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

Forums - Gaming - Sony: MS "punched themselves out of the fight"

redspear on 07 April 2008
bobobologna said:
Ok, I think we can agree that the standards for resolutions are pretty muddy as to what is official terminology and what is not. Computer resolutions are extremely standardized, whereas differing standards for each countries broadcast system requires different standards for TVs. If I say this is a SXGA monitor, there's no question as to what the native resolution of that monitor is.

I also think we can all agree that 1080p is generally accepted by most people to mean a resolution of 1920x1080. Calling GT5 Prologue a 1080p game is (IMO) technically correct, but is potentially misleading to consumers. BUT, it's no different (again, IMO) from saying this or that game "supports" 1080p. You wouldn't believe how many people think Halo 3 runs at 1080p because "it says so on the back of box."

And that's basically the last thing I'll say in this thread.

And before anyone here does claim that Halo 3 runs at 1080p, no it does not. It outputs a 1080p image, it upscales to a 1080p image, but it does not run or render at 1080p.

Bobobologna.

 

Television broadcast standards are very standardized and also very complicated. They are much more standardized and complicated tahna standard computer monitor since everythign has to fall within exact parameters for full compatability with all sets. Not only that all sets must be able to display what the signal is sending for that standard. This dictates everything from Framerate to viewing area to aspect ratios to color. With the advent of ATSC it has become closer to computers you no longer have to focus on getting your color between nine oclock and 12 oclock on vetroscope but it is still slightly more restrictive than a computer monitor. There is a lot that goes on with a signal that your tv takes care of before you actually see the image and the newer sets allow for a greater variety but it is still not anything goes. I am just glad that Title Safe will be finally gone in about 5 years for the most part.

 



Around the Network
bobobologna on 07 April 2008
redspear said:
bobobologna said:
Ok, I think we can agree that the standards for resolutions are pretty muddy as to what is official terminology and what is not. Computer resolutions are extremely standardized, whereas differing standards for each countries broadcast system requires different standards for TVs. If I say this is a SXGA monitor, there's no question as to what the native resolution of that monitor is.

I also think we can all agree that 1080p is generally accepted by most people to mean a resolution of 1920x1080. Calling GT5 Prologue a 1080p game is (IMO) technically correct, but is potentially misleading to consumers. BUT, it's no different (again, IMO) from saying this or that game "supports" 1080p. You wouldn't believe how many people think Halo 3 runs at 1080p because "it says so on the back of box."

And that's basically the last thing I'll say in this thread.

And before anyone here does claim that Halo 3 runs at 1080p, no it does not. It outputs a 1080p image, it upscales to a 1080p image, but it does not run or render at 1080p.

Bobobologna.

 

Television broadcast standards are very standardized and also very complicated. They are much more standardized and complicated tahna standard computer monitor since everythign has to fall within exact parameters for full compatability with all sets. Not only that all sets must be able to display what the signal is sending for that standard. This dictates everything from Framerate to viewing area to aspect ratios to color. With the advent of ATSC it has become closer to computers you no longer have to focus on getting your color between nine oclock and 12 oclock on vetroscope but it is still slightly more restrictive than a computer monitor. There is a lot that goes on with a signal that your tv takes care of before you actually see the image and the newer sets allow for a greater variety but it is still not anything goes. I am just glad that Title Safe will be finally gone in about 5 years for the most part.

 


Ok, my comment was probably worded poorly.  I'm not saying that TV broadcasts/TV signals are a "anything goes" sort of system.  I realize that it's very complicated and I'm not trying to imply it isn't.  What I was trying to imply was that a 1024x768 pixel TV is considered a 720p TV.  So is a 1280x720 TV and a 1376x768 TV.  But if someone tells you that they have an SXGA monitor, there is just 1 resolution that that monitor will be, 1280x1024.



Username2324 on 07 April 2008
Imthelegend said:
Is he only talking about MS or about Nintendo as well. The article sounds like he is talking about both Nintendo and MS but the headline says MS. If he is also talking about Wii then maybe he should wait until after E3.
Microsoft fired off Halo 3 already, and Gears of War 2 is their only big title left, and Nintendo has fired off SSBB, and Mario Kart Wii is on the way, while the PS3 still has quite a few big titles in the pipe waiting to be released.

 



jkimball on 07 April 2008

This was pretty funny. The wikipedia article on the first page stated that 1080p meant 1080 lines of VERTICAL and p for progressive.

A 16:9 display needs 1920 lines of Horizintal to be 1080p
A 4:3 display needs 1280 lines of Horizontal to be 1080p
A 1:1 display needs 1080 lines of Horizontal to be 1080p.

