how hard could that be?

It depend son the game. There are already 1080P 60fps games on PSN. So far it seems unlikely we'll see "traditional" games at 1080P/60

Wrong... there are a number of 1080p/60fps games for the PS3, both on the PSN and in retail starting with Ridge Racer 7 back in 2006. Off the top of my head the list includes Gran Turismo: Prologue, NBA '09, Tekken 5: DR and Virtua Fighter 5.

It's hard because they want to push the polygon counts and lighting. They technically could get every game at 1080p/60, but they've have to cut so much back that it wouldn't be worth it.

I'd really like to see them add some of the controls over game details that we get in PC games. While the main reason is to accommodate different levels of hardware, there is also the personal desire for detail vs. performance. If we wanted certain games to have a higher and/or more consistent framerate, we could turn down the texture quality, turn off shadows, simplify the lighting, change the draw distance, etc. I would gladly turn off the crowd (or at least stop it from animating) if it meant that a sports game could stay at 60fps.

Racing games are some of the most impressive 1080/60 games out there, WipeoutHD being among the best of them.

Didn't we just do this thread?

It's hard because they want to push the polygon counts and lighting. They technically could get every game at 1080p/60, but they've have to cut so much back that it wouldn't be worth it.

I'd really like to see them add some of the controls over game details that we get in PC games. While the main reason is to accommodate different levels of hardware, there is also the personal desire for detail vs. performance. If we wanted certain games to have a higher and/or more consistent framerate, we could turn down the texture quality, turn off shadows, simplify the lighting, change the draw distance, etc. I would gladly turn off the crowd (or at least stop it from animating) if it meant that a sports game could stay at 60fps.

I am guessing he means can we have a game 1080p 60fps with no limitations like the type you are mentioning.

You'll never see games Like KZ2, COD4 or the like at those specs with the current hardware. They had to limit COD4 to 600p to get 60fps and keep all the good stuff, but it still look very nice.

You'll never see games Like KZ2, COD4 or the like at those specs with the current hardware. They had to limit COD4 to 600p to get 60fps and keep all the good stuff, but it still look very nice.

Never is a long time. And, you can't judge the entire lifespan of a console by the limitations of a multi-platform game released in the first 18 months of it's release.

I think it's safe to say that you won't see a 3rd party multi-platform game that runs at 1080p/60fps anytime soon. 1st, or 2nd party exclusives? I wouldn't bet against it. Ask me again at the end of 2010.

And, the more important question is will it matter in those types of game if they are successful in the other areas? Apart from the internet fanboy war, of course.

And, the more important question is will it matter in those types of game if they are successful in the other areas? Apart from the internet fanboy war, of course.

The answer is "no."

Apparently pretty hard since very little actually renders at a real 1920x1080p, looks like some sports games and PSN titles. Does it even matter? I would take 480p if it meant seeing stuff in-game previously thought impossible.

Never is a long time. And, you can't judge the entire lifespan of a console by the limitations of a multi-platform game released in the first 18 months of it's release.

I think it's safe to say that you won't see a 3rd party multi-platform game that runs at 1080p/60fps anytime soon. 1st, or 2nd party exclusives? I wouldn't bet against it. Ask me again at the end of 2010.


The thing is, instead of going 1080p/60fps, it makes more sense to target 720p/30fps, and use that extra "power" to overload the game with special effects and fancy graphical tricks. It reads better in previews, it looks better in screenshots, and it gets more hype. Sure GG probably could've gotten KZ2 running at 1080p/60fps by toning down what they needed to tone down, but how would it have looked in screenshots and movies, and how would that translate to the buzz around the game?

I don't think you will see 1080p/60fps this generation very much. Probably not next generation either for the same reason. I'd prefer 720p/60fps myself (like R&C Future).

Racing games are some of the most impressive 1080/60 games out there, WipeoutHD being among the best of them.

Didn't we just do this thread?

Every other day. Its a must.

if were currently in "next-gen" what do we call "next-next gen" and what specs should we ex-spec?

alot of ppl still dont have 1080p sets so whats the point or pushing this even farther?

i think the gen after this will demand 1080p/60fps.....just like it did this gen with 720p

are their any PC games that run those specs now??

It's going to depend on how much more powerful the next systems are. If that rumor about them making the PS4 like the Wii (no significant performance increase) turns out to be true, we may not get 1080p games at 60fps.

Yes, some games have hit that benchmark, but I doubt most other developers will see the point in pushing for both 1080p and 60fps. For most current HD sets, going to 1080p doesn't make much difference to consumers. And if consumers can't tell the difference, then why would developers put the extra resources into pushing for it? If they can do it relatively easily (as with small-scale PSN games), then sure. But otherwise, I don't think they see much point to it.

