3D PS3 Titles Will Suffer Visual Downgrade, GT5 a Casualty?

[Mr Latte]

I must admit to being confused about the above.

During last year you could pick up a 50" Samsung plasma for around £599 from stores such as Argos, Tescos. Now the cheapest Samsung 3DTV LED that I can find is £1999.99. The 55" Samsung plasma 3D TV is £2999.99.

Now I apologise if im wrong because it might be that im looking at the wrong websites.

Samsung is the only brand offering 3DTV (that im aware of) in LCD, LED & Plasma.
Because of this prices vary quite a bit and the features/specs/performance will also vary.

You can look here as one example.
Many TVs from Sony/LG/Panasonic/Sharp are available in similar sizes that are not necessarily new models and 2D which currently are selling for more than the costs of these particular Samsung 3DTV slim plasmas.

Yes glasses have to be purchased seperate unless bundle deals are done.

Some consumers may want LED and LED models will cost much more but that doesnt mean they are technically better particulary in black levels and for 3D than what these Plasma models may be.

Point being made is, here right now is a range of 3DTVs that doesnt seem to be at a pricepoint costing many hundreds of pounds more than current 2D models.

AVforums in the UK has a thread regards this model.
The model number is different in the USA but is already on sale and forums ike AVS will have owners already discussing them.

 

[TokyoDrift]

Ive said to others you are more than welcome to create a thread and fill it with photographs of GT5P in 1080p mode and compare it to the 720p mode.

You really are something aren't you? Who the hell are you to go telling people what they can and cannot see with their own two eyes? You said the same thing to me when I said that on MY 720p and 1080p BRAVIA TVs, with GT5P I notice an improvement in clarity in 1080p mode through having less shimmer and less pronounced jaggies. I don't have to photograph or prove anything, or concern myself with it possibly being the way my TVs are setup or whatever.

TD I dont mind discussing things

I do, when you go around thinking you know everything about everything, including what people can or cannot see.

If you or others think 3D is a FAD or it will fail, fine I disagree and for reasons made above....

What, because a 2010 Samsung 3DTV costs less than a 2009 SONY HDTV?!

 

[yesbossdodd]

HDTV hasn't even fully settled in yet, only movies and games really use it. In the UK there will be over 60 HD channels by the end of the year but most of the content on these channels will be upscaled therefore making it pointless for a while yet. I personally think 3DTV is a fad that will die out soon enough, the main reason for this is it is designed for short term viewing of around 2 hours. Any longer than this and most people will start to suffer with headaches and migranes, making 3DTV not so good for us gamers.

On the difference between 720 and 1080, I can definitely see the difference using the PS3's internal upscaling as well as the diference between games in 720 &1080. I do work in the TV industry though so I am probably more used to seeing things in their raw format and therefore can see the imperfections of lower quality a lot more.

Thats just my six eggs on the subject and why I don't think 3DTV will last.

 

[eSZee]

first thing first fat Ps3 have HDMI 1.2 !!!1080p in 3d at 60 fps won't happen ! it's imposibble on hdmi 1.2.. 720p at most in 30 fps.

The ps3 was launched with 1.3 support and updated to full 1.3 a long time ago.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

You really are something aren't you? Who the hell are you to go telling people what they can and cannot see with their own two eyes? You said the same thing to me when I said that on MY 720p and 1080p BRAVIA TVs, with GT5P I notice an improvement in clarity in 1080p mode through having less shimmer and less pronounced jaggies.


:

I do agree with you TD.

Prior to buying my Bravia I rented a Sony HDTV that was only 720P. Now when I started playing GT5P in 1080P on my new bravia the clarity of picture was much better.

Maybe this isn't the case for other makes of TVs but its certainly the case with a Sony TV. This is one of the reasons I chose to buy a Sony TV and not bother with any other brand. A friend of mine has his PS3 connected to a 1080P Samsung and the picture quality isn't as good as mine.

 

[Mr Latte]

TD if you prefer to argue rather than discuss I will ignore future posts which you wish to turn into debates. Fine if we disagree state what or why you disagree. Im not interested in replying to constant quotes or baiting.

For now on if you have a major issue then by all means lets argue over PM.

Play the game how the heck you like.
I know how Ill be playing it

Regards the 720p/1080p comparison and how it improves GT5.
I pleasantly offered and this goes to anyone if they want to do a fair comparison and prove me wrong they are welcome to create a thread and photograph for everyone to see the differences in GT5P between each resolution within the game. May I add you cant compare it properly on two different spec TVs thats pointless. It would have to be the same model in each mode.

