"true" 1080p games coming soon for Xbox 360

[Anthony1]

Apparently, both NBA Street Homecourt and Virtua Tennis 3, will be the first two Xbox 360 games to be native 1080p. Of course on the downside, is actually getting that 1080p video to your display. Without a HDMI output (for now), the best way to get 1080p to a 1080p tv via the 360 is with the Xbox 360 VGA cable. This also requires the 1080p display to accept 1080p via VGA, which isn't a given for 1080p sets with VGA input. You can also get 1080p games via component, but displays that accept 1080p via component are extremely rare. I think there is only 3 TV's on planet Earth that will accept 1080p via component. There are many more HDTV's on Saturn and Uranus that will accept 1080p via component. :)

[jajaja]

So its possible to get true 1080p through VGA? I thought you had to use HMDI. I wonder why no games (not even the XBLA games) got 1080p then.

[dethink]

Yeah, talk about pointless.

1080p isn't that big a deal to me, as the TV I purchased last march only goes up to 1080i, but still...why even bother to waste the resources when approximately 0 people can take advantage of it.

The number of people with 1080p capability over component/vga connections that actually own 360's has to be infinitesimal.

[Mr. Smashy]

I have a 360 running 1080p over VGA and I'm looking forward to picking up Virtua Tennis 3.

Historically, the Virtua Tennis games have looked pretty good over VGA.

[jajaja]

I have a 360 running 1080p over VGA.

Ok, i checked alittle around and it seems that it was first possible after the software update. Then it makes sense why there arent any 1080p games out yet hehe (yes i've checked the entire gaming list on xbox.com).

[SaturnFan]

1080p 1080p 1080p......I'm so annoyed with the whole 1080p ordeal. Only slow paced games will use that feature and Virtual Tennis looks like crap with low textures, so all your going to see is a high def picture of crappy textures.

I only buy fast paced action games and I have a 720p capable HDTV so i'm good to go. MS and Sony should just forget about the whole 1080p crap.

[njiska]

Yeah that's the gist of it. HDMI is mostly hype (for now), it's being pushed largely for digital encryption reasons. The main reason it wasn't an option before was because not enough TVs supported it.

Honestly i thing 720p is a high enough resolution for now because it allows you to put more power to effecct, but if you can do all your effects without compromise at 1080p then why not go with it?

Oh and that's not really a fair statement. While Splinter Cell DA is not listed as natively 1080p i beleive it's natively 1080i and 1080i is created by rendering a 1080p image in the frame buffer and then splitting it into feilds for output.

[jajaja]

Oh and that's not really a fair statement. While Splinter Cell DA is not listed as natively 1080p i beleive it's natively 1080i and 1080i is created by rendering a 1080p image in the frame buffer and then splitting it into feilds for output.

Its not how it works. A 1080 picture would just be another word for a picture thats 1920x1080 pixels large. The i and p only describes how the picture is rendered. A TV thats running in 1080i will still be interlaced so it doesnt matter how the image is. It will still draw every other line anyway, not all lines at the same time like progressive scan.

However, there is some methods to deinterlace the picture. I havnt really read much into it, but the way i understand it its different methods used to remove problems with interlaced signals being shown at a progressiv scan TV. It will usualy cause decreasing of the picture quality so it wont be able to "emulate" 1080p quality, unfortunatly.

I found a picture on Wikipedia:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Interlacingani2.gif

Compare the quality from the progressive scan and the deinterlaced picture. You'll see that the deinterlaced picture is much blurrier. More info about deinterlacing here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinterlacing :)

[njiska]

Its not how it works. A 1080 picture would just be another word for a picture thats 1920x1080 pixels large. The i and p only describes how the picture is rendered. A TV thats running in 1080i will still be interlaced so it doesnt matter how the image is. It will still draw every other line anyway, not all lines at the same time like progressive scan.

However, there is some methods to deinterlace the picture. I havnt really read much into it, but the way i understand it its different methods used to remove problems with interlaced signals being shown at a progressiv scan TV. It will usualy cause decreasing of the picture quality so it wont be able to "emulate" 1080p quality, unfortunatly.

