Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is HD Worth the Leap for Gamers?

Tags:
  • Flat Screen
  • Gaming
  • HD
  • DVD
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
January 31, 2007 4:28:35 PM

Does HD gaming really matter? Is it worth getting a flat screen plasma for your gaming experience? And if so, which DVD standard should you embrace: Blu-Ray or HD-DVD?

More about : worth leap gamers

January 31, 2007 5:30:12 PM

Quote:
The only rub for the PS3 is that it doesn't come standard with an HDMI cable, required to actually get HD signals between the console and a display; the Xbox 360 does, saving you about $20.


The 360 doesn't come with an HDMI cable. It doesn't even support HDMI yet. That would take a hardware change as it would need to be able to output a digital video signal. It supports 720p/1080i over component, and 1080p over VGA, which is not compatible with HDCP and is not included with the 360 ($40 for adapter).

Quote:
At the moment, HDCP-capable monitors are coming onto the market, in the form of the 30" HP LP3065, and some of Dell's new UltraSharp displays. HDCP-capable graphics cards are basically the new breed of DirectX 10 / Windows Vista compliant cards, namely the GeForce 8800 at this point. Mind you, 30" monitors and GeForce 8800 cards don't come cheap, so at the moment there is no real cheap and easy way to get HD content on the PC.


You don't need a G80 or a 30" monitor to support HDCP. Several lesser cards and even some 19" LCDs support HDCP.

Quote:
An increasingly viable option for HD gaming is the use of high-def projectors...


Now there's an expensive option. The cheapest (decent) projector I found with a native res of 720p was $1000. Most HD projectors are only natively 480p, but say they support 720P/1080i. (It's true, they do take the signal, but it's down converted.) 1080p projectors are extremely expensive.

Then there's the bulb, which generally costs $400 to replace, if you can get a replacement. They last an average of 2000 hours. That's about two years with an average of 4-3 hours a day of gaming. They offer a special high-brightness gaming mode, but that lowers the life expectancy of the bulb by about 25% or more.

Then there's the care. They are delicate machines. Tip them up too much (greater than 15 degrees) and you risk blowing up the bulb. They require a long time for startup and shutdown, and you should wait at least 10 minutes if you shut it down and want to turn it on again, or you'll blow the bulb. Don't ever touch the bulb or use the projector in a dusty environment or...you'll blow the bulb.

You also need to take into account the screen/wall you're projecting on and ambient light. White reflects light. This can be good if your walls are black, the lights are out, you don't have any windows, and your screen is white. But if you're in a regular room with white walls, several windows, and a couple lights on, you'll have a washed out image like you've never seen, even with a good projector. Unless you want a small image, but then why would you get a projector?

Quote:
Addressing the title question of this article, "is HD worth the leap for gamers?" the answer would be "No." The reason for this is not that consoles can't do HD well, or that HD content doesn't look good. The problem is that there aren't enough HD games to warrant going HD now rather than later, when the prices for better displays will have fallen.


I still went and did it. The reason is the same as upgrading a PC. If you wait, you'll only have something else to wait for. If it's time for an upgrade, then it time for an upgrade.
January 31, 2007 9:13:19 PM

A mildly offensive article.

The PC has offered 'High Definition' gaming for at least 6 years. If you told a PC gamer that they should be impressed with a game running at 720p they would spit in your face. 1080p is only a mild improvement. HD gaming is a media phrase used to sell under-powered consoles.

And what is this nonsense about HDCP? You only need HDCP if you are watching BluRay or HD DVDs. This is true whether you have a PC or a console.
cheers
Related resources
January 31, 2007 10:07:35 PM

Quote:
720P is not IMO HD.


I'm sorry but 720p is HD :lol:  granted its the lowest rung of HD but it is still HD and i think the industry should have more of a say in this than you!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television...

Some people believe that having 1080p on a 40inch LCD isn't much of a step up in picture quality from the 720p when sitting back from the screen in your living room.

One of the reasons AA and other filtering techs were developed for pc games is because they realised that simply going to higher and higher resolutions was not improving the quality of graphics of pc games a great deal, especally when playing on such small screens ie computer monitors.

I do agree with your point that pcs have had extremely high resolutions, even higher than 1080p for many years, but this article is talking about TVs more than monitors - if you'd care to read the article you may of realised this.

Quote:
You also need to take into account the screen/wall you're projecting on and ambient light. White reflects light. This can be good if your walls are black, the lights are out, you don't have any windows, and your screen is white. But if you're in a regular room with white walls, several windows, and a couple lights on, you'll have a washed out image like you've never seen, even with a good projector.


This is such an exaggeration, I've recently upgraded my projector from a 480p model to a 720p (both optomas HD30 and HD70) and after having years of faultless operation with my old model the new one is miles better.

I have white walls and windows - the picture is amazing at night with pc games, xbox 360 and standard dvds (i dont yet have the HD dvd addon for the 360 as i want a HDMI connection) and although its a little washed out its still watchable during the day when the blinds are drawn. I suspect this poster hasn't viewed a good recent model projector as they have come a long way in the last few years. Also the bulbs aren't that much of an issue, even if you have to replace it twice during the life of the projector (costing you $1800 in total) you you could still spend far more on a decent LCD.
January 31, 2007 10:29:45 PM

Quote:
I suspect this poster hasn't viewed a good recent model projector as they have come a long way in the last few years.


