Played_Out said:
Take Blu-Ray and HD-DVD as an example. The blue laser technology they incorporate has been around for decades, but only now is it slowly finding favour as a consumer product. Resolutions above 1080p will not become an industry standard within the next decade because: 1.) Owners of TVs that support 1080 (or even 720) are still in a minority and will be for several years (globally). 2.) The broadcast standard will be 1080 max. 3.) The highest res supported by optical media will be 1080p. 4.) Current games consoles can only achieve 1080p in situations where there is very little going on on screen. 5.) TVs would cost a shitload more, and nobody with a TV <50" would be able to tell the difference anyway. @ davygee 60fps is far more important for gaming than 1440p. @ matte.lova CoD4 runs at 60fps on both consoles. |
That pretty much covers it. Much boils down to source material for the given native resolution of a display. For cable TV and 99% of gaming, 1080i/720p covers it for displays in the range of 32" and below. Even with a 50+" display, you're still limited by video source.
Blu-Ray, HD DVD, the PS3 XMB user interface (native 1080p), a handful of PS3 games, a smaller handful of 360 games (Dashboard is 720p native which is why it looks softer when displayed at 1080p), and any video card with 64MB of VRAM or more, and HD camcorders.
1440p native displays make less sense from the standpoint that only computer video cards can output such resolutions. There is no optical media format at that resolution. Cable broadcasts are limited to 720p/1080i due to bandwidth restrictions. These are broadcast standards. Standards that took the better part of ten years to establish. Arguments regarding upgrading the entire national network in the span of a 2-3 years are unrealistic at best, not to say that I wouldn't mind having access to one. Moving to Japan is your best bet currently.
Yes, the PS3 can output 1440p resolutions, but seeing as how 1080p is still far from standard for games, how many people would actually spend thousands on a 1440p display that would provide next to zero benefits? So you can play downloadable arcade style games at 1440p? Seriously...
As for size/viewing distance, I'm going to say I personally notice the dot pitch limitations of 1080p even on a "small" 52" display. Of course, you need to be sitting within 5' and have 20/20 vision. And by limitations, I'm referring to being able to see pixel edges that are not visible on a 37" 1080p display unless you are within computer monitor viewing distances (arguably the only reason for a smaller 1080p display is if it's seeing double use as an extra computer display).
But as it's already been pointed out, cost is the prime factor. Even if they produce them, what is the target market? Smaller than 1080p sets (which are currently replacing 1080i/720p sets at 42" and above as the industry standard). Even smaller when considering that the only current "standard" that exists for outputting 1440p resolutions are computer video cards.
Until there is a 1440p or better broadcast standard or media standard, do not hold your breath to buy one. Even when they become available, the premium they will command will put it far out of reach of the average consumer. For TV viewing purposes, I would be surprised to see these manufactured in sizes less than 60". Long ways away yet. Just like mass market viable HD downloads.
