By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Which has more 1080p native games? Xbox 360 or PS3?

Squilliam on 11 January 2011
Khuutra said:

Every generation I think "Okay, this will be the one where we get a ton of great-looking games at 60fps all the time"

And every generation, developers care about something else.

I'll take 720p next gen if I can get it locked at 60fps.


You're not alone there!



Tease.

Around the Network
dahuman on 11 January 2011
Mr Puggsly said:
dahuman said:
Mr Puggsly said:
dahuman said:

you should have made a thread named "Who actually gives a shit if a game is 1080p native or not on the HD consoles?" and have a poll with that, see the results, then decide if you want to make this thread, but no, you didn't do that, so I'm going to say, who gives a shit? everything looks terrible if not on PC outside of a few games anyways.

Well said... PC games do look great when they aren't crashing or bugging out. :-p

But yeah, I don't think it really matters. Very few seem to run at 1080p and they aren't the stand out titles.

you know as well as I do that HD console games need just as much patching if not more these days, thanks to always being online, everybody is getting screwed, but at least my Steam updates everything and I don't even need to look at it.

Console games get patched because of bugs. PC games often get patched because they won't work on certain hardware or they don't get patched and you gotta upgrade. Not every game is on Steam.

Anyhow, this isn't a PC gaming discussion. Try and stay on topic. My guess is you try to crowbar the awesomeness of PC and Steam whenever you get a chance.

no, games don't get patched to work on certain hardware most of the time, that's more on the video card maker's drivers unless you are talking about games from 10 years ago. It's the same bugs and BS you'd see on any hd console game. We are not in the 90s anymore.

My point was right there in my first post. Who gives a rat's ass about 1080p on consoles? It's not like they have enough ram or AA to not look like shit no matter which way you look at it, it's moot as hell, but that's not stopping me from playing that jaggied ass 720p 3D mode GT5 because that's just how it is.



dahuman on 11 January 2011
kowenicki said:
BMaker11 said:

I thought the 360 couldn't even do 1080P natively because you need HDMI for that, and 360 originally didn't have that. Therefore, everything that's "1080P" on the Xbox is merely upscaled, while the PS3 was built with 1080P in mind from the ground up?

If my assumption is correct, the PS3 has more 1080P native games.....because the 360 has 0



Oh dear.... how many times!?

1.  You DONT need HDMI for 1080p, I was pushing out 1080p on component on my first 360 (launch model). So long as the TV was capable of showing 1080p over component (my samsung was) then there was no problem.

2.  ALL 360's have had HDMI for the past few years

3.  Who cares?

 

That's correct, 1080p is more TV based, you can run 1080p on component if the TV supports it, so bam!



BMaker11 on 11 January 2011
kowenicki said:
BMaker11 said:
AussieGecko said:

BMaker11 - If HDMI isnt used the console resolution changes. Native doesnt mean minimum it means it is designed to run at that resolution. Therefore your assumption is incorrect.

OP I dunno but it would be interesting to find out. The 3D games would have to be wouldnt they?


A lot of games can "run" at 1080P. Halo 3 for example. But we know it's native resolution is really 1154x640. Wipeout HD, on the other hand, has a native resolution of 1920x1080. That's the kind of difference I was talking about.

@kowenicki

I was under the assumption that it was needed to have true 1080P, at least for consoles. I wasn't entirely sure, hence all the question marks in my original post. But regardless, in terms of natively running games at 1080P for the 360, I thought the 360 only upscaled. I know you can technically play them at that resolution....but I was playing a SNES emulator on my computer when it was hooked up to my 40" HDTV....the game was outputting 1080P but I mean....

And that's what I thought the situation was similar to on the 360 (albeit not as extreme).

And lastly, you keep saying "who cares", but the guy mere wanted a few numbers and little discussion. Nothing wrong with that

The 360 doesnt "just" upscale to 1080p... although yes it can upscale all games to 1080p, it is also entirely capable of running true 1080p and does.  I dont understand why people even think this cant be done?  It comes from the sony fanboy propaganda of its early life I guess.

