X360 "Not True HD Functionality" says Sony...

[quote name='javeryh']I disagree. Anyone who buys a primary TV from now on that isn't HD and 16:9 is a total moron. It would be like buying a Beta VCR because they were cheap but were already discontinued. OK, maybe money has something to do with it but HD sets are really really cheap now - certainly cheaper than a regular TV that looked like a piece of furniture was back in 1975 and I'm not even counting inflation.[/QUOTE]
a good size HDTV is $900+. Some people cant afford that. They aren't cheap
 
[quote name='dooddude']a good size HDTV is $900+. Some people cant afford that. They aren't cheap[/QUOTE]

then there are those that think something as useless as a television doesn't warrant a $1K purchase.
 
[quote name='Spoon_si']I'll like to see them pull something remotely close to the killzone demo...[/QUOTE]
The killzone demo was running on RT, however only at 5fps, and was then sped up 12 fold. The speeding up was to simulate the power of the console that was not accesible at E3. Though this still does not make Killzone's graphics a definete, it does convince me.

We must all remember that it is up to the developers to make high quality games for these systems. This process costs time and money, and might not be as profitable for the developers. Good quality games take time, it doesnt matter if its in 1080p or whatever.
 
This Console Rap war needs to stop, We don't need another East coast VS West coast. Ken K is going to end up getting shot 9 times by some nintendo fanboys.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']This Console Rap war needs to stop, We don't need another East coast VS West coast. Ken K is going to end up getting shot 9 times by some nintendo fanboys.[/QUOTE]

...because Microsoft fanboys can take their anger out on one of the many shooters that are available for the system. Nintendo fanboys have no outlet for their anger.
 
[quote name='dooddude']a good size HDTV is $900+. Some people cant afford that. They aren't cheap[/QUOTE]

How in the world is a 26, 28, 30, or 34 inch 16:9 HDTV not a good size TV? Most people run 32 inches at most, the truth is most people run 20 inches, a 4:3 image on a 26 inch is still bigger than a 20 inch set. Wal-Mart has people wasting $100 on a 23 inch "Stereo" TV with an RCA input and at most an S-Video input. How in the world is $400 for a 30 inch Philips WS NEW at Wal-Mart or a clearanced Panasonic for $350 not a good deal?

HD is available to the general public..the general public is just

1. Too stupid to know what having an HD set means

2. Too stupid to know what not having an HD set means

3. Too blind to see the difference between HDTV and regular definition

I see "gift sets" in collector's cases of FULL SCREEN versions of Spiderman/2 and X/X2....there's no reason those should even be sold. It's not elitism or being a snob, it's the plain truth. Unless HD becomes the dominant technology, just like DVD was forced to consumers over VHS, Walmart and Best Buy will keep selling off brand 20 inch tubes by the hundreds every month.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']How in the world is a 26, 28, 30, or 34 inch 16:9 HDTV not a good size TV? Most people run 32 inches at most, the truth is most people run 20 inches, a 4:3 image on a 26 inch is still bigger than a 20 inch set. Wal-Mart has people wasting $100 on a 23 inch "Stereo" TV with an RCA input and at most an S-Video input. How in the world is $400 for a 30 inch Philips WS NEW at Wal-Mart or a clearanced Panasonic for $350 not a good deal?

HD is available to the general public..the general public is just

1. Too stupid to know what having an HD set means

2. Too stupid to know what not having an HD set means

3. Too blind to see the difference between HDTV and regular definition

I see "gift sets" in collector's cases of FULL SCREEN versions of Spiderman/2 and X/X2....there's no reason those should even be sold. It's not elitism or being a snob, it's the plain truth. Unless HD becomes the dominant technology, just like DVD was forced to consumers over VHS, Walmart and Best Buy will keep selling off brand 20 inch tubes by the hundreds every month.[/QUOTE]

don't forget #4

4. Don't give a shit about what's on tv or HDTV for that matter.
 
i want to see a class action lawsuit against sony. false advertisement...selling hdtv's that aren't truly hd. i wonder if crazy ken's statements will stand up in a court.
 
[quote name='gaelan']don't forget #4

4. Don't give a shit about what's on tv or HDTV for that matter.[/QUOTE]


I'm watching my Winter Olympics in HD.

Anyone who doesn't like HD hates America.

Yeah, I said it.

[USA...USA....USA]
 
[quote name='Tromack']Given how much the 360 is selling, is it odd that Sony is trying to deface it?[/QUOTE]

Well, it'll be hard for Sony to fight a console with 20 FPS's with just Killzone..

But seriously, the second Sony gets a Gran Turismo 5 video or some FF XIII screens, they won't even need to say a word and make absurd claims, they'll just have to roll the footage and let the critics play...the battle will be done after that.
 
We can call this guy names all we want, but the fact remains that the PS3 will be 1080p, output in hdmi, and come with a blu-ray drive. This is going to be a superior machine to the 360. All three of these specs make it more "high-def" if you will, than the 360. This is what Sony is building their hype machine on. None of us probably have a 1080p TV right now with hdmi input as the sets are few and far between. A year or two from now all the hd sets will display up to 1080p and have hdmi inputs. This is when the PS3 will truly show it's superiority.