I myself have done that long ago in the past, when GT5P appeared and upon a review I was doing for the Panasonic AE2000 projector which appeared on the market at the same time.

On a technical level with 360 additional lines in vertical resolution it does not really improve GT5 much graphically over the 720p mode. In PC gaming when you increase res you get good benifits in the reduction of jaggies. Regards GT5P this doesnt seem to improve much but a degree of sharper image does become aparent from the 1080p. Its not that their are NO improvements but is this a great improvement, in my opinion not really.


Would for instance it be worth someone spending £300 more on a 1080 telly over a cheaper 720p for GT5 purposes, well not really. If the game natively used the full 1920 horizontal resolution then by all means it would offer much greater improvements and who knows maybe GT5 full game might?

However would someone get more of an improvement in spending an extra £300 between a 1080 HDTV and a 3DTV regards GT5? I beleve so as it will offer a new experience and not just a slightly sharper image.

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

Ive said to others you are more than welcome to create a thread and fill it with photographs of GT5P in 1080p mode and compare it to the 720p mode. The difference is not massive but please prove me wrong if you wish...

Ive not argued that with movies or indeed TV that 1080 shows more of a benifit.

TD I dont mind discussing things, I offered my opinion to points you raised, you dont have to agree with them.
Im not prepared to contuinuely make posts between us, points of arguments.

If you or others think 3D is a FAD or it will fail, fine I disagree and for reasons made above....

yes right you have your opinion and i have my opinion
between hd and fhd is a difference which you can see and between fhd and 60fps fhd is a big difference too,i have a thread ?old new GT5 video?go and download the fhd version and the 60fps fhd version ...

 

[Mr Latte]

yes right you have your opinion and i have my opinion
between hd and fhd is a difference which you can see and between fhd and 60fps fhd is a big difference too,i have a thread ?old new GT5 video?go and download the fhd version and the 60fps fhd version ...

Your welcome to offer your opinion certainly however maybe you should read my posts again as where have I stated their was no difference?
In (67) I said "Little Benifit" and in post (90) said "Difference Is Not Massive"
At no point have I said their is actually no difference.

Twice I have offered for people to show photo evidence backing their opinion if indeed they dont agree or think the difference is much more than I refer to.
I cant be more fair than that.

Many of the shadows which cause "jaggies" in GT5P happen on the horizontal plane. In particular the most noticed is in cockpit view with shadows from the "A Pillar". Selecting 1080p mode does not do much to improve these as normally is the case with higher resolutions.

The REASON
GT5P @1080p (ingame) 1280x1080 (It is not Full HD native resolution to start with)
GT5P @720p (ingame) 1280x720

Both 1080/720p modes of the game use 1280 pixels on the horizontal plane = FACT. So when any 1080p TV is scaling those 1280 pixels to the Full HD resolution of a 1080p TV with 1920 pixels it offers ZERO extra detail over the 720p mode as they are identical.

Certainly when selecting 1080p mode you get an exta 50% more vertical resolution benifit going from 720-1080 on the vertical plane. THAT however is the only resolution benifit 1080p in GT5 offers and this does little to fix the jaggies within the game. The visible jaggies is one of my biggest letdowns from the game.

This limited increase is in my expression "Not massive difference" or "little benifit" as it only improves the image vertically.

 

[Mr Latte]

Back to main topic....

Below is a link to Kotaku reporting on their impressions of GT5 CES 2010 in 3D mode
Link

Their comments are quite mixed...

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

yes its your opinion but for me its a big difference especially*if you watch hd and fhd with 60fps (i dont speak about the gt5P graphics, i speak about the graphics in the demos)

 

[TokyoDrift]

Mr Latte, as I've said before, you can quote facts all you like, because it does not change the reality that on my setup, GT5P subjectively looks better in 1080p than in 720p. You clearly have a problem accepting what people experience for themselves, which is kinda' sad considering the lecture you gave me recently.

Is it worth an extra £300 to play GT5 in 1080p? Yes, I believe so, because the fact is, the TV would not just be used for GT5. Is it worth an extra £300 on top of that to play GT5 in 3D? Based on what I've read and heard so far, no, not yet. If you disagree, fine, just don't go writing out another essay on why this is the case.

