Nintendo missing the resolution mark again.

#121teh_kyle00Posted 10/5/2012 7:26:44 PM
SgtBass8705 posted...
4k resolution is coming and coming fast. Sony's XBR-84X900 4K LED TV $24,999.99. Yeah wow that's expensive, but it's a good sign. within 4 years these things will be pricing closer to $2,500. Not to mention feature stripped versions in the $1,000 dollar range. At least 1080P won't look like crap in 4k TVs like 480p does on HDTVs.


I don't think Nintendo is missing out on anything.

TVs with 4k resolution cost about $50k or so on average right now, and in order to see any difference from 1080p the screen has to be at least like 70-80 inches big.
---
This signature is lacking in beef.
#122DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/5/2012 7:37:55 PM
teh_kyle00 posted...
SgtBass8705 posted...
4k resolution is coming and coming fast. Sony's XBR-84X900 4K LED TV $24,999.99. Yeah wow that's expensive, but it's a good sign. within 4 years these things will be pricing closer to $2,500. Not to mention feature stripped versions in the $1,000 dollar range. At least 1080P won't look like crap in 4k TVs like 480p does on HDTVs.


I don't think Nintendo is missing out on anything.

TVs with 4k resolution cost about $50k or so on average right now, and in order to see any difference from 1080p the screen has to be at least like 70-80 inches big.


Nope. Again.

Not everyone sits 10 feet away from their TV. Some people don't have massive huge homes with living rooms that are as big as an average back yard. In many cases, it's more practical to sit maybe 4-5 feet away. In that case, even a 30-40" TV will show a massive benefit from 3840x2160, and that doesn't count that, again, 3840x2160 rendered content still looks better on a 1920x1080 screen.
---
Also, lolz@SATA drives. You see, they make these things called "heat," which kills consoles.
-darkjedilink
#123TheFallenPriestPosted 10/5/2012 8:23:46 PM
People seem to be missing the key point. It isnt a TV perspective, its a hardware perspective. Do you realize the cost of just the graphics card alone that would be able to render a 4k image? 499 alone. The graphics card alone costs more than a ps3, thats not considering ANY other factors in making the console. Just the card alone will be 500. Thats from just a simple google search. I have a friend that has a custom made Gaming PC, and he is saying that it is unrealistic from a cost perspective to have a game system that can handle 4k games.
---
Brawl Code-3051-7214-3118
Mains Are Ice Climbers, Gannon, And Mario-Add Me
#124DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/5/2012 9:00:20 PM
TheFallenPriest posted...
People seem to be missing the key point. It isnt a TV perspective, its a hardware perspective. Do you realize the cost of just the graphics card alone that would be able to render a 4k image? 499 alone. The graphics card alone costs more than a ps3, thats not considering ANY other factors in making the console. Just the card alone will be 500. Thats from just a simple google search. I have a friend that has a custom made Gaming PC, and he is saying that it is unrealistic from a cost perspective to have a game system that can handle 4k games.


Actually, my $100 GPU from a year ago does it just fine, and it scales notoriously poorly to higher resolutions. IIRC, it's comparable to a HD7770 at anything above 2560x1440, so that's really not that special.
I fully expect any serious next-gen console to have something at least up to par with a 7870 or 7950, considering how quickly premium technology drops in price. That kind of performance will be in the $200 range in less than a year, for consumer chips.
---
Also, lolz@SATA drives. You see, they make these things called "heat," which kills consoles.
-darkjedilink
#125Enigma149Posted 10/5/2012 9:11:48 PM
I've noticed a lot of comparisons to HDTVs in 2005, with many people saying that Nintendo will once again be "behind".

Given the current price of 4K TVs, wouldn't a better comparison be HDTVs in 1998? Even if some games in the coming generation do support 4K (as some supported HD in the 6th generation), they would be few-and-far between and wouldn't look anywhere near as good as 4K games in the 9th generation.

Now, if Nintendo leaves 4K out of their 9th generation console, as they left HD out of the Wii, that'd be another thing...
---
PSN:CrimsonEnigma; 3DS:4897-5935-1924
I don't spend much time online, so don't be offended or surprised if I don't respond to a friend request or something.
#126SolisPosted 10/5/2012 9:48:06 PM
TheFallenPriest posted...
People seem to be missing the key point. It isnt a TV perspective, its a hardware perspective. Do you realize the cost of just the graphics card alone that would be able to render a 4k image? 499 alone. The graphics card alone costs more than a ps3, thats not considering ANY other factors in making the console. Just the card alone will be 500. Thats from just a simple google search. I have a friend that has a custom made Gaming PC, and he is saying that it is unrealistic from a cost perspective to have a game system that can handle 4k games.


