Wii and 16:9 ratio...looks exactly the same to me. Why

[rbudrick]

Hi Folks,

I finally broke down and bought component cables for my Wii. I set the setting to 16:9 in the Wii menu and then I set the Wii menu settings to 480p. However, the main menu looks exactly the same and in the same 4:3 square box. Am I doing something wrong, or am I just completely misunderstanding what's going on here? I know this is probably a super newb-like question, but I'm stumped, and I'll bet you guys know the answer.

-Rob

[BetaWolf47]

You have to set your TV to 16:9. Wii's 16:9 isn't true widescreen... it just gives you a 4:3 picture that doesn't look warped when you set your TV to 16:9.

[Oobgarm]

Some TVs pick up on the resolution format change without a hitch, some have to be manually set.

You'll notice a difference when it happens, trust me.

[dao2]

Wii's widescreen sucks :|

[Nz17]

480p can be either fullscreen or widescreen (4:3 or 16:9) so if the Wii gives you a "boxy" output that's because it's 480p output is 640x480 pixels (4:3).

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/480p

[Darkman2K5]

I have the same problem with my TV when I set the Wii to 16x9. I have to manually change my TV's 16x9 to accomadate the Wii, try playing with your tv settings and see if you can get it to work properly.

[rbudrick]

Well, my TV has three other settings than the setting labeled "normal" (which is what I had it on. The others are Wide, Panoramic and Zoom). Wide just stretches everything uniformly and looks like ass, but is the least shitty. Panoramic is similar, but things closer to the center of the screen are less warped than the edges (just a shittier version of Wide). Zoom just zooms in on the center of the 4:3 box and cuts stuff off.

So, all the settings suck balls. What to do?

-Rob

[kedawa]

What the hell are you people trying to do? If your tv is a widescreen, set it to 16:9. If it's not, then leave it set to 4:3.
Your tv/monitor should be set to stretch the image to fill the screen.

[Leo_A]

As you've been told, 480i/480p widescreen content such as Wii games and DVD's is anamorphic widescreen. That means a widescreen image has been horizontally squeezed so it can be stored into a standard 4:3 aspect ratio frame.

Your television has to re-expand it horizontally to fill the screen. Just set your television to wide since it's doing what it's supposed to do, stretch the image. Only HD content is natively widescreen, you won't find any 480i/480p content that is flagged as widescreen so your display automatically switches to stretching it, it's all native 4:3.

[Red Warrior]

My TV is very similar to yours. When I set my Wii to 16x9 widescreen, I have to set my TV manually to the WIDE setting... unlike my 360 which does everything automatically. Panoramic and Zoom won't cut it. The WIDE setting is what you want for 16x9 Wii.

[rbudrick]

Ok, thanks, guys. I could have just stretched it just the same with 4:3 using my TV settings, so I really don't see the benefit (is there any? I just really don't get it). What's the point of widescreen if it is distorted?

-Rob

[SkiDragon]

You have to set the Wii to display in widescreen. This will squish the image horizontally. Then you set the TV to "wide" or "16:9" or whatever to make it fill up the whole screen. If done correctly the aspect ratio should be fine, e.g. the round buttons in the Wii menu should be round, not oval. Of course, horizontal dpi is lost in this process, but that will always be the case for a non-HD widescreen image, I believe.

[Leo_A]

Ok, thanks, guys. I could have just stretched it just the same with 4:3 using my TV settings, so I really don't see the benefit (is there any? I just really don't get it). What's the point of widescreen if it is distorted?

-Rob

You just don't get it. If you stretched it when it was set to 4:3, the image wouldn't of been switched to an anamorphic widescreen 4:3 image that was suiteable for stretching to then look correct. You'd of just distorted the game.

