Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

The reason I ask is that my family just got a Samsung 42" LCD television yesterday; we hooked up the Gamecube with standard a/v cables last night and played some Wave Race, Metroid Prime 2 and Resident Evil 4. They all looked absolutely beautiful up there on the screen.

My understanding is that Revolution's 480p would look sharper than the set-up I just described. For those who have seen it in action, how much better would a 720p screenshot look? I'm not arguing that Nintendo was right not to include high def support, but will Xbox360 and PS3 games really look that much better from a sharpness standpoint?

I've read that the jump from 480i to 480p is the most dramatic change in picture quality. 720p and 1080i are, of course, better but the improvment isn't as dramatic.

I suspect it really depends on how big of a videophile you are. Some people drool over the difference even an S-video cable can make, but I just don't see it myself. Hell, I know a guy that's absolutely obsessed with the picture quality on his HDTV. He bought special equipment to help him calibrate the screen. Even going as far as hiring a technication for several hours to fine tune the color values more accurately than the TV menus allow. The result of his hard work? He's never happy with his picture quality. It always needs more fine-tuning depending on what he's watching/playing at the moment. He ruined the experience for himself.

In the end, the difference you see depends on the quality of the TV you're using and your own experience. Just hook things up the best your setup/consoles will allow and be happy with it. You'll have more fun that way.

If you see The Revolution in high def expect to see Bobby Z. make up really cake in performance.

I'll be pissed if I have to pay extra for that stupid shit.

Originally Posted by coolz481 The reason I ask is that my family just got a Samsung 42" LCD television yesterday; we hooked up the Gamecube with standard a/v cables last night and played some Wave Race, Metroid Prime 2 and Resident Evil 4. They all looked absolutely beautiful up there on the screen. My understanding is that Revolution's 480p would look sharper than the set-up I just described. For those who have seen it in action, how much better would a 720p screenshot look? I'm not arguing that Nintendo was right not to include high def support, but will Xbox360 and PS3 games really look that much better from a sharpness standpoint?

I have an HD set and I have the component cables for the GC . First off 480p looks much better than 480i . You get a clearer picture and sharper image. An example I have seen would be windwaker . At first I didnt notice the difference until I restarted the game sans progressive scan.

Then I notice how blurry text was and how much duller the game looked I thought it was just my eyes but it wasnt . 720p is better than 480 . why because its a higher resolution and you can see more. Take the pc for example, games with lower resolution tend to look duller textures not as rich as you would think. but once you start bumping up the resolution you will start seeing more and more of the screen and sharper textures clearer image.

I don't want to pay more money for support of something I don't utilize. If you really want HD, give them some kind of add-on. But I don't see who needs HDTV anyway.

Originally Posted by drumbandit I've read that the jump from 480i to 480p is the most dramatic change in picture quality. 720p and 1080i are, of course, better but the improvment isn't as dramatic. I suspect it really depends on how big of a videophile you are. Some people drool over the difference even an S-video cable can make, but I just don't see it myself. Hell, I know a guy that's absolutely obsessed with the picture quality on his HDTV. He bought special equipment to help him calibrate the screen. Even going as far as hiring a technication for several hours to fine tune the color values more accurately than the TV menus allow. The result of his hard work? He's never happy with his picture quality. It always needs more fine-tuning depending on what he's watching/playing at the moment. He ruined the experience for himself. In the end, the difference you see depends on the quality of the TV you're using and your own experience. Just hook things up the best your setup/consoles will allow and be happy with it. You'll have more fun that way.

Well to be fair to your friend, many higher end sets these days need to be calibrated properly, and regularly...sort of like in the golden age of TV's. As long as they meet a certain tolerance at the factory they're sent out, but doesn't mean it's completely optimized. Most people won't care, but some can tell the difference.

Originally Posted by daschrier Well to be fair to your friend, many higher end sets these days need to be calibrated properly, and regularly...sort of like in the golden age of TV's. As long as they meet a certain tolerance at the factory they're sent out, but doesn't mean it's completely optimized. Most people won't care, but some can tell the difference.

I just need a female technician to jungle my junk ... on a more serious note to me it's just a TV. I used to play on some pretty crappy TV's back in the day. I just want the Revolution games to be good and look decent then I will be happy regardless if it is HD or not.

From a marketing standpoint though it's just another thing that PS3 and XBOX360 will try to exploit.

I dont have an HDTV so honestly its not an issue for me, it is a next gen system and will look stunning and just about any tv thats readily available.