:(  I just bought a Mitsubishi HD1000U. I hope that agree it's a "good recent model projector". I don't watch it during the day as the room with our projector has south-facing windows and white blinds that don't block the light. Maybe if we had heavy drapes...

I was just shocked that Rob recommended a projector as an option for kids and got carried away. I don't think kids should be using them, especially all around the house.

I'll admit I'm new to the game, but you didn't complain about anything else I wrote, so I hope that means I'm right. :wink:
January 31, 2007 11:01:27 PM

The HD1000u is a great projector and i think that reviews rated it slightly higher than my HD70 in terms of black levels - i just got a really good deal on the optoma and it comes with a longer warranty, 3years and 1 on the bulb :p 

I'm shocked he recommended it for that use too, they really aren't that portable when you also have to take speakers etc with it and god forbid a kiddy knocked it off the table or turned it off while it was running!
January 31, 2007 11:48:54 PM

Quote:
oh and if we let the industry decide what was best and what wasn't, intel would still be going on about how high ghz was best...


No because the other half of the industry (AMD) proved that ghz wasn't the be all and end all :wink:

Quote:
...and car manufacturers would be going on about how a car that could go 300MPH was better than one that could go 120.


A 300MPH car would be better, its just that the thing would be bloody expensive.
Just like a projector or 50 inch LCD with your dream res of 2560x1600 or whatever other Ultra HD res you want.

What is the point of making a console which is going to be used 90% of the time in a living room support some massive res that no resonably priced tv can ever hope of displaying?

Have you ever seen a 50inch 1080p screen running a HD game/movie?
They look awesome!
So unless you are Bill Gates and have enough money to buy a 60inch TV with WHUXGA resolution (7680×4800) stop with the whine and go back to your computer desk and play on your 30inch dell monitor.
January 31, 2007 11:56:23 PM

Quote:
Portability is an issue for both gamers and parents with gaming children. Being able to take your console and HD display along to a friend's house or other venue is quite advantageous, compared to being tied down to a particular location all the time.


I found this quote to be hilarious. I could just imagine some guy trying to stuff his xbox360 and his 42" plasma tv into his car to bring to a lan party. By the time HD console gaming becomes the norm, most owners of xbox360's and ps3's will be able to afford HDTVs.
February 1, 2007 2:42:55 AM

Ok, where to begin. I generally try to be upbeat and positive in my posts. I can't help but describe this article as pure FUD. Sorry, but not one shred of it left me with any knowledge in the current state of HD gaming. In contrast it left us all with so much misinformation. StrangeStranger you missed nothing by skipping this article.

I don't understand why half the article went on about HD DVD or Blue ray tangent. I think the biggest mistake in the article was taking on too many subjects and throwing them into one clump unorganized thought.

Let's talk about gaming on HD TV's. Anything higher than 1280x720p is considered HD as termed by the industry. Currently, it's actually hard to find a HDTV with less resolution than 1366 x 768p or higher. If you do the math (921,600 pixels) the industry is basically saying anything 1 million pixels and higher is considered high definition. As far as needing HDMI cables for HD is also incorrect. Your standard YPbPr component cables are capable of delivering 720P and 1080i. This is high definition and nearly 3 times the number of pixels of old SDTV's. You are correct that HDMI or DVI is needed for resolution of 1920 x 1200.

Again why the tangent of DRM and HDCP? This copyright subject is a whole article in itself. Leave this fiasco alone. It will play out in time, but best to be on the sidelines as it could be an expensive lesson. Seems to me the industry is making it so hard protecting copyrights it will be chasing off a lot of consumers. I personally have found playing DVD's or HDDVD's a much more positive experience played from component players. Having a computer to play DVD medium is nice, but never generally as good from my experience.

Now, it's in my opinion that the author has never seen an XBOX 360 on a plasma TV. My god it's the BOMB. I had a 50" Sony (3rd gen) plasma with 10k:1 contrast, and let me tell you it's the best I have ever seen. It looks so much better than my Westinghouse 37" 1080p. My biggest concern with the plasma was with burn-in from images that weren’t refreshing (i.e. crosshairs, health bar, ECT.). I never had the image fully burn-in, but it would linger longer than I was comfortable with. Currently, I have a new 56" Samsung 1080p DLP. While not as stunning as the plasma, the picture is much nicer than the Westinghouse I own. The DLP is cheaper, lighter, and larger with almost as nice as picture. The Westinghouse does PC the best. At 1920x1080 and 37" it is crisp and clear sitting about 2-3 feet away. I can't tell you how much fun it is to be enveloped by the game. I have never experienced ghosting on any of my sets.

I think gaming should be taken for what it is. If you like the game play it. Both the 360 and PS3 support titles that delve into the HD zone. Without a doubt these games do look better depending on the size and type of TV. I highly recommend DLP's for the most casual to serious gamers. The contrast is great and black levels tend to make fewer adjustments to brightness levels. I'd stay away from projectors unless you live in the bat cave. I do admit my DLP is a bit more sensitive to light sources than I like. I do close cutains to cut off any reflections to the screen. Plasmas are ok if your a very casual gamer, but I'd hate to burn-in a 3,000+ TV. LCD’s are good too, but are comparably more expensive than DLP's. If you use a large LCD TV (26" and higher) as a PC I highly suggest resolutions atleast 1920x1080. As the pixels get stretched you'll need to sit farther away from the set. Mostly text will not be as crisp the closer you sit and may be strainful for your eyes.
February 1, 2007 3:40:59 AM

Quite right. Further, you are NOT required to use HDMI for HD gaming. You can do so with component cables as well for all but 1080P.