I don't think you have a eye for it anyways so I wouldn't worry about it. Setting the Wii's menu setting to 16:9 and having it still display at 4:3 on your television resorts in a very different looking image than when the Wii was set to 4:3. If you couldn't tell there was a difference (Such as the circular Wii menu buttons on the lower part of the screen becoming ovals), it's your own eyes. You have to then have your tv stretch this image so those ovals and everything else then look correct. That's how widescreen is achieved in standard and extended definition, because as you've been told a dozen times already, these definitions by nature are 4:3 and you have to get a widescreen image through trickery (Non square pixels in a 4:3 image, which the Wii's menu setting triggers when set to widescreen, which when stretched by your television, creates a correct looking 16:9 image). Only HD is natively widescreen.

Set the Wii to widescreen in it's internal settings so it will change to outputting a anamorphic widescreen image in a 4:3 frame, and set your television to stretch that 4:3 anamorphic widescreen image to fill your screen. It will be a correct 16:9 non distorted image then, just like how you get widescreen from 16:9 DVD's, PS2, Xbox, Dreamcast, and GCN titles.

Also realize that some Wii titles and all Virtual Console titles are 4:3 only. So while your Wii's menu setting is 16:9, the image it outputs always remains a 4:3 image, so these titles are unaffected because there's no anamorphic widescreen setting for them to change to. But when you want to play one of these titles, you have to set your television to maintain the 4:3 aspect ratio it's being told to display (Because, as you've been told, 480i/480p is always flagged as 4:3) so these titles aren't incorrected stretched to 16:9 and become distorted.

Also, if you want to play any widescreen GameCube games, the Wii's menu setting doesn't do anything to those games, you still have to switch it to widescreen in their own ingame menus (And switch to 480p when supported by holding B on the GCN controller when they start up).

But I'd suggest just leaving it wherever it is and stop thinking about it since you can't tell anyways when you make any of the changes you've been told.

[Zthun]

Ok, thanks, guys. I could have just stretched it just the same with 4:3 using my TV settings, so I really don't see the benefit (is there any? I just really don't get it). What's the point of widescreen if it is distorted?

-Rob

The component cables are worthless on the Wii. The system can only output 480p. You have to set both your TV to output 16x9 and the Wii to output 16x9. The Wii menu won't change much, but your games will.

[j_factor]

As you've been told, 480i/480p widescreen content such as Wii games and DVD's is anamorphic widescreen. That means a widescreen image has been horizontally squeezed so it can be stored into a standard 4:3 aspect ratio frame.

What do you call a 720 x 480 resolution then? Or is the Wii not capable of outputting that?

[BetaWolf47]

If you're talking about true 16:9, no it can't.

[TheRedEye]

The component cables are worthless on the Wii. The system can only output 480p.

...and what magical cables do you have that are compatible with the Wii, not component, and output at 480p?

[j_factor]

If you're talking about true 16:9, no it can't.

Figures. A "squeezed" widescreen is nothing, any system can do that (Virtua Fighter 32x does it, and I heard some 3DO game did it). When Wii came out, Nintendo seemed to be emphasizing its "widescreen" progressive scan capability, as if it were different from Gamecube. But I guess it's the same damn ability. I suppose that explains why sometimes screenshots of Wii games are in weird non-standard (but wide) resolutions.

Extra-lame is that there are quite a few Wii games that don't even support progressive scan (and they don't even tell you!). It shouldn't be anything in software, it should be natively supported by the video hardware. That's how it worked on Dreamcast, it works by default, and the games that don't allow it had it actively disabled by the developer (and even then, the game just has a "no VGA cable" flag, and you can force it to work). I guess the Wii is less advanced than the Dreamcast.

[Leo_A]

I think he's confused and not aware that component can benefit a console even at non hd resolutions. Even at just 480i, component gives a nice boost to the visuals. Heck, I have several classic consoles that released before the NES modded for component output just for the increased clarity, improved colors, etc., that it provides. Component cables for the Wii are a must have at 480i, and if you're playing on a 480p set it's even better.

