox One is providing a clearly superior graphical experience at launch. After examining all the available evidence, it seems clear that the PlayStation 4 versions of launch games like Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty: Ghosts enjoy a slight graphical advantage over their Xbox One cousins. It also seems equally clear, to me, that the difference just isn't that big a deal—unless you plan on playing games while looking through a magnifying glass.

Examining the video a foot or two away from a PC monitor doesn't really mimic the way console gamers play games, though. For that, you're going to have to back up from your monitor at least a couple of long paces. Watch the video again from this farther vantage point. Can you still make out the differences? Even if you can, are they as significant?

Whether a gain in output resolution is noticeable to the human eye depends on three things: the pixel count, the screen size, and, crucially, the distance from the screen. The value of an increase in raw pixels goes down as the screen size gets smaller and as you get farther from the display.

Digital Trends has calculated the distances and screen sizes where various resolutions actually matter.

If your living room TV is 10 feet away from your seat, you need a TV a bit larger than 50 inches to notice the difference between 720p and 1080p. If you're 12 feet away, you need a screen larger than 60 inches.

Viewing distances aside,

we're reaching a point of somewhat diminishing returns when it comes to improving a gaming image just by throwing more pixels at it.

Back in the '80s, the jump in resolution between the Atari 2600 and the NES was about the same pure pixel ratio as the jump from 720p to 1080p, but it provided a much more noticeable effect on image quality (even if you discount the NES' wider simultaneous color palette and larger character sprites).

The jump from 720p to 1080p is much less noticeable, even up close, than the jump from 480p to 720p that made Wii games look like muddy, washed-out relics compared to their Xbox 360/PS3 brethren.

It's hard to look at the Xbox One's technically "inferior" 720p output with the same kind of practical concern as those inter-console resolution comparisons of the past. Resolution aside, the games look practically identical, with similar textures, apparent polygon counts, frame rates, and particle effects (like smoke).

The small aliasing difference due to the resolution pales in comparison to the similarities in the overall look and feel of both versions.

None of this is to ignore the actual differences in resolution between the PS4 and Xbox One versions of at least a couple high-profile, multiplatform launch games. If you're the kind of person who isn't happy unless his gaming rig generates the highest raw benchmark numbers, the PS4 seems to be your console of choice for the time being (though, really, a high-end PC still wins out on this score). If you're the kind of person who values actual gameplay, though, choose your next console based on the games. You can feel secure in the knowledge that, graphically, there doesn't seem to be much practical, noticeable difference in performance.

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

BF4 side by side comparison shot

720p to 1080p doesn't contain any diminishing returns, it's just plain better.

This shits getting old, the ignorant and misinformed are running rampant.

Cost is going to be the deciding factor. It was last gen...

720p is such a small resolution compared to 1080p. If you need a magnifying glass to see the difference, then you're one blind motherfucker.

Stay blind morons, 1080p is more than double the resolution, and causes no eye bleeds.

These people must have god-awful eyesight, I feel sorry for anyone incapable of seeing the clear distinction at all times.

you feel bad for people who dont nitpick small differences? lol

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

I can't believe these gullible jerk offs. This is the kind of thinking that leads the uneducated to think the xbone has some magic upscaler that adds more detail. I hate people sometimes, well dumb people anyway.

More than double the resolution is small now? lol

It's not better graphics, it's higher resolution. Of course people aren't worked up about that.

i'm glad the lems are still riding for their console of choise. Me as an objective gamer with no dog in this fight and only going with what I think is best, i'll be getting a PS4 first so that I can enjoy all the "minor" differences in performance that the console provide.

I watched the video comparison on that site and while I couldn't see a huge difference in res, the PS4 had a lot less jaggies and better Post processing as well. The only thing TC managed to do was show just how big a difference there is.

There is no damage control at all. The footage is out there and more and more people are concluding that the PS4 versions of these games look better, but not by a great deal at all. That's becoming the consensus. You just can't see how people are starting to see with their own two eyes that the differences in these games just aren't that great. No one is saying the Xbox One versions look better. Only that resolutiongate is becoming a bit of a joke when you actually look at the footage. Just posting articles like we all do. Decide for yourself what you think.

So people are basically blind or have a crappy displays

Cept their wrong. Go to dream's thread.

@KHAndAnime: If you are paying $100 dollars more for a console shouldn't it look slightly better not worse?

Yes.

1080p>720p

1600p>1440p>1080p

Maybe in 2 gens console peasants will be able to get those resolutions

MS open checkbook to American media. Westerner are funny, if playstation having huge pixel advantage, AA, post process, and more, becomes "slight advantage" even though inferior console cost more.

The jump from 720p to 1080p is much less noticeable, even up close

meanwhile in ArsLand...

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/03/the-ars-itunes-1080p-vs-blu-ray-shootout/

Ars was recently able to conclude that the newly launched iTunes movies encoded in 1080p do, in fact, look better than the same content encoded in 720p, despite the modest increase in file size. That's good news for iTunes customers. But the real question is: how do iTunes 1080p downloads compare to the reigning king of home video image quality—Blu-ray Disc (BRD)? This is what we set out to test.

who's running at 1600p comfortably? Rougly 2% of the earths population.

We need a wall of shame for posts like this.

2% of the population(7 billion) is about 140m,that's a shitload of people running 1600p comfortably it seems.

Ryse looks better than all 1080p games. That's how important resolution is.

Can respect that. Nods.

lmao at lems nowadays. buh buh teh superior multiplats dont matter now!!!!!!

It was only a just a while ago when lems where celebrating having grass in mafia 2

00.2, stop assuming shit.

More storytime from ARS!