All systems fan boy biiiatch!
 
[quote name='THE DARK KNIGHT']A year or two from now all the hd sets will display up to 1080p and have hdmi inputs. This is when the PS3 will truly show it's superiority.[/QUOTE]
No... when the PS3 has games worth playing that are fun, then it will prove itself as a game console. No system is superior save for in its software. This spec-hype machine is the the dumbest thing ever. What GAMES will you have? I don't care if its ultrasuperduperhidef 21048930942p, if the games blow, I'm not in.
 
[quote name='THE DARK KNIGHT']We can call this guy names all we want, but the fact remains that the PS3 will be 1080p, output in hdmi, and come with a blu-ray drive. This is going to be a superior machine to the 360. All three of these specs make it more "high-def" if you will, than the 360. This is what Sony is building their hype machine on. None of us probably have a 1080p TV right now with hdmi input as the sets are few and far between. A year or two from now all the hd sets will display up to 1080p and have hdmi inputs. This is when the PS3 will truly show it's superiority.

All systems fan boy biiiatch![/QUOTE]

The thing is, the PS3 doesn't look like its anywhere close to launching yet so this stuff could change. Even if it launches a year from now, having all those bells and whistles on the system will be VERY expensive. I think when all is said and done, this generation of consoles and their differences will closely mimic the previous generation with the exception of sony and microsoft switching places, I'm speaking in terms of graphics only because I don't want to speculate on success. I think the revolution will definetly be a wildcard.
 
All this talk of the "best" HD resolution is kind of irrelevant, IMO. You could have an Atari 2600 compilation that will be output in 720p by an Xbox 360, but so what? The pixels (blocks) are still going to be the size of my left nut due to the game's graphics. It's up to the game developers to make graphics detailed enough to blow us away. Enter the Matrix is probably a good example of a game that runs at high resolution (1080i), but the graphics are worse than many games that run at 480p on the Xbox.
 
what a frickin tard.

By July 1, all TV sets measuring at least 36 inches diagonally must be sold with digital tuners. By Dec. 31 of 2006, the conversion to digital, allegedly, will be complete.

Supposedly, then, broadcasters will no longer air analog signals by Jan. 1, 2007.

High-definition television (HDTV) means broadcast of television signals with a higher resolution than traditional formats (NTSC, SÉCAM, PAL) allow. (From Wikipedia). If you want to go into further detail check out wikipedia.org.
 
[quote name='themadbunny']what a frickin tard.

By July 1, all TV sets measuring at least 36 inches diagonally must be sold with digital tuners. By Dec. 31 of 2006, the conversion to digital, allegedly, will be complete.

Supposedly, then, broadcasters will no longer air analog signals by Jan. 1, 2007.

High-definition television (HDTV) means broadcast of television signals with a higher resolution than traditional formats (NTSC, SÉCAM, PAL) allow. (From Wikipedia). If you want to go into further detail check out wikipedia.org.[/QUOTE]

And lawmakers keep pushing back the date upon which all this is supposed to happen. Your facts are old.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/250259_congtv30.html

[quote name='"Nov 30, 2005"'] By July 2007, all new TVs with screens larger than 13 inches must be digital-ready.[/quote]
The House would pull the plug [on analog] Dec. 31, 2008, while the Senate would end analog service April 7, 2009, right after the NCAA basketball tournament.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly we should already be completely digital according to the original law. Some actual market penetration really wouldve helped them along, I think they originally wanted 10%?

Also Digital signal =/= HDTV. There are non-HD digital channels... but "Digital Tuners only" Implies that VHF and UHF are dead.
 
Before you guys get all wet in the panties over HD content, a couple of important facts to remember:

1) Nbody broadcasts in full HD. 720p, 1080i..whatever....you're never seeing a true HD picture from any broadcast source (Over the Air OR Cable OR Satellite) because they ALL Compress the shit out of the signal, period.

The best DVD outputs run around 8mbps (mega bits per second) in bandwidth..like a Superbit DVD. The average HDTV signal (which has 3x the number of pixels) is usually compressed down to about 12-14mbps over cable or over the air. This means even HD isn't looking as good as it possibly could.

2) on screen sizes less than about 65 inches, 720p looks virtually identical to 1080p at the same seating distance. 1080p only really comes into play when your screen sizes get much larger (like with a front projector throwing a 100"+ image). However, a 1080p display you can sit closer to...at the same screen size....than a 720p display because you're less likely to see the pixels that make up the image. 1080p nice, the future, but still....an incremental step up. Go check out a 37" 720p display and then check out a 37" 1080p display from about six feet away. They look identical. Nuff said.

3) Sony's Blu-Ray is only supposed to work via digital connection...what does this mean? I tmeans that millions of HDTV owners who have sets that only have component inputs are fucked. Dont think thats going to go over lightly when people who paid $4 grand for their HD sets in 2002 and 2003 find themeslves SOL with HD content on disc.