FYI, my 2m HDMI cable cost $10 bucks from the egg (lucky for me their warehouse is like 10 miles away, so I always get overnight shipping).

I agree that the article lacked focus, it either needed a few more pages or a tighter focus...
February 1, 2007 4:06:54 AM

The Wii is the only console that knows what it is doing. The console can never compete with the PC for graphics. Not only is it much cheaper to get a HD Display (my Dell 2407 cost $580 and supports 1920x1200), but with the ability to add new hardware sooner than every new console generation, each new set of games can keep pushing the graphics envelope further. Whereas, the PS3 is stuck with its G71 technology for however many years, and it is -already- shadowed by the G80.

But the Wii, the Wii is fun. :)  Wario Ware is a blast just because its a complete 180 different from anything I've ever played before. Nintendo knows what it is doing, IMO.
February 1, 2007 4:14:20 AM

I don't think that Consoles ever really plan to supplant PCs (despite Sony's claims to the contrary). Console gaming is just different than PC gaming. For a strategy or RPG game, I generally go PC. If I want a sports or action game, I use my PS3 (I prefer consoles for FPS games, I know thats sacrelige around here). There will always be competition and cross-over, for example, I use my PS3 as an HTPC and will be putting Linux on it soon, but niether will ever supplant the other.
February 1, 2007 4:18:52 AM

I completely agree that the Wii fits a large niche of the consumer population than the ones that want to deal with the costs of HD gaming. I too will eventually buy a Wii. I'd much rather have my kids lugging around a $250 console rather than a $1,000+ projector, lol.

Now, if I could only find this elusive Wii.
February 1, 2007 4:52:54 AM

Quote:
Ok, where to begin. I generally try to be upbeat and positive in my posts. I can't help but describe this article as pure FUD. Sorry, but not one shred of it left me with any knowledge in the current state of HD gaming. In contrast it left us all with so much misinformation. StrangeStranger you missed nothing by skipping this article.

I don't understand why half the article went on about HD DVD or Blue ray tangent. I think the biggest mistake in the article was taking on too many subjects and throwing them into one clump unorganized thought.

Let's talk about gaming on HD TV's. Anything higher than 1280x720p is considered HD as termed by the industry. Currently, it's actually hard to find a HDTV with less resolution than 1366 x 768p or higher. If you do the math (921,600 pixels) the industry is basically saying anything 1 million pixels and higher is considered high definition. As far as needing HDMI cables for HD is also incorrect. Your standard YPbPr component cables are capable of delivering 720P and 1080i. This is high definition and nearly 3 times the number of pixels of old SDTV's. You are correct that HDMI or DVI is needed for resolution of 1920 x 1200.

Again why the tangent of DRM and HDCP? This copyright subject is a whole article in itself. Leave this fiasco alone. It will play out in time, but best to be on the sidelines as it could be an expensive lesson. Seems to me the industry is making it so hard protecting copyrights it will be chasing off a lot of consumers. I personally have found playing DVD's or HDDVD's a much more positive experience played from component players. Having a computer to play DVD medium is nice, but never generally as good from my experience.

Now, it's in my opinion that the author has never seen an XBOX 360 on a plasma TV. My god it's the BOMB. I had a 50" Sony (3rd gen) plasma with 10k:1 contrast, and let me tell you it's the best I have ever seen. It looks so much better than my Westinghouse 37" 1080p. My biggest concern with the plasma was with burn-in from images that weren’t refreshing (i.e. crosshairs, health bar, ECT.). I never had the image fully burn-in, but it would linger longer than I was comfortable with. Currently, I have a new 56" Samsung 1080p DLP. While not as stunning as the plasma, the picture is much nicer than the Westinghouse I own. The DLP is cheaper, lighter, and larger with almost as nice as picture. The Westinghouse does PC the best. At 1920x1080 and 37" it is crisp and clear sitting about 2-3 feet away. I can't tell you how much fun it is to be enveloped by the game. I have never experienced ghosting on any of my sets.

I think gaming should be taken for what it is. If you like the game play it. Both the 360 and PS3 support titles that delve into the HD zone. Without a doubt these games do look better depending on the size and type of TV. I highly recommend DLP's for the most casual to serious gamers. The contrast is great and black levels tend to make fewer adjustments to brightness levels. I'd stay away from projectors unless you live in the bat cave. I do admit my DLP is a bit more sensitive to light sources than I like. I do close cutains to cut off any reflections to the screen. Plasmas are ok if your a very casual gamer, but I'd hate to burn-in a 3,000+ TV. LCD’s are good too, but are comparably more expensive than DLP's. If you use a large LCD TV (26" and higher) as a PC I highly suggest resolutions atleast 1920x1080. As the pixels get stretched you'll need to sit farther away from the set. Mostly text will not be as crisp the closer you sit and may be strainful for your eyes.


