Arstechnica: Resolution isn't a big deal at all

  • 124 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for clyde46
#51 Posted by clyde46 (49047 posts) -

0.02 is 2%. 0.2 is 20%.

Avatar image for Murderstyle75
#52 Posted by Murderstyle75 (4412 posts) -

@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?

Avatar image for ReadingRainbow4
#53 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (18733 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

0.02 is 2%. 0.2 is 20%.

I believe it's called a typo.

Avatar image for Dreams-Visions
#54 Edited by Dreams-Visions (26576 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?

LOL NO.

Where did you find these clowns while I was away, System Wars? Is this even real life? This guy clearly has never done any side by side testing or moved from a 720p TV up to a 1080p TV.

Avatar image for MonsieurX
#55 Posted by MonsieurX (36133 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@clyde46 said:

0.02 is 2%. 0.2 is 20%.

I believe it's called a typo.

Sure.

Because 140m is much more than you expected

Avatar image for deactivated-58e448fd89d82
#56 Posted by deactivated-58e448fd89d82 (4494 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 truth of consolite denial bolded for you.

Avatar image for ReadingRainbow4
#57 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (18733 posts) -

@MonsieurX said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@clyde46 said:

0.02 is 2%. 0.2 is 20%.

I believe it's called a typo.

Sure.

Because 140m is much more than you expected

Relax mademoiselle.

Avatar image for 2mrw
#58 Edited by 2mrw (5631 posts) -

So remind me why were lemmings rubbing the 1000 pixels and the 2 fps lead in the x360 versions in the cows faces when doubling the amount of pixels on the screen makes no difference?

Avatar image for tormentos
#59 Posted by tormentos (26080 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

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.

This ^^...

The fact alone that the difference from 720p to 1080p is actually greater than from 480p to 720p show how silly and stupid this argument is,we may have as well stayed at 480p is there difference was so mall.

Avatar image for tormentos
#60 Posted by tormentos (26080 posts) -

@waltefmoney said:

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

Really.?

BF4 on PS4 has faster frames per second as much as 14 FPS faster = smoother.

Way less jaggies again = smoother

900p sharper image.

How all that doesn't amount to better looking.?

Hell and we haven't see the game running yet on xbox one,AC4 is no where to be found either,is stupid to claim the PS4 version doesn't look better.

Avatar image for Murderstyle75
#61 Posted by Murderstyle75 (4412 posts) -

@tormentos: doesn't matter how great the difference is. Your eyes can only see so much. The gaming fanboys boast about screen resolutions yet the experts say otherwise. The THX recommended viewing distance for a 50″ screen is 5.6 ft. You can't even start seeing 1080p on a 50 inch screen until closer than 9.8 feet and even that's very minimal. The smaller your screen, the closer you have to be.

Avatar image for mems_1224
#62 Posted by mems_1224 (56630 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@mems_1224 said:

@KHAndAnime said:

@AMD655 said:

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

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.

sucks to be you i guess

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
#63 Posted by KHAndAnime (17565 posts) -

@Murderstyle75 said:

@tormentos: doesn't matter how great the difference is. Your eyes can only see so much. The gaming fanboys boast about screen resolutions yet the experts say otherwise. The THX recommended viewing distance for a 50″ screen is 5.6 ft. You can't even start seeing 1080p on a 50 inch screen until closer than 9.8 feet and even that's very minimal. The smaller your screen, the closer you have to be.

We're not talking about watching movies (which is what the THX specification had in mind), we're talking about things being rendered in 3D. Videogames rendered in 720p are extremely pixelated compared to 1080P (no matter what viewing distance you're at). If we were talking about Blu-Ray movies, maybe you'd have a point. If you're close enough to your TV to play videogames, read smaller text, and see what's going on sufficiently, you're close enough to be able to see the clear difference.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
#64 Edited by KHAndAnime (17565 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

@KHAndAnime said:

@mems_1224 said:

@KHAndAnime said:

@AMD655 said:

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

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.

sucks to be you i guess

It does suck :( Life would be easier with the standards of a bum

Avatar image for Murderstyle75
#65 Posted by Murderstyle75 (4412 posts) -

@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.

Avatar image for -Damien-
#66 Posted by -Damien- (5355 posts) -

So now MS bribing media to downplay the resolution difference. f***ing slimey bastards

Avatar image for mems_1224
#67 Posted by mems_1224 (56630 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@mems_1224 said:

@KHAndAnime said:

@mems_1224 said:

@KHAndAnime said:

@AMD655 said:

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

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.

sucks to be you i guess

It does suck :( Life would be easier with the standards of a bum

Word, I feel bad for people with elitist douchey standards. Poor bastards, can't even enjoy the simple things in life.