I found a picture on Wikipedia:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Interlacingani2.gif

Compare the quality from the progressive scan and the deinterlaced picture. You'll see that the deinterlaced picture is much blurrier. More info about deinterlacing here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinterlacing :)

I suggest you do a little more research on the issue before you make this novice argument. I mean no offense, you just made a common mistake that most people make when looking at video.

So here's a brief, dumbed down, rundown on how the Xbox renders video at 1920x1080.

Rendering native 720p
First all the visual data is processed by the CPU/GPU and a full 1280x720 image is placed into the frame buffer.

The frame is then passed into the video processor which then converts the image to a Progressive HD signal and outputs to your TV.

Rendering native 1080i
First all the visual data is processed by the CPU/GPU and a full 1920x1080 image is placed into the frame buffer.

The frame is then passed into the video processor which then converts the image to two fields and sends an interlaced HD signal to your TV.

You're TV then reads the data and (assuming it's nan LCD which is incapable of displaying interlaced video) deinterlaces it and put the image on your screen as one frame.

Rendering native 1080i
First all the visual data is processed by the CPU/GPU and a full 1920x1080 image is placed into the frame buffer.

The frame is then passed into the video processor which then converts the image to a Progressive HD signal and outputs to your TV.

So as you can see the only difference between outputing natively at 1080i and 1080p is if the video processor breaks the frame into two fields. Take that step out and you get 1080p output.

I know you're going to immidiately claim that the xbox is rendering 2 1080 field in the frame buffer but the fact is that's unrealistic. In order to do per feild rendering you need a crap load of extra math and you need to have a fixed frame rate. Even one dropped field will produce a horrible image.

So as i stated, if Splinter Cell DA is 1080i natively, then it should be outputting real 1080p video in 1080p mode, not deinterlaced 1080i. It makes no sense to interlace the frame and then dump it into the video processor again to deinterlace it.

[Mr. Smashy]

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=12680

I played the demo for this game today (which looks great, by the way) and after reading this article, I'm beginning to wonder exactly how different a 1080p signal at 30 fps is compared to a 1080i 60 Hz signal of a game running at 30 fps when displayed on a 1080p-capable TV.

I'll have to dig a little more into that one. In theory, when sent over a VGA signal, shouldn't they be identical? Haven't there been any Xbox 360 games that supported true 1080i before now? I could have sworn that there were a bunch of them.


Rendering native 1080i
First all the visual data is processed by the CPU/GPU and a full 1920x1080 image is placed into the frame buffer.

The frame is then passed into the video processor which then converts the image to two fields and sends an interlaced HD signal to your TV.

You're TV then reads the data and (assuming it's nan LCD which is incapable of displaying interlaced video) deinterlaces it and put the image on your screen as one frame.

Rendering native 1080i
First all the visual data is processed by the CPU/GPU and a full 1920x1080 image is placed into the frame buffer.

The frame is then passed into the video processor which then converts the image to a Progressive HD signal and outputs to your TV.

So as you can see the only difference between outputing natively at 1080i and 1080p is if the video processor breaks the frame into two fields. Take that step out and you get 1080p output.

Clear as mud. I'll assume that you intended for the second bolded segment here to read "1080p".

[jajaja]

njiska: I already know all that stuff you write in the description. I also assume the last bold stuff is suppose to say 1080p, not 1080i? If i understand you correctly now, are you saying that its enough with a software update (the 1080p update from MS that came out some months ago) to be able to change 1080i games to true 1080p?

I see you use focus on "native". Can you describe to me what the differences are between native and not native are? If i understand your description correctly you say that the only difference between 1080i and 1080p is how its its rendered and that if you remove the step (two fields) you will have true 1080p output. In that case, if you remove that step, where does the 1080i come in? I mean, if you remove it, the description fits native 1080p. So can you please explain what you mean with native 1080i that outputs 1080p?

