deepbrown said:on a tiny pc screen...what's the point in 1080p when it's on that tiny screen?
You mean my 24" HDMI 1080p monitor? :lol
deepbrown said:on a tiny pc screen...what's the point in 1080p when it's on that tiny screen?
GodofWine said:The first MW2 trailer looks great, and looks like great fun. period.
Guled said:I really don't care about it being 600p, its just dumb to see PS360 owners defend their sub HD resolution while they rag about it on the wii.
Just like PC owners rag about it to console owners.Guled said:I really don't care about it being 600p, its just dumb to see PS360 owners defend their sub HD resolution while they rag about it on the wii.
Snap indeed my good friend, snap indeed.Osaka said:oh snap
NinjaFridge said:This thread is like 20 pages too long and is just an excuse for thinly-veiled trolling. BTW about the 4850, what is it like compared to the 4770? It can be found cheaper but is the 4770 better?
Osaka said:![]()
Ugh, yeah, I hate sitting at my pc desk in my big comfy chair.
shuri said:..and also having a big pc case next to your tv is also so awkward..
canworm.jpg
Fersis said:Just like PC owners rag about it to console owners.
OverHeat said:I rather play on my comfy couch![]()
Err, 600p upscaled to 720p still looks SIGNIFICANTLY better than the awful video output on the Wii. There is nothing "dumb" about it.I really don't care about it being 600p, its just dumb to see PS360 owners defend their sub HD resolution while they rag about it on the wii.
I play PC games on my couch. :OI rather play on my comfy couch
Osaka said:That's not comfy, your ass and back will be drenched in sweat in 10 minutes from starting to play on that black leather couch
The-Warning said:Yeah thinly veiled like a mack truck in a dress.
(I don't know what that means.)
I just think it's silly that people are comparing the jump from PS360 to PC to the jump from Wii to PS360. I mean come on that's just pushing it.
dark10x said:Err, 600p upscaled to 720p still looks SIGNIFICANTLY better than the awful video output on the Wii. There is nothing "dumb" about it.
Not only is the Wii rendering at 640x480 resolution, but it also tends to suffer from additional image quality flaws (dithering). Furthermore, the 600p number seems close to 480p, but in reality, it's still a widescreen resolution. 1024x600 is much cleaner than 640x480 (4:3) stretched to fill a 16:9 screen.
I play PC games on my couch. :O
For that reason, I hope this game supports the 360 pad this time around.
Osaka said:You mean my 24" HDMI 1080p monitor? :lol
brain_stew said:No its not, not in anyway at all. A $500 PC will render the game at 13.5x the resolution with better graphics settings whilst maintaing the same (if not better) framerate as the consoles.
That's an order of magnitude. That's not pushing it in any way at all. That's just fact.
kamorra said:Compared to most peoples HDTVs, 24" is tiny.
kamorra said:Compared to most peoples HDTVs, 24" is tiny.
shongololo said:No, it's just bad maths.
Fixed.beermonkey@tehbias said:I love how one huge part of GAF talks about how this gen should go on for like five to seven more fucking years with no new hardware, and another huge part of GAF is mad that everything isn't at least 720p back buffer. :lol
These smaller resolutions are being used to make these games look MORE like the PC counterparts. Tradeoffs are being made and this is necessary because the 360 and PS3 VRAM and RAM aren't all that.
Fersis said:Fixed.
Ok, this thread deserves his place on the classic archive.
Cheers guys, bye.
BriareosGAF said:To be really fair, more like the 360 GPU's constrained embedded RAM and the PS3's terrible fillrate.
brain_stew said:What's bad maths? 1024x600 = 614 400 pixels
1280x720 with 3x3 supersampling = 921600 x 9 = 8 294 400
8 294 400 / 614 400 = 13.5
So yes, in my tests with 3x3 supersampling I was rendering at 13.5x the resolution thankyou very much, and on my $150 GPU I got a perfect 60fps refresh, this is with improved textures and 16x anisotropic filtering to boot.
A 13.5x increase in rendering power is generally classed as an order of magnitude increase in performance in the computer world.
So again, what's wrong with my maths?
yupbrain_stew said:Yeah, that's more exact in this case, yes.
The fact that a 1024x600 buffer with 2xmsaa, tidily fits into the 360's 10MB of eDRAM is no coincidence of course.
