"1080p is meaningless"

360 News | So says Microsoft bigwig.

In a recent blog post, Director of Technical Strategy for Xbox Live, Andre Vrignaud, has dismissed 1080p output (very high resolution, for those who don't know 720p from 540i) of the PlayStation 3 as "meaningless this generation". Not surprising, considering the Xbox 360 doesn't support 1080p.

"Most modern HD displays (Plasmas, LCD, DLP, etc.) display content progressively, even if they first received an interlaced signal," notes Vrignaud. "Let me restate that: when you're watching a 1080"x" signal on a modern HD display, you're almost always watching a 1080p signal. The only difference is where the de-interlacing happens - but the displayed output is always 1080p."

So if what he's saying is correct, 1080p and 1080i are, in most cases, going to look the same. But, Vrignaud went on. "As to games, 99% of PS3 titles will natively render at 720p; the few that come out with 1080"x" support are either going to be simple classic arcade ports that don't need to render complex scenes (think the original Battlezone), will give up a lot of in-game visual effects and simply won't look very good (hence the poor showing of Gran Turismo "HD" at this past E3)." Ouch.

Not that this really matters, though. According to Vrignaud, we "won't see any 1080"x" games for the PS3 this year." Vrignaud's reasoning behind this is that, as the Xbox 360 and PS3 have relatively similar specifications (in his eyes, at least), multi-format developers who want their games to work on both consoles will only have their games running in 720p anyway.

"Simply put, a developer who is planning to release their game for both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 will aim for a common attainable ground," said Vrignaud, with that common ground being 720p. "Just make sure you have a recent HDTV that de-interlaces 1080i signals correctly and you'll be just fine."

More on the incessant sniping between Sony and Microsoft as it happens.

Related Content

Marvel: Ultimate Alliance interview
12 Aug, 2006 We speak to producer Matthew Paul about Activision's ambitious new title.

Red Tribe developing Wii and PS3 title
08 Aug, 2006 Australian support for the new consoles.

GTA IV won't affect race between Xbox 360 and PS3
24 Jun, 2006 Loss of exclusivity won't harm us - Sony exec.

Page12 Next

41 Comments

Frozencry

5 years ago

Read this on the GameTrailers news a couple of minutes ago.

Honestly, it's not suprising to see the MS boy taking potshots at Sony, seeing that the 360 doesn't support 1080p. Of what I've witnessed, 1080i doesn't look very nice, and I doubt it'll look the same as a 1080p signal.

Console wars reminds me of political rumblings in Nazi Germany for some reason, eg right wing vs left wing.

GooberMan

5 years ago

Apart from saving bandwidth, I never really got the point of interlaced high res television signals. It always comes out with a weaker picture as it's only drawing half the image at any given rate. The current interlaced standards for 1080i also emulate the old PAL/NTSC refresh rates too closely, so using an interlaced signal would still bring up conversion artefacts when converting from a 24fps movie to a 50/60hz signal.

1080p is definately a rarely supported feature in consumer electronics, but no doubt within a few years that will change. My current HDTV should do me fine though, it supports 720p and has DVI input (which, with a converter, will be fine for HDMI inputs). I won't need to upgrade this TV for a while, but chances are I will if I get rich because there are bigger TV sizes than 32"

D.Dark

5 years ago

Was it ever meaningful?

Spanca

5 years ago

Of the tiny proportion of people that own HDTV sets, a similarly tiny proportion are 1080p capable sets. You're lucky if you can find a set on the market today that's 1080p compatible, and even luckier if you can afford such a set. Even by HDTV standards, 1080p sets are expensive.

So I'm inclined to agree with him. For the mainstream, HDTV has picked up yet, and when it does it won't be the more expensive 1080p sets that everyone starts buying.

admeister

5 years ago

"Not surprising, considering the Xbox 360 doesn't support 1080p. "

Taking potshots as usual, same old. I'm not too worried about te resolution wars, I don't have any HD TVs, so 720 is fine for me. Widescreen is good, though.

Sin Ogaris

5 years ago

He is an idiot, the difference between an interlaced image and progressive is phenomenal (sp?), moreso, in my opinion, than an increase in resolution itself (i.e. I would opt for 720p over 1080i any day, it just looks so much better).

Jellyfish

5 years ago

He's right about the "always" progressive output though. Only CRTs can do interlacing, but I take it that only every other line is updated each refresh cycle, so 1080p will look better thab 1080i.

ultracrazy1

5 years ago

1080p looks a LOT better than 1080i, but he has a point - a TV that can properly deinterlace 1080i will be comparable to 1080p.

Not sure if any of you have tried this, but get an interlaced video, play it with VLC, right click, choose deinterlace, and then watch the difference. Deinterlacing is a software trick that the better TVs are capable of, even without the beefy equipment required for 1080p.

There's got to be a difference of course, and true 1080p will look better than deinterlaced 1080i, but it is largely affected by what TV you have. Choosing a decent TV is a much tougher decision than deciding whether to get a 360 or PS3. A good TV will make the difference MUCH less noticable.

Sin Ogaris

5 years ago

That's interesting to know, although it also begs the question... Why the hell do LCDs/plasmas even have an interlaced option then? Is it for nostalgia? Another nifty little "feature" one company can tote over another? What the Hell is the point?

This is why I started to move away from all things technological, it's just getting way too retarded.