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/1080p-on-a-smartphone-screencan-it-possibly-matter/

We took this question to Dr. Raymond Soneira, president and CEO of DisplayMate, a company that produces calibration software for displays of all types. Dr. Soneira has also been known to publish display shoot-outs that pit the latest smartphones against each other in the battle for the best display.

When it comes to 1080p on a smartphone, he admits that it might not matter for the most casual users. "For some people, it is possible to tell the difference if we were to sit down and study a [1080p] display and a [720p] display, side-by-side," he said in a phone interview with Ars. "If you’re really a fanatic and you study images, or you have some professional applications and you’re really into displays, then it may make a visual difference for you."

For most people, though, it won't matter. Photos are inherently fuzzy, so it won’t matter whether they’re viewed on a 1920×1080 or 1280×720 smartphone display; you’ll still see their imperfections. "Even the tiniest image detail in a photograph is always spread over more than one pixel," Dr. Soneira explained in a follow-up e-mail. "The image detail is never perfectly aligned with the pixel structure of the display." Videos are even worse: not only are they fuzzy like photographs, but the pictures are constantly moving. Even if the images were sharp, the human brain couldn’t zero in on content that’s appearing for only a fraction of a second on such a small display. "For ordinary viewing of videos, 1920×1080 is really not going to make a visual difference," adds Dr. Soneira.

Where a 1080p smartphone display could really make an impact is with computer-generated content—that is, the user interface, buttons, and text. "Only computer-generated images make full use of the pixel resolution of the display," says Dr. Soneira. "For graphics and text, maybe you want that kind of sharpness." Like desktop computers, smartphone displays can also utilize sub-pixel rendering, which helps improve the visual sharpness of computer-generated graphics.

A 1080p display might also be useful for simply viewing 1920×1080 content and not worrying about scaling. "Every time you rescale content that’s scaled for some other resolution, it’s not going to look as good. So there’s an advantage to living with 1920×1080 even if your eye can’t appreciate the fine details, because you don’t have the rescaling artifacts," he says.

Just quoting what you said.

2% is 0.02

2% of 7 billion(earth's population) is 140 million.

Dat Xbone defense force.

I so damn love to see all dat DC happening on soooooo many sites. Finally gamers care about resolution and don't just accept shit given by a company who've made no progress in EIGHT YEARS. This article was as laughable as every single i peaked at

@Dreams-Visions said:

The jump from 720p to 1080p is much less noticeable, even up close

meanwhile in ArsLand...

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/03/the-ars-itunes-1080p-vs-blu-ray-shootout/

Ars was recently able to conclude that the newly launched iTunes movies encoded in 1080p do, in fact, look better than the same content encoded in 720p, despite the modest increase in file size. That's good news for iTunes customers. But the real question is: how do iTunes 1080p downloads compare to the reigning king of home video image quality—Blu-ray Disc (BRD)? This is what we set out to test.

Damn Dreams going hard on these softies, the ownage is too strong for their butt to handle the hurt.

And again welcome back!

If you have low standards, more power to you. I wish I didn't notice it. Then instead of owning thousands of dollars in expensive A/V gear, I could just get an old SD TV and hook everything up to that.

Of course it's a huge deal since there's a massive difference between 720p and 1080p.

1080p is just much clearer.

Not a console, but Onlive delivers the same image.

My own video.

PS4 more powerful and cheaper.

This gen is gonna be soooo good. Glad to be a cow.

Thank you Sony!

I can concur for you...this guy above knows math.

To the moron that thinks 2% is .2...that's 20%. So, with your' new math, 7 billion divides out a fifth (your' new number) to 1.4 billion people comfortably playing at 1600p.

I think your' new estimation is going in the wrong direction dude...

Google "math" and come back to this thread later.

good to be home, Haze! :D

2/10.

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

http://en.community.dell.com/dell-blogs/direct2dell/b/direct2dell/archive/2013/10/31/new-dell-ultrasharp-monitors-deliver-phenomenal-screen-performance-and-clarity-for-an-impressive-viewing-experience.aspx

Today, Dell is previewing two new Dell UltraSharp monitors that will be added to its award- winning monitor line globally within the next two months. Users can immerse themselves in a phenomenal viewing experience with the exciting Dell UltraSharp 32 Monitor (UP3214Q), while the Dell UltraSharp 24 Monitor (U2414H) provides virtually borderless viewing for a seamless multi-monitor set-up. Both monitors are available in China starting today.

Dell’s largest monitor, the Dell UltraSharp 32 Monitor (UP3214Q) features awe-inspiring screen clarity and detail with Ultra HD 3840 x 2160 resolution and high pixel density on an expansive 31.5” screen. The Dell UltraSharp 32 Monitor offers great screen real estate allowing you to multi-task and view multiple applications neatly side by side, helping enhance your productivity. Its ultra-wide 176°/176° viewing angle ensures that images and colors remain consistent regardless of your viewing perspective so you can see details down to the pinpoint.

Dell PremierColor, featured on the UP3214Q, gives color professionals what they need to do their jobs: consistent, accurate colors calibrated with a deltaE<2 for quick set-up, support of color industry standards, user-enabled color adjustments, and excellent color depth of up to 1.07 billion colors for an amazing level of detail even in dark areas. This monitor is perfect for power users like graphic designers, video and game designers, CAD/CAM designers and engineers, and photographers or anyone who requires high-performance monitors for precise, accurate, color-critical work.

I wonder what the excuse will be when PS4 games are made on 720p just like xbox one,but the extra power is use for frames and better visuals.

I am sure MS will find some sites that also claim that detail and frames aren't important either,...lol

Resolution matter only on 20 inch PC monitors...hahaha got to love those PC lovers so full of sh**.

That's 20%

No that's 0.02 stop assuming shit.