Like I said, I was under the assumption as such. I hadn't really looked into myself....just saying what I've heard over the years



raygun on 11 January 2011

Actually 1080i is the limit without HDMI, not 1080p.



Around the Network
greenmedic88 on 11 January 2011
disolitude said:
greenmedic88 said:

This comparison/argument has been rendered essentially pointless as any game that actually pushes the visual envelope on either hardware won't run at a native 1920x1080p anyway. With the exception of games like Wipeout HD and GT5, most 1080p console games are PSN/XBL games or games with small playing levels (sports games) and fewer on screen models.

You will never see a hardware pushing game like Uncharted 3 or Gears 3 running at 1080p native render as neither have the GPU memory or processing power.

The only noticeable difference for the most part is the fact that the PS3 renders its menus at 1080p and the Xbox renders at 720p upscaled to 1080p giving them a softer appearance that most haven't even noticed.

Very few games indeed. Even GT5 isn't native 1080p, its 1280x1080 and then the width is upscaled to 1920 pixels.

Not to mention its been confirmed by digital foundry that 720p in that game runs smoother than "1080p" mode...so whats the point?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-gran-turismo-5-tech-analysis?page=1

I'm not going into an "interpretive" argument over the definition of 1080p, but by definition it means 1080 lines of vertical resolution, progressively scanned. That includes any horizontal resolution.

The marketing term "Full HD" assumes 1920x1080p.

There are plenty of video camcorders on the market that are correctly marketed and sold as "1080p" yet have multiple aspect ratio recording modes to include those that are below a 16:9 aspect ratio 1920 lines of horizontal resolution. Still "1080p" by definition.



dahuman on 11 January 2011
raygun said:

Actually 1080i is the limit without HDMI, not 1080p.


ZOMG STOP WITH THIS BS PEOPLE! Component is a lot like a VGA cable OK!??!?!?! Analog analog analog! It depends on the TV hardware to be able to display anything higher than 1080p on component, most newer TVs are able to do 1080p component KKKKKKKK????!?!!?! Don't post if you don't know about this shit! HDMI = 1.) Digital video w/audio 2.) HDCP capable to fight piracy, and 3.) 3D support.



disolitude on 11 January 2011
dahuman said:
raygun said:

Actually 1080i is the limit without HDMI, not 1080p.


ZOMG STOP WITH THIS BS PEOPLE! Component is a lot like a VGA cable OK!??!?!?! Analog analog analog! It depends on the TV hardware to be able to display anything higher than 1080p on component, most newer TVs are able to do 1080p component KKKKKKKK????!?!!?! Don't post if you don't know about this shit! HDMI = 1.) Digital video w/audio 2.) HDCP capable to fight piracy, and 3.) 3D support.

I can do 3D over VGA on my PC...

Just sayin' :)



greenmedic88 on 11 January 2011
Khuutra said:

Every generation I think "Okay, this will be the one where we get a ton of great-looking games at 60fps all the time"

And every generation, developers care about something else.

I'll take 720p next gen if I can get it locked at 60fps.

If everyone doesn't deliver 1920x1080p @ 60fps next generation at minimum, I have to question what else those consoles would bring besides a new platform to sell new games on considering that sub $100 GPUs with 1GB of dedicated VRAM should easily be able to deliver such performance.

While I doubt it would see any sort of mass consumer living room use, multi-display output should be an option. 



dahuman on 11 January 2011
disolitude said:
dahuman said:
raygun said:

Actually 1080i is the limit without HDMI, not 1080p.


ZOMG STOP WITH THIS BS PEOPLE! Component is a lot like a VGA cable OK!??!?!?! Analog analog analog! It depends on the TV hardware to be able to display anything higher than 1080p on component, most newer TVs are able to do 1080p component KKKKKKKK????!?!!?! Don't post if you don't know about this shit! HDMI = 1.) Digital video w/audio 2.) HDCP capable to fight piracy, and 3.) 3D support.

I can do 3D over VGA on my PC...

Just sayin' :)


I just said support, as in companies investing in such tech, nobody will support component 3D, I can bet you money on that one. =P