-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Do you think Widescreen will become the standard, and 4:3 the option next generation?
- Thread starter Tabris
- Start date
CurlySaysX
Banned
All games should be 16:9 standard now, I cant stand 4:3 games especially newer games.
The fact that those are the default cords which are meant to be used with the default TV setup; meaning, all of the old 4:3 TVs that are still in use only have that as their best input (not even S-Video) so there's really no point in putting everything in 16:9 if people are using those old cords.
At least that's the tone I hear all the time... sure you can hook up a PS2 to a HDTV using an RF and stuff, but that sorta defeats the purpose, right?
Same deal here. As long as there's no impetus to change the default method of signal input, there'll be no real impetus to change the default display method either.
At least that's the tone I hear all the time... sure you can hook up a PS2 to a HDTV using an RF and stuff, but that sorta defeats the purpose, right?
Same deal here. As long as there's no impetus to change the default method of signal input, there'll be no real impetus to change the default display method either.
I think he was making the point that console manufacturers cater for the lowest common denominator (composite video), therefore its likely they'll go 4:3 as standard?
I'd hope they do what Xbox does. Have a console option, then the game picks it up when it boots up and selects the correct game mode accordingly.
HooDoo - a 4:3 front projector? Wow. If I was spending big money, I'd go 16:9 these days for sure.
I'd hope they do what Xbox does. Have a console option, then the game picks it up when it boots up and selects the correct game mode accordingly.
HooDoo - a 4:3 front projector? Wow. If I was spending big money, I'd go 16:9 these days for sure.
open_mouth_
insert_foot_
gofreak said:
And I'm sure this will be the case for the vast majority of games out there.
I actually don't like the way widescreen is handled on the Xbox. Since there's no option in the game's menu to turn on widescreen, I can never know whether the game supports it or not, and even if I know it does, I can't tell whether it wqas turned on correctly or not.
And does displaying in widescreen add extra strain on the engine? Because if not, then it's just devs being lazy.
And does displaying in widescreen add extra strain on the engine? Because if not, then it's just devs being lazy.
Well mrklaw, my front projector is a 16:9 projector, I sure love 16:9 for games that support it but 4:3 is still the best option for the moment when I look at my games collection. And I can play it in full size.
Europe doesn't have 4:3 TV sets anymore, not as far as big screens are concerned.
Europe doesn't have 4:3 TV sets anymore, not as far as big screens are concerned.
I can use widescreen on my tv with RCA cables... just not progressive scan.
I agree with having both screen formats as being a standard in games though.
As for Xbox and it's universal 16:9/480p setting, I'd rather have it, than going into every options menu in a game and then setting it for widescreen/480p ala PS2.
I agree with having both screen formats as being a standard in games though.
As for Xbox and it's universal 16:9/480p setting, I'd rather have it, than going into every options menu in a game and then setting it for widescreen/480p ala PS2.
Maybe you should have the setting on the console, and then any games which don't support 16:9 are displayed in a pillar box?
Or just make 16:9 compatibility a requirement in your publishing checklist. It'd be easy enough to do for the next gen.
HooDoo, I was basing my comments on your original post, which sure sounded like you had a 4:3 projector...Anyway, good for you - have you watched star wars on it yet
Or just make 16:9 compatibility a requirement in your publishing checklist. It'd be easy enough to do for the next gen.
HooDoo, I was basing my comments on your original post, which sure sounded like you had a 4:3 projector...Anyway, good for you - have you watched star wars on it yet
Well, I'm actually using a 4:3 HDTV set (which, from what I've seen, is not common). I chose that screen ratio simply because most games are 4:3. However, I seriously prefer the look of 16:9 on a 4:3 set with black bars on the top and bottom to black/gray bars on the left and right when using a 16:9 set with a 4:3 image (non-stretched). I was tempted to buy a 16:9 set, but it just isn't worth it yet. I use the almost exclusively for gaming, so it isn't as if other factors were a part of the choice.
I do hope that nextgen console offer higher resolution support by default, though. 720p/1080i support in all games would rock hard. Every game should have 480i, 480p, and 1080i support as well as 4:3 and 16:9 support.
I do hope that nextgen console offer higher resolution support by default, though. 720p/1080i support in all games would rock hard. Every game should have 480i, 480p, and 1080i support as well as 4:3 and 16:9 support.
Here's what I think: 4:3 will still be standard but practically every game (particularly the blockbusters) will have a widescreen option.
Having said that, I'm sure there will be plenty of games that don't support 16:9 next-generation, unless Sony and Microsoft demand that all developers give the option.
Technology itself moves fast, but consumers take a while to catch on to it. In fact, most consumers, I think, couldn't care less if they play with standard RCA cables or 480p-enabled component cables. After all, you know stores still sell the RF-signal adapters even for current consoles because, apparently, there's still a demand for them. In other words, not only has widescreen not caught on yet, but one of the oldest television-connection types is still widely in use!
Having said that, I'm sure there will be plenty of games that don't support 16:9 next-generation, unless Sony and Microsoft demand that all developers give the option.
Technology itself moves fast, but consumers take a while to catch on to it. In fact, most consumers, I think, couldn't care less if they play with standard RCA cables or 480p-enabled component cables. After all, you know stores still sell the RF-signal adapters even for current consoles because, apparently, there's still a demand for them. In other words, not only has widescreen not caught on yet, but one of the oldest television-connection types is still widely in use!