 

[eSZee]

Back to main topic....

Below is a link to Kotaku reporting on their impressions of GT5 CES 2010 in 3D mode
Link

Their comments are quite mixed...

The execution was good, for the most part, but his eyes couldn't handle the effects. Not PDs problem the man can't handle his 3d as well as he thought.
The 3d effect not adding much to the game is what most of us expected anyway.

 

[count_dynamo]

can someone please help me with this
i have not read too much into it, but is GT5 only coming out in 3D,
or 2D, with 3D capabilities?
because i have a 5 year old BIG projector tube TV, and dont have the money to afford a new tv anytime soon
if GT5 is only in 3D, well, sony and PS3 are pretty much dead to me

 

[Mr Latte]

The execution was good, for the most part, but his eyes couldn't handle the effects. Not PDs problem the man can't handle his 3d as well as he thought.
The 3d effect not adding much to the game is what most of us expected anyway.

Id guess like how 3D is some will enjoy it more than others.
Your right it could all be a big fuss over nothing that special particulary on small screens in the home.

 

[Mr Latte]

Mr Latte, as I've said before, you can quote facts all you like, because it does not change the reality that on my setup, GT5P subjectively looks better in 1080p than in 720p. You clearly have a problem accepting what people experience for themselves, which is kinda' sad considering the lecture you gave me recently.

Is it worth an extra £300 to play GT5 in 1080p? Yes, I believe so, because the fact is, the TV would not just be used for GT5. Is it worth an extra £300 on top of that to play GT5 in 3D? Based on what I've read and heard so far, no, not yet. If you disagree, fine, just don't go writing out another essay on why this is the case.

Look Sony used 1080p games to help promote sales of 1080p TVs and their console. Here we are several years later and about a dozen are 1080p games.
Now credit to PD and Sony for making this happen and being able to offer it to games like GT5.

The point you wont accept as a fact that these although technically 1080 res are not even close to FULL HD resolution quality. Do the math.....

The big benifit (which we differ to how much that actually is) You say its there and notice so fine but well quite frankly the difference between native resolutions of 720p - Full HD is 2.5 more than that difference you are ranting on about. I fully agree a noticable difference from 720p-1080p but man 2.5x more from true 720-1080 is a hellva lot more. Also 10 years ago a half decent PC ran 1280x1024 which isnt a kick in the backside off Sonys proclaimed 1080p games at 1280x1080 and the laughable thing is how you whinge about 3DTV being old tech.

This whole 1080p gaming via PS3 is a half assed 1080p effort primarily their for promotional purposes. Quite frankly Id be happy with 720p and much improved general image quality you noted earlier. If they reduced jaggies or shadowing effects to me that would improve the visuals of the game even more than a "sales factor" vertical only 1080p game mode.

You criticse Sony for promoting 3DTV and these upcoming games to offer it yet they did the exact same with 1080p. Congratulations for buying a 1080p TV like many of us and here we are several years since the advent of HDTVs and how many real 1080p sources are their?

Dont get me wrong I really enjoy the benifits of Blu Ray, certainly moreso than my wife who doesnt give a damn. The best bit though if your like the average UK 1080p TV owner chances are 70% of the TVs usage you have is done viewing not FULL HD content but satellite limited 1080i, some 720p gaming and lots of SD material in common good ole fashioned telly.

My goodness, someone could possibly argue that 1080P is a bit of a fad as well but you and millions bought into it.

 

[Lion-Face]

1 - The point you wont accept as a fact that these although technically 1080 res are not even close to FULL HD resolution quality. Do the math.....

2 - You criticse Sony for promoting 3DTV and these upcoming games to offer it yet they did the exact same with 1080p. Congratulations for buying a 1080p TV like many of us and here we are several years since the advent of HDTVs and how many real 1080p sources are their?

My goodness, someone could possibly argue that 1080P is a bit of a fad as well but you and millions bought into it.

1 - Full HD = 1440x1080i Gotta love marketing!

2 - I love this point, people calling 3D a fad yet they own 1920x1080 TV's. Its all just marketing, although I believe more in 3D and what it has to offer more than I do 1080p.

Any difference people are seeing between 1080 TV's and 720 TV's are most likely color reproduction and contrast levels.

