PS4 to Support 4K Resolution - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 280 Old 09-07-2012, 03:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post



But I still stick by my claim that the big mainstream selling point for the HD shift was the size and shape of displays, not the resolution. Without something comparable, it will all seem pretty much more of the same to most consumers. As for me, I'd be satisfied with some basic iterative changes like you say. We've reached a point of diminishing returns on resolution, unless the underlying technology itself changes.

That a few other things that have nothing to do with resolution.
I have been working part time at Best Buy and Circuit City since 99 when RCA came out with their HDTV with Directv built in. Every since then the resolution has become less important to the average consumer. Size form factor where higher priority. Plasmas where the big thing because it was cheaper than an LCD. Most consumers are coming in for both LED and Plasma. LED because of the thin bezel design you see on LG and Samsung that will fit in the spots they tried outting a thick bezel LCD in. Consumers would go to the back of the heat wall and see all these TVs on display and people would claim this tv and that tv looks the best. Regardless that the displays are set by manufactor settings but they don't even pay any action past the price that the tv they consider looks better is a 720p display over the 1080p model next to it. These same consumers on average do not care about calibration. All they want is bigger than what they have, features they can get and what is the lowest they need to pay to get it. It is why Dynex and Westinghouse and Insignia sell so much. Those same customers will say they never heard of any of those companies but the picture looks good enough for them and that's what they want to get. At the same time we have plenty of customers that come in and research what and after hearing what they are looking for and where it needs to go in their home all they care about is it HD not whether it is 1080p. The same customers are also cutting themselves away from cable and Sat as well.

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 280 Old 09-08-2012, 05:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barrelbelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboi352 View Post

All broadcasts still only top out at 1080i.
That's what cracks me up, we aren't even at a point where native 1080p cable and satellite is obtainable! Some form of Cable/Satellite/Antenna has to be at least 50% of most everyones TV consumption in a given day, and we aren't even watching Full 1080p in that regard!
I swear, the people clamoring for 4K are the type that want it just so they can show it off at their next Super Bowl watch party during the half time show. "Hey man, it's half time let's check out this 4K resolution I just bought! Let me put in this single Uber Bluray 2.0 being that it's the only piece of material that supports 4K at the moment and BLOW YOUR MIND AWAY!"
Let me know when my cable, PS5 and every BluRay supports 4K resolutions and I will purchase a nice 55" set when it costs under 2 grand.

I guess we can surmise from your summary and antipathy for 4k, that you only have technology in your dwelling that top out at 720p. Since it seems to represent your threshold of difference. Good for you. Enjoy it. A lot of people still enjoy 480i/p. Good for them. But last time I looked...part of the mission of this forum was to discuss and debate cutting edge AV science. Isn't that the very definition of 4k x2k...8k x 4k...or even 16k x 8k for that matter. You have no idea where visual reality intersects with visual cognition. Most have moved on with this. We enjoy 1080i where it lives best...1080p where it lives best. And we'll just love native 4k x 2k whereever it lives best. Even in the domains where it scales and integrates with other video technologies to transform lower resolutions to eyepopping extremes, so as to achieve new visual objectives. We'll be happy with our choices. And I'm sure you'll be happy with yours. But until you truly test everyone's eyesight or all of the ways 4k x 2K will be utilized, you won't have a clue like you smugly accuse others of. But hey...I'm sure you'll still be happy and correct from where you sit. Enjoying limitations you have imposed on yourself and others...whether they are true of false. I'm sure Sony is happy as a clam that it is riding this 4k horse. So I can presume, based on your contempt for their strategy...you won't be buying Sony going forward...if it has 4k. "That cracks me up".
Randomoneh likes this.
barrelbelly is offline  
post #183 of 280 Old 09-08-2012, 10:45 PM
 
TyrantII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 10,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 832
rolleyes.gif
TyrantII is offline  
post #184 of 280 Old 09-09-2012, 11:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
zoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 10,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
When can I have one?
zoro is offline  
post #185 of 280 Old 09-11-2012, 09:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
zoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 10,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I am selling my ps3 on anticipation .
For interim would 790 Sony or 220 penny shall work?
zoro is offline  
post #186 of 280 Old 09-12-2012, 10:32 AM
Newbie
 
Ivor Bigbottie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Most of the PS3 games are 720p. Very few are 1080. I suspect because most of them were produced in the US where 480 p to 720p is quite a difference. 625i to 720p is only marginally better to look at for we Euros so we need 1080. Typically all the US worry about is themselves so all they serve up is 720p.