Plasma for casual gamers? Burn-ins is an issue in the past. The new plasmas dont have em. I'm pretty hardcore and i love my plasma. The Contrast ratio is where its at for gaming because of the blacks and in dark games it counts a lot. My panasonic doesnt have any burn in issues at all.
February 1, 2007 5:32:29 AM

Quote:

Plasma for casual gamers? Burn-ins is an issue in the past. The new plasmas dont have em. I'm pretty hardcore and i love my plasma. The Contrast ratio is where its at for gaming because of the blacks and in dark games it counts a lot. My panasonic doesnt have any burn in issues at all.


Dude, I'm not dissing plasma at all. The contrast 10,000:1 is perfect for gaming. My Sony plasma was FWD-50PX2/S if you want to look it up. It was hands down the best I have ever seen. My only worry was after gaming I could always see images left in the screen. Soon as I powered back on the unit the image would be washed away, so like I said I never had any negative experience with the image being permanently burned in. It just made me kind of nervous.

I just can't recommend plasma since DLP's are so comparable in visual quality and cheaper. If you have to have the most ultimate visual gaming experience at any price the plasma is your toy.
February 1, 2007 6:55:19 AM

It was brought up elsewhere that the 8800GTX and GT only support HDCP in single link. So they cannot support the full resolution of a 30" display in HDCP mode. So not a good combination for HD movie playback, apparently...
February 1, 2007 7:01:11 AM

Let me start by saying that My HDTV is a good old fashioned CRT capable of plain 1080i. But it works great with my PS3!

Also, one thing to note, and this is just an opinion, but depending on the TV, I think that CRTs at 1080i look better than plasmas in 720p. My friends only does 720p, and while the color is crisper, the picture is obviously note quite as clear as my TV in 1080i.

I only point this out to show that while some plasmas may be good for gaming, a lot of the cheaper ones are only 720p, in which case DLP or CRT would be better.
February 1, 2007 7:17:53 AM

CRT is still the reference standard for image quality. (At least in terms of released consumer level products.)

I'd only consider switching to LCD, DLP, LCOS, or plasma, to get a much larger screen size...
February 1, 2007 7:50:40 AM

Quote:

Plasma for casual gamers? Burn-ins is an issue in the past. The new plasmas dont have em. I'm pretty hardcore and i love my plasma. The Contrast ratio is where its at for gaming because of the blacks and in dark games it counts a lot. My panasonic doesnt have any burn in issues at all.


Dude, I'm not dissing plasma at all. The contrast 10,000:1 is perfect for gaming. My Sony plasma was FWD-50PX2/S if you want to look it up. It was hands down the best I have ever seen. My only worry was after gaming I could always see images left in the screen. Soon as I powered back on the unit the image would be washed away, so like I said I never had any negative experience with the image being permanently burned in. It just made me kind of nervous.

I just can't recommend plasma since DLP's are so comparable in visual quality and cheaper. If you have to have the most ultimate visual gaming experience at any price the plasma is your toy.

DLP comparable in visual quality to Plasmas? no way. Higher contrast ratios yield better blacks, colors are far more vivid, and obviously the form factor is more attractive and manageable in a room. Plasmas have also dropped in price significantly.
February 1, 2007 9:09:16 AM

I have to agree that HD gaming is nothing new if you have been in to PC gaming for any length of time. 1280X1024 gives a much higher quality than this supposed HD gaming experience and I have been using resolutions like that for about 9 years now. At the moment I play all my games on my monitor’s native resolution of 1680X1050 that is fairly close to 1080p all be it in a 16:10 aspect ratio.

But to go back to what I think is the real question asked. Is HD resolutions a good thing for consol gaming and is it worth the price of a new TV, this is a fairly easy question to answer. The answer is of course yes. Progress has been needed for a while now as consoles have been held back for a long time by the common viewing technology that has not changed much in over 20 years.
February 1, 2007 12:01:53 PM

Probably one of the worst articles I have read on this site, I don't even know where to begin,

1. The title, it should be "Is HD Console Gaming Worth the Leap for Gamers (question? why the need for capital letters on nearly every word?)

2. "The two main high-definition gaming platforms are the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3." No, sorry that's wrong , the main HD gaming platform is the PC end of story.

3. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a HDMI socket so I doubt it comes with a HDMI cable.

4. "The PC, meanwhile, is not really an HD platform at the moment." Unbeliveable!! one of the most stupid and untrue statements I have ever read, do the authors of this article even have a PC? I doubt it. The rest of that paragraph is the biggest load of crap and has nothing to do with gaming, DRM? HDCP? where are all the games that use these standards?

5. I'm getting sick and tired of pointing what's wrong with this article and think I'll finsh here, just a note to say is it any wonder other sites slag off THG articles when you present them with this sort of ammunition.

PS: you can get 1080p over component.
February 1, 2007 12:06:49 PM

Good moaning everybody. To address some of your concerns:

HDMI Is Not Required For HD Content: Sure, if you’re looking at non-DRM restricted content. We plugged an Xbox 360 into a Samsung Plasma TV via component and also VGA, and the best she’d do was 720p. To get 1080 one needs HDMI… practically all that makes HD content so convoluted is the DRM restrictions like this. (Amusingly we set the console to 1080 on the component and rather than display an error, the screen went blank and two restarts were required to get it back on track.)

PC HD gaming: Plug your PC into your 56” TV often do you? Essentially PC’s have been capable of doing HD gaming, but who has been using it – on a consumer or developer side – to its full extent? And why don’t we… because it’s really expensive and even more convoluted if you throw in DRM with the new HD DVD and Blu-ray drives.