As for the criticism of how the Wii achieves widescreen, that's just how it's done at 480i/480p.

[rbudrick]

I understand what the folks above told me, but what I was trying to say is that the menu display is was EXACTLY the same whether I set it to 4:3 or 16:9 and then set the TV to the wide setting...or so I thought. It was very difficult to see anything different until I really looked at whether the Wii system setting button was shaped any differently (thanks for the tip on that!). It turned out it really was only slightly oval. I really thought I was getting the same thing no matter what I set it on.

Thanks for all your help, guys, and sorry for the dumb newbishness. I really thought I was doing something wrong.

-Rob

[Leo_A]

It can be tough to notice I admit. Especially in something like a menu.

I actually use the Wii on a 16:10 computer monitor that has component inputs, and I honestly don't notice a difference of using a slightly different aspect ratio (Sadly, since the signal is 4:3 from the Wii that the monitor has to then stretch to fill the screen, there's no way to get a 16:9 AR out of it on my 16:10 monitor).

[Vlcice]

What do you call a 720 x 480 resolution then? Or is the Wii not capable of outputting that?

720x480 is still essentially 4:3, just with non-square pixels. It's usually used by 4:3 systems.

[kedawa]

My computer outputs 720x480 to my 4:3 television and my video driver won't let me change it to 640x480, so I have to deal with a vertically stretched image.
I don't know why non-square pixels were ever allowed into video standards, but it was a serious mistake.

[Zthun]

...and what magical cables do you have that are compatible with the Wii, not component, and output at 480p?

None. From what I see, 480i barely has any difference than 480p. Same goes for 1080i and 1080p. Hell, most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p. Unless your sitting a foot away from your TV, the difference is minuscule.

When it comes to TV resolutions, numbers are just numbers, and most people just use them to brag to others about how they have the latest technology and how they are better than everyone else because of it. The difference between 480p and 720p is worth it - it's a huge change. The difference between 720p and 1080p is barely anything visible to the human eye, so it's a waste to pay extra for something that you're barely going to notice. The difference between 480i and 480p is barely visible so unless he got the cables for 99 cents or a gift, I would say it was probably a waste of money.

The answer has been stated here. The Wii does not output hi def and while some games do output at 16x9, the Wii menu does not. Golden rule about Nintendo - they can have some of the best games on the market, but as far as technology goes, they are always a generation behind the others.

[BetaWolf47]

My computer outputs 720x480 to my 4:3 television and my video driver won't let me change it to 640x480, so I have to deal with a vertically stretched image.
I don't know why non-square pixels were ever allowed into video standards, but it was a serious mistake.

What kind of video driver do you have that won't allow you to change your scaling settings???

[Leo_A]

Don't listen to him, the component cables are cheap and increase the image quality significantly, even at 480i. You'll get a much nicer looking image by not having the signals mixed together, reduced color bleeding, reduced dot crawl, more vibrant and accurate colors, etc. You can notice the quality difference even on a Atari 2600.

And if you're playing on a HDTV, regardless of any differences between 480i and 480p, it's likely that your Wii will do a much better job outputting a progressive image than your tv's scaler chip would do at deinterlacing the signal as it does it's job to upscale the image to the tv's native resolution. Will likely improve your image quality and reduce input lag since it's one less processing step your television has to do to the image before displaying it.

[j_factor]

You can notice the quality difference even on a Atari 2600.

Nothing NES and below benefits from anything above composite. The video hardware just doesn't do anything better, internally. SMS was the first console with RGB video, and thus it benefits from SCART, component, or s-video.

[Leo_A]

Sorry, but that's simply untrue. S-video and Component modifications for classic consoles are possible, with component modifications being especially common on Colecovisions. I suggest you spend some time looking around at AtariAge where there's much discussion on the video mods for all the popular pre NES consoles.

My classic consoles all have improved picture quality with s-video or component, over composite.

[kedawa]

I don't see the point of using component over rgb.