Earlier someone was stating that their 200hz Bravia was a much better picture than their previous 720model Bravia. Well, the 200hz Bravia is a very high end TV, in addition to being 1080 native, it has a lot of picture enhanced features that comes with the top of the line models, such as the WCG-CCFL Backlight, 10bit Panel etc, which provide a much better color range the TV can display and a better contrast. While the 720 model Bravia, depending on the age could have been an entry level model with your basic backlights and LCD panel, offering a much more muted color and contrast range. Not to mention that every year the newer TVs often have a much better contrast than the year prior.

It is these specs that have the biggest effect on your viewing pleasure and where the difference between TV's come in, not the lines of resolution. Often the mistake is made where people are equating the better picture quality to the jump in resolution, which is not the case.

 

[eSZee]

1 - Full HD = 1440x1080i Gotta love marketing!

2 - I love this point, people calling 3D a fad yet they own 1920x1080 TV's. Its all just marketing, although I believe more in 3D and what it has to offer more than I do 1080p.

Any difference people are seeing between 1080 TV's and 720 TV's are most likely color reproduction and contrast levels.

Earlier someone was stating that their 200hz Bravia was a much better picture than their previous 720model Bravia. Well, the 200hz Bravia is a very high end TV, in addition to being 1080 native, it has a lot of picture enhanced features that comes with the top of the line models, such as the WCG-CCFL Backlight, 10bit Panel etc, which provide a much better color range the TV can display and a better contrast. While the 720 model Bravia, depending on the age could have been an entry level model with your basic backlights and LCD panel, offering a much more muted color and contrast range. Not to mention that every year the newer TVs often have a much better contrast than the year prior.

It is these specs that have the biggest effect on your viewing pleasure and where the difference between TV's come in, not the lines of resolution. Often the mistake is made where people are equating the better picture quality to the jump in resolution, which is not the case.

I thinks it's more to do with comparing native 720p content running at 720p vs same content upscaled to 1080p. Games are usually 720p native and TV sets upscale them depending on what settings you have. I prefer to play my games on their native setting for best results.
Plus 720p and 1080p have different optimal viewing distances if I recall.
I got a 720p Westinghouse LCD a few years back, loved it. Then I got my 1080p Aquos and he picture was night and day. The blacks, the contrast, colors all were worlds ahead. But of course, games look better on the westinghouse because they're more smooth looking due to lesser detail and panel quality, I suppose.

 

[Griffith500]

I feel I must express my appreciation of this post

Is dat what happens Mon when you be swaying to de Reggae beat Mon?

Good times Mon, when you be rasterized

Throwing napalm on the flames, maybe:
I can see a huge difference between (full) 1080p and 720p - in GT5, the horizontal scaling is obvious, though.

I only play in 720p (on a 1680x1050 monitor, so I've got messed up aspect ratio ) and it's good enough, really. I think the quality of the visuals of game in 3D-mode may be compromised slightly, but I doubt the rest of the game will suffer. PD are always very good at optimising, though they really do push very close to the envelope, such that slowdown still occurs (well, at least in GT1, GT2 and GT5).


Full 1080p digital may just well end up better than analogue techniques. Let's see what improvements we get now, especially since the hardware companies have something new to work towards accommodating (i.e. higher throughput for 3D in HD+).
The coming panel technologies will be very exciting, if those field emission ones can be mass produced, bonza - LEDs, even better! We'll be getting displays of the sort of crispness and responsiveness of the old CRTs, at last 👍
I probably won't be getting a 3D display until those new technologies have appeared, or matured. That is unless 120Hz "legacy" devices end up dirt-cheap inside of a year

At the end of the day, we're a little bit at the mercy of the manufacturers - "buyer power" isn't really what it used to be. The man on the street is only a small slice of the pie; industrial / corporate sales are probably more important (dood, we can conference-call in 3D!!) not to mention how useful 3D displays will be for 3D modelling and visualisation, of any kind, especially combined with haptic interfaces - etc.

3D will happen, I just don't expect 3D TV broadcasts in any great numbers for a little while (HDTV is only just catching up over here in the UK, and it's still hit-and-miss at best...) - 3D Blurays, on the other hand...

/babble.

 

[Mr Latte]

1 - Full HD = 1440x1080i Gotta love marketing!

2 - I love this point, people calling 3D a fad yet they own 1920x1080 TV's. Its all just marketing, although I believe more in 3D and what it has to offer more than I do 1080p.

Any difference people are seeing between 1080 TV's and 720 TV's are most likely color reproduction and contrast levels.