The "i" in 1080i mean interlaced, the "p" in 1080p means progressive. If something is running 1080i, it describes that the picture resolution is 1920x1080 and that its interlaced, which means that every other line is rendered. This gives a good picture quality and most important it saves bandwith since it only have to render half the lines as progressive scan does. Since most (every?) LCD and plasma TV is set to progressive scan it uses a build-in deinterlacor (check Wikipedia link that was posted earlier for more info). So much for research hehe ;)

[njiska]

njiska: I already know all that stuff you write in the description. I also assume the last bold stuff is suppose to say 1080p, not 1080i? If i understand you correctly now, are you saying that its enough with a software update (the 1080p update from MS that came out some months ago) to be able to change 1080i games to true 1080p?

I see you use focus on "native". Can you describe to me what the differences are between native and not native are? If i understand your description correctly you say that the only difference between 1080i and 1080p is how its its rendered and that if you remove the step (two fields) you will have true 1080p output. In that case, if you remove that step, where does the 1080i come in? I mean, if you remove it, the description fits native 1080p. So can you please explain what you mean with native 1080i that outputs 1080p?

The "i" in 1080i mean interlaced, the "p" in 1080p means progressive. If something is running 1080i, it describes that the picture resolution is 1920x1080 and that its interlaced, which means that every other line is rendered. This gives a good picture quality and most important it saves bandwith since it only have to render half the lines as progressive scan does. Since most (every?) LCD and plasma TV is set to progressive scan it uses a build-in deinterlacor (check Wikipedia link that was posted earlier for more info). So much for research hehe ;)

OK native, vs, non-native in this context it refering to the size of the image not the output method. i.e. native 1080i/p is a real 1920x1080 image as opposed to an upscaled 1280x720.

and yes the last bold is supposed to be 1080p.

The point i'm trying to make, and failing at, is that data is a full frame until the video processor selects the output signal.

here listen to this it will explain http://www.majornelson.com/archive/2006/10/15/Show-198-The-one-about-1080p-and-Family-Settings.aspx

[jonjandran]

Just wanted to mention that I have a Mitsubishi HC5000 1920x1080 projector on a 165" screen.

And there is a big difference when watching 1080p and 1080i.

So for some of us it does matter :)

[jajaja]

OK native, vs, non-native in this context it refering to the size of the image not the output method. i.e. native 1080i/p is a real 1920x1080 image as opposed to an upscaled 1280x720.

and yes the last bold is supposed to be 1080p.

The point i'm trying to make, and failing at, is that data is a full frame until the video processor selects the output signal.

here listen to this it will explain http://www.majornelson.com/archive/2006/10/15/Show-198-The-one-about-1080p-and-Family-Settings.aspx

I listened through the entire 1080p interview with Albert, but he doesnt mention anything about the 1080i native to 1080p output or SC : DA that you talked about earlier, atleast not what i heard. At what XX:XX time is he talking about it?

They only talk about that the software update now supports true 1080p output through VGA and component and what requires to make a native 1080p game. Otherwise its upscaling from 720p to 1080p, not disabling of 1080i rendering and make it into 1080p. If that was the case it would mean that basicly every 360 game would be true 1080p because all of them (according to xbox.com atleast) supports 1080i.

So if the source material for 1080i and 1080p is exactly the same and the software update would allow you to change how the gpu renders 1080i games and change it to 1080p instead, it wouldnt be any upscaling or anything. And it doesnt really matter if the game itself is native 1080i if the source is exactly the same as 1080p. If a update changes this the game would be native 1080p because as you say, the data is exactly the same before its being rendered. So instead that saying i need to do some research, isnt it better that you do some instead?

I learned something new tho, that 50-60% of all TVs will downscale 1080p to 540p (1080i) signals if HDMI isnt used due to some protection stuff. That will sux for people who got one of those TVs and a 360 that want to run 1080p, not just for games, but for movies too. Hopefully there will be a HDMI box to the 360 or a new model with HDMI output.

[Anthony1]

Just wanted to mention that I have a Mitsubishi HC5000 1920x1080 projector on a 165" screen.