For example, if you want truly HD games (with the HD content) or HD movies, you have to buy a HD DVD or Blu-ray player for your PC. The unit prices for these are the same as DVD drives in the early days of the CD switchover. Right now the PC has the same problem as the consoles, magnified: A lack of true HD content plus cost of HD hardware. Sure your PC has the power, but you’ll pay for it.

As for projectors, at CES TI was very interested in showing off the projectors working off of their DLP technology; and we saw the same stuff at many third party manufacturers. At this point they’ve got projectors down to a managable size, and I was shown projectors specifically styled to suite consoles in look and feel. Their aim is to put the right price point, portability and usability down in front of users so that, yes, you can bring a HD display around in a box sized projector. I’m pretty sure I laughed at the idea of buying myself a 52” HDTV about a year ago, but hot damn…

Whatever about “Who had HD first?”, consoles are part of the wave currently driving HD content into living rooms. They’re not quite there yet to justify the expense (as we said, Resistance is the PS3’s flagship title, at 720p). It’s true that when you stick true HD content onto a true HD display it looks f**king great. However the fact is that 1. There isn’t a huge amount of true HD content yet and 2. It costs a bomb to be capable of displaying this content.
February 1, 2007 12:21:37 PM

Ok first off, I'd like to chime in with the others about how the PC has been HD gaming for years. I've been running all of my games well above 1080p for, I dunno, atleast 4 years if not longer. Computer monitors can do much higher resolutions than HDTV. If you try to say that PC's are not HD, then you just don't know what you are talking about. If you describe HD only by definition of using blueray or HDDVD, then I guess you could say they aren't, but the fact of the matter is that PC gaming is more HD than the xbox360 or the ps3.


Second, if you don't know what all the hub-bub is about with the rights protection hoopla and vista, check out this forum topic(and read the links inside):
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/software/-ftopict233838....

Or if you're too lazy to pick out the important links:
It's long, but easy to read-
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.h...

A podcast interviewing the guy who wrote the above article. He explains what he wrote.
http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-074.htm

another interesting article linked within the forum topic:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37091
February 1, 2007 12:46:50 PM

PC and HD.

A bit apples and oranges perhaps...as HD really is about television standards, broadcasting, and all that...

As for resolution, Halo will play on a PC at 2304 by 1440, a bit better than any HDTV I've heard of, that's released anyway...
February 1, 2007 1:32:27 PM

Quote:
Good moaning everybody. To address some of your concerns:

HDMI Is Not Required For HD Content: Sure, if you’re looking at non-DRM restricted content. We plugged an Xbox 360 into a Samsung Plasma TV via component and also VGA, and the best she’d do was 720p. To get 1080 one needs HDMI…


Right, so I've went and paid £15 for a HDMI lead, where do I plug it into my Xbox 360 again?

Quote:
PC HD gaming: Plug your PC into your 56” TV often do you?


No, one of my PCs is pluged into my 37" HDTV though.

Quote:
Essentially PC’s have been capable of doing HD gaming, but who has been using it – on a consumer or developer side – to its full extent? And why don’t we… because it’s really expensive and even more convoluted if you throw in DRM with the new HD DVD and Blu-ray drives.



I don't mean to be rude , but do you know what HD means? High Definition generaly means an increase in resolution, basically 1280x720 progressive or higher, now I don't know about you but I have been playing my PC games at a higher resolution than that for years, without the need for HD-DVD or Blue Ray drives

(BTW since the Xbox 360 doesn't come with a HD-DVD drive as standard and every game for it is on a normal DVD, does that mean that the 360 doesn't have a single HD game available for it? acording to your definition of HD gaming, it doesn't)
February 1, 2007 2:20:14 PM

As others have said, this article was pretty much worthless. Very little had anything to do with HD gaming on consoles, and all it said was that HD games look better on HDTV's, but there aren't very many HD games available today.

HD-DVD, BlueRay, and HDCP(DRM) have little or nothing to do with gaming on a console or a PC (which as others pointed out is more than capable of exceeding HDTV resolutions). They have a lot to do with other HD content, but have no affect on whether or not Half-Life or Halo can be played at large resolutions.

Now, as a console gamer, I was looking for a comparison of how games from different consoles look on HD sets. It should include older consoles as well because games may look better at 480p than 480i, and perhaps some of the upscaling in the TV makes a 480p game from the PS2 or Wii look pretty good at 720p when compared to an SDTV, or maybe the artifacts look even worse. I don't know the answer, and the article avoided the question.

Finally, HDTV reviews and comparison can be found elsewhere on the site, so there's no reason to rehash it here. Choose an HDTV, maybe defend the choice, and start comparing games and console on this display versus and SDTV, and you'll have a much better article.

- the Hun
February 1, 2007 3:03:49 PM

Quote:
1. The title, it should be "Is HD Console Gaming Worth the Leap for Gamers (question? why the need for capital letters on nearly every word?)
Correct on the console part, but to answer your question, becaust its a title and thats the rules of grammar

Quote:
2. "The two main high-definition gaming platforms are the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3." No, sorry that's wrong , the main HD gaming platform is the PC end of story.
That depends on your definition of HD. If you say that anything over 480 is HD, then of course, but if you say that its technically a standard for displaying on HDTVs, then maybe not, since I would guess more people connect consoles to their HDTVs than PCs.