Completely wrong, even a 2 generation old mid-ranged card like the HD 6670 is capable of rendering at and outputting resolutions ABOVE 4K. Where in the world do you get your information from? A "simple google search" shows that you can get one of those for under $72.

Hell, here's an image I rendered on a gtx 460, which is a mid-ranged card that could be bought for $130 around 2 years ago:

http://i592.photobucket.com/albums/tt7/Solisgf/MarioGalaxy2UHD02.jpg

Nearly 3 times the resolution of 4K.
---
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review
#127MotiJrPosted 10/5/2012 11:02:31 PM
Who in their right mind spends a grand on a tv?! I only got a HD tv about 3 years ago and even then it was about 400 quid.
---
Fanboys are a cancer to gaming but Sony fanboys are a particularly aggressive and repulsive form.
#128DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/5/2012 11:11:23 PM
Who expects that 3840x2160 is going to stay over 1k?
It'll be down in the hundreds within a couple years, easily. = =
---
Also, lolz@SATA drives. You see, they make these things called "heat," which kills consoles.
-darkjedilink
#129PendragoonPosted 10/5/2012 11:34:54 PM
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Who expects that 3840x2160 is going to stay over 1k?
It'll be down in the hundreds within a couple years, easily. = =


Based on past HDTV trends, it will take about 5-7 years before 4k starts to overtake 1080p in most stores and even then 1080p will still be considerably cheaper. It took 3 years for 120hz to become a mass market tech and that was a very cheap add on, 4k is a much higher pixel density that won't be as easy to scale down to consumer friendly prices.

Then you have that quality HD sources are still losing out to DVD. It is an uphill struggle to be sure for any new tech entering the market. 4k alone won't be enough to get enough people to jump onboard.

Next gen is when consoles will have to consider supporting 4k, to do so this gen would be mostly for show, just another buzz word on the box with a very small group of games actually using it anywhere close to natively. By the time Nintendo is ready to launch their next system then it will be known if 4k is worth investing in.
---
Know Japanese? Post your advise in the topic below!
http://gamefaqs.com/boards/316-gamefaqs-world-japan/63714709
#130DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/6/2012 12:43:42 AM
PENDRAG0ON posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Who expects that 3840x2160 is going to stay over 1k?
It'll be down in the hundreds within a couple years, easily. = =


Based on past HDTV trends, it will take about 5-7 years before 4k starts to overtake 1080p in most stores and even then 1080p will still be considerably cheaper. It took 3 years for 120hz to become a mass market tech and that was a very cheap add on, 4k is a much higher pixel density that won't be as easy to scale down to consumer friendly prices.

Then you have that quality HD sources are still losing out to DVD. It is an uphill struggle to be sure for any new tech entering the market. 4k alone won't be enough to get enough people to jump onboard.

Next gen is when consoles will have to consider supporting 4k, to do so this gen would be mostly for show, just another buzz word on the box with a very small group of games actually using it anywhere close to natively. By the time Nintendo is ready to launch their next system then it will be known if 4k is worth investing in.


120hz for a TV is no cheap addon. It might be garbage, but it took a lot to make it work right. After all, it has to process frames to generate new frames to slip between them. I'm surprised it works as well as it does after 3 years.
As for the DVD thing, that's more because Blu Ray doesn't really impress. It's actually quite disappointing in terms of image quality; each frame is only 256 colours, which results in some pretty ugly scenes sometimes. On top of that, it's still overpriced, and people already have established DVD collections. If you're buying a HDTV just to watch blu-ray movies, you're doing it wrong.

The technology will cheapen quickly onece adopted. All that has to happen is for something to push it into homes on the premium end of the spectrum. I don't think that'll be hard, considering how much rendered content can benefit from resolution, unlike prerendered/filmed content, which is usually fuzzy anyway.
---
Also, lolz@SATA drives. You see, they make these things called "heat," which kills consoles.
-darkjedilink