I don't know about the framerate. Doesn't say anything about it on my PS3 as far as I can tell.

What good will 4k be anyway? You need the TV to match. I don't forsee myself getting even a 3d TV for some years, so Sony might be taking a bit of a risk here.

Still, I would not want to stop them. 4K and 3D may well be cheap as peanuts by the time I get around to upgrading my 2004 vintage Pioneer TV.

The easiest way to find something lost around the house is to buy a replacement.
Ivor Bigbottie is offline  
post #187 of 280 Old 09-12-2012, 11:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Since it is practically nothing in terms of hardware costs, no harm, no foul for plugging it in to the next console.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #188 of 280 Old 09-12-2012, 01:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

Since it is practically nothing in terms of hardware costs, no harm, no foul for plugging it in to the next console.

With a possible manufacturing run of 10 million or more, each decision to increase unit direct materials cost by 1 cent reduces corporate net profits by $100,000.00. So it is in fact a very big decision whether or not to add any feature at some non-zero cost. When I worked in the auto industry, individual parts were costed in tenths of a cent on a car with a $15,000.00 MSRP, and part substitution decisions 'one way or the other' were often made as a consequence of just a one or two tenths of a cent cost difference.

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is offline  
post #189 of 280 Old 09-12-2012, 11:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. No, pennies are nothing in the big scheme of things when the unit itself will cost $350+. Adding 4K will be as financially painless as adding 1080P was to the PS3. As costly as the PS3 was at launch, no one tried to suggest the resolution was a reason why.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #190 of 280 Old 09-13-2012, 08:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by boidsonly View Post

For what it is worth, here is a somewhat informative read on, "4K for the PS4? Who cares?"eek.gif
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57502241-221/4k-for-the-ps4-who-cares/?tag=nl.e404
If you can get past the personal opinion and look at the facts, he raises some interesting points; many of which have been discussed in this thread. Remember, take it with a grain of salt.....biggrin.gif
The author of that article has written a few anti-4K articles for CNET and I notice that he made a mistake. As seen in this 2010 HDMI press release HDMI 1.4 is limited to 30 fps at 3840x2160 while it is limited to 24 fps at 4096x2160. As such for consumer 4K TVs, which use a resolution of 3840x2160, the frame rate limit for 4K over HDMI 1.4 would be 30 fps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

With a possible manufacturing run of 10 million or more, each decision to increase unit direct materials cost by 1 cent reduces corporate net profits by $100,000.00. So it is in fact a very big decision whether or not to add any feature at some non-zero cost.
If adding a faster HDMI transmitter chip to the PS4 added a lifetime cost difference of 10 cents than if Sony was to sell 100 million PS4 consoles that would be a cost of 10 million dollars. That may sound like a lot but it would not only give Sony a marketing advantage that they could easily show but it would also help them sell 4K TVs. Also 4K over HDMI is supported on both the AMD Radeon 7750 and Intel Haswell integrated graphics so I don't think cost would be an issue. I also don't think that 4K video decoding would be an issue with the PS4 and here is a link to a YouTube video of a Intel Haswell demonstration taken at IDF 2012 in which a 4K video at 200 Mbps was decoded entirely in hardware.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #191 of 280 Old 09-19-2012, 11:19 AM
Member
 
chrischaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboi352 View Post

All broadcasts still only top out at 1080i.
That's what cracks me up, we aren't even at a point where native 1080p cable and satellite is obtainable! Some form of Cable/Satellite/Antenna has to be at least 50% of most everyones TV consumption in a given day, and we aren't even watching Full 1080p in that regard!
I swear, the people clamoring for 4K are the type that want it just so they can show it off at their next Super Bowl watch party during the half time show. "Hey man, it's half time let's check out this 4K resolution I just bought! Let me put in this single Uber Bluray 2.0 being that it's the only piece of material that supports 4K at the moment and BLOW YOUR MIND AWAY!"
Let me know when my cable, PS5 and every BluRay supports 4K resolutions and I will purchase a nice 55" set when it costs under 2 grand.