Do remember we are referring to games here and not actual video resolution.
Im referring to the issue of 1080p labelling. Id want games offering a 1:1 to their 1080p panels which for optimum quality they should offer. Also thats what I would assume the average consumer thinks he is getting in PS3 advertised 1080 games but isnt.

If someone was to run a PC game at 1920x1080 resolution it would show much larger and clear benifit in reduction of jaggies and sharper image quality compared to this 1280x1080 PS3 version of 1080p.

Yes indeed, marketing and we know fine well 3D will be hyped no different than 1080p was. If anything its following the exact same path 1080p made with movies, games and sports all being advertised to promote it. A Fad a new techy cool product but one that might excite or indeed interest people.

I agree with your comments on various levels of TV perfromance between models. like I said to TD pointless comparing the game on two screens to say the 1080p one looks sharper, err duh thats not whats being discussed were discussing the quality/resolution benifits of 720p mode and 1080p mode not if 1080p TVs are better than 720p models. Whatever mode people want to run then go with it, if you need to run 1080p mode to satisfy your purchase and it makes you feel happy then do so. You will get a bit of an increase so enjoy it but your still being cheated and fooled with marketing.

3D is more than Movies/Games?
A major difference is 3D is not just an improved resolution like 1080p was. It has many more oppertunities to be used in applications. 3D technology will be coming to mobiles, handhelds, games systems and more than likely to a future Apple product within the next 2 years. With the current technology available small screens such as these mobile devices use wont need glasses as they only need limited viewing angles. The current technology has to mature to allow this possible with wide enough viewing angles for TVs but it will get their eventually, then the glasses wont be an issue.

So my argument for all these 3DTV attacks is that its not going to go away its not just TV or movies but coming in laptops, digital cameras, video cameras are for bringing it to the masses.
If then companies cannot get the world to accept it then it will likely go down as the biggest hardware failure of all time.

Like it or loathe it 3D has only just started....

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

yes some guys are right
i want to say another thing

some months ago i bought a fhd bravia tv and before i bought it ,i compaired the tvs
example:there was a fhd LG tv with 100hz and a fhd sony with 100hz
the LG has cost 500euros and the sony ~1000 euros
much people think the lg is better because its cheaper and it can fhd +100hz
but no guys
between the tvs was a whole world XD the quality from sony was awesome and the quality from the lg was ****
both tvs got the same movie

i asked a guy who was selling the tvs and he said you read fhd 100hz but there is no fhd 100hz in it
icant explain it in english but he said something like :in the sony you get real 100 pictures/s and in the lg they put 40 "black"pictures in it and than they have 100 (60+40=100)but thats not real 100hz

 

[Mr Latte]

Picture quality has many, factors.
Generally 1080p TVs have been more expensive so included more picture enchancing hardware. This isnt now the case as 1080p is now mainstream and not high end only. The comparison you make isnt so good as one TV is almost 1/2 the price so of course was very likely not to perform as well. Both being 1080p screens doesnt guarantee anything regards actual picture quality.

The Funny thing is Sony dont even use their own panels, This years 3DTV models I believe use LG panels and is part of the delay with them going from 200HZ - 400HZ. Sharp aparently will be working in supplying Sony with panels as well. They used to use Samsung in the past and this is one reason Sony models cost more as their manufacturing costs are higher buying in panels from other makes then adding their own technology and design into them.

 

[TokyoDrift]

Look Sony used 1080p games to help promote sales of 1080p TVs and their console. Here we are several years later and about a dozen are 1080p games.
Now credit to PD and Sony for making this happen and being able to offer it to games like GT5.

1080p, just like you will argue for 3D, was an inevitable evolution. So, what is your point? They are using 3D to help promote sales of their new TVs and console just the same.

The point you wont accept as a fact that these although technically 1080 res are not even close to FULL HD resolution quality. Do the math.....

Did I say that I don't accept the facts about the resolution of GT5P? No. What I did say is, regardless of the facts you are quoting, there is an inprovement in image clarity when I switch from 720p to 1080p mode. A fact that YOU refuse to accept.

The big benifit (which we differ to how much that actually is) You say its there and notice so fine but well quite frankly the difference between native resolutions of 720p - Full HD is 2.5 more than that difference you are ranting on about. I fully agree a noticable difference from 720p-1080p but man 2.5x more from true 720-1080 is a hellva lot more.

