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

[TokyoDrift]

I'm lost here I don't know what do you want to prove. Technically no console race game is doing what GT5 is doing, that don't mean that in every aspect will be the best of every single game in the market.

He wants to prove to you that you are not (or shall we say, should not be) seeing an improvement in 1080p mode over 720p mode with your own two eyes, hence why he is asking for photographic evidence and making reference to jaggy shadows that were never even part of the argument in the first place. However, you said it perfectly:

"But have in mind that at the end you can't prove how good or bad my eyes are showing the game in my setup with my settings"

 

[Mr Latte]

Zero
Your totally right this is the pinnacle racing game on a technical level on any console and has been from the very beginning running 1.5x resolution with 16 cars and 60fps. Ive commented on that many times in places.

Im not trying to prove anything. Im having a discussion on the matter as its all quite subjective just that one person here has an issue that I disagreed with "how big a difference" 1080p actually makes to the game. Yet because he sees a big difference then he has to be right and anyone else is wrong or calling him a liar.

Jaggies bother many people.
Can I ask what screen size and distance your own setup uses?
Thats also a factor to someone noticing such jaggies and as you can imagine on a projector or larger screen they are more aparent.

We have established several times now:

• Yes thier is notable differences.
• Various hardware will show various differences.
• 1080p PS3 games fall technically quite a bit short in reaching 1:1 1920x1080.
• 1080p may not be a great benifit to everyone and many consumers find it hard to notice.
• Alternatively others seem very sensitivite to noticing small resolution increases.

 

[TokyoDrift]

Zero
Your totally right this is the pinnacle racing game on a technical level on any console and has been from the very beginning running 1.5x resolution with 16 cars and 60fps. Ive commented on that many times in places.

Im not trying to prove anything. Im having a discussion on the matter as its all quite subjective just that one person here has an issue that I disagreed with "how big a difference" 1080p actually makes to the game.

Jaggies bother many people but can I ask what screen size and distance your own setup uses? Thats also a factor to someone noticing such jaggies and as you can imagine on a projector or larger screen they are more aparent.

We have established several times now:

• Yes thier is are notable differences.
• Various hardware will show various differences.
• 1080p PS3 games fall technically quite a bit short in reaching 1:1 1920x1080.
• 1080p may not be a great benifit to everyone and many consumers find it hard to notice.
• Alrenatively others seem very sensitivite to noticing small resolution increases.

Wow, so many mistakes. Another mistake you made is how you worded the fact that you disagreed with "how big a difference" 1080p makes to the game. You didn't just disagree, you flat-out refused to believe what I said, and so challenged myself and others to prove what we were seeing by providing photographic evidence. That's the issue right there, not the fact that you think the difference is small. Yes, the difference is small, but it's there, and if you had chosen to word thing more respectfully in the first place, maybe you wouldn't be in the position you are in now having spat your dummy out and stuck your fingers in your ears while singing, "La la laaaaa".

 

[Mr Latte]

To those in the foums yeah I make typos with poor spelling and Im crap at typing too.

Although the above is bordering on trolling so Im reporting the matter as already Ive made clear to this person and also via PMs yesterday I am not furthering debate with him and it is clear to me in several threads if he isnt arguing with me its someone else.

 

[TokyoDrift]

To those in the foums yeah I make typos and lots of em Im crap at typing too.

Although the above is bordering on trolling so Im reporting the matter as already Ive made clear to this person and also via PMs yesterday I am not furthering debate with him and it is clear to me in several forums if he isnt arguing with me its someone else.

It's always easier to run away and throw in the towel when you are wrong eh, especially on forums? Well, as he decided to publicly declare his actions, last night I wrote a perfectly nice, respecful PM asking for a truce, and basically had that thrown back in my face. This is consistent with his obvious stubborn attitude and lack of willingness to accept that he was wrong to question what I saw with my own two eyes, to which yes, I was personally offended by.

 

[Mr Latte]

By all means to Zero or anyone else...

Im sure we can just discuss the matter without it being a "grudge" or make it a persuit for personal insult.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

Unfortunately I can't provide photographic evidence. However my screen size is 40" and I sit about 6ft away from my TV and I can certainly tell the difference between 720 & 1080P. The difference might be small but its certainly noticeable.