Also, this current gen going HD has been a part of pushing consumers into the HD market. Once they have those sets (which most do not), how do you then create a market for an even better HD set? Most folks haven't made the HD transition, so I doubt developers (or even console manufacturers) will feel the need to push beyond current resolution standards.

However, 60fps seems like a reasonable goal. It's noticeable on nearly any set (including SD sets), and it applies to all sets universally (unlike 1080p).

i think the gen after this will demand 1080p/60fps.....just like it did this gen with 720p

are their any PC games that run those specs now??

There are plenty of PC games that can run at 1920x1080 60fps if you've got the hardware to do it. I can run COD4 at that with no problem with 4x AA on mine.

Never is a long time. And, you can't judge the entire lifespan of a console by the limitations of a multi-platform game released in the first 18 months of it's release.

I think it's safe to say that you won't see a 3rd party multi-platform game that runs at 1080p/60fps anytime soon. 1st, or 2nd party exclusives? I wouldn't bet against it. Ask me again at the end of 2010.

And, the more important question is will it matter in those types of game if they are successful in the other areas? Apart from the internet fanboy war, of course.

Clearly I meant never as in never in this current generation of hardware (360 and PS3) I will eat humble pie when it happens. I mean KZ2 has been in development for PS3 only for how many years? If it can't do it then what does it take? I know it takes more than a 7800GTX and 256 RAM.

the video card isnt strong enough to do it

Clearly I meant never as in never in this current generation of hardware (360 and PS3) I will eat humble pie when it happens. I mean KZ2 has been in development for PS3 only for how many years? If it can't do it then what does it take? I know it takes more than a 7800GTX and 256 RAM.

+1, should read that b4 responding :)

1080p with all the bells and whistles and high AA and AF...forget it, PC games are barely doing it, forget consoles doing it this gen. Next Gen PS/Xbox should have it for sure. Anything less and I'd consider them a fail.

1080p with all the bells and whistles and high AA and AF...forget it, PC games are barely doing it, forget consoles doing it this gen. Next Gen PS/Xbox should have it for sure. Anything less and I'd consider them a fail.

This post illustrates perfectly why the question of 1080p/60fps is truly irrelevant.

With "all the bells and whistles and high AA and AF" working properly, what's really going to be gained visually by upping the frame rate and resolution? KZ2 is locked at 720p/30fps (I think) and they are using a plethora of movie style post processing effects like bloom, motion blur, etc. Would there be a difference between 720/30 and 1080/60 when things moving quickly in the game are blurry, by artistic design?

So, what's the real question here? Wipeout HD runs at 1080p/60fps. So, the answer for the OP is a definitive "yes." Are pixel count and refresh rate the most important things in visual presentation?

as stated already, Wipeout HD supports 1080 and 60 fps.

Don't bother using Wipeout as an example, purists will dismiss it since it drops resolution to keep the framerate up.

Purists? Pure what? :D

Sony got NBA game that has that, but the game is crap

the video card isnt strong enough to do it

I agree. The RSX is basically a 7900GT, but with the memory bus of a 7600GT. So it's a hypothetical 7700GT, if you will.

It just doesn't have the pixel processing power or the memory bandwidth to do 1080p with a full level of detail.

I agree. The RSX is basically a 7900GT, but with the memory bus of a 7600GT. So it's a hypothetical 7700GT, if you will.

It just doesn't have the pixel processing power or the memory bandwidth to do 1080p with a full level of detail.

Can't the Cell pick up some of the slack? I hear it has Blast Processing or something.

so no 1080p @ 60fps & 4xAA?

so no 1080p @ 60fps & 4xAA?

What response are you looking for, exactly?

Add as many parameters as you want--no comment in this thread is going to be anything more than internet masturbatory keyboard speculation.

I think resolution is far down on the list as far as importance to a game looking really nice. Framerate, lighting, textures, AA, etc seem to be much more critical. A friend came over and saw Grand Turismo Prologue and played a bit on a large screen. She didn't seem too impressed. A few weeks later I had the controller out but happened to be playing a compressed video of a real auto race that was originally 480i. Terrible quality. She was like "Oh my gosh, this game looks real". There's obviously a long way to go to even approach realism at high resolutions and framerates.

That being said, I don't think I'll buy another 30 fps shooter on the PS3. On Crysis, Far Cry 2, etc, I dial things back until I hit mid 40's or above or it just seems annoying.

She didn't seem too impressed.

I stopped reading right there. I'm not sexist, but most people around here will understand my reasoning for this.

I think resolution is far down on the list as far as importance to a game looking really nice....There's obviously a long way to go to even approach realism at high resolutions and framerates.