Crazymoogle
Member
mrklaw said:
Yeah. The only problem with 1080p is that it's 30fps only. :/
Miburou: DVI is a digital signal, component tends to be an analog one. The farther the signal can go without digital->analog conversion, the better, so DVI is a superior output type.
dark10x said:
1080p/60 is doable it's just that digital camera tech which is widely available at the moment cant capture at 1080/60p. But, it should be more widely available in the future.
(Note: This really does not apply to Videogames since most of the in-game stuff is done in real time, so if the next gen consoles have the raw power they should be able to output a 1080p/60 signal.)
Also, 1080i is broadcast at 60 fields (half frames) per second. Your eyes and brain blends the two fields into 30 frames per second.
720p/60 (IMO.) will still be the best option for most games since it wont take huge amounts of processing power and is widely supported by HDTVs.
Crazymoogle
Member
Hari said:
There's just one problem: 1080p/60 is not in the HDTV spec. Any 60fps format would have to be created and implemented with future HDTVs, and would suffer as being a non-approved spec.
GamePnoy74
Member
Maybe HDMI will be more common than DVI in the future, looks more consumer friendly (just one small plug for both digital video and sound). Newer TVs out now are starting to sport the HDMI input than DVI nowadays.
You can also use a DVI to HDMI input converter (minus sound) if you have a DVI source (video game console, HD box, PC, etc.) and plug in sound (digital optical or analog RCA's) separately.
You can also use a DVI to HDMI input converter (minus sound) if you have a DVI source (video game console, HD box, PC, etc.) and plug in sound (digital optical or analog RCA's) separately.
Games and game systems have to support the lowest common denominator or else alienate a large percentage of consumers.
4:3 has to remain the standard with 16:9 as an extra for the higher end consumers. I think 16:9 should become a standard option, but for the foreseeable future, it should remain only that. An option.
4:3 has to remain the standard with 16:9 as an extra for the higher end consumers. I think 16:9 should become a standard option, but for the foreseeable future, it should remain only that. An option.
Warm Machine
Member
I hope 16:9 is the standard with an option for 4:3. Picking one over the other makes development a lot easier.
Ferrarisimo
Member
I'm pretty sure 1080p is 24fps, not 30fps.
The Faceless Master
Member
i hope it doesn't.. i don't wanna have to buy a $1500 tv to play a game the proper way...
Fularu said:
Actually... no.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2101354/fr/rss/
Still, I'm all for having the option for having full screen OR widescreen. But I (as many others) will always prefer widescreen. Especially now that I have a new 16:9 TV.
1008p on consoles could easily output at 60Hz. Thats most likely the display rate of the devices you are watching it on anyway.
1080p/24 is a HD spec because thats what movies would be shot on. Just like movie DVDs are 24fps.
If you have a good PC DVD player, you can recreate exactly that 24fps on a normal DVD. On a progressive standard DVD player, it does the same, but displays it at 60Hz.
I'd fully expect BluRay to store its movies in the same way, so you can watch them 1080i on an interlaced display, and when the technology allows, you can recreate the original 1080p movie frames and display them completely.
1080p/24 is a HD spec because thats what movies would be shot on. Just like movie DVDs are 24fps.
If you have a good PC DVD player, you can recreate exactly that 24fps on a normal DVD. On a progressive standard DVD player, it does the same, but displays it at 60Hz.
I'd fully expect BluRay to store its movies in the same way, so you can watch them 1080i on an interlaced display, and when the technology allows, you can recreate the original 1080p movie frames and display them completely.
BlackClouds
Member
The only reason why widescreen isn't more prevalent is because it can affect framerate. The next gen should be powerful enough to do widescreen running backwards, as well as progressive scan 720p/1080i, as a standard. It's easy enough to support both widescreen and 4:3. On the other hand if it's not mandated by first party then you won't see 100% support for the feature. I think it's a must feature, who cares about the folks dragging their feet.
Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony have a helluva job deciding on TV specs to support next-gen. The European and US TV markets have completely diverged. At least bog-standard PAL and NTSC signals were used on 4:3 sets, happened to be interlaced and the resolutions didn't differ by a huge margin.
Western Europe: Widescreen now standard on 21"+ sets, virtually no HDTV ( 50,000 sets at the end of 2003) and no governmental push to introduce higher resolutions or progressive scan (an estimate of only 4.5m HDTVs by end of 2008).
USA: HDTV pushed like crazy yet widescreen is still an afterthought. You have the ridiculous notion that a cut to pieces 4:3 DVD is somehow "fullscreen". A huge selling point of DVD early on was that you could get the letterbox, pan & scan and widescreen version on a single disk, what happened?!
Western Europe: Widescreen now standard on 21"+ sets, virtually no HDTV ( 50,000 sets at the end of 2003) and no governmental push to introduce higher resolutions or progressive scan (an estimate of only 4.5m HDTVs by end of 2008).
USA: HDTV pushed like crazy yet widescreen is still an afterthought. You have the ridiculous notion that a cut to pieces 4:3 DVD is somehow "fullscreen". A huge selling point of DVD early on was that you could get the letterbox, pan & scan and widescreen version on a single disk, what happened?!
cja:
> Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony have a helluva job deciding on TV specs to support
> next-gen. The European and US TV markets have completely diverged.
It's not that bad. ATSC and DVB support the same resolutions and refresh rates. A scaler solves the issue of actual tv sets being differently specced. The real problem is RAM as always. 1920x1080 takes up quite a lot of space.
> Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony have a helluva job deciding on TV specs to support
> next-gen. The European and US TV markets have completely diverged.
It's not that bad. ATSC and DVB support the same resolutions and refresh rates. A scaler solves the issue of actual tv sets being differently specced. The real problem is RAM as always. 1920x1080 takes up quite a lot of space.