And there is a big difference when watching 1080p and 1080i.

So for some of us it does matter :)



Yeah, for projector owners with ginormous screens like us, 1080p would be a significant boost. Anytime you are spreading that kinda resolution over a giant surface area, any and all warts in the image will be revealed, so for people like us with giant screens, we can never get enough resolution. I have a 131 inch screen myself, and I thought 131 inches was pretty ridiculous but 165 inches GoDDAMN!!! Right now I'm using a Misubishi HD1000u which I got for $850, it's a "true" 720p DLP, and I hope to upgrade to a true 1080p DLP in about 2 years, but for now this puppy does the trick for me.

[Trebuken]

Just wanted to mention that I have a Mitsubishi HC5000 1920x1080 projector on a 165" screen.

And there is a big difference when watching 1080p and 1080i.

So for some of us it does matter :)


How far does the projector have to sit from the screen to project an image that size?

[jonjandran]

How far does the projector have to sit from the screen to project an image that size?

22' at the moment, but it can be as close as 18' I think with the zoom all the way out.

[petewhitley]

Anthony1 and jonjandran aside, I wonder how many of us can actually take advantage of a 1080p image. Like a lot of us, I have my 360 hooked up to HDTV, but 720p is what I'm capable of. Even today, the majority of consumer TVs/monitors can't output 1080p (regardless of what anyone says, go to your local electronics shop and see what is readily available and selling). I know it's possible on the cheap with some ingenuity, but most of us went to Best Buy and bought an affordable, pre-existing HDTV or hooked up our system to a larger computer monitor). IMO, this is just a bragging rights thing in terms of how useful this is in 2007. Several years from now, this might mean something.

[Trebuken]

Anthony1 and jonjandran aside, I wonder how many of us can actually take advantage of a 1080p image. Like a lot of us, I have my 360 hooked up to HDTV, but 720p is what I'm capable of. Even today, the majority of consumer TVs/monitors can't output 1080p (regardless of what anyone says, go to your local electronics shop and see what is readily available and selling). I know it's possible on the cheap with some ingenuity, but most of us went to Best Buy and bought an affordable, pre-existing HDTV or hooked up our system to a larger computer monitor). IMO, this is just a bragging rights thing in terms of how useful this is in 2007. Several years from now, this might mean something.

I suspect all new model sets will soon be 1080p. I believe 720p is now defunct (accept on CRT's, and sub 40" displays). I am convinced that most 720p sets for sale are simply the 'cheap' sets. They will only continue to sell them until they have converted all the manufacturing to 1080p. 720p sets are effectively 'clearance' at this time.

Most if not all 1080p sets deinterlace 1080i and as has been said, this makes a huge difference as your display size increases.

1080i vs. 1080p is essentially the same as 480p was for 480i as far as DVD's.

Bragging rights will belong to the first person to buy a Quad HDTV with 2160p; due to hit shelves this year. 1080p is the standard, 720p continues to be marketed because it is more profitable.

[petewhitley]

I suspect all new model sets will soon be 1080p. I believe 720p is now defunct (accept on CRT's, and sub 40" displays). I am convinced that most 720p sets for sale are simply the 'cheap' sets. They will only continue to sell them until they have converted all the manufacturing to 1080p. 720p sets are effectively 'clearance' at this time.

I'm sorry man, but that is just flat wrong. Firstly, 720p is the current standard in terms of HDTV programming, both in gaming and television. It is anything but "defunct". And I don't know where you're shopping, but the large majority of sub-$2,000 HDTVs at large electronics retailers such as Best Buy are NOT 1080p compatible (go to your local store, or even the Best Buy website to confirm this). To a videophile, a sub-$2,000 television might consititute "cheap", but that's a popular price point for the average consumer who is looking to step into the world of HDTV. Future HDTVs are likely to more and more support 1080p, but as of right now, 720p HDTVs are anything but on "clearance" as a whole, and undoubtedly enjoy a much larger installed user base than 1080p-combatible sets.