I can appreciate this opinion but do not understand the disdain for wanting to constantly move forward. That's what electronics do-move forward, rendering today's tech obsolete. I have not seen 2k, 4k, whatever, but i look forward to it. I had a 1080P TV long before 1080P was the norm because i thought it would be (i was only 1/2 right as TV is still mostly 720). To me, the difference between 720 and 1080 is quite noticeable and any good title i watch on DTV, i'll rent again on BR (audio plays a factor as well). Titles i know i will like will be purchased on BR right away and i will not view them on 720. I do not know if the difference between 1080 and 4K will be as noticeable but i look forward to finding out-when the costs are reasonable.
chrischaos is offline  
post #192 of 280 Old 09-28-2012, 12:34 PM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrischaos View Post

I can appreciate this opinion but do not understand the disdain for wanting to constantly move forward. That's what electronics do-move forward, rendering today's tech obsolete. I have not seen 2k, 4k, whatever, but i look forward to it. I had a 1080P TV long before 1080P was the norm because i thought it would be (i was only 1/2 right as TV is still mostly 720). To me, the difference between 720 and 1080 is quite noticeable and any good title i watch on DTV, i'll rent again on BR (audio plays a factor as well). Titles i know i will like will be purchased on BR right away and i will not view them on 720. I do not know if the difference between 1080 and 4K will be as noticeable but i look forward to finding out-when the costs are reasonable.

I hear what you're saying but I don't think we're there yet, not by a long shot. You say so yourself: " I had a 1080P TV long before 1080P was the norm because i thought it would be (i was only 1/2 right as TV is still mostly 720)" So to those that think PS4 will come with 4k support, it very well could, but it won't be anything meaningful especially in regards to games, or AT LEAST for the entirety of the PS4's relevant lifespan (a.k.a. pre-PS5). Sony is hemmoraging money at an unprecedented rate, and any cost cutting maneuvers they can perform on PS4 they will no doubt tackle. Like I said before, if PS4 has 4k, it will be about as utilized as 1080p was on PS3: On the Main Menu screen and for BluRay movies. I think it's been 5 game titles total in the 6 years PS3 has been out that actually utilize native 1080p. resolutions.
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #193 of 280 Old 02-25-2013, 01:57 PM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
And there you have it folks. PS4 supports 4K VIDEO and PICTURES. No 4K GAMES. End of thread.
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #194 of 280 Old 02-25-2013, 02:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
...and presumably 3D 1080P @60 fps games, which is only possible with 4K.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #195 of 280 Old 02-25-2013, 06:59 PM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

...and presumably 3D 1080P @60 fps games, which is only possible with 4K.

Yeah, no. http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/21/ps4-will-output-video-in-4k-but-not-games/
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #196 of 280 Old 02-25-2013, 09:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Repeating the same thing doesn't refute my post in the slightest. I've always said 4K games weren't going to be developed - that's common sense to anyone who understands the limits of visual perception, resolution and modern HDTV sizes.

However, 4K is more than simply a resolution. You can use half of its resolution for 3D purposes and direct a different frame to each eye while maintaining a high frame rate. When it comes to 3D gaming on the PS4, some developers can (and I predict, will) use the 4K rez tech to offer 1080P games at 60fps in 3D, which is simply not possible on the PS3 with the limitation of its 1.4a HDMI spec. That spec only allows less than 30fps when you split the 4K rez in half for 3D purposes.

So what the Sony exec is saying is true - no games advertising "4K resolution" will be developed, but you can tout 3D 1080P at 60fps. The tech can, and I believe will, still be used for a different gaming purpose than mere super HD resolution bragging rights.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #197 of 280 Old 02-25-2013, 10:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,941
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

Repeating the same thing doesn't refute my post in the slightest. I've always said 4K games weren't going to be developed - that's common sense to anyone who understands the limits of visual perception, resolution and modern HDTV sizes.

However, 4K is more than simply a resolution. You can use half of its resolution for 3D purposes and direct a different frame to each eye while maintaining a high frame rate. When it comes to 3D gaming on the PS4, some developers can and (and I predict, will) use the 4K rez tech to offer 1080P games at 60fps in 3D, which is simply not possible on the PS3 with the limitation of its 1.4a HDMI spec. That spec only allows less than 30fps when you split the 4K rez in half for 3D purposes.

So what the Sony exec is saying is true - no games advertising "4K resolution" will be developed, but you can tout 3D 1080P at 60fps. The tech can, and I believe will, still be used for a different gaming purpose than mere super HD resolution bragging rights.