Surely this debate depends on the quality of your TV. For instance I purchased the Sony V4000 because of its excellent reviews and it actually recieved better reviews than the W/V5500 series which followed after the V4000.

Im not surprised though because many of my friends who own HDTVS always comment on how the picture quality is better on my Sony. The only friend who doesn't owns a Pioneer but their price range is out of my reach.

 

[TokyoDrift]

It's not about a personal grudge, it's about you, Mr Latte, being in the wrong, refusing to admit it, twisting the issue, and then running away from it instead of bringng it to a sensible closure.

Anyway, I sit 9ft away from my 46" BRAVIA X-series and I can clearly see the difference in 1080p and 720p modes when playing GT5P. The same cannot be said, however, when playing the same game on my cousins new 32" Samsung - the image quality is very good, and we sit so far away that it seems to make little difference. Clearly, it depends on what hardware you have, and how you sit relative to it. There will be a distance at which no matter what, you'll never be able to tell the difference.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

It's not about a personal grudge, it's about you, Mr Latte, being in the wrong, refusing to admit it, twisting the issue, and then running away from it instead of bringng it to a sensible closure.

Surely nobody is right or wrong here because its just a difference of opinion. Although I disagree with Mr Latte view I respect that he has a different opinion. If we all used exactly the same hardware then I would agree, however because we don't means we have different opinions.

 

[Mr Latte]

Unfortunately I can't provide photographic evidence. However my screen size is 40" and I sit about 6ft away from my TV and I can certainly tell the difference between 720 & 1080P. The difference might be small but its certainly noticeable.

Surely this debate depends on the quality of your TV. For instance I purchased the Sony V4000 because of its excellent reviews and it actually recieved better reviews than the W/V5500 series which followed after the V4000.

Im not surprised though because many of my friends who own HDTVS always comment on how the picture quality is better on my Sony. The only friend who doesn't owns a Pioneer but their price range is out of my reach.

It depends on many things and yes the display is a big factor.
Peoples rooms are also a factor too regards screen size and seating distance.
Something Im trying to get from this discussion is that 1080p may not always give everyone noticable benifits or indeed the level of that benifit may vary for different rooms and people.
Again someone here just made it evident it was worth spending say £300 more money on it regardless yet it seems not taking in many factors for different users.

For the record because of the annoyance of others this has to be said again.... Ive NEVER stated NO difference or NO benifit, anyone is welcome to quote me if I did. Someone keeps seemingly wanting to prove Im wrong when the actual difference in opinion is by "how much benifit" not that Ive ever said thier is no difference or that those of you that with your own setups do see a noticable difference are seeing things.

Lets clear that up as with the arguing maybe that was what was coming across or indeed someone keeps insisting.

For the more mature of you and reasonable heres a chart thats used by many as a good reference on AVS and AVF specialst AV Forums. The link is also provided as the guy that did this seems to know what hes saying.

Info Link

"What the chart shows is that, for a 50-inch screen, the benefits of 720p vs. 480p start to become apparent at viewing distances closer than 14.6 feet and become fully apparent at 9.8 feet. For the same screen size, the benefits of 1080p vs. 720p start to become apparent when closer than 9.8 feet and become full apparent at 6.5 feet. In my opinion, 6.5 feet is closer than most people will sit to their 50" plasma TV (even through the THX recommended viewing distance for a 50" screen is 5.6 ft). So, most consumers will not be able to see the full benefit of their 1080p TV."

Now you also have to factor in this is in reference to full 1920x1080 resolution and not the 1280x1080 reduced resolution GT5 uses in game based on its 1080p mode.
Again yes some Tvs may show differences in how they display their 720p 1080p sources particulary with onboard hardware like "Bravia Engine" but these differences some of you are seeing perhaps are not going to be their for everyone.

Resolution increase in GT5 may not fix issues with shadow or other graphical elements. It should however be to the benifit of the jaggies and reducing them while also giving a sharper image.
It does do that for me but in my own hardware doesnt make much benifit to the jaggies..

I asked for a photo to see the difference others were experiencing but that turned into being a crime and condeming me for treating them like a liar.

 

[TokyoDrift]

Surely nobody is right or wrong here because its just a difference of opinion. Although I disagree with Mr Latte view I respect that he has a different opinion. If we all used exactly the same hardware then I would agree, however because we don't means we have different opinions.