The problem is, a huge chunk of the extra horsepower in, say, the PS3 over the Ps2 is just getting the damn games to run in a higher resolution. Resolution is probably the least important thing, it has just taken greater prominence this generation because of MS and Sony's hype.

I stopped reading right there. I'm not sexist, but most people around here will understand my reasoning for this.

You're not? Could've fooled me.

Come on now. Let's not just diminish the impact of higher resolution. I agree that 1080p isn't needed over better effects and polygons, but 720p still is a nice upgrade over 480p. It was time for games to be HD, and it wasn't just hype.

But, feel free to set your consoles to 480p, and throw out your Blu-ray movies while you're at it. Who needs them? ;)

Resolution is the probably the least important thing? I couldn't disagree more. Like SirDrexl says who needs HD and BD then we could just stick with DVD and the banding, compression issues and on and on. If it doesn't matter then all along we could have had low rez monitors for pc's as well.

so no 1080p @ 60fps & 4xAA?
Fillrate/bandwidth just isn't there which is something the Cell can't help with. You have to steal a lot bandwidth from the Cell to keep the pixel pipelines full which leaves you with no CPU power for "gameplay". Full Auto2 is the only full 1080P 4xAA non PSN game IIRC.

Resolution is the probably the least important thing? I couldn't disagree more. Like SirDrexl says who needs HD and BD then we could just stick with DVD and the banding, compression issues and on and on. If it doesn't matter then all along we could have had low rez monitors for pc's as well.Is 1080p cooler than 720p? Sure. Is 1080p at 30fps better than 720p at 60fps? That's a bit fuzzier.

I'd wager that most folks here would prefer the faster framerate (though I could be wrong), and I'd all but guarantee that your average gamer would definitely prefer the faster framerate. And once you start adding all the other technical bells and whistles (texture shading, lighting and particle effects, AA, etc.) resolution does start looking pretty low on the totem pole.

At the size displays that most people have, the jump to 720p is huge, but the jump to 1080p isn't as big or noticeable a jump to most folks since they don't have a display large enough for it to be as dramatic a difference.

But the real question is would there be enough of an extra market for pushing the tech that far, or would it just be for the high-end market? If that's the case, then the extra resources wouldn't be worth it to most developers or publishers to bother.

Resolution is the probably the least important thing? I couldn't disagree more. Like SirDrexl says who needs HD and BD then we could just stick with DVD and the banding, compression issues and on and on. If it doesn't matter then all along we could have had low rez monitors for pc's as well.

The first thing a person does if the performance of a game on PC is suffering is turn down the resolution. Would you prefer to play a game with CoD4 style graphics at 1024x600 (the native res of the game) or a game with, say, CounterStrike 1.6 style graphics at 2560x1600? I think most would choose the former. The point is that while resolution is important, there are more important things that go into a "good looking" game.

It was time for games to be HD, and it wasn't just hype.

I agree that the existence of HD sets made the switch a reality and a necessity, but I think MS and Sony endlessly talking about 720p or 1080p or whatever over the other things the new hardware brought to the table has meant resolution taking a more prominent role in the discussion of these games than it deserves. The fact is that a lot of these games can't even hit 720p. But then again I shouldn't be surprised, before it was resolution it was fake "polygon per second" counts for each hardware, and before that it was SuperFX and blast processing.

But, feel free to set your consoles to 480p, and throw out your Blu-ray movies while you're at it. Who needs them?

Blu-Ray is obviously a different thing altogether, because of how movies are filmed. You are losing more details at DVD resolution. Games aren't filmed.

The first thing a person does if the performance of a game on PC is suffering is turn down the resolution. Would you prefer to play a game with CoD4 style graphics at 1024x600 (the native res of the game) or a game with, say, CounterStrike 1.6 style graphics at 2560x1600? I think most would choose the former. The point is that while resolution is important, there are more important things that go into a "good looking" game.

Yes, but you're talking about the difference between an ultra-high resolution and a high resolution. The perceived difference between those two isn't going to be that noticeable (probably not noticeable at all on a TV at normal viewing distances). You get diminishing returns the higher you go. The difference between 480p and 720p, on the other hand, is very noticeable, and I think it's worth giving up some polygons and effects to get it (or close to it) on these consoles.

Blu-Ray is obviously a different thing altogether, because of how movies are filmed. You are losing more details at DVD resolution. Games aren't filmed.

The resolution can affect how much detail is shown in textures. If the game's resolution is lower than that of the textures, you will lose detail. This doesn't matter when you get close enough to them, like walking right up to a wall in a FPS, but games that don't often show textures close up (like racing games, generally) will be affected. Then there's also edges to consider, especially if AA isn't used.