Honestly, RSX could have been a half decent 1080p GPU if Sony didn't gimp it like they did. It certainly wouldn't have had half as many sub-HD games at the very least anyway.
andycapps said:This is what I get for coming back to Gaming Discussion after being in OT for so long. PC owners bragging about resolutions and console owners fighting on their righteous battle. Ugh, the game is going to be great regardless of native resolution. Is it disappointing that they still can't hit native 720p on consoles at 60 fps? Yes, but it's obvious now that these consoles aren't as powerful as we thought they were 3 years ago. It's also obvious that they'd be able to do a lot more if they were specializing in one platform versus having to build for multiple platforms.
Guled said:I really don't care about it being 600p, its just dumb to see PS360 owners defend their sub HD resolution while they rag about it on the wii.
AlStrong said:old hardware is old. Can't expect up-to-date graphics (arguably) with ancient hardware. They could target 720p and 60fps, but it'd also look old (for an FPS).
Also, 1080post
shongololo said:Well, you're including an AA routine as part of your resolution for a start. It's highly likely your card uses adaptive supersampling, which won't get close to 9 times the original resolution.
AlStrong said:old hardware is old. Can't expect up-to-date graphics (arguably) with ancient hardware. They could target 720p and 60fps, but it'd also look.. old.
brain_stew said:Honestly, I think there is a decent amount of specialisation going on here, on the 360 side. The fact that the buffer fits precisely into 360's eDRAM, and the fact that the engine runs a very smooth 60fps most of the time on 360 whilst spending most of its time below that on PS3 is no coincidence here. It shouldn't be surprising either, considering the game's history.
Its clearly targeted at 360 hardware, and is a bit of an awkward fit for the PS3.
TheExodu5 said:Supersampling through nForcer will render the game at a higher resolution. This isn't simply MSAA.
andycapps said:Yes, but it's obvious now that these consoles aren't as powerful as we thought they were 3 years ago.
shongololo said:Well, you're including an AA routine as part of your resolution for a start. It's highly likely your card uses adaptive supersampling, which won't get close to 9 times the original resolution.
deepbrown said:
RSX has higher fillrate.BriareosGAF said:To be really fair, more like the 360 GPU's constrained embedded RAM and the PS3's terrible fillrate.
andycapps said:So they're not claiming that the game will run identically on both platforms like they did on COD4? That seems like a pretty big step down and a big slap in the face to all the people that bought COD4 on PS3. While the 360 version sold more undoubtedly, the PS3 version sold quite a bit.
Go play Wipeout HD and you'll see.GodofWine said:Whats the point of 1080p in general really? thats just a sexy number that 99/100 people wouldn't be able to tell from a 720p display in their house.
And probably most cannot tell 720p from 600p..motion blur etc covering up the flaws like airbrushing away a little cellulite in Maxim. Still looks good.
Anyone who complains about the resolution in this thread should not buy the game, period.
The first MW2 trailer looks great, and looks like great fun. period.
shongololo said:I'm well aware of that but 3x3 adaptive supersampling isn't equivalent to 9 times the resolution.
nHancer said:Supersampling
Supersampling is a very straight forward method, that was also first introduced on Voodoo 4/5 cards. It's currently not available for 8x00 cards.
The image is just rendered with a higher resolution internally. After a whole image has been rendered, it is then scaled down to the target resolution. While doing that, each pixel is colored from the avarage of all apropriate pixels of the high-resolution image.
Supersampling modes are named after the size of the internally used resolution. I.e. the mode 2x1 means that the internal resoltion has twice the horizontal resolution and the same vertical resolution. The result is, that each final pixel is made from the average of 2 pixels. With the 4x4 supersampling mode, each final pixel is created from the average of 16 pixels.
Thats a really silly argument. You know that every HDTV these days has either DVI or VGA. Heck, this is my setup. A 46 inch Bravia is my monitor, which also double as my console display. And I even have a big comfy couch behind it!!11deepbrown said:yeh, tiny.
![]()
beermonkey@tehbias said:On the other hand at this point last gen Half-Life 2 for the Xbox was 3-4 months from shipping, and even though it ran 640x480 it still looked like total shit compared to a weak gaming PC. The gap was bigger then than now. Expectations have changed.
Osaka said:You mean my 24" HDMI 1080p monitor? :lol
-viper- said:Go play Wipeout HD and you'll see.
Dot50Cal said:Thats a really silly argument. You know that every HDTV these days has either DVI or VGA. Heck, this is my setup. A 46 inch Bravia is my monitor, which also double as my console display. And I even have a big comfy couch behind it!!11