Support NeoGAF

[BlazeHedgehog]

You're blowing things WAYYYYY out of proportion here.

It's simply a means to entertainment. Settle down.

My only point is this: everyone has a different opinion on whether or not HD is worth it, but there is no denying that HD offers a significant increase in quality.

The method in which you present your opinion makes it seem as if you are informing us that there is virtually no difference between a low resolution DVD and a 1080p Blu-ray disc rather than simply stating that "it isn't for you".

Why are you taking such a negative stance against it? That's what I don't get. You act as if HD is destroying your life or something. Nobody is demanding that YOU personally purchase an HD product, we are simply noting the drastic differences between them. Whether or not those differences matter to an individual determines whether or not one will purchase it...but that doesn't mean those differences do not exist. The fact that you are satisfied with SDTV does not change any factual information on what HD offers.

I am rather calm and settled down quite nicely, actually. But it seems like you are putting words in to my mouth, here.

Obviously, there is a difference between SD and HD. But does that difference matter? Not really, no. I made the example earlier about Youtube and DailyMotion and how alternatives to those services, ones that offer high-res video streaming are just kind of floundering around and not doing anything in particular.

How can you say I act like HD is destroying my life when, repeatedly in this thread, I have said that I will get HD when I need a new TV? The key phrase in there is, "When I need a new TV." I don't expect to need a new TV for quite some time now. But there are a number of people in this thread and all over the world who seem to measure your worth by whether or not you have HD and I just don't get the point in all of it. There are people in this very thread who seem offended by the fact I have an SDTV and that I am happy with it.

That's my problem. Those people need to get over it.

 

[Ranger X]

The increase in image quality is there. But this increase to be significant for people is exactly what is totally subjective here.

 

[AstroLad]

That's my problem. Those people need to get over it.

Hey some people are still using RF adapters for their PS3's. Maybe there are one or two people that take issue with that, but I certainly don't and I'd guess dark doesn't either. The issue arises when people make outlandish arguments and claims to justify their decision to "go RF" as it were.

 

[Ranger X]

Hey some people are still using RF adapters for their PS3's. Maybe there are one or two people that take issue with that, but I certainly don't and I'd guess dark doesn't either.

You're the worse offender here. And your comparison is extremely bad anyways. We moved from RF to Composite and then we moved again from Composite to Component and HDMI. People that are still in RF ARE wierd and very few.
You have to understand that the majority are happy with SD stuff and only some minority wants HD displays right now. This means YOU the HD guy need to cope with the Sonic dude up there and not the opposite.

 

[sprocket]

The increase in image quality is there. But this increase to be significant for people is exactly what is totally subjective here.

Which depends on a lot of different things.

- What are they use to seeing?

- what size tvs are they use too?

- do they even care enough to adjust the image of any tv they have ever owned?

- are they blind?

 

[AstroLad]

You're the worse offender here. And your comparison is extremely bad anyways. We moved from RF to Composite and then we moved again from Composite to Component and HDMI. People that are still in RF ARE wierd and very few.
You have to understand that the majority are happy with SD stuff and only some minority wants HD displays right now. This means YOU the HD guy need to cope with the Sonic dude up there and not the opposite.

Well certainly no need to be too defensive about it. Just like RF Guy says "it doesn't bother me; I'm still having fun," etc. so SD Guy makes the same claims. And very few people would "jump" on that--I certainly wouldn't. I do not begrudge anyone their fun no matter what display they're playing on--even if it's the modern-day equivalent of black-and-white RF.

Now if RF Guy starts saying how RF is just as good as component or even RCA and how he "can't even tell the difference" and how it's "all BS made up by the RCA industry," that's a little different.

Look, you can even get it all in one handy-dandy unit:

Save even more money!

 

[dark10x]

But it seems like you are putting words in to my mouth, here.

Oh really?

Obviously, there is a difference between SD and HD. But does that difference matter? Not really, no. I made the example earlier about Youtube and DailyMotion and how alternatives to those services, ones that offer high-res video streaming are just kind of floundering around and not doing anything in particular.

You DIRECTLY suggest that the difference DOES NOT MATTER. That is a highly subjective issue. It may not matter to you, but it matters to me. Neither one of us it "correct", it's simply a preference. That doesn't change the factual information that there is a signficant difference between the two.

Now if RF Guy starts saying how RF is just as good as component or even RCA and how he "can't even tell the difference" and how it's "all BS made up by the RCA industry," that's a little different.

Well put. That's exactly how the above poster has come off here.

 

[Ranger X]

Well certainly no need to be too defensive about it. Just like RF Guy says "it doesn't bother me; I'm still having fun," etc. so SD Guy makes the same claims. And very few people would "jump" on that--I certainly wouldn't. I do not begrudge anyone their fun no matter what display they're playing on--even if it's the modern-day equivalent of black-and-white RF.