I hope you're right. I think the industry is a bit too quick to give up on 3D gaming. I know that most consumers don't care about it, but 1080p 3D at 60 frames per second would be a totally different ball of wax.. I think...
Anthony1 is offline  
post #198 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 06:44 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

Repeating the same thing doesn't refute my post in the slightest. I've always said 4K games weren't going to be developed - that's common sense to anyone who understands the limits of visual perception, resolution and modern HDTV sizes.

However, 4K is more than simply a resolution. You can use half of its resolution for 3D purposes and direct a different frame to each eye while maintaining a high frame rate. When it comes to 3D gaming on the PS4, some developers can (and I predict, will) use the 4K rez tech to offer 1080P games at 60fps in 3D, which is simply not possible on the PS3 with the limitation of its 1.4a HDMI spec. That spec only allows less than 30fps when you split the 4K rez in half for 3D purposes.

So what the Sony exec is saying is true - no games advertising "4K resolution" will be developed, but you can tout 3D 1080P at 60fps. The tech can, and I believe will, still be used for a different gaming purpose than mere super HD resolution bragging rights.

http://www.thealivezone.com/3d-not-a-focus-ps4-wont-support-4k-games/

“3D was a big thing a couple of years ago — we made it a big thing because it was lead by the consumer electronics side of Sony and we liked what we could do on PS3 using 3D stereoscopic,” Yoshida said. “But now the consumer electronics side of Sony, or all of the companies have shifted focus from 3D TV to something else, so if they’re not talking about it, why would we?”

We can do this all day. I like your enthusiasm, but no.
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #199 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 07:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked: 1347
Except given that most if not all current 3D TVs don't support 1080p/60/3D, and pushing that far will have serious performance issues, seeing that actually happen in games is just as unlikely as 4K.

Most 3D is still going to happen at 720p, as that has the widest support and basically entirely alleviates the performance issues. Some games might push 1080p/24/3D, which has wide support, and as long as that reduced frame rate leads to higher quality motion blur, it should look quite cinematic. Eventually support for higher res and frame rate in 3D will open up, but that PS4 isn't going to get any faster, and they're just going to support the lowest common denominator.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #200 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 07:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboi352 View Post

http://www.thealivezone.com/3d-not-a-focus-ps4-wont-support-4k-games/

“3D was a big thing a couple of years ago — we made it a big thing because it was lead by the consumer electronics side of Sony and we liked what we could do on PS3 using 3D stereoscopic,” Yoshida said. “But now the consumer electronics side of Sony, or all of the companies have shifted focus from 3D TV to something else, so if they’re not talking about it, why would we?”

We can do this all day. I like your enthusiasm, but no.
Indeed we can.

Are you now making the silly suggestion that there will be no 3D support for PS4 games at all? That's what your post suggests. Of course it will be an optional feature in some titles.

Like the 4K comment above, Sony isn't using it as a major talking point, but that's far from saying that certain aspects of 4K tech and 3D won't be used in gaming at all. He refers to the fact that Sony's TV side aren't hyping 3D, but they are still offering it in their sets, aren't they? The same will be true for the PS4.

If you don't think that there will be new 3D PS4 games, then there isn't really much else to say except that I believe that opinion is wrong. However, if you acknowledge that it will show up here and there, then you have to acknowledge that developers will try to get the most out of it as they can. This means that when possible, some of those 3D game developers will tap into the 4K rez -that is already included in the PS4- to max out the frame rate to 60fps at 1080P. That's only common sense. I mean, if 4K is included, then tell me what's to stop them from doing that?

The exec is downplaying 3D and 4K so the media doesn't make a big deal about Sony ignoring market trends by pushing tech as major selling points. Sony is trying to keep up the impression of focus on other areas.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #201 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 08:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Except given that most if not all current 3D TVs don't support 1080p/60/3D, and pushing that far will have serious performance issues, seeing that actually happen in games is just as unlikely as 4K.

Most 3D is still going to happen at 720p, as that has the widest support and basically entirely alleviates the performance issues. Some games might push 1080p/24/3D, which has wide support, and as long as that reduced frame rate leads to higher quality motion blur, it should look quite cinematic. Eventually support for higher res and frame rate in 3D will open up, but that PS4 isn't going to get any faster, and they're just going to support the lowest common denominator.

When the PS3 came out, HDMI and Bluray weren't wide spread. They put tech in launch consoles because if the ten-year vision thing. Eventually, just about every HDTV will have 4K support and the new HDMI standard because it is cheap to do so. That's not to say that the public will accept it as a big deal, but that it will simply happen. As it gradually gets adopted, the PS4 will easily be able to function well with it.