It is you who is quoting all manner of adjectives to describe the difference that you keep on telling me that I am imagining. Funny, you asked me to do the math earlier, yet it seems you are incapable of doing so yourself.

1. True 720p --> true 1080p = 2.25x the number of pixels
2. GT5P running at 1280 * 1080 = 1.5x the number of pixels

So, you are telling me that increasing the number of pixels by 50% makes little/no observable difference? Whatever...

Also 10 years ago a half decent PC ran 1280x1024 which isnt a kick in the backside off Sonys proclaimed 1080p games at 1280x1080 and the laughable thing is how you whinge about 3DTV being old tech.

Comparing PCs to consoles now are we?

The further you go back in time, the less PCs were used for gaming. They were, and still are, used for wide range of tasks, from basic word processing right through to complex 3D rendering. Typically a PC user sits at a desk, close to a dedicated display, where a higher reslution gives you the benefit of a larger canvas. The display resolution was not restricted to that of panels designed to display broadcast TV.

Not quite the same as a games console then, where they are typically hooked up to a TV in a bedroom or lounge. As such, the resolution of games consoles kept pace with that of TV development.

The concept of making each eye see a different image is very old, yes. Not whinging, just stating fact.

This whole 1080p gaming via PS3 is a half assed 1080p effort primarily their for promotional purposes. Quite frankly Id be happy with 720p and much improved general image quality you noted earlier. If they reduced jaggies or shadowing effects to me that would improve the visuals of the game even more than a "sales factor" vertical only 1080p game mode.

You criticse Sony for promoting 3DTV and these upcoming games to offer it yet they did the exact same with 1080p. Congratulations for buying a 1080p TV like many of us and here we are several years since the advent of HDTVs and how many real 1080p sources are their?

Dont get me wrong I really enjoy the benifits of Blu Ray, certainly moreso than my wife who doesnt give a damn. The best bit though if your like the average UK 1080p TV owner chances are 70% of the TVs usage you have is done viewing not FULL HD content but satellite limited 1080i, some 720p gaming and lots of SD material in common good ole fashioned telly.

My goodness, someone could possibly argue that 1080P is a bit of a fad as well but you and millions bought into it.

Like I have already explained, I use my TV for more than just watching movies, TV and playing games. I have a NetTop media PC hooked up, where 1080p is a huge benefit over 720p.

 

[Mr Latte]

Bored to tears with your constant arguing and multi quote super specials.
So much to the point im not going to read it all as really TD i dont give a damn what you think your the one criticisng 3DTV with ZERO experience of GT5 with it so give it a rest.

However:
Im fully aware Sonys 1080p in games is 1.5 more than 720p res.
Im referring to the difference of their 1080p so called games to actual Full 1080p and how it isnt close to really benifiting 1080p Tv owners as much as it could.

A)1280x720 = 921600
B)1280x1080 = 1382400
C)1920x1080 = 2073600

Difference or improvement of PS3 1080 (B) over 720p games (A) = 460800



Full HD 1920x1080 @ 2073600
Minus PS3 1080 Games @ 1382400
Equals 1152000 missing pixels of full HD quality / So well over 1 Million Pixels short of a 1080p TVs native possibile quality

Back to 720p advantage PS3 1080 games has over standard 720p games
(B) - (A) = 460800
Mutiply this x 2.5 = 1152000

Therefore this big advantage you see isnt big at all when properly compared. Its a difference sure but overrated marketing and in comparison to comparing proper full 720p to 1080p quality theirs MUCH BIGGER difference. Many people struggle to determine 720/1080 content differences with over 1.3 million pixels apart let alone below the 1/2 milliion your going on about and I bet anything you couldnt walk into a shop today with several TVs and distinguish ones that were indeed set to 720 or 1080. That is the honest truth Id say for the majority of people reading this.

The majority of gamers dont even notice games that run below 720p res and their are many that cheat the marketing at that too.
Heres a fine example: Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriot = 1024x768 (2xAA, temporal)

Did people who played this game instantly detect oh hold on thats not 720p?
I rest my case.

 

[Lion-Face]

there is an improvement in image clarity when I switch from 720p to 1080p mode. A fact that YOU refuse to accept.

This is definitely true. I have done a few tests on a few different models of TV, probably the most interesting result I found was that 1080p mode in GT5 on my 720p TV (KLV46V300A - Native Res 1366x768) looked much better than the 720p mode in GT5.

