Print

[bucko]

To much to read but I always feel 1080p should be left for the movie space.

720p WideScreen is definitely ok for most people, hell the 360 only has a couple of 1080p titles but it's just not worth it imho.

I think 1080p only shows it's true awesomeness if you have a 1080p projection set-up with a dedicated theatre room.

[throwingks]

This is a fairly old topic of debate.

Microsoft says 720p is the res of choice for games this gen. 1080p is just too much for today's hardware.
Sony says no way, we can do it with our hardware, that is why we are better.

After all is said and done. Microsoft was right again. Both companies sweet spot is 720p. Although some could argue that Nintendo was right with their 480p choice, because 720p is still out of many people's range and budget.

[twistedsymphony]

720p is indeed the "sweet spot" for this generation. The technology in the PS3 and 360 is quite powerful but anyone who puts out at 1080p 60FPS wont be showing you anything remotely "complex" to use your overwhelmingly unscientific term.

I would vehemently disagree that Nintendo made the right choice with their graphics. If the Wii supported 480p widescreen and 4xMSAA on top of that I would say they were doing fine..

unfortunately there are quite a few games that only support 480i in a 4:3 frame with no FSAA to speak of. Most Wii games don't even support widescreen or surround sound.

Nintendo required FSAA from all Gamecube games so while it wasn't the biggest pixel pusher it had relatively smooth graphics even in standard definition. By comparison I consider most Wii games to look markedly worse than what I saw in the Gamecube library if for nothing other than jaggies.

If you don't want to support HD because you think it's out of the price range of the market... by all means. I have no problem with that and I enjoy quite a few games in SD and ED... the lack of any standardization to speak of is what really pisses me off.

The absence of a digital audio output is puzzling as well considering both the Wii and Gamecube are perfectly capable of it. They both support surround sound through analog compressions as well meaning it wouldn't take any sort of performance hit, and the cost to add such a feature to the console would be <<$2

[Kr0n1k]

That was actually a pretty interesting read. I'm glad I didn't run out and buy a 1080p TV. Even in movies, there isn't a huge difference between 720p and 1080p on comparable monitors. Its good, but its not a thousand dollars more good. For comparisons sake, lets just look at what a high end PC can do with Oblivion.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800 ($975), Intel 975XBX2 ($200), eVGA 680i SLI ($200), 2GB Corsair Dominator CM2X1024 Memory (1GB x 2) ($200), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive ($165), Windows XP SP2, GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB. ($400)

30FPS 2048x1536, 4xAA/16xAF

And the same system, but with GeForce 8800 Ultra SLi'd (768MB x 2) ($700 x 2)

61 FPS 2048x1536, 4xAA/16xAF

Article can be found here.

I know the resolution is a bit more than 1080p, but its compareable, and you could expect a slight increase in avg. FPS at true 1080p. So, by my calculations, Sony is claiming the performance to be equal to a $3,000 gaming PC. It doesn't even really compare to the $1,800 PC because Oblivion only runs at 720p. Is a few extra pixels really worth thousands of dollars? Nope. And since the PS3 can't do it, I have absolutely no reason to go 1080p. This report just saved me some money.

[Giga_Death]

QUOTE("Kr0n1k")

That was actually a pretty interesting read.

... This report just saved me some money.

Wasn't the intention but glad it helped.