Also, there are some interesting things to keep an eye on. Glasses free 3D is a goal for HDTV makers, right? That will use 4K tech as well. If gaming 3-5 years from now works with glasses free 3D, then the PS4 will use 4K to do it. No exec will make a big deal about this stuff because it takes things off message from the current focus.

BTW, 1080P @24fps for 3D is already possible on the PS3. That's why it is only logical that 3D PS4 games will naturally take the next step and go 1080P 60fps when possible. That's where the included 4K tech comes in (and new HDMI standard) to make it work. Really, if the current gen PS3 had next gen HDMI ports, I think it could support 4K as well with a firmware update.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #202 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 08:31 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
joeblow, you have to understand I'm simply quoting what the folks at Sony have stated. I understand your optimism for these features in regards to PS4, but the truth is if anything gets implemented in any fashion, it will be from 1st party titles only and probably only a handful at that. Again, IF being the operative word here.

"That's why it is only logical that 3D PS4 games will naturally take the next step and go 1080P 60fps when possible."

I have to disagree here with your opinion. Saying "it's only logical that PS4 does xyz because PS3 did abc" is baseless and pure conjecture. I'll take the quotes from Sony themselves over your assessment in this regard. If they say 4K games ain't happening, I have to believe it ain't happening. Sony is notorious for over promising and under delivering (They touted "True 1080p gaming" for PS3 in 2006, and in 2013 only 5 games actually run in native 1080p on PS3) so when they flat out admit 4K gaming is not happening, I have to believe them. People are getting too caught up in the spec numbers and not actually paying attention to what kind of specs are really needed for 4K _gaming_ processing. We aren't talking videos, pictures or movies here.
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #203 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 08:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked: 1347
The main difference is that 3D isn't really a support challenge, its a performance challenge.

The first round of PS4 games are still looking to be 1080p/30fps. That level of performance translates almost directly to equal performance at 720p/30/3D. A 1080p/60/3D game = 720p/60/3D. 720p/60 games right now (like cod), basically drop down to 720p/30 in gameplay. You basically have to cut something in half - either frame rate or resolution.

If I'm supposed to believe that 1080p/60/3D games are going to be made, that would push the 2D spec for the game up to 2x1080p/60( 1/2 of 4k). Theyre just going to have to leave half of the power of the PS4 on the table, just to support a spec that few people have TVs that can even take advantage of. That sound incredibly unrealistic to me if games are starting out at 1080p/30. And the squeeze on performance gets even worse as the generation goes on.

Maybe they'll eventually be able to check that box, just like they can check the 4K box - but it's unrealistic for actual gameplay. Believe me I'm with you, I'd love nothing more than 1080p/60/3D, but its either asking too much of the PS4 and/or seriously compromising the 2D experience for the other 90% of people.

As far as glasses free goes - it really has zero to do with support from the PS4. The TV will probably be 4K, but the PS4 will still just send a 1080p/3D signal, and the TV will take care of converting the signal to utilize its extra pixels properly.

The PS4 is going to be a powerful box, but it still has its limits. For what it's worth 1080p/60/3D is at least more realistic than 4K.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #204 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 08:36 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

The main difference is that 3D isn't really a support challenge, its a performance challenge.

The first round of PS4 games are still looking to be 1080p/30fps. That level of performance translates almost directly to equal performance at 720p/30/3D. A 1080p/60/3D game = 720p/60/3D. 720p/60 games right now (like cod), basically drop down to 720p/30 in gameplay. You basically have to cut something in half - either frame rate or resolution.

If I'm supposed to believe that 1080p/60/3D games are going to be made, that would push the 2D spec for the game up to 2x1080p/60( 1/2 of 4k). Theyre just going to have to leave half of the power of the PS4 on the table, just to support a spec that few people have TVs that can even take advantage of. That sound incredibly unrealistic to me if games are starting out at 1080p/30. And the squeeze on performance gets even worse as the generation goes on.

Maybe they'll eventually be able to check that box, just like they can check the 4K box - but it's unrealistic for actual gameplay. Believe me I'm with you, I'd love nothing more than 1080p/60/3D, but its either asking too much of the PS4 and/or seriously compromising the 2D experience for the other 90% of people.

