36 replies to this topic

[+McKay]

I play at 1080p on my 32 inch 1080p TV, looks fine to me. Are your settings derped?

[+jamesyfx]

Yeah I've always been aware that most games are at best 720p.

I think I remember reading that Alan Wake runs at 544p and Final Fantasy XIII runs at 576p. Nowhere near 1080p.

[srbeen]

The smaller a high def the TV is, the better it looks the closer you get to it. The closer you are to a bigger screen, the worse it looks. The resolution is 1920 pixes by 1080 pixels. They ALL fit in a 32" or a 70". just the 70" is obviously 2x the size pixels so you are literally halfing your aliasing (I think)

This is why I went from a 42" 720p to a 32" 1080p TV. Wow, you really notice the difference. Same as an iPad 2 to an iPad 3 screen. apart you can't tell, but side by side its a world of difference. We won't include the fact that most 360 games run at 720P at best, only the menus/dvd playback/netflix/arcade or something are doing the true 1080.

[LUTZIFER]

I've heard quite a few people mention that the 360 isn't 1080p, and that games aren't either.
I know my 360 is set on 1080p and my TV is, and the majority of my games are 1080p.
All I know is I got a pronominal picture quality and awesome game detail when I play my games. Nuff said.

[theyarecomingforyou]

LUTZIFER, on 24 November 2012 - 14:22, said:

I've heard quite a few people mention that the 360 isn't 1080p, and that games aren't either.
I know my 360 is set on 1080p and my TV is, and the majority of my games are 1080p.

Unless you're nearly exclusively playing 2D arcade games there's no way that the majority of your games are 1080p, as the X360 simply isn't powerful enough to render games at that resolution. Heck, there are lots of games that don't even run at 720p and have to be upscaled from 640p. The X360 may be outputting at 1080p but it is not rendering at that resolution.

[+jamesyfx]

Correct. The little resolution popup on your TV says 1080p as thats the output, but that's not what the games are running in natively. It's just being stretched to that.

[AJerman]

Both PS3 and 360 have a very limited number of native 1080p games. I haven't actually read any details as to why, but I can guarantee it's to use higher quality graphics while keeping the frame rate up. The 360 and PS3 don't have the power to run these games the way they want them at 1080p. Next gen will jump to native 1080p (and possibly support output to 4k, while they probably won't have power to run games at 4k). You have to remember when these systems came out, 1080p screens weren't in every room of every house like they are now.

[theyarecomingforyou]

AJerman, on 24 November 2012 - 14:43, said:

You have to remember when these systems came out, 1080p screens weren't in every room of every house like they are now.

True, but they knew they would be. It was a cost saving measure.

[HawkMan]

Well a console that would have cost 800-100 dollars, with DUAL SLI setups and 1000W power consumption and the cooling system from hell wouldn't have been very popular

[AJerman]

theyarecomingforyou, on 24 November 2012 - 14:46, said:

True, but they knew they would be. It was a cost saving measure.

HawkMan, on 24 November 2012 - 14:49, said:

Well a console that would have cost 800-100 dollars, with DUAL SLI setups and 1000W power consumption and the cooling system from hell wouldn't have been very popular

Yeah, I think it would have made the system far to expensive and bulky like HawkMan said, at least at launch, to support it. Think about how much power you'd need to play games at 4k right now. You'd need probably quad SLI to smoothly play games at high quality in 4k, but in 6 or 7 years time, your regular old video cards would probably do it. I mean, you COULD make a 1080p game for the 360 or PS3 right now, but you'd have to minimize graphic texture detail a whole lot, and they figure it looks better at 720p upscaled. Honestly, I've never had any issues with my 360 looking "bad" on my 1080p screen, but it'd be kind of like going from an 800x480 screen on a phone to a 720p screen. You didn't know how bad it was before until you upgraded to it and looked back.

[Blackhearted]

AJerman, on 24 November 2012 - 14:43, said:

Both PS3 and 360 have a very limited number of native 1080p games. I haven't actually read any details as to why, but I can guarantee it's to use higher quality graphics while keeping the frame rate up. The 360 and PS3 don't have the power to run these games the way they want them at 1080p. Next gen will jump to native 1080p (and possibly support output to 4k, while they probably won't have power to run games at 4k). You have to remember when these systems came out, 1080p screens weren't in every room of every house like they are now.

There's 3 simple reasons there's pretty much no games with modern visuals at 1080p on a console. Memory size(512MB of ram for the whole system is nowhere near enough), Memory bandwidth(22GB/sec of video bandwidth is far too low), and simply raw horsepower.

[Shadrack]

Xbox 360 is already a 7 year old console but I think games look pretty nice still. Wonder how significant the next gen will be...

[Alladaskill17]

Shadrack, on 24 November 2012 - 23:50, said:

Xbox 360 is already a 7 year old console but I think games look pretty nice still. Wonder how significant the next gen will be...

For real. Companies *finally* really showing off what the current generation is/was always capable of. In my mind BF3, Halo 4. Anyways, imagine at the end of next generation (ahem, current/soon PC graphics - saving many of you time on that comment) what games will look like. Sadly we have to start with crap, even from first party, like Perfect Dark Zero and finally be impressed at the end of a cycle... /rant

[theyarecomingforyou]

Shadrack, on 24 November 2012 - 23:50, said:

Xbox 360 is already a 7 year old console but I think games look pretty nice still. Wonder how significant the next gen will be...

It will be noticeably behind what is available with top-end gaming PCs, as all the talk is that Microsoft and Sony will be quite conservative after the massive investments they made this generation. Load times will likely increase, as consoles will be bottlenecked by optical drives and won't haven't the storage to install most games (let alone at SSD performance levels as seen on PC). They'll handle 1080p comfortably and with noticeably improved visual fidelity but PCs have been at that level for years and a lot of gamers have moved on to high resolution displays (2560x1600), multi-monitor setups (5760x1200) or 3D (1920x1080 @120fps). More interestingly, 5760x1200 (7m pixels) isn't that far off 4K (8.3m pixels) so certainly the next generation of PC graphics cards should handle it with ease.

As usual, if you want "next gen" then just buy a PC and hook it up to your TV. The games are also cheaper. You'll miss out on a few exclusives but then the PC gets exclusives of its own.

[LaP]

Dane, on 21 November 2012 - 13:39, said:

The 360 does not support native 1080p correct? Only 720p?

I recently went from a 32 inch 720p HDTV to a 40 inch 1080p HDTV. The games look far worse then ever. It seems like the game upscale, and there isnt anything to do to correct it.

Anyone else have this problem? On the back of games, it says 1080p. It supports it, or is it native 1080p?

The console itself can support it.

But most games run in 720p or 540p since the console is not powerful enough for 1080p in those games. Basically for true 1080p a game must have really simple gfx­.

I don't think your TV will do a better upscaling job than the 360 so leave it at 1080p output.

And yeah 360 games don't look that great on a good 1080p TV WHEN you compare them to real 1080p sources (Blu ray, PC output, ...) displayed on it. I play some of my PC games on my TV using a wireless controller and at real 1080p with AA and aniso it's really another league.

Anyone with a good PC and a good 1080p monitor will tell you that those 360 versus PC witcher 2 videos are just silly. It's like if the PC version is run on a 5yo PC at lower resolution with mid quality settings ...