To be fair, if it was just an opinion, I'd totally agree with you. However, when somebody tells me to provide photographic evidence for something that I can see with my own two eyes, that turns it from an opinion into a challenge along the lines of "I don't believe you, so prove it". Rightly or wrongly, that wound me up the wrong way hence why I stayed on the defensive.

Ultimately, it's more about our actual experiences than opinions. The facts speak for themselves in terms of increased pixel count for the higher resolution, so it's fair to say that there is a difference. How much people perceive that difference is, as you say, down to the equipment, how far they sit from it, and also the quality of their actual vision. I notice Mr Latte has provided a chart, however, this isn't really about the debate of 1080p over 720p in general, it's about 1080p over 720p in relation to GT5P, in which there is clearly a noticeable difference, even at distances that the chart would suggest otherwise.

 

[Stonemonkey]

One thing I'm a bit confused about with regards to the reports of drop in quality is the drop in both framerate AND image quality/resolution.

I can accept that something has to give way as you effectively need two seperate images but unless you consider a variable framerate and losing vsync and suffer tearing the framerate could only drop to 1/2X or 1/3X etc. So say the framerate (for each eye) is halved then why would it take longer to draw the second frame of the stereo image than it would to draw the next frame when viewing mono at 60fps especially when some of the work from the first stereo image can be re-used for the second (shadows/envmaps etc.)?

Just as I've written that I've thought of something, it's possibly not the processing power (or lack of) that's resulting in the reduction in resolution but instead a lack of available video memory, if GT5 is using all available video memory when outputting 2D then the only option may be to reduce the size of the output buffers for 3D output where at least two extra fullscreen buffers are required. If that's the case then 3D could well be a solid 30fps with no tearing and it would show that 2D is not being compromised by the addition of 3D at all, it's actually the other way around with 3D being compromised so that 2D quality is maintained.

 

[Zer0]

Jaggies bother many people.
Can I ask what screen size and distance your own setup uses?
Thats also a factor to someone noticing such jaggies and as you can imagine on a projector or larger screen they are more aparent.

About 66" screen at 6.5 ft sitting.

I made this comparisson time ago when someone post these images about how jagged looked his game: (all the second photos are mine)

===================

===================

===================

===================

===================

Two more examples, sorry for the quality(camera phone) but seeing the above comparisson you can make an idea:

 

[eSZee]

All your photos are taken from further back and not straight on. When doing comparisons like this, you should keep everything you can, same.

 

[Stonemonkey]

TV settings could be very different too, like contrast and sharpness levels.

 

[Jump_Ace]

These 'jaggies' as you all call them are trivial and don't matter. I'm thinking none of you really played much GT4 LAN. I have, dozens of times...anyone play Sarthe in a GT4 LAN event? The ENTIRE SCREEN shook for about 3 to 5 seconds straight. This typically happened on Sarthe, but GT5P looks great and I hope for the same in GT5.

Jerome

 

[Mr Latte]

Thanks for uploading....

Okay as the photos differ quite a bit in distance, the trucks on the first one is a good indicatior of this as is the wheel in the others.
Its maybe harder to be sure with these photos. I cant make out much difference in the last two from the mobile but do see what seems a degree of improvement in some others.

It would be easier to determine a scene that had particulary obvious jaggies like from one of the cars cockpits and door/A pillar shadows.

Would you like me to say which is which and perhaps others can guess too before you tell us?

I think:
Spanish = 720p
English = 1080p

If that's the case then 3D could well be a solid 30fps with no tearing and it would show that 2D is not being compromised by the addition of 3D at all, it's actually the other way around with 3D being compromised so that 2D quality is maintained.

Will they drop to 30fps?
They never have released a GT game at this even with PSP.
I really think they would essientially want to maintain that and again I mentioned earlier how do you really have a game with perhaps 3D players @ 30fps competiing with 2D @ 60fps.

That just doesnt work for me, cant speak for others although Im quite keen to find out if the 3D is any good with being tempted to buy a 3DTV if it is . Then again if 3D is 30fps I would have to really reconsider that purchase.

 

[Stonemonkey]

Will they drop to 30fps?
They never have released a GT game at this even with PSP.

I don't know but even with the reduction in resolution I can't see it being rendered at 120 fps (60 stereo frames) unless they start lowering car,track and scenery detail.