That said, 1920x1080 has become the defacto standard for '1080p' because wide screen TV's are 16:9. If widescreen TV's were 16:10, like computer monitors are then 1080p defacto standard would be 1728x1080 - and still be called '1080p'.

personally I have rockin 20" CRT. With an antenna. And six channels. Woot.





Trying to convince me the Wii is a real adult game machine 'if you play it right' is like trying to convince me Tofu tastes great 'if you just cook it right'

ZenfoldorVGI on 07 April 2008
mesoteto said:
@Zen i got a screen shot but dont tell the industry


 LMAO what if it was "Mike Tyson's Punchout: Wii" and starred tyson again. I would die happy.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Around the Network
Isamu on 07 April 2008
gebx said:
Isamu said:
MikeB said:

@ RocketPig

"The F38310 is a widescreen CRT HDTV with a digital resolution of 1,280 by 1,080 and a dot pitch of 0.78 millimeters." source

Some HDTV sets 1280 x 1080:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4566-6485_7-0.html?filter=502443_12354559_ 

 


Sorry to jump in here.

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/hitachi-p50h401/4505-6482_7-32331463.html

 From the site you linked:
Hitachi's P50H401 is hardly a typical plasma, however. Its spec sheet proclaims "HD1080" resolution, which sounds a bit like "1080p" but most decidedly is not

Or another part :

Unlike most 50-inch plasmas, which have native resolutions of 1,366x768 or 1,920x1,080 pixels, the P50H401 claims a native resolution of 1,280x1,080. Hitachi calls this resolution "HD1080," but it's similar to the company's old ALiS system in that the vertical resolution (the all-important "1080" part) isn't comprised of discrete pixels. Like all other non-CRT HDTVs, the Hitachi converts all incoming signals to match its native resolution.


Ah! Someone give this man/woman a star!

Heh me = Man.  Thanks for noticing it, it seems that it got completly avoided ! :(



Frost on 07 April 2008

Normally Sony PR sounds like buffoonery to me, much like PR from the other two, however in this case I find myself agreeing. I mean, the guy's logic is sound, and we're already starting to see the effects.

360 vs. PS3 is playing out like the electronics version of Foreman vs. Ali, respectively.



redspear on 07 April 2008
jkimball said:
This was pretty funny. The wikipedia article on the first page stated that 1080p meant 1080 lines of VERTICAL and p for progressive.

A 16:9 display needs 1920 lines of Horizintal to be 1080p
A 4:3 display needs 1280 lines of Horizontal to be 1080p
A 1:1 display needs 1080 lines of Horizontal to be 1080p.

That said, 1920x1080 has become the defacto standard for '1080p' because wide screen TV's are 16:9. If widescreen TV's were 16:10, like computer monitors are then 1080p defacto standard would be 1728x1080 - and still be called '1080p'.

personally I have rockin 20" CRT. With an antenna. And six channels. Woot.




As far as I am aware there is no standard for any 1080 setting within the broadcast systems that supports 4:3. It is possible to be an antiquated or failed spec or perhaps limited to the Japanese market(they have had HD since 1986 if I recall).

 

The TV set description says it all the proccessing is done by the TV and is an offspec TV. In theory you can make any TV resolution anything you want BUT it has to be able to display standard signals. The TV does all of the work there for little to no gain that I can think of. It is not a standard and since it is 16:9 it does kind of debunk the Wiki page claim of 4:3.

 



MikeB on 08 April 2008
jkimball said:
This was pretty funny. The wikipedia article on the first page stated that 1080p meant 1080 lines of VERTICAL and p for progressive.

A 16:9 display needs 1920 lines of Horizintal to be 1080p
A 4:3 display needs 1280 lines of Horizontal to be 1080p
A 1:1 display needs 1080 lines of Horizontal to be 1080p.

That said, 1920x1080 has become the defacto standard for '1080p' because wide screen TV's are 16:9. If widescreen TV's were 16:10, like computer monitors are then 1080p defacto standard would be 1728x1080 - and still be called '1080p'.

personally I have rockin 20" CRT. With an antenna. And six channels. Woot.




Interesting post. I agree the description for 1080i is rather similar: "1080i is a shorthand name for a category of video modes. The number 1080 stands for 1080 lines of vertical resolution, while the letter i stands for interlaced or non-progressive scan."

Nice to see a few people like you participating in this thread. I think RocketPig and a few others take things far too personal, IMO discussing technicals is nothing to get that upset about.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

selnor on 08 April 2008

rocketpig it's ok. mikeB is so caught up in 4d he doesnt know fact from fiction. I stopped listening to anything he said about a year ago when the words PS3 and more powerful came out his mouth. Oh and GT5p is native 720p upscaled to 1080p. And as we all know PS3's upscaler is software orientated. Not hardware.