[Trebuken]

I'm sorry man, but that is just flat wrong. Firstly, 720p is the current standard in terms of HDTV programming, both in gaming and television. It is anything but "defunct". And I don't know where you're shopping, but the large majority of sub-$2,000 HDTVs at large electronics retailers such as Best Buy are NOT 1080p compatible (go to your local store, or even the Best Buy website to confirm this). To a videophile, a sub-$2,000 television might consititute "cheap", but that's a popular price point for the average consumer who is looking to step into the world of HDTV. Future HDTVs are likely to more and more support 1080p, but as of right now, 720p HDTVs are anything but on "clearance" as a whole, and undoubtedly enjoy a much larger installed user base than 1080p-combatible sets.

I do undesrstand your point and I appreciate that I went a little far but...I do shop at Best Buy and such. I also know that many of the sets for sale at such stores are often not the current models (especially at the end of the year). The retailers do not bring in the newest models until they have eliminated their inventory, or until they are being produced in sufficient quantity or at an acceptable cost. If you look at upcomoing sets from most manufacturers you will see 720p disappearing using retail stores as a guide is faulty.

When looking at technology you have to be ahead of the cureve. 720p is the most popular, certainly, and I think 1080i is technically the standard, though plenty of HDTV is braodcast in 720p. 1080p isn't much more than 1080i, none of which requires 720p.

720p is popular and common, but it's on the way out. These are essentially starter TV's, for the non-videophiles.

[maxlords]

1080i is inferior to 720p anyway :)

I'll stick with 720p...which is the best my TV does. It's 26" LCD anyway, so you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p IF you could go to 1080p anyway. I suspect 1080i will be a dead format in the next 2 years or so. If ya want the breakdown of how it works, check out this thread:
http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=ps3&thread.id=938503

[petewhitley]

720p is popular and common, but it's on the way out. These are essentially starter TV's, for the non-videophiles.

I have to wonder is the popularity/user base of 720p HDTVs and programming has already reached that critical point where it will preclude 1080p programming from taking off in the near future.

[dethink]

1080i is inferior to 720p anyway :)

I'll stick with 720p...which is the best my TV does. It's 26" LCD anyway, so you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p IF you could go to 1080p anyway. I suspect 1080i will be a dead format in the next 2 years or so. If ya want the breakdown of how it works, check out this thread:
http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=ps3&thread.id=938503

That guy's posts are great. However, I'm surprised after all the harping sony's done about HDMI, resolutions, and "deep color" that they haven't kicked him from the board and deleted his posts. ;)

The chart is excellent too...so even though I'm "stuck" with my 11 month old "obsolete" panasonic 26" 720p display, it makes no difference whatsoever, due to the distance of my couch.

[maxlords]

Yeah, assuming his info is accurate and it DOES appear to be quite so, basically all the video fanatics that think TV X is the best thing and they can tell the difference etc etc are completely full of shit, which is what I thought in the first place ;)

Essentially unless you have a GIGANTIC TV, there is no difference between 720p and 1080p at all, though there is one between 420p and 720p (still not THAT huge tho). And 1080i is an inferior standard that causes problems with "artifacting". Guess that's why my Xbox looks better on 720p than 1080i :)

I also like his views on HDMI cables....as most of you may know, there is NO difference between the signal from a $15 HDMI cable and a $100 Monster HDMI cable. None. And for the record, once you get past a certain level of quality in regular cables (A/V, component, etc) there's no difference either. It's more what other stuff you feed them through (switchboxes, etc) than the actual cables. Monster cables are the biggest ripoff ever. Just buy regular decent cables with gold plated connectors and everything will look fine!

[SaturnFan]

I can't believe some of you guys are saying 720p is out. 720p is not even "in" as far as I can see. The majority of the people out there are still using SDTV's, so how could 720p be "out" when most people don't even own an HDTV yet? 1080p has got atleast 5 years before 50% of the population own one. I don't even think 50% of people own a 720p capable HDTV yet.

