frybread said: Dystopian Delight said: You keep dumping on the graphics of the non-wii consoles, I don't believe I have.  I dump on the catchphrase of "HD gaming" which is hilarious in its lack of description.  Just think about it for a moment,  your mom playing Solitaire on her laptop is "HD gaming".   You playing GTA IV on your PS3 - not HD gaming.   Rather, people lump all Wii games together as ugly or say that Wii owners don't appreciate graphics, because it's not "HD gaming"

 

Yeah it's a catchphrase PC gaming has had these resolutions for a long time but explain to me, how else would you market it to people? How would you describe the transition from 480 to 1080 to the mass market? Maybe you don't understand the whole "HD" thing isn't about resolution sizes it refers to the clarity on a TV. Old cathode tube TV's are considered Standard resolution, hell they are even called standard, now what would you say a whole new wave of TVs and digital cable service be called...New standard?Nicer Picture? How bout something consumer friendly and has tangible meaning such as I dunno....High definition?  The whole HD thing applys more to TVs since you can't set thier resolution so bringing in the PC compared to consoles isn't very apt.

If you seriously can't see the huge consumer difference then you are just being the same as the elitist talking about Wii games as bad graphics.

Btw I would bet most people lump Wii games together not because of thier comparisons to this current gen's games but cause of thier similair graphical power to last gen.

 

Exactly, it's marketing and speaks nothing of quality. It's the 16 bit, 32 bit, 64 bit playground arguments all over again.

What should they tout instead of "HD Gaming"? I'd prefer they drop meaningless terms and let the games speak for themselves.  But if they absolutely must speak of graphical power, I suggest they compare Fillrates, as that's simple and speaks more about visuals than the ability to run something in "HD" - which a computer from 1992 can do just fine, so long as the game is very simple.

Most developers don't make their games 1080p, because they'd have to sacrifice too much to reach that resolution. In other words, HD would make their game ugly.

If you think 720p Sims looks better than PS3's GTA IV (which by definition is not HD), then by all means, stick to spouting the superiority of "HD Gaming".

frybread said: Exactly, it's marketing and speaks nothing of quality. It's the 16 bit, 32 bit, 64 bit playground arguments all over again. What should they tout instead of "HD Gaming"? I'd prefer they drop meaningless terms and let the games speak for themselves.  But if they absolutely must speak of graphical power, I suggest they compare Fillrates, as that's simple and speaks more about visuals than the ability to run something in "HD" - which a computer from 1992 can do just fine, so long as the game is very simple. Most developers don't make their games 1080p, because they'd have to sacrifice too much to reach that resolution. In other words, HD would make their game ugly. If you think 720p Sims looks better than PS3's GTA IV (which by definition is not HD), then by all means, stick to spouting the superiority of "HD Gaming".

 

HD doesn't just refer to just consoles in fact I don't think I have ever heard any actual company involved in games talk about them as HD. You are too hung up on the fans of the systems rather than the actual terms. ALMOST EVERY SINGLE USAGE OF THE TERM HD RELATES TO TVs AND THE SERVICE WHICH BRINGS THEM HD CHANNELS.

I mean are you stupid? When the hell did I mention graphics when talking bout my likes and dislikes of the Wii. I never said what should they say instead of "HD gaming" you just made that up cause you have no point now. In fact this whole time you are the only one who keeps saying "HD gaming". Do you not realize the term of HD was used to sell TVs? Do you understand High definition TVs aren't bought exclusively for two video game consoles? Seriously are you stupid?ignorant?biased?

I thought you could read a paragraph and not spin it into the same crap you have been saying. Like I said before you just have a huge unfounded bias that won't let you understand it's only fanboys that say the Wii bad cause of graphics. If you seriously cannot understand the meaning and idea of how "HD" pertains to the market other then just video game consoles then this is just a fruitless conversation.

Your posts are tantamount to bitching about the transition in TVs from black and white to color and companys using the term technicolor which you think is bullshit cause life has real color even though it's never been on this medium before.

I think I gave you too much credit in the reply above. I didn't realize you had a basic misunderstanding of "HD" as it pertains to Televisions.

Before you start calling me stupid and ignorant, you may want to do a bit of research.

HD does refer to resolution, exactly like a computer screen. It's been made more simple for consumers to understand, here are the common conversions:

480p = 720x480
720p = 1280x720
1080p = 1920×1080

HD is defined as anything 1280x720 (720p) or higher.