Quote:
3. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a HDMI socket so I doubt it comes with a HDMI cable.
Glaring mistake in the article.

Quote:
PS: you can get 1080p over component.
Oops my mistake on that one.
February 1, 2007 3:34:20 PM

Quote:
Good moaning everybody. To address some of your concerns:

HDMI Is Not Required For HD Content: Sure, if you’re looking at non-DRM restricted content. We plugged an Xbox 360 into a Samsung Plasma TV via component and also VGA, and the best she’d do was 720p. To get 1080 one needs HDMI… practically all that makes HD content so convoluted is the DRM restrictions like this. (Amusingly we set the console to 1080 on the component and rather than display an error, the screen went blank and two restarts were required to get it back on track.)
As other have pointed out, this is just false. The Xbox 360 only outputs true 1080i over component cables, and 1080p over VGA. As for HDMI being required to get 1080, thats just plain dumb. Are you saying the XBox 360 doesn't support 1080 at all, since there IS NO HDMI connector on the 360?

Quote:
PC HD gaming: Plug your PC into your 56” TV often do you? Essentially PC’s have been capable of doing HD gaming, but who has been using it – on a consumer or developer side – to its full extent? And why don’t we… because it’s really expensive and even more convoluted if you throw in DRM with the new HD DVD and Blu-ray drives.
Uhh, you don't have to have your PC connected to a 56" (or any really) TV to get HD gaming over the PC. depending on your interpretation of HD, any resolution over 480p is HD, so PCs have been doing it for years.

Quote:
For example, if you want truly HD games (with the HD content) or HD movies, you have to buy a HD DVD or Blu-ray player for your PC. The unit prices for these are the same as DVD drives in the early days of the CD switchover. Right now the PC has the same problem as the consoles, magnified: A lack of true HD content plus cost of HD hardware. Sure your PC has the power, but you’ll pay for it.
Are you SERIOUS? So you mean the whole world is lying and the XBox 360 is NOT an HD console? It doesn't support gaming over either of those standards, so it must not be. Not to mention that there are a lot of PC games that support HD resolutions currently and are shipped on DVD.

Quote:
Whatever about “Who had HD first?”, consoles are part of the wave currently driving HD content into living rooms. They’re not quite there yet to justify the expense (as we said, Resistance is the PS3’s flagship title, at 720p). It’s true that when you stick true HD content onto a true HD display it looks f**king great. However the fact is that 1. There isn’t a huge amount of true HD content yet and 2. It costs a bomb to be capable of displaying this content.

True for the most part, though I know that NBA 07 and I think Fight night Round 3 both do 1080. As for costing a bomb, it cost me maybe $1500 for my HD rig (1080i max). I don't know if thats considered a bomb, or if you want to say thats not true HD, since its not 1080p, but I am more than happy with it.

You may wanna re-check some of your facts or statements ...
February 1, 2007 3:37:41 PM

:twisted: This is fun :!:

Seriously, time for me to stop acting like a jack-ass. No sleep will do that to you...
February 1, 2007 4:31:36 PM

I think we're having problems with definitions and it's confusing almost everyone. HD = High Definition, a marketing slogan to emphasize that people aren't using their consumer electronics to their fullest. What most people think they're talking about when discussing PCs is high resolution, not HD. It's true that PCs support it, but it didn't originate with PCs and was never intended for them.

HD is a term with associated resolutions, signal technologies, and display devices. The resolutions that qualify as HD are 720p, and 1080i/p. The signal technologies, or cables, are component, VGA, DVI, and HDMI. The device technologies are DLP, LCD, Plasma, and CRT. If a signal matches any of those resolutions, goes across any of those cables, and is displayed on any of those devices, it is HD.

Sony muddied the issue by saying that only 1080p is true HD, then they buggered it up by releasing 720p games. Microsoft was right in calling bull on that claim. If a signal is HD, then it's full HD. There are no degrees of definition. It's either high or it's standard (480i).

Another issue that seems to be confusing you is HDCP. HDCP requires that the content, player, output device, cable, input device, and display all match a spec to display data at high resolutions. If anything along the path does not match the spec, the image is down-converted to prevent recording and distributing content at full-res. HD <> HDCP compliant.

If you're recommending that people hold off until they can acquire HDCP equipment, that's one thing. But that's not what you said and I disagree with the recommendation. I'd rant about it, but it's been done. All I'll say is you should not be a part of the problem.

Quote:
We plugged an Xbox 360 into a Samsung Plasma TV via component and also VGA, and the best she’d do was 720p. To get 1080 one needs HDMI…


I wasn't blowing smoke when I said VGA will do 1080p. It's doing it on mine, and it has been for over a month. Two things might be preventing it for you: 1) Your TV might not support it through VGA. 2) You don't have the latest console updates. Do some investigation to fix that because it works. Some of the content is up-converted, but it's still a 1080p signal.

Quote:
For example, if you want truly HD games (with the HD content) or HD movies, you have to buy a HD DVD or Blu-ray player for your PC.


If you go out and buy some play-back software, the USB HD-DVD player for the 360 works on your PC. Old news, guys.