I really think they would essientially want to maintain that and again I mentioned earlier how do you really have a game with perhaps 3D players @ 30fps competiing with 2D @ 60fps.

You mean online?
The physics and networking run at their own speed independent of framerate, I'm sure there will be players with all sorts of framerates in online PC racing games.

Or are you meaning it'd be a disadvantage to be playing at 30fps?
Perhaps the additional depth cues could make the 60fps 2D players the ones to be at a disadvantage, who knows until we get the chance to try it out.

That just doesnt work for me, cant speak for others although Im quite keen to find out if the 3D is any good with being tempted to buy a 3DTV if it is . Then again if 3D is 30fps I would have to really reconsider that purchase.

 

[Raagentreg]

Will they drop to 30fps?
They never have released a GT game at this even with PSP.
I really think they would essientially want to maintain that and again I mentioned earlier how do you really have a game with perhaps 3D players @ 30fps competiing with 2D @ 60fps.

That just doesnt work for me, cant speak for others although Im quite keen to find out if the 3D is any good with being tempted to buy a 3DTV if it is . Then again if 3D is 30fps I would have to really reconsider that purchase.

I thought Kaz said 60fps and no less?

 

[Griffith500]

Info Link

Brilliant! However, it says it is based on the human eye being able to resolve 1/60th of an arc degree, which will vary hugely from individual to individual. This in itself explains why some people can't see the difference, and why I clearly can
It also shows that 1440p is next-to pointless in many applications, at least in terms of pixel throughput.

By the way, I'm finding it incredibly difficult to follow this thread with all the snidey sniping


Then there's terminology; traditional jaggies ought really be called pixel aliasing, due to the resolution of the z-method on a per-triangle basis, or per-pixel basis, as is relevant.
Shadow "jaggies" ought to be called shadow aliasing, again due to insufficient shadow resolution for the given pixel resolution and shadow distance from observer. A similar effect can be achieved with poorly mapped textures (which in some cases is all shadows are.)

 

[Zer0]

Thanks for uploading....

Okay as the photos differ quite a bit in distance, the trucks on the first one is a good indicatior of this as is the wheel in the others.
Its maybe harder to be sure with these photos. I cant make out much difference in the last two from the mobile but do see what seems a degree of improvement in some others.

It would be easier to determine a scene that had particulary obvious jaggies like from one of the cars cockpits and door/A pillar shadows.

Would you like me to say which is which and perhaps others can guess too before you tell us?

I think:
Spanish = 720p
English = 1080p

The increase in resolution is very evident in the fences, track lines or crowd detail.

The last 2 images are both mine not a comparison, as an example of why the jaggies are not a big issue for me.

Spanish = The forum user said he was playing at 1080p(LCD tv) but looks 720p to me.
English = 1080i

*I think you are mixing screen jaggies with the effects resolution.

 

[Mr Latte]

Or are you meaning it'd be a disadvantage to be playing at 30fps?
Perhaps the additional depth cues could make the 60fps 2D players the ones to be at a disadvantage, who knows until we get the chance to try it out.

Yeah mainly that and also from the point that in one hand they give you 3D vision but 1/2 the framerate and also lower resolution. Im not sure thats an upgrade for players/gamers particulary at such expense for 3D effects.

If it is going to be like that then I tell yeah one thing the 3D effects would need to be awesome...

E3 should give us the answers...

The increase in resolution is very evident in the fences, track lines or crowd detail.

The last 2 images are both mine not a comparison, as an example of why the jaggies are not a big issue for me.

Spanish = The forum user said he was playing at 1080p(LCD tv) but looks 720p to me.
English = 1080i

*I think you are mixing screen jaggies with the effects resolution.

Id find it very surprising that the top images are 1080p maybe your right they are 720p as its as you say quite evident the bottom ones, yours have less jaggies at 1080i. Notice the "YACHIO" sign in particular, bottom one has def improvement. Although to be fair you image is quite a bit further back (see rear view mirror to judge)

I will maybe try this later in the week with my own photo and via the monitor at 720/1080.
At least that way I can try to get the same distance using the same camera in the same conditions on the same hardware.
Too many varibles do little to confirm anything.