Originally Posted by Nirvanaguy777 I dont have an HDTV so honestly its not an issue for me, it is a next gen system and will look stunning and just about any tv thats readily available.

Pretty much.

This gen of consoles is supposed to last 5 years. Anyone who buys a TV in that time will most likely get a HD TV.. If you don't buy a TV in the next 5 years then maybe this won't affect you, but I'd think most people probobly would. My reasons for speculating this are simple: 1) The proliferation of HD content on TV. In 5 years everything on TV will be HD. 2) Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. 3) Many exisiting DVDs are 480p, so people will see a doubling of quality even with older material.

480p is DOUBLE the resolution of 480i, which is essentially 640x240. That's also about half of what computer users were seeing nearly 20 years ago (VGA graphics). 720p is SIX TIMES the resolution of 480i and THREE TIMES the resolution of 480p.

To add 720p to the Revolution would probobly cost Nintendo about 20 cents.
My guess is Nintendo will release the Revolution, then a year later release the Revolution SP or something with HD and make everyone buy it again. This is standard Nintendo strategy.

Originally Posted by sheek My guess is Nintendo will release the Revolution, then a year later release the Revolution SP or something with HD and make everyone buy it again. This is standard Nintendo strategy.

Since when? I don't seem to recall any different/upgraded versions of home consoles, aside from offering new colors.

I don't have an HD T.V., but I plan on buying one very soon when all the November sales hit. Honestly though, I don't really care if the Revolution won't support HD if it keeps the cost of hardware and software down.

I have a regular 13 year old tv and man I can still notice a huge leap in visual quality when going from an a/v cable to an s-video cable for all of my systems. I can't even imagine going from s-video to 480p to *gasp* 720p. I would notice definately notice it if I had a high def tv.

The Gamecube's graphics already look amazing, and they're not in HD. We already know the Revolution's graphics are going to be even better than the Gamecube's, probably by far, and that's good enough for me.

I know it matters to a lot of people but for me it really doesn't. Heck I don't even have that need the biggest TV I can find gene. I certainly can appreciate a sweet setup but it just isn't a high priority for me. I used to play the atari 2600 when I was young so that could be the reason too.

I'm sometimes quite suprised by games when I play them now. Everyone complained about Wind Waker but I just kept thinking WOW I'm playing a cartoon! That was only a dream when Dragon's Lair came out with its move in 4 directions or use your sword with pre-determined outcomes. So I thought it was pretty awesome from a graphical standpoint.

I do like to see what is capable with an HDTV and some high resolution but I would rather the game itself immerse me rather than the sharp picture.

HD isn't a big deal for me. My TV is just fine now, and with 2 more years of college (and possibly grad school after that) I'll be poor enough as it is without making the switch. When it comes down to it, the games are most important to me...but to the average consumer, I'm sure graphics are most important. The average consumer might not *really* care about HD standards and whatnot, but if you just market it as "The 360 and PS3 have better graphics" I'm sure people will care about it then.

my TV is so ghetto ass that I'm cool without HDTV.

In all honesty, I really do notice the difference on different screens. I think my eyes are really good at picking up on those things.

But will it justify the cost? I payed nothing for my 20 inch behemoth tv that weighs and arm and a leg and I'll be damned if the next tv I own costs more than $100.

Basically I won't see an HDTV in my house/apartment for 10 years

Originally Posted by sheek 720p is SIX TIMES the resolution of 480i and THREE TIMES the resolution of 480p. To add 720p to the Revolution would probobly cost Nintendo about 20 cents.

Um... no. If 720p is six times the resolution, the Revolution would require six times the fillrate to churn out those graphics. Not to mention the increased RAM needed to support the larger textures and character models you'd need to make the game look good in HD.

If you're only considering the cost of the component output, then 20 cents might be reasonable. But if you want your games to run at more than 10 fps and have decent textures, it would need a lot more hardware, which would cost well over 20 cents.

Not really a big deal. I was angry at first because I thought we would get the same thing as the gamecube, no digital port, and end up with 480i s-video only.

I'm happy at 480p. My DLP projector is a 4:3 800x600 model anyway (basically 480p in widescreen mode) and thus not HD, so although the extra would help (better to downscale a bit than upscale), I'm happy as long as it is progressive.

Honestly, though, 720p shouldn't take that much more video card power. I mean, modern video cards on PCs are basically built with 1024x768 as a minimum spec.

For those of you with small screens, maybe you can't tell. But even on my old 27" TV s-video looked a lot better than standard composite cables. On a big screen (about 90" 4:3 for me) 480p is much better than 480i.