4) The first blu-ray players are expected to hit in the $1000 range......prices will soon drop to the $600 range if history repeats the way it did for DVD players. If Sony brings out the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player and a fully blown Next Gen console for $500 or so, you'll never be able to find one, because everyone who owns a HD set will clamor to get one even if they aren't a gamer...just to use as a blu ray player.

Or, its going to be the shittiest blu-ray player on earth. Everyone knows the PS2 is a shittastic DVD player, but since most people hook up their PS2's to analog 27" type TV's, nobody ever really knew the difference. Sony can't get away with that on a blu-ray player.........so I'm curious to see how Sony plans to sell and price the PS3....
 
[quote name='HeadRusch']


3) Sony's Blu-Ray is only supposed to work via digital connection...what does this mean? I tmeans that millions of HDTV owners who have sets that only have component inputs are fucked. Dont think thats going to go over lightly when people who paid $4 grand for their HD sets in 2002 and 2003 find themeslves SOL with HD content on disc.

[/QUOTE]

is that the hdmi requirement i've heard talked about? something like they are only going to let blu ray hook up via hdmi connections.
 
Digital connections...so HDMI or DVI. Some people think their DVI-enabled monitors will work, but it wont, its got to have HDCP enabled on the port which means most monitors are out as well.

The real issue is that these ports didn't really start appearing until 2003-2004 in any kind of quantity, but HD sets have been sold since the late 90's.

I realize we are a disposable society, but I have a 65" set that has no DVI/HDMI on it from 2001, and they're going to tell me my $3000 investment wont work? Apparrantly so.

It'll be interesting to see how that shakes out. Luckily I have a digital projector as that TV isn't my primary display anymore, but the fact remains....a loooot of people who wont be able to upgrade will now be screwed.

Also, word says Blu-Ray players will require hookup to broadband or to telephone to periodically update keys/codes, which may make even "grey market" players (that would output HD through component) impossible to work. Dunno.

Interesting times ahead...
 
[quote name='daroga']No... when the PS3 has games worth playing that are fun, then it will prove itself as a game console. No system is superior save for in its software. This spec-hype machine is the the dumbest thing ever. What GAMES will you have? I don't care if its ultrasuperduperhidef 21048930942p, if the games blow, I'm not in.[/QUOTE]

:applause:
 
Just....to be clear: 1080p is not a true HD resolution. In so that its not defined as part of the American Standards for HD broadcasting.

The only True HD resolutions for broadcast quality are 720p and 1080i. LCD, DLP and the like all cannot produce an interlaced image...so they interpolate a 1080i signal into 1080p (combing two fields of 540 lines each into one progressive 1080p frame).

The funny thing is that many 1080p devices CANNOT accept a 1080p signal.....meaning you'd still have to set your output device (Bluray player, whatever) to a 720p or 1080i signal output and let the set do the interpolating/deinterlacing to produce the 1080p image.

If Sonys game machine can effectively pull off 1920x1080p content at 60fps it would be a significant step forward....but I'm guessing it will just upscale the way the Xbox 360 is.
 
[quote name='HeadRusch']Just....to be clear: 1080p is not a true HD resolution. In so that its not defined as part of the American Standards for HD broadcasting.

The only True HD resolutions for broadcast quality are 720p and 1080i. LCD, DLP and the like all cannot produce an interlaced image...so they interpolate a 1080i signal into 1080p (combing two fields of 540 lines each into one progressive 1080p frame).

The funny thing is that many 1080p devices CANNOT accept a 1080p signal.....meaning you'd still have to set your output device (Bluray player, whatever) to a 720p or 1080i signal output and let the set do the interpolating/deinterlacing to produce the 1080p image.

If Sonys game machine can effectively pull off 1920x1080p content at 60fps it would be a significant step forward....but I'm guessing it will just upscale the way the Xbox 360 is.[/QUOTE]


Le google le friend

http://searchsmb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid44_gci1071898,00.html

theres plenty more from where that came

I sold these things for a living for a long while and have talked to some of the people who make them I.E Pioneer, Samsung, Mitsubishi, TRUE hd is 1080p actually the resolutions right now can even go higher than that. Mitsubishi has a T.V capable of producing 4000 plus lines of resolution availible in Japan for professional use. Its often confused that 1080i and 720p are true HD because they are the formats that we're used to being HDTV now. In reality 1080p has been the target and even been around since the beginning, but the equipment cost was nearly double than the 720p and 1080i broadcast ideas, so they skipped the 1080p. Thats from Joel Fischer Vice presidnet of technology Pioneer chicago office.
 
I was unaware that 1080p had become an accepted ATSC standard. However in looking online, sure'nuff...I was wrong!

Thanks for correcting me, I'll update my mental database of useless knowledge :)
 
Hrmmm.... looks almost like splitting hairs. "True HDTV" vs. "Original HDTV". While accurate I call the Sony guy's assertions misleading. Both are "Real" HDTV standards.
 
from what I here u wont notice the difference from 1080i to 1080p if the tv isnt bigger than 50 inches. I think thats sounds plausible. But I would think it would show more in a videogame than broadcast tv.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top