Although, this is only true for GT5, or at least the most noticeable on that game. I have tried a few other games but saw no, or very little difference between the resolutions. Nothing worth while outside of a meter from your TV. I just set my PS3 HD modes to 1080p/720p and let it decide for each game. Outside of GT5, which does look better at 1080p, can't really say its worth worrying about.

 

[Griffith500]

Bored to tears with your constant arguing and multi quote super specials.
So much to the point im not going to read it all as really TD i dont give a damn what you think your the one criticisng 3DTV with ZERO experience of GT5 with it so give it a rest.

However:
Im fully aware Sonys 1080p in games is 1.5 more than 720p res.
Im referring to the difference of their 1080p so called games to actual Full 1080p

A)1280x720 = 921600
B)1280x1080 = 1382400
C)1920x1080 = 2073600

Difference or improvement of PS3 1080 (B) over 720p games (A) = 460800


Full HD 1920x1080 @ 2073600
Minus PS3 1080 Games @ 1382400
Equals 1152000 missing pixels of full HD quality / So over 1 Million Pixels short of 1080p native quality

Back to 720p advantage PS3 1080 games has over standard 720p games
(B) - (A) = 460800
Mutiply this x 2.5 = 1152000

Therefore this big advantage you see isnt big at all when properly compared. Its a difference sure but overrated marketing and in comparison to comparing proper full 720p to 1080p quality theirs MUCH BIGGER difference. Many people struggle to determine 720/1080 content differences with over 1 million pixels apart and I bet anything you couldnt walk into a shop today with several TVs and distinguish ones that were indeed set to 720 or 1080.

The majority of gamers dont even notice games that run below 720p res and their are many that cheat the marketing at that too.
Heres a fine example: Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriot = 1024x768 (2xAA, temporal)

You're probably right about walking into a shop and being able to tell the true 1080p boxes; but there's always side by side comparison, and assuming a full HD source, that should be blindingly obvious which is which!

As for games, I'm pretty good at picking up on image quality, being a PC gamer and all (with many years of experience trying to balance resolution with fullscreen effects etc.), so I can recognise the games that seem to be skimping on image "quality" (i.e. via scaling) - frankly I was appalled at the thought, when I initially cottoned on to it. Things are as they must be, I s'pose. It's funny, MGS4 runs at 15% below 720p, and somehow it looks worse than that? Must be the texture filtering... (Don't get me wrong, it's a great looking game and a stunning early example of what the PS3 can do, but in places the image quality produced by the engine does drop a fair bit, despite the artistic style)

So, we're discussing image quality, as perceived by the average gamer on the average display. I think it's safe to say GT5 should come out looking alright in 3D

 

[mr_VOLCANO]

Is the resolution for gt5 confirmed? Will it be same as gt5p or true 1080p? Or is the ps3 even capable to show gt5 in full HD? Sorry its a little of topic, but I saw so much talk about resolution

 

[Mr Latte]

You're probably right about walking into a shop and being able to tell the true 1080p boxes; but there's always side by side comparison, and assuming a full HD source, that should be blindingly obvious which is which!

So, we're discussing image quality, as perceived by the average gamer on the average display. I think it's safe to say GT5 should come out looking alright in 3D

I have a friend that owns an electrical store for many years and youd be amazed even with a Blu Ray many of his customers cant tell much difference.

Customers when asked will quite often pick out the TV that looks more vivid in its colour. If anything important things like colour accuracy or image detail has usually very little to do with their decision. In many cases its what image seeems to stand out the most and the whole thing is subjective as everyone has of course personal preferences.

Being a PC gamer you will realise this whole resolution debate isnt worth it. The difference in pixel terms is actually very similar to PC gamers that migrated from 1280x1024 monitors to widescreen 1680x1050 models. They got a resolution upgrade close to what these PS3 1080 games give over 720p. Nice but nothing major.

Difference is a PC can kill off jaggies and that is a major benifit that this generation of consoles seems to suffer with. PC gaming is another example of players adding graphical effects to reduce jaggies and run with a lower resolution than running a higher resolution but with fewer or none of the effects. Why because the end result in quality is higher, resolution isnt everything particulary when you need to go much higher to really make it benifit.

Would you agree?

As for 3D in 720p my main worry is image flicker with the glasses and various models of 3DTVs. If its annoying then it wont work well for games and playing them for long periods of times.
LED models are suffering from more flicker aparently so Id def recommend people try before they buy when these games release.