[j_factor]

Sorry, but that's simply untrue. S-video and Component modifications for classic consoles are possible, with component modifications being especially common on Colecovisions. I suggest you spend some time looking around at AtariAge where there's much discussion on the video mods for all the popular pre NES consoles.

My classic consoles all have improved picture quality with s-video or component, over composite.

I know little about the Colecovision, but the NES video chip only does composite video. There is no chroma/luma or red/green/blue separation in the hardware. If you mod it for s-video or component, you're only separating a composite signal after the fact. You may get a slightly clearer signal out of component cables, but composite doesn't in any way degrade the picture. Genesis and SNES use RGB video. When you play them in composite, you're significantly downgrading the video; S-video is less of a loss, and component is practically no loss.


I don't see the point of using component over rgb.

On this side of the pond, most of us have TVs with component inputs, but few of us have anything that can accept an RGB signal. SCART is extremely rare. RGB monitors were common in the Amiga days, and multisync monitors aren't unheard-of, but that's not an easy road to take.

[Leo_A]

That's just the NES, it doesn't apply to earlier consoles. And even then, the NES can be modified past composite video.

Incidentally, there are even VGA and HDMI modifications in the works for several pre crash consoles due to HDTV's becoming more common.

Modern televisions tend to perform better with higher end inputs than plain old composite, due to the focus modern displays put on HD material over doing a decent job with standard definition. I think the Colecovision one even implements a scaler into the design to upscale it before reaching the display if I'm remembering correctly.

Sounds like overkill now, but in a few years I wouldn't be surprised to see such designs become more commonplace in video modifications for classic consoles in order to try to improve the experience when playing on a modern television.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

On this side of the pond, most of us have TVs with component inputs, but few of us have anything that can accept an RGB signal. SCART is extremely rare. RGB monitors were common in the Amiga days, and multisync monitors aren't unheard-of, but that's not an easy road to take.

It's actually getting a lot better. A lot of LCD TVs are getting a VGA input... and VGA carries an RGB signal. Also many home theater projectors have inputs that can switch between component and RGB via the component inputs.

[Ed Oscuro]

I don't know why non-square pixels were ever allowed into video standards, but it was a serious mistake.
psst that's what they started with

[kedawa]

What do you mean? Aside from a few oddball arcade and early PC resolutions, most video broadcasts and display standards use resolutions that are the same aspect as the physical screen, and therefore use square pixels. Or are you just referring to widescreen modes using conventional signals?

[TonyTheTiger]

and component is practically no loss.

I don't understand how component is any loss whatsoever. Doesn't it do the same thing just through a different method? Instead of carrying Red, Green, and Blue separately, it carries Red, Blue, and Luma separately and then lets the math take over and make everything else Green. What's being lost?

I've never seen a side by side comparison. I'd wonder what kind of results a double blind experiment would see.

[Leo_A]

This post doesn't make any sense, so I'm doing the next best thing to deleting it...

[j_factor]

I don't understand how component is any loss whatsoever. Doesn't it do the same thing just through a different method? Instead of carrying Red, Green, and Blue separately, it carries Red, Blue, and Luma separately and then lets the math take over and make everything else Green. What's being lost?

I've never seen a side by side comparison. I'd wonder what kind of results a double blind experiment would see.

I don't know. I've just been told it's a slight loss. Although I've never done a real side-by-side comparison myself, from what I can gather, it looks just as good to me. I may have been misinformed. Or maybe it's just that most RGB systems can't normally do component, so it requires transcoding, and the process of transcoding is what causes a slight loss. *shrug*

[kedawa]

People can see contrast and brightness better than they can discern color. Component having an entire channel devoted to luminance theoretically makes the image more accurate to the human eye than RGB. RGB has more accurate color, but the contrast and brightness are the byproduct of the three color signals, which could potentially be slightly out of phase with one another and blur monochrome detail.