Avatar image for no-scope-AK47
#68 Posted by no-scope-AK47 (3752 posts) -

Do they even make 720p hdtv's or displays any more ??

Avatar image for PSdual_wielder
#69 Posted by PSdual_wielder (10646 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

No that's 0.02 stop assuming shit.

Not sure which side you're on, but come on lol.

Avatar image for darkspineslayer
#70 Posted by darkspineslayer (22339 posts) -

The few pixel difference in various multiplats is important to the 360 though?

Avatar image for no-scope-AK47
#71 Posted by no-scope-AK47 (3752 posts) -

@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 slam dunk Dream

Avatar image for FinalFighters
#72 Posted by FinalFighters (2754 posts) -

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

Avatar image for tubbyc
#73 Edited by tubbyc (3854 posts) -

I watched that BF4 comparison. There wasn't much difference in the overall look. The aliasing in the Xbox One version was more noticeable in some parts. The part with the transmission towers was what stood out. However, the colours looked more vivid on the Xbox One version, but occasionally the black areas could be in place of a bit of extra detail on the PS4 version.

Whatever. In the big scheme of things, I think games on the PS4 will be able to look a bit smoother and more impressive but it's not a deciding factor for me for which console to get. I never got Halo 4 before my Xbox 360 broke (had decided to skip it anyway), but checked out some of a playthrough on youtube last night and it looks beautiful. Considering that the Xbox One is about 8 times more powerful, I would be happy with what it's capable of. On the other hand, those videos gave me the feeling that I've had enough of Halo. I checked out some more Fable 4 too, and it doesn't seem to be what I would have liked.

I'm not keen on the Xbox One and I'm sure I'll get a PS4 but it's about games and developers for me when comparing these two.

Avatar image for Zophar87
#74 Edited by Zophar87 (4344 posts) -

.

Avatar image for Heil68
#75 Posted by Heil68 (57159 posts) -

PS4 is the most powerful video game console ever created in the history of video games and it's less expensive. double win.

Avatar image for Dreams-Visions
#76 Posted by Dreams-Visions (26576 posts) -

@tubbyc said:

I watched that BF4 comparison. There wasn't much difference in the overall look. The aliasing in the Xbox One version was more noticeable in some parts. The part with the transmission towers was what stood out. However, the colours looked more vivid on the Xbox One version, but occasionally the black areas could be in place of a bit of extra detail on the PS4 version.

You looked at a poor comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/user/jackfrags

Look at these in full 1440p glory.

Avatar image for jhcho2
#77 Edited by jhcho2 (4960 posts) -

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.

Avatar image for superclocked
#78 Edited by superclocked (5864 posts) -

So much misinformation in that article.. If resolution didn't matter, then why are people buying HDTV's? It's the higher resolution that gives HDTV's their nice, sharp image. 1080p is far sharper than 720p, even from 20 feet away on a 30" screen..

The people writing these articles are either XBox fanboys, MS fanboys, or they were paid by Microsoft...

Avatar image for kuu2
#79 Posted by kuu2 (9183 posts) -

They must have been paid off by MSoft. Maybe their capture device was hooked up wrong. Maybe the analyst is blind legally.

Either way Sony Fan will deny and cry about it being clear as day.

Avatar image for superclocked
#80 Posted by superclocked (5864 posts) -

@Murderstyle75 said:

@tormentos: doesn't matter how great the difference is. Your eyes can only see so much. The gaming fanboys boast about screen resolutions yet the experts say otherwise. The THX recommended viewing distance for a 50″ screen is 5.6 ft. You can't even start seeing 1080p on a 50 inch screen until closer than 9.8 feet and even that's very minimal. The smaller your screen, the closer you have to be.

That's not true at all. I did the test using a 30" CRT HDTV that natively displays all resolutions. From 20 feet away, 1920x1080 is far sharper than lower resolutions, even on a 30" screen...

Avatar image for RR360DD
#81 Posted by RR360DD (13588 posts) -

This is a stupid argument. I can definitely notice the difference between a GUI at 720p and one at 1080p.

But as for a game I wouldn't even care to notice. No one is going to sit there playing XOne games thinking its blurry. Not unless they're sitting there comparing it side by side with a 1080p version.

So the whole doomsday theatrics can stop now.