Now if RF Guy starts saying how RF is just as good as component or even RCA and how he "can't even tell the difference" and how it's "all BS made up by the RCA industry," that's a little different.

Sure but the SD guys here didn't deny a difference. Their message from what i read here is essential "we agree there's a difference but it doesn't matter for us now". In some previous post of yours its like you were telling them SD is extremely phased out and they are wrong to still use that kind of display. They are not wrong, they are perfectly fine. My point is that we need to cope with the majority. Right now the majority = SD therefore HD guys needs to cope with them. The RF guy isn't the majority anymore, he's an extremely small majority, smaller than the HD guy. He needs to cope with the SD guy too. HD guy only need some patience that's all. Eventually he will rule the world and the SD guy will be the new RF guy.

I didn't want to sound all defensive and stuff, my point being that SD vs HD right now really is just a matter of choice and it's not true that SD is not relevant anymore. It's people that tells what's relevant and what is not. Right now people are telling us they aren't switching to HD for the most part. This non respect of people chosing SD (or HD anyways) is fuelling alot of useless discussion imo.

 

[Shockgamer]

Err, the SD quality on that CRT should have been pretty good. If you were not satisfied with it, no TV will satisfy you (especially not something like OLED).

If you can live with the SD, however, a good plasma would be a great fit for you right now.

I'm hoping that the 32 inch Vizio(yeah, I know..) plasma turns out well.

 

[dark10x]

Their message from what i read here is essential "we agree there's a difference but it doesn't matter for us now".

Actually, it's more like...

Obviously, there is a difference between SD and HD. But does that difference matter? Not really, no.

I'm hoping that the 32 inch Vizio(yeah, I know..) plasma turns out well.

Err, I, uhh, wouldn't hold out much hope. That 34" Sony CRT (awesome, but giant TV) will kick the shit out of any Vizio.

 

[AstroLad]

I didn't want to sound all defensive and stuff, my point being that SD vs HD right now really is just a matter of choice and it's not true that SD is not relevant anymore. It's people that tells what's relevant and what is not. Right now people are telling us they aren't switching to HD for the most part. This non respect of people chosing SD (or HD anyways) is fuelling alot of useless discussion imo.

Yep, I definitely agree with a lot of this. As I said before Nintendo made a very smart decision appealing to the Wal-Mart/SD crowd rather than jumping into HD about a year or two early like MS and especially Sony did. But in terms of trends going forward, we are already starting to see it and many people just seem very resistant to change and almost oblivious or in denial of its benefits.

 

[Ranger X]

Actually, it's more like...

:lol I see what you did there

 

[sprocket]

wait a sec. How can people NOT be switching to HD? I don't think they have a choice. SD sets are not even being made now.

 

[JB1981]

profit-mongers trying to shove progress down our throats.

die progress, die. don't make me want things.

 

[Ranger X]

Yep, I definitely agree with a lot of this. As I said before Nintendo made a very smart decision appealing to the Wal-Mart/SD crowd rather than jumping into HD about a year or two early like MS and especially Sony did. But in terms of trends going forward, we are already starting to see it and many people just seem very resistant to change and almost oblivious or in denial of its benefits.

The change will definetely happen. I question the absolute need of it going faster than it already is. People will become less and less resistant to HD. Just you wait when some truly good 42 inch or more HDTV will be sold at 500$...

 

[Tieno]

I likes my HD gaming and Blurays. The clear and sharp image (especially with blu-ray) feels like your TV is a window.

 

[LCGeek]

Yep, I definitely agree with a lot of this. As I said before Nintendo made a very smart decision appealing to the Wal-Mart/SD crowd rather than jumping into HD about a year or two early like MS and especially Sony did. But in terms of trends going forward, we are already starting to see it and many people just seem very resistant to change and almost oblivious or in denial of its benefits.

My friend faf can barely see the difference of HD only when it's very apparent is it something he doesn't want to go back too. The problem to me is most companies have a bad way of showing the differences and never really demonstrate how it can change a lot of things. A lot of things centered around hd say hdmi are a good thing or at the least how color reproduction is much better because they don't need the shit tv has. They focus on that more people might switch, but until people have a real need which I agree with sonic, there really isn't most aren't gonna care.

 

[LCGeek]

I likes my HD gaming and Blurays. The clear and sharp image (especially with blu-ray) feels like your TV is a window.

Don't buy tv's just byy displays, but technically tv's are still monitors they are just horribly gimped in fucntionality and have tons of fluff bs to em.

 

[Tieno]

Don't buy tv's just byy displays, but technically tv's are still monitors they are just horribly gimped in fucntionality and have tons of fluff bs to em.

huh?