 

[Zer0]

Just some notes.

-Both, GT5P 3D menus and in-game HUD are rendered at Full HD.
-All the scaling is procesed internally by the PS3. A PS3 set at 1080p has always a raw video output in GT5 of 1920x1080. Your tv does not do the job.
-The image resolution is not always about pixel counts, in the past GT4 made some tricks and was capable of display a 1080i/60fps image with the same power processing.
-GT PSP made use of another trick to increase the perceived resolution. https://www.gtplanet.net/why-gran-turismo-psp-looks-so-good/
-Some Full HD tvs does an amazing job increasing the apparent details and masking defects.
-Some Full HD sets and settings work very bad with GT5P making worst than is it.

I play on a 720p projector + PS3 set at 1080i, I see a crisper image and less jaggies than PS3 720p mode. On my set GT5 TT is actualy one of the cleanest and more detailed games on PS3.

 

[Stonemonkey]

.....
-GT PSP made use of another trick to increase the perceived resolution. https://www.gtplanet.net/why-gran-turismo-psp-looks-so-good/
.....

wow, I think there's a slight error in the explanation you linked to. I think it's shifting the image, or rather rendering the image with a 1/2 pixel offset. I've been doing something similar with software rendering but doing two small renders per frame (one with 1/2 pixel offset) then upscaling using data from both images. It loses some detail compared to a single full render but gives some sort of AA and is faster.

 

[Griffith500]

I have a friend that owns an electrical store for many years and youd be amazed even with a Blu Ray many of his customers cant tell much difference.

Customers when asked will quite often pick out the TV that looks more vivid in its colour. If anything important things like colour accuracy or image detail has usually very little to do with their decision. In many cases its what image seeems to stand out the most and the whole thing is subjective as everyone has of course personal preferences.

Being a PC gamer you will realise this whole resolution debate isnt worth it. The difference in pixel terms is actually very similar to PC gamers that migrated from 1280x1024 monitors to widescreen 1680x1050 models. They got a resolution upgrade close to what these PS3 1080 games give over 720p. Nice but nothing major.

Difference is a PC can kill off jaggies and that is a major benifit that this generation of consoles seems to suffer with. PC gaming is another example of players adding graphical effects to reduce jaggies and run with a lower resolution than running a higher resolution but with fewer or none of the effects. Why because the end result in quality is higher, resolution isnt everything particulary when you need to go much higher to really make it benifit.

Would you agree?

As for 3D in 720p my main worry is image flicker with the glasses and various models of 3DTVs. If its annoying then it wont work well for games and playing them for long periods of times.
LED models are suffering from more flicker aparently so Id def recommend people try before they buy when these games release.

Your friend's account doesn't surprise me at all! That's what my comment about the average gamer, average display was all about. However, many of us here are "connoisseurs", for want of a less pretentious, more accessible term; hence, we will quite easily be able to spot image quality issues.

As for PC games, I also made the upgrade from 1280x1024 to 1680x1050 at the beginning of the year, and it is a noticeable difference. The issue is that the average 1280 monitor is 17" (as was mine), which has a very fine pixel pitch (compared to TVs, for example) whilst 1680 monitors can be up to 22" and have an even finer pitch... Trouble is, it's a bigger screen, so you have to sit further away... see where this is going? Anyway, I still appreciate the difference - I play most games at 2xAA and notch up the AF instead, since the higher resolution is inherently less prone to aliasing and the higher res is a larger burden anyway - such that it actually plays very similarly at both resolutions for me. Another trick I used to use, is to take advantage of the built-in scale up in LCD displays, and play at a lower resolution with lower AA and let the upscale deal with the aliasing - result!

I agree about the glasses. Lenticular-based 3D would be ideal for the short term, if viewing angles can be improved, since headtracking is a must (for GT5, at any rate) - true, multi-layered "holograph"-type screens would be amazing, though!

wow, I think there's a slight error in the explanation you linked to. I think it's shifting the image, or rather rendering the image with a 1/2 pixel offset. I've been doing something similar with software rendering but doing two small renders per frame (one with 1/2 pixel offset) then upscaling using data from both images. It loses some detail compared to a single full render but gives some sort of AA and is faster.

Clever! Presumably that's only "worth it" if upscaling to a resolution having linear measurements greater than √2 times the rendering resolution? Or are there other benefits at other points in the pipeline?