Avatar image for Heil68
#82 Posted by Heil68 (57159 posts) -

We all know lems would be respectful and not bring this up as an advantage if the roles were reversed. lmao

Avatar image for shawn30
#84 Posted by shawn30 (4367 posts) -

@Heil68 said:

We all know lems would be respectful and not bring this up as an advantage if the roles were reversed. lmao

But here's the thing. The debate over if the PS4 is more powerful is over, lol. No site that I have seen says the PS4 version isn't the best. The debate is how great is the difference so far in a finished product ready for release right now. The answer to that is being hotly debated. I do not think the difference between the games going forward will ever leap that great a distance. There is no PS4 game yet that can evidence that claim and obviously the resolution alone doesn't do it.

Avatar image for Ryan_Som
#85 Edited by Ryan_Som (2468 posts) -

"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."

I own a 65" and sit 8 feet away. Your "point" is invalid.

Avatar image for Zophar87
#86 Posted by Zophar87 (4344 posts) -

Resolution is a huge deal when you're trying to pass your console off as "next gen."

Avatar image for wis3boi
#87 Edited by wis3boi (32507 posts) -

damage control for a new gen that's heavily outdated before it hit the shelf.

Avatar image for no-scope-AK47
#88 Posted by no-scope-AK47 (3752 posts) -

The article is for casuals and consolites. Hermits who game at 2560x1600 and bench, frankly know what their looking at vs consolites. Consolites are used to sub 30fps and 720p on uncalibrated cheap hdtv's sitting too far or too close to their display in poor lighting.

Avatar image for shawn30
#89 Posted by shawn30 (4367 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

damage control for a new gen that's heavily outdated before it hit the shelf.

15% difference at best. Certainly not the end of the world, lol

Avatar image for wis3boi
#90 Posted by wis3boi (32507 posts) -

@shawn30 said:

@wis3boi said:

damage control for a new gen that's heavily outdated before it hit the shelf.

15% difference at best. Certainly not the end of the world, lol

"Cassettes are still music, 15% difference at best" - repeat ad nauseum

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
#91 Edited by KHAndAnime (17565 posts) -

@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.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
#92 Edited by KHAndAnime (17565 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

@shawn30 said:

@wis3boi said:

damage control for a new gen that's heavily outdated before it hit the shelf.

15% difference at best. Certainly not the end of the world, lol

"Cassettes are still music, 15% difference at best" - repeat ad nauseum

It's a night and day difference if you ask me. You'd have to be requiring glasses not to notice the left side is a disgusting blurry mess. An even better comparison would be blowing up 720P images to the size of a 1080P image, and compare it to a native 1080P image. Then people might finally see how massive the difference actually is. People can't really grasp the comparison if you're scaling 1080P down to 720P size, because we're dealing with bigger screen sizes, not smaller.

Avatar image for Heil68
#93 Posted by Heil68 (57159 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

@shawn30 said:

@wis3boi said:

damage control for a new gen that's heavily outdated before it hit the shelf.

15% difference at best. Certainly not the end of the world, lol

"Cassettes are still music, 15% difference at best" - repeat ad nauseum

Dont forget 8 tracks!

Avatar image for Shewgenja
#94 Posted by Shewgenja (18178 posts) -

@shawn30 said:

BF4 side by side comparison shot

I just love how the one part of the picture that has a detailed enough object (the building on the far right) is done in 900p so as not to deteriorate the overall image. Wow, the utter shit that people are going to damage controlling for the Xbone is truly astounding!

Avatar image for NineTailedGoku
#95 Posted by NineTailedGoku (1977 posts) -

Where were these damage control articles when PS3 had disadvantages by a smaller degree? I don't think anyone can deny MS paying off the gaming media. Because of MS business tactics, I hope Sony annihilate them in sales.

Avatar image for treedoor
#96 Posted by treedoor (7648 posts) -

I really am just so glad I don't care about graphics as much as cows do.

Avatar image for branketra
#97 Posted by BranKetra (51726 posts) -

I remember last gen when so many disregarded the Wii because its selling point was a peripheral and it had weaker hardware than the Xbox. Now, people for Microsoft do not care as much about hardware as the previous generation. What an interesting development.

That said, the Xbox One's main selling point will be its user interface. Kinect 2.0 and the efficiency of the Xbox One as a multimedia device will make it sell or fail.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
#98 Edited by KHAndAnime (17565 posts) -

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.

Avatar image for raging_user
#99 Edited by raging_user (467 posts) -

if one game was at 720p (or lower) and little to no AA but matched the visual fidelity of a pre-rendered pic http://i.imgur.com/qL8iUHT.jpg

and another game at some ludicrous resolution and AA up the ass, but it only looked comparable to something like shadow fall http://i.imgur.com/6JPWnby.jpg

which would you choose as the better looking game

Avatar image for treedoor
#100 Edited by treedoor (7648 posts) -

@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?