 

[Knify]

HD picture and sound really all boils down to what expectations you have when you're making a transition from SD to 720p/1080p. Of course, it's easy to differentiate a 640x480 picture to a 1920x1200 picture on a computer screen, since you can easily tell the picture with the higher resolution has more clarity and detail. But why is it so hard for 720/1080p?

For one thing, many "experts" say if you're outputting a 1080p picture, you'd better have a television screen that's 50 inches plus, (I think 42 is bear minimum) or it's a waste. And I agree to some extent. If you've ever seen a 720p signal vs a 1080p signal on a 100in SXRD projector, you will definitely see a difference --but YMMV (see: expectations). However not everyone can afford a big LCD or Plasma, so why feel ashamed of your puny SDTV? Be content of what you've got. I think in your case, when you do decide to upgrade your tv to something that warrants it's quality over price, it'll ultimately "add" to your experience than take away from.

On the topic of games, games rendered in 720p are able to output more geometry, more FPS than a 1080p picture. And this has been proven (so far)... take Uncharted or Gears of War for example. Both of these games draw a good amount of raw graphical/cpu power from their respectable consoles, but because of hardware constraints (DX9, RAM?), they're limiting to a degree. But it's interesting to see Crysis making its way onto consoles, and consoles games for that matter raising the bar in the graphical department. And who can forget comfy couches and 5.1 surround sound.

In short, you're blind. :lol

 

[Ash_69]

Just coming from a new perspective that i've never heard mentioned before...

Some people are adament that HD tv isn't THAT much better than SD while some say you're blind for not noticing a huge difference. Could this difference be because a difference in location i.e. PAL vs NTSC. PAL is 576i(625 lines) compared to NTSC which is 480i (525 lines) meaning those seeing in NTSC will be seeing a bigger jump in quality. Also is this why whenever you see american shows in the UK, it has that muddy look (i'm serious!)?

 

[LCGeek]

huh?

Crap my bad

Displays are anything that shows vid to me in a generalized sense

Professional Displays - are devices that can take inputs from a variety of sources/formats and can do many resolutions.

PC monitors - are a step down but the quality is no where what a PD would be and the only offer a few input solutions and format solutions. They can be PD if the quality of imagery is there but you get a transcoder or upscaler to do the rest of the work

TVs - are the bottom of the barrel and shit unless they fit exactly what you want.

Gamers get fucked for various reasons but if you want gaming with no problems in terms of response or iq even DIY solutions are better than getting a tv hd or sd/ed base.

 

[Ranger X]

Just coming from a new perspective that i've never heard mentioned before...

Some people are adament that HD tv isn't THAT much better than SD while some say you're blind for not noticing a huge difference. Could this difference be because a difference in location i.e. PAL vs NTSC. PAL is 576i(625 lines) compared to NTSC which is 480i (525 lines) meaning those seeing in NTSC will be seeing a bigger jump in quality. Also is this why whenever you see american shows in the UK, it has that muddy look (i'm serious!)?

No. It's just showing you that the matter is subjective. And you know people on GAF are experts at over-expressing themselves.

 

[Solideliquid]

Thank you for all the replies!

I'm going to come out and say, looking at the Blade Runner pics (and yes, I have the BD new Blade Runner CE) I can most def see a difference and my image looks just like the one posted in page 4.


On another note, isn't this the best time to buy the Xbox HD player? I mean it will most likely be cheap in stores and sites like eBay soon. You will be able to buy most if not all the HD DVDs at reduced price. Lets face it, the HD DVD library is pretty large.

 

[layzie1989]

hmmmmm i see a difference

 

[TAJ]

wait a sec. How can people NOT be switching to HD? I don't think they have a choice. SD sets are not even being made now.

Of course they are. The only difference is that they now have ATSC tuners built-in, tuners that almost nobody who buys them will ever use because they have cable or satellite.

 

[Lord Error]

I made the example earlier about Youtube and DailyMotion and how alternatives to those services, ones that offer high-res video streaming are just kind of floundering around and not doing anything in particular.

That example is pretty bad because majority of youtube users and other such low res services use them to see people making failed judo chops or laugh at dramatic rats, not watch movies where they care about what they see. Even then, I wouldn't say Stage6 is exactly floundering.

Displays are anything that shows vid to me in a generalized sense

Professional Displays - are devices that can take inputs from a variety of sources/formats and can do many resolutions.

PC monitors - are a step down but the quality is no where what a PD would be and the only offer a few input solutions and format solutions. They can be PD if the quality of imagery is there but you get a transcoder or upscaler to do the rest of the work

TVs - are the bottom of the barrel and shit unless they fit exactly what you want.

Apples and oranges. For example, I think for gaming and video display, plasma screens are the best (better than any PC monitor, no matter how calibrated). However, I'd never want to use plasma as a computer display.

 

[65536]

.