Bitchacho

5 years ago

D.Dark wrote

Was it ever meaningful?

yeah exactly. i think the word 'meaningless' is completely out of place. he should have said '1080p is pointless' but instead he uses a word that does not make sense. cant blame someone from Microsoft not knowing English.

LeonJ

5 years ago

Pretty sure 720p will be standard in this generation. 1080p is a audience not worth targetting as they are just starting to come out now (well for a little while). Pretty sure PS3 developers are having enough trouble rendering kick arse graphics @720p atm. I'm sure down the track some killer games will be @ 1080p, but we are while off that I think.

Infested Jibbs

5 years ago

Well 720p is the standard at least for 360 games.It's the res all games use as a benchmark.

rankodour

5 years ago

If you can hook a PS3 up to a PC monitor, then at least you COULD play games at 1080p (providing the game supports it).

I am so sick of these corporate bigwigs taking petty shots at one another. It only feeds fanyboyism.

EvilHayama

5 years ago

I've read a bit about this and from normal TV viewing distances there's hardly any difference between 1080i and 1080p, especially if your TV handles 1080i well... More importantly 1080p compatible TVs have a huuuuge premium. It's bad enough looking for 1080i panels, they seem to carry a $300-400 premium over 720p

mqphu1

5 years ago

I did a little bit of this for my Honours Research Project at UNI.

MS talks sh*t. They think consumers are as dumb as their PR.

Comparison

720i with 720p - 720p is better (of course)
Only noticeable if watching FAST moving video, like action, sports etc

720p with 1080i - depends on the TV size
For small size TV, 720p is better visually for fast moving video
For large size TV, 1080i is better because it has more pixels per scan row.

1080i with 1080p - 1080p is DEFINITY better
VERY noticeable if watching FAST moving video, like action, sports

REMARKS
* If you have a small TV (32" less), then 720p is good enough.
* If you have a large TV (32" more), then 1080p is a DREAM

Se7en

5 years ago

It's fair to say the culture of fear instilled in the mainstream bleeds into all facets of life including "future proofing" technology. Vrignaud and his cohorts fear PS3 will devour X360 as his grog bog blog indicates. As the tech race continues SONY will truly blossom. I will savour supporting the technological force this generation.

ugh the boot

5 years ago

Personally Interlaced for me is not an option (progressive all the way....720p over 1080i and 1080p over anything else). Also unless your tv actually has 1080 (or more) pixels across (x axis) then the image is not in it's native format therefore it won't look as clear.

Mqphu1's last post is actually very accurate...but I would still display 720p over 1080i.

Spanca

5 years ago

ugh the boot wrote

I think you mean 1080 pixels up (y axis).

ugh the boot

5 years ago

^ yea doh....obviously the longer side is the x axis.

e.g. 1920x1080

I seriously don't know why I put x axis.

Spanca

5 years ago

^ Yeah I understood your point though.

I think what people in this thread are missing here (well those criticising this guy) is that he said "1080p is meaningless this generation", not forever! (way to go Brendan taking his quote out of context) Yes obviously 1080p is better than 720p, but it's really not important this generation if:
a) publishers want their games to work cross-platform as easily as possible, and more importantly:
b) HARDLY ANYONE WILL OWN 1080p SETS THIS GENERATION!

Zarnoss

5 years ago

I find it weird that apparently from the quote above that 1080i is better than 720p only on a big TV.
I have a big HDTV 46inch and have tested 1080i and 720p and found that 720p is far more clearer and colours are far more vibrant(1080i seems to wash out a bit because of the interlacing causing a natural lightness from the interlacing)
Although to be honest the 1080i mode is alot more smoother in the anti aliasing aspect.(as expected)

ugh the boot

5 years ago

Spanca wrote

a) publishers want their games to work cross-platform as easily as possible, and more importantly:
b) HARDLY ANYONE WILL OWN 1080p SETS THIS GENERATION!

Quoted for truth.

I was waiting for the 1080p Aquos (sharp) line to come out in Australia and I think they are due to be released end of this month...but after seeing they are almost double the price....I don't think I can afford to display at 1080p. So i'm thinking of picking up a 37" 720p set which should do me nicely. The difference in price for me does not warrant the difference in quality.

I completely agree that for this generation we may barely even see 1080p getting used on Ps3 so it's not much of an advantage over the 360.

k1dcharm

5 years ago

Hahaha... Of course MS will say 1080p is meaningless cause Xbox360 cannot support it.

On the other hand, 1080p is meaningless for me also, cause I don't have to TV to output 1080p onto... doh!!!

mqphu1

5 years ago

"HARDLY ANYONE WILL OWN 1080p SETS THIS GENERATION!"
Are you talking about you and your neighbours or for REST of the world?

This generation will go for 6 to 10 years. Thats 2016.
Technology are moving really fast.
* Remember what technology was like in 1996 and how much those plasmas cost? *

Although 1080p displays are expensive now, but give it a couple of years displays will very AFFORDABLE.

If any of you ever been to a IEEE technical conference (and I DID). They are currently talking about super resolution images.
Thats 1200p upto 2080p.

DVD is using MPEG2 and HDDVD is using MPEG4 (or MS format) BUT
in the literature, MPEG7 is already become standard.

SONY is the only active research company out of MS and N,
they know how far display devices will advance in the next decade.

My point is technology are far more advance than any of you can imagine.
By saying 1080p is useless this generation is WRONG.
"A PESSIMIST"

Page12 Next

View as forum topic

Add Comment