My points summarized, just for you:
1) Games running at 1280x1024 and higher emerged in the 90's.
2) Many modern games, such as GTA IV, are not running in HD.
3) HD isn't as important for the visual quality of a game as its visual effects, style, color, etc.

Again, compare the Sims in 1080p to a non-HD game like GTA IV.  HD says very little about the technology behind the visuals, or the visuals themselves at this point in gaming.

With Xbox 360 I can play new games on a $300 system, which is nothing compared to how much it would cost to buy and upgrade a computer to play the same game.  Also, Xbox multiplayer is a better experience than PC multiplayer, be it on the couch with friends or easily getting a game going along much easier with more friends.   Thus, for me:

Wii = party games with family, girlfriend

PC = strategy games

Xbox 360 = everything else

ManusJustus said: With Xbox 360 I can play new games on a $300 system, which is nothing compared to how much it would cost to buy and upgrade a computer to play the same game.  Also, Xbox multiplayer is a better experience than PC multiplayer, be it on the couch with friends or easily getting a game going along much easier with more friends.

To equal a 360 would probably take $350 to $400 on a PC.   $500 would get you a PC that runs Bioshock, Mass Effect, GTA IV, Gears, and any other game with far better visual quality than 360/PS3.  Also, many PC users prefer Steam to Live, and there's no law against using a PC in the living room, 360 controller in hand.

 Wii = in-person multiplayer, new-gen gaming

PC = traditional gaming, online multiplayer

Xbox 360 = sports games  (the only genre not well represented by the two above)

Oh great, another fanboy thread to attack the HD consoles...wow this is so pathetic.

I'd probably have just bought a DS and PSP and called it a day. If the Wii had gone the PS360 route, all of the good games would be on handhelds anyway.

frybread said: I think I gave you too much credit in the reply above. I didn't realize you had a basic misunderstanding of "HD" as it pertains to Televisions. Maybe you don't understand the whole "HD" thing isn't about resolution sizes it refers to the clarity on a TV... so bringing in the PC compared to consoles isn't very apt Before you start calling me stupid and ignorant, you may want to do a bit of research. HD does refer to resolution, exactly like a computer screen. It's been made more simple for consumers to understand, here are the common conversions: 480p = 720x480 720p = 1280x720 1080p = 1920×1080 HD is defined as anything 1280x720 (720p) or higher. My points summarized, just for you: 1) Games running at 1280x1024 and higher emerged in the 90's. 2) Many modern games, such as GTA IV, are not running in HD. 3) HD isn't as important for the visual quality of a game as its visual effects, style, color, etc. Again, compare the Sims in 1080p to a non-HD game like GTA IV.  HD says very little about the technology behind the visuals, or the visuals themselves.

Ok you are just a troll that has to be it. I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT  HD CONSTITUTES.  If you would have actually looked at my posts and thoughts you would easily understand the term HD was not made to relate directly to a resolution size but more as a tool to describe the advent  of higher resolution TVs why the fuck else would it apply to different resolutions? would 720 be HD and 1080 be HigherD? NO of course not. Do you honestly think the standard consumer has any idea what resolution thier monitor or tv is? Is it honestly that hard to see I am talking about a term just like you keep saying "HD gaming". If I didnt know the resolution sizes why would I have said 480 and 1080???? random fucking numbers that came out my ass? You seriously didn't read or comprehend so I am still gonna call you stupid as hell, cause if you weren't you could tell the context of the qoute in question and the reason that "HD" was in quotes it self. You have done nothing but strawman and reiterrate the same redundant bullshit. You keep bringing up graphics, Gta4 and "HD gaming" when I have said nothing about them.

 

My point summarized, just for you:

1. You cleary ignored and cherry picked my arguments that the term HD applys mostly to TVs especially when console makers and gaming companys don't use them.

2. You quoted me and then ignored the fact I was talking about resolution sizes the previous sentence (learn to infer).

3. Consumers Were not marketed to as High resolution TVs hence High definition which to consumers is...*GASP*Visual clarity

4. You have said nothing new in 4 posts other than "HD gaming"

5. You must have no comprehension or reading skills.

 

It's fine that you couldn't find a reasonable argument to my last post so you had to take the context out of one single sentence out of posts before that. It's ok I am sure you will respond with something else out of context cause clearly you can't find anything to refute what I said.

Well, I'm a PC gamer and I've never owned any console. I've played console games at friends, though. I have to agree that the so called HD consoles have become too similar to PCs so I have no interest in them. Instead I've purchased a Wii and a DS just because they're different and I love Nintendo's first-party games.