MGS4 : 786k pixels

SCC : 589k pixels

As I said, not even comparable...

Displaying a 720p game on a 1080p set needs no upscaling actually, it's just an interpolation.

Vertical resolution is the most important one, that's why some studios preffered anamorphic resolution like 960x1080 over 1280x720 (wich is almost the same pixel rendering cost)

This generations obession with resolution is bordering on the moronic.

Newsflash, high resoltion has nothing to do with how good a game looks. Thats more based on colour pallete, lighting, art direction then having more tiny squares. Not to mention gameplay is king anyway.

When you display a 720p game on a 1080p display one of several things is going on.

1. The 1080p display switches to 720p mode and the signal is stretched to fill the display
2. The 1080p display upscales the 720p signal to 1080p, depending on the display features
3. Your Xbox 360 upscales the 720p signal to 1080p
4. The game engine code upscales the 720p signal to 1080p mode

Upscaling means approximating more pixels through interpolation. It is not the same as displaying a lower res signal at full screen on a higher res display.

The easiest way to differentiate between the two is to watch a DVD on an Xbox with an HDMI connection, and then without. The former upscales the 480p signal to 1080p, while the latter produces a 480p signal stretched, not interpolated/upscaled to fill your 1080p display.

But yes, more vertical lines of resolution, including with signals using non-square pixels, produce a smoother image as in greatly reduced pixel stepping ("jaggies").

what turned you off from the game?

While I agree the focus on resolution is getting out of hand you can't say it has nothing to do with how good a game looks - it is a major factor in how good a game will look depending upon the relationship to the resolution and the display.

Game assets, art direction, lighting, etc. will make a huge difference in whether the game looks attractive or not - no doubt about it - but they can be both enhanced or scuppered by resolution.

Yes thats true. But without proper design of the visuals the high resolution accomplishes nothing. I can create a hand drawn scribble at 1080p, too bad I can't draw and it'd looks like ass. Whereas a sub hd picture of the Mona Lisa still looks better despite its lack of hd resolution. Resultion is great, but a high resolution says nothing about the actual image thats on the television except for the fact that its a little bit less pixelated.

Just finished the demo. It looks good and plays well. I dont see what people are moaning about.

but if they are not tiling 720p frames into the daughter chip there is no reason that it shouldn't have 4xmsaa... that would be a reasonable trade off

I think its more of a case of people jumping on the hate bandwagon just regarding resolution they are annoyed with.  So many people were quick to criticize FFXIII on the 360 regarding its issues, even with everything mentioned, when I saw the game in action its still a beautiful looking game.  The worst points regarding the quality of that game in comparison to the PS3 version were not because of the resolution fully but rather steps they implemented while porting.  The CG video could have looked a shed load better with some better use of the compression codecs rather than the hasty job that appeared.  The mad alisasing that occurs in places could have been fixed if they'd patched the engine prior to porting rather than doing the rush job. 

The point is that like you say resolution can enhance the image but it should never be a buying point, mind you some would argue graphics in general should never be a main buying point!