As far as glasses free goes - it really has zero to do with support from the PS4. The TV will probably be 4K, but the PS4 will still just send a 1080p/3D signal, and the TV will take care of converting the signal to utilize its extra pixels properly.

The PS4 is going to be a powerful box, but it still has its limits. For what it's worth 1080p/60/3D is at least more realistic than 4K.

This. I couldn't have stated it any better myself.
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #205 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
number1laing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,993
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Isn't there a bandwidth issue at 1080p/60fps/3D? I have messed around with Nvidia's 3D solution on my PC, and my choices are 720p/60fps or 1080p/24fps.

I'll be honest - I don't get the appeal of 3D gaming. Even with the biggest annoyance fixed (most console games have to drop resolution to support 3D), I still don't get it. With the exception of a few games (SSF4 and Trine 2 - both 2D games) I greatly prefer 2D.
number1laing is offline  
post #206 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 09:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked: 1347
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post

Isn't there a bandwidth issue at 1080p/60fps/3D? I have messed around with Nvidia's 3D solution on my PC, and my choices are 720p/60fps or 1080p/24fps.

I'll be honest - I don't get the appeal of 3D gaming. Even with the biggest annoyance fixed (most console games have to drop resolution to support 3D), I still don't get it. With the exception of a few games (SSF4 and Trine 2 - both 2D games) I greatly prefer 2D.

There is a bandwidth limit on HDMI 1.4, but there won't be once the new spec comes out.

Try motorstorm: apocalypse in 3D, and then let me know what you think about 3D gaming. tongue.gif

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #207 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 11:11 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

There is a bandwidth limit on HDMI 1.4, but there won't be once the new spec comes out.

Try motorstorm: apocalypse in 3D, and then let me know what you think about 3D gaming. tongue.gif
I'll admit that gaming in 3D on some first person shooter games was neat, but I just cannot get over the having to wear glasses thing. It just kills it for me.
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #208 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 11:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked: 1347
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboi352 View Post

I'll admit that gaming in 3D on some first person shooter games was neat, but I just cannot get over the having to wear glasses thing. It just kills it for me.

No one likes the glasses. I don't mind so much cause I'm always wearing glasses anyway. I also don't mind running cables under my rug to get surround sound, that's too much for some people too. In the end they're both exceptionally easy for the developer to implement, and even easier for the user to ignore. For those that care, it'll be there. Anyone who thinks 3D support will in any way hold back 2D simply has no understanding of what it takes to make a game 3D, its basically effortless.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #209 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 11:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboi352 View Post

joeblow, you have to understand I'm simply quoting what the folks at Sony have stated. I understand your optimism for these features in regards to PS4, but the truth is if anything gets implemented in any fashion, it will be from 1st party titles only and probably only a handful at that. Again, IF being the operative word here.

"That's why it is only logical that 3D PS4 games will naturally take the next step and go 1080P 60fps when possible."

I have to disagree here with your opinion. Saying "it's only logical that PS4 does xyz because PS3 did abc" is baseless and pure conjecture. I'll take the quotes from Sony themselves over your assessment in this regard. If they say 4K games ain't happening, I have to believe it ain't happening. Sony is notorious for over promising and under delivering (They touted "True 1080p gaming" for PS3 in 2006, and in 2013 only 5 games actually run in native 1080p on PS3) so when they flat out admit 4K gaming is not happening, I have to believe them. People are getting too caught up in the spec numbers and not actually paying attention to what kind of specs are really needed for 4K _gaming_ processing. We aren't talking videos, pictures or movies here.

Let's be clear - "optimism" has nothing to do with what I posted. It's simple common sense. If you grab a can of soup that you want to open and notice that a hand-operated can opener is sitting on the table right next to a state-of-the-art electric can opener, which would you choose?

That's what any PS4 3D game developer has the option to consider when they want to use the best tool for the job. Again I ask you, since 4K is confirmed to be PS4 tech, what would stop a developer from using it in order to get the best possible 3D performance (1080P 3D @60fps)? It's not optimism; it's common sense.

You keep riding Sony quotes as if what he says directly conflicts with mine. That is where you are most confused. He is asked about 4K resolution PS4 games in development and says there won't be. I've been saying the exact same thing many times for over six months. I am still saying the same thing now - there won't be 4K games.

However the ability to display in 4K, which the PS4 will be able to do, allows for a different perk alongside the new HDMI standard: 1080P games in 3D at a frame rate greater than 24fps. Will those games, should they arrive as I predict, be displayed in 4K resolution? No!