Quote:
As for projectors, at CES TI was very interested in showing off the projectors working off of their DLP technology; and we saw the same stuff at many third party manufacturers. At this point they’ve got projectors down to a managable size, and I was shown projectors specifically styled to suite consoles in look and feel. Their aim is to put the right price point, portability and usability down in front of users so that, yes, you can bring a HD display around in a box sized projector.


I guess you got caught in more marketing hype. TI doesn't have a new thing with small projectors. The two that RubberJohnson and I mentioned earlier are both smaller and lighter than an Xbox 360 or PS3, but I wouldn't recommend that you lug them around, despite their portability, because of their sensitivity.
February 1, 2007 5:51:24 PM

Minor details:

480p and 720i are not HD, they are ED.

HDCP is not currently being used by any HD content. Not movies nor games. The movie studios do not want to loose 90% of the HD viewers out there who bought their HD displays before HDCP was even released. So, HDCP is moot and will likely be moot for a good long time.

HTPCs can be made as cheap as a 360+HDDVD or PS3 if you are smart. So HDTV for computers is reality too.

Gaming has nothing to do with HDTV specifications and therefore only reference it has is frame rate + resolution which PCs seriously PWN consoles although for a higher price.

A great 1080p 42inch display, Westinghouse LVM-42w2, can be found for less than $1,300.
February 1, 2007 6:34:05 PM

Quote:
Ok first off, I'd like to chime in with the others about how the PC has been HD gaming for years. I've been running all of my games well above 1080p for, I dunno, atleast 4 years if not longer. Computer monitors can do much higher resolutions than HDTV. If you try to say that PC's are not HD, then you just don't know what you are talking about. If you describe HD only by definition of using blueray or HDDVD, then I guess you could say they aren't, but the fact of the matter is that PC gaming is more HD than the xbox360 or the ps3.

Right on brother, I've been playing PC games at 1600 x 1200 or higher for years as have plenty of other people. It's a total load of **** that people are touting this generation of consoles as the dawn of HD gaming. OMG. The Dell 30" babe is where HD gaming is really at.
February 1, 2007 7:10:49 PM

Quote:
480p and 720i are not HD, they are ED.


Good catch.
February 2, 2007 10:21:09 AM

This might just be my imagination, but is the PC HD crowd in here having a cock size comparison issue? Yes, the PC has been capable of very high resolutions for many years. However, and here's the rub, we've (mostly, thankyouverymuch sods who can afford 37" displays) been playing on smaller displays and the actual content (your textures and suchlike) have been limited by the DVD format. We're now starting to see games coming on multiple DVD's for lack of space to fit scaled up content - thus the new HD DVD and Blu-ray formats are as much about HD gaming as anything else.

In response to the Xbox 360 and it's VGA / Component cables, I think that just goes to show how bloody convoluted the entire HDTV lark is (mainly thanks to DRM); "You may have a problem with an older TV. Or an older firmware on the 360." Consoles having once been the perview of younger gamers / non-PC typed unable to handle the complexity of handling the Control Panel in Windows, I wonder how many people are playing HD-consoles on HDTV's without actual HD?
February 2, 2007 3:18:14 PM

For those that are interested in the Wii and are having trouble finding one.... Check this link: www.ps3seeker.com/wii/. This is how I found one for my wife's birthday last week...um...it's really for her, not me. Anyways, just type in your zip code and off you go.

I know others have already thrown their hat into the ring as far being disappointed with this article. But I have to throw in my own two cents... I really feel dumber after reading that article. I'm a hardcore PC gamer and I've been gaming in "HD" for years now. It really peeves me off when people talk about consoles being HD before the PC...

To Aaron, no offense buddy, but HD has nothing to do with being limited by DVD formats. There are some of us who remember installing games with 10 or more CDs. This is just file size... not equivalent to resolution in any way.
February 2, 2007 3:29:22 PM

Quote:
This might just be my imagination, but is the PC HD crowd in here having a **** size comparison issue? Yes, the PC has been capable of very high resolutions for many years. However, and here's the rub, we've (mostly, thankyouverymuch sods who can afford 37" displays) been playing on smaller displays and the actual content (your textures and suchlike) have been limited by the DVD format.


Most games for all systems will easily fit on a standard DVD, textures aren't actually on the disc thay are rendered by the graphics chip, the only thing on the discs are lines of code, and on older games prerendered scenes, these prerendered scenes were mostly 640x480 and still they took up a large chunk of the disc, why do I bring this up? because most of the large size game discs for the PS3 are full of HD prerendered scenes which take up gigabytes of space, that's why they're on Blu Ray Discs.

Quote:
We're now starting to see games coming on multiple DVD's for lack of space to fit scaled up content - thus the new HD DVD and Blu-ray formats are as much about HD gaming as anything else.


Well the PC doesn't 'scale up' unlike the consoles, it renders a game at what ever resolution you decide on (or the game supports)

You've got to remember, there will probably be very little (or zero) games for the Xbox 360 on HD-DVD discs, why? because the majority of 360 owners don't have a HD-DVD drive and the software companies don't want to spend thousands(millions?) on game devolopment for such a small profit sector.

I'm sorry to say this, but I have a funny feeling that there was zero research done before this article was posted.
February 2, 2007 3:36:38 PM

Quote:
I found one for my wife's birthday last week...um...it's really for her, not me.