By the way, I'm finding it incredibly difficult to follow this thread with all the snidey sniping

Then there's terminology; traditional jaggies ought really be called pixel aliasing, due to the resolution of the z-method on a per-triangle basis, or per-pixel basis, as is relevant.
Shadow "jaggies" ought to be called shadow aliasing, again due to insufficient shadow resolution for the given pixel resolution and shadow distance from observer. A similar effect can be achieved with poorly mapped textures (which in some cases is all shadows are.)

Regards sniping as you can see Ive done as I said would and have avoided any further input he makes besides his attitude I dont think is appreciated by anyone here. He's proved to me today even after an apology via PM yesterday that I did the best thing telling him to ignore me and Id ignore him. Looks to be though that he cant do that and has to persist in being annoying.

Regards shadows issues:
I think youve hit the nail on the head so to speak in how GT5P is limited in its shadows with whatever method they are using and perhaps cant avoid.

 

[mr_VOLCANO]

The increase in resolution is very evident in the fences, track lines or crowd detail.

The last 2 images are both mine not a comparison, as an example of why the jaggies are not a big issue for me.

Spanish = The forum user said he was playing at 1080p(LCD tv) but looks 720p to me.
English = 1080i

*I think you are mixing screen jaggies with the effects resolution.

To be honest, I think the biggest differences in those pictures are that your TV is better calibrated, but your pictures are also sharper.

 

[Raitziger]

That projector has major artifacts on screen; aliasing is the last thing the guy should worry about. The stripes are not made by ps3.

 

[Zer0]

That projector has major artifacts on screen; aliasing is the last thing the guy should worry about. The stripes are not made by ps3.

The stripes are made by the camera, it's called a moire pattern. The picture is fine.

A state of the art Pioneer Kuro with the same photo artifacts:

 

[Mr Latte]

Yeah its common when taking photos.
Although some projectors (older generations) sometimes suffered from banding.
The old AE700 from Panasonic was a fine example...

Im curious if you have a 720p projector and GT5P uses 4xAA on 720p why you dont get the best result from that?
Yet when you use 1080i output from PS3 your projector has to then downscale/deinterlace and then having the game use the 2xAA for 1080 Console setting?

Perhaps your projector in the scaling is adding a nice effect to reduce the jaggies and who knows maybe GT5P also uses the 4xAA in 1080i output?

Would be great to see a good example from you Zero or anyone else and I will add some at the weekend.

 

[Griffith500]

That is an interesting point. What do they do with 1080i? Since it's about half the pixel throughput of full 1080p, and GT5 only uses 1280x1080, surely that means 1080i is 25% less intensive than full 720p? (at the same refresh rate)

Quick comparison, in terms of relative pixel area per second:

Full 1080p: __ 1920x1080@60__1.00
Full 1080i:____1920x540@60___0.50
GT5 1080p:_1280x1080@60__0.67
GT5 1080i:__1280x540@60___0.33 (??)
Full 720p: ___ 1280x720@60___0.44

 

[Mr Latte]

• Two Identical 24" 1080p monitors
• Both set to identical colour temp, contrast & brightness levels.
• PS3 Video settings on each console set identical
• Identical HDMI cables
• ONLY hardware changes made was for 1080p 1080i & 720p
• Each image was captured and only trimmed
• Picasa was used to auto adjust colour & contrast
• Both images then placed top/bottom as single image saved and uploaded

Notes:
Even with all the above actions taken I actually noticed a varied amount of difference in video output on each monitor with each PS3 using different resolutions.
This may of been different tolerences in the monitors themselves or in how PS3 depending on resolution set may alter the video output slightly.

Two monitors side by side


Spot the differences:

SET1

Which is 1080i & 1080p?


SET 2

Which is 1080i & 1080p?


SET 3

Which is 720p & 1080p?


SET 4

Which is 720p & 1080p?


SET 5

Noticable difference here on advertising @ London
Is this 480 Vs 720p or 1080i Vs 1080p?

 

[Watevaman]

Sorry if I'm being dumb, but wouldn't the differences between 1080i and 1080p only be visible during the fluid picture, and not stills?

 

[H20HYBRID_GT]

Don't know if it matters but on my TV 720p looks clearly better than 1080i, so why should 1080i look not worse than 1080p?
In case of GT I also thought 720p uses 4x AA, so it probably always looks best in that resolution?