That's why it's strange that you continue to be confused on this crucial point. You believe what the Sony exec says and so do I.However, since it's obvious that developers can use that tech to improve 1080P 3D, then it is pretty clueless to think that some of them won't bother try hitting the 60fps mark when nothing is stopping them.

Which reminds me that you idn't directly answer my two questions in my last post:

1) Do you believe there will there be any native PS4 3D games?

2) If your answer is yes and acknowledge that 4K tech is in the PS4, then what in the world would stop a gaming developer from hitting 60fps in a 1080P 3D game if they are able to do so?

The resolution would not be 4K but 1080P (rendered twice to accommodate each eye), so what conflict in statements are you still confused about? Lastly, if glasses-free 3D is what you want to try in games some day as you imply in a later post, you can thank 4K tech in the PS4 for that if we see it supported (which I believe we will).

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #210 of 280 Old 02-26-2013, 11:59 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

Let's be clear - "optimism" has nothing to do with what I posted. It's simple common sense. If you grab a can of soup that you want to open and notice that a hand-operated can opener is sitting on the table right next to a state-of-the-art electric can opener, which would you choose?

That's what any PS4 3D game developer has the option to consider when they want to use the best tool for the job. Again I ask you, since 4K is confirmed to be PS4 tech, what would stop a developer from using it in order to get the best possible 3D performance (1080P 3D @60fps)? It's not optimism; it's common sense.

You keep riding Sony quotes as if what he says directly conflicts with mine. That is where you are most confused. He is asked about 4K resolution PS4 games in development and says there won't be. I've been saying the exact same thing many times for over six months. I am still saying the same thing now - there won't be 4K games.

However the ability to display in 4K, which the PS4 will be able to do, allows for a different perk alongside the new HDMI standard: 1080P games in 3D at a frame rate greater than 24fps. Will those games, should they arrive as I predict, be displayed in 4K resolution? No!

That's why it's strange that you continue to be confused on this crucial point. You believe what the Sony exec says and so do I.However, since it's obvious that developers can use that tech to improve 1080P 3D, then it is pretty clueless to think that some of them won't bother try hitting the 60fps mark when nothing is stopping them.

Which reminds me that you idn't directly answer my two questions in my last post:

1) Do you believe there will there be any native PS4 3D games?

2) If your answer is yes and acknowledge that 4K tech is in the PS4, then what in the world would stop a gaming developer from hitting 60fps in a 1080P 3D game if they are able to do so?

The resolution would not be 4K but 1080P (rendered twice to accommodate each eye), so what conflict in statements are you still confused about? Lastly, if glasses-free 3D is what you want to try in games some day as you imply in a later post, you can thank 4K tech in the PS4 for that if we see it supported (which I believe we will).

I hear you, I really do. But you are continuing to imply statements that are not based in reality. They are more like "wish" and "hope" statements. Sure, 1080p 60fps 3D gaming is plausible on PS4. But to what extent, and for what type of games? This isn't a blanket one size fits all thing we're talking about here. Some devs may want to push more polygons, textures and advanced A.I. as a goal instead of a 60fps or even 1080p goal (although native 1080p should be standard now with PS4's horsepower). Every game every generation has the ability to run at 60fps, but at what costs? And IMO the costs don't check with what devs want, and that is to push the boundries graphically instead and "call it a day" at 30fps.

1) Do you believe there will there be any native PS4 3D games? Yes. First party Sony offerings. Even further, with Sony themselves focusing less on 3D gaming, then the already non-existent 3rd party 3D support will most likely follow suit.

2) If your answer is yes and acknowledge that 4K tech is in the PS4, then what in the world would stop a gaming developer from hitting 60fps in a 1080P 3D game if they are able to do so? See my variables above. And requoted here: " This isn't a blanket one size fits all thing we're talking about here. Some devs may want to push more polygons, textures and advanced A.I. as a goal instead of a 60fps or even 1080p goal"

I'll end it with this to reiterate: Sony is notorious for over promising and under delivering. For that reason alone, I will hold off on any "This will totally happen because it _can_ happen" statements in regards to PS4. In all honesty, I expect nothing more than 1080p 30fps games pushing the texture, draw distance and A.I. boundaries as far as they can go for the majority of all games next generation, as was the case this past generation. Basically, more of the same.
gatorboi352 is offline  
Reply PlayStation Area

Tags
Playstation 4 Console

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off