No, no, no. It's for wii. Get it? :wink:

The results are in. There are officially..."unknown" units available in the Seattle area. Good thing I already got one. Now if only I knew where to get some Wii-motes...

Quote:
...the actual content (your textures and suchlike) have been limited by the DVD format.


I think "textures and suchlike" are more limited by RAM. I don't think HD-DVD or Blu-Ray will provide more. Who cares how many textures are on a disc if you can only display so many at a time? When that improves, then higher disc capacities will be more important.
February 2, 2007 3:37:32 PM

I agree.

This article is written by some tenage who doesn't know a thing about HD and PC Gaming. PC gamers have been playing HD for years. Just plug a big LCD or Plasma to a decent PC and you will have better graphics than 360 or PS3. I dont know about NVIDIA but ATI cards have been supporting 720p and 1080i for a while.
February 2, 2007 3:47:05 PM

As an avid nvidia patron, they certainly have been supporting those HD resolutions for quite some time. I've got an HTPC that's been hooked up to my Samsung 50" DLP for about 5 years now running 720p. Of course I've been upgrading the computer periodically with the latest and greatest nvidia cards and such. I'm at the 7600gt right now and once I see where the 8000 series nvidia cards and DX10 are going, I'll move over my 7950gts to the HTPC and be ready for an HD-DVD player (thanks to Microsoft's xbox)...

And VBDude, it certainly has been for wii. ;)  Let me know if you want me to UPS some wiimotes to you. I've had pretty good luck finding them here in Jacksonville, FL. Hey while I'm here, any experience with the component cables on the Wii? Worth it?
February 2, 2007 4:13:25 PM

Quote:
Hey while I'm here, any experience with the component cables on the Wii? Worth it?


Haven't tried it yet. Still on composite. Just got a brand new reciever, so I'll have to try it out. I think the only difference would probably be depth of color and 480p.

As for the Wii-motes, I'm patient. I had a preorder on the 360 that took until mid February. I can wait for more controls...unless it takes until March. :?
February 2, 2007 7:32:27 PM

VB,
A new receiver.. nice. :D  What did you get? I'm saving up for a yamaha rx-v2700. I'm still quite a few months away... sigh...
February 2, 2007 9:15:38 PM

8O Nothing near that expensive. We opted to avoid HDMI for the time being and got something, also from Yamaha, for about $400. Someday we'll upgrade it, but it hits the sweet spot of being exactly what we need for a price we can afford right now. One component out, and plenty of inputs. Up-converts anything that isn't component, too. It even has a dock for an iPod.

Our 37" LCD has one HDMI input, and the projector has one as well, but can you imagine buying a 50' HDMI cable to connect it? Besides, the only HDMI device we have is a DVD player.
March 4, 2007 10:23:47 PM

I don't think that article is as clear (or accurate) as it should be.

But rather than argue the point that you don't need HDMI to play in 1080P on an Xbox 360, or that you can play HD games on a PC, I think I'll just go play some Flight Sim X in 3840x1080. http://www.greenjem.com/FSX.wmv.
March 5, 2007 12:30:09 AM

Quote:
I don't think that article is as clear (or accurate) as it should be.

But rather than argue the point that you don't need HDMI to play in 1080P on an Xbox 360, or that you can play HD games on a PC, I think I'll just go play some Flight Sim X in 3840x1080. http://www.greenjem.com/FSX.wmv.


This thread is dead a month and you sign up for the forums and ressurect the thread for that?

No offense, but the discussion has already died out, and you didn't really contribute anything to it by linking to a huge video file that nobody is going to watch.

Thanks :!: :twisted:
March 5, 2007 8:25:02 AM

LOL Hitler I thought his comments were worth reading. So what if he wants to comment a month down the line. I'd rather read something useful a month late than miserable bitching by someone who's not got any authority to tell anyone what do on this forum.
March 5, 2007 9:04:22 AM

I agree, dont tell people what to do on the forum 8O

P.s. How anyone can say the PC cant offer a true HD experience needs there bloody head examined…
March 5, 2007 2:08:54 PM

Chill out people. The point is to to encourage him to post something thats a little more relevant to the conversation at hand.

As for posting something useful, I wonder how many people actually dl'ed and watched the 133MB file he linked to.

I am not telling people what to do, but everyone here always bitches about the quality of the posts, then when you try to get people to post something more useful, everyone jumps down your throat.
March 5, 2007 3:18:25 PM

LOL It's an open forum. The whole point is that anyone can ask anything or say anything. You don't learn anything unless you ask the question, even if it is laughed at (or a month late). Who cares whether people bitch at the posts. I don't. :lol: 
March 5, 2007 3:21:58 PM

Erm… everyone does not bitch about posts, it’s just the same people time and time again that bitch about posts. Do you want to be one of theses people who bitch about posts to? Because from where I am looking it does.

“The point is to encourage him to post something that’s a little more relevant to the conversation at hand.”

I would use your advice your self, as I don’t think your post was all that relevant… In fact on a relevance scale of one to ten yours would score 0 and his would score 6.5.
March 5, 2007 3:28:05 PM

I don't care about whether people bitch, and I AM NOT starting this whole argument again here. I am sure I came across as a bit harsh, but my point was he basically signed up to say the article sucked. He didn't ask any questions or give any reasons why.

The only additional discussion he has spawned is this whole asinine discussion about whether I am Hitler or not.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!