[Anthony1]

1080p is incredibly overrated. I've said this before, but everybody knows that I'm one of the resident videophiles on these boards, and in the very beginning, I thought that 1080p was the Holy Grail of video. It's not. Not even close. Very few people will be able to enjoy the true value of 1080p. There is a mathmatical equation in which the distance that you are sitting from your display determines the maximum resolution a human being is able to perceive. When it comes to the argument between 1080p and 720p, the bottom line is that you either need a ginormous 1080p screen, or you need to sit VERY,VERY CLOSE to a 1080p TV.


For example, if you have a 50 inch 1080p display and are sitting more than 7 feet from the screen, you have basically wasted the $600 difference you paid to get 1080p, because a distance greater than 7 or 8 feet away makes the resolution increase a moot point. The human eye can not resolve the resolution improvement at that distance. If you were to sit say 4 to 6 feet from the 50 inch 1080p, you would notice the improvement in a big way. But how many people sit that freaking close to a 50 inch TV? Very, very, very few. Most people sit 9 feet or more from a 50 inch TV, thus 1080p has no advantage for them. I sit about 10 or 11 feet away from my 51 inch tv, and at one point I was going to upgrade that particular display to a 1080p display, but when I found out about this mathmatical forumla, and how close I would have to sit for my eyes to actually resolve that resolution I said the hell with it.

1080p only matters for people that have absolutely huge screens (I'm talking 65 inches and up), or for people that sit extremely close to their display. Also, with a 65 inch set, you also have to sit very close up. So in all reality, if you don't sit super close to your TV, then 1080p doesn't really matter to much. For the projector set, that have screens that are 8 to 10 feet wide, 1080p is a huge deal, but 1080p in the projector world is still quite expensive. Right now, the only relatively affordable (key word relatively) 1080p projectors are the LCD based projectors, and I'm not a huge fan of LCD. I prefer DLP when it comes to front projection, and the 1080p DLP front projectors are way the hell out of my price range. Maybe in 2 or 3 years they will get into my price range, but not right now.

[maxlords]

*gobble gobble gobble*

Thanks for already stating what's been said in a longer and more obtuse form! *looks for a poet's shirt* 1080p is however...not at all overrated. It's just that it's not that different unless you fit within a certain category..and this may change in the future...depending on how companies make TVs :)

[Anthony1]

Thanks for already stating what's been said in a longer and more obtuse form! *looks for a poet's shirt* 1080p is however...not at all overrated. It's just that it's not that different unless you fit within a certain category..and this may change in the future...depending on how companies make TVs :)


Let me guess, you bought a 1080p TV and feel the need to defend your purchase.

[Trebuken]

I love 1080p debates.

One of what I believe to be the overlooked elements of the argument is the material produced for 1080p. I think many of the HD-DVD's and Blu-Ray moves are being transferred satisfactorily enough to make 1080p as effective as it could be. Many Over-the-air HDTV shows (CSI-Miami, Smallville, Supernatural) seem to me to be superior to all those next generation DVD's and they are only broadcast in 720p or 1080i.

I think this helps to blur what 1080p is capable of. It's common knowledge that many DVD's released on the last couple of years have dramatically better picture quality then DVD's released before that; presumably because superior and more affordable transfer processes are available. 1080p has a strong future that we have yet to see...

[maxlords]

Let me guess, you bought a 1080p TV and feel the need to defend your purchase.


Nope. I have a 720p LCD TV that can "upscale" to 1080i.

[petewhitley]

Content is really what is going to decide this resolution war, and right now, 720p content is so overwhelmingly ahead it seems as though the writing is on the wall, regardless of the benefits/lack-thereof that 1080p brings to the table.

[Garry Shandling]

Gary Shandling

[Humongous Forum Troll]

There are many more HDTV's on Saturn and Uranus that will accept 1080p via component. :)

'Uranus' smells, ah ha, ha ha.

[Wilford Brimley]

*shakes head*

Son, you better eat your oatmeal. It's the right thing to do and the tasty way to do it.