what does 1080p mean in terms of graphics?

#11KeshaIsMyLovePosted 12/20/2013 5:13:36 AM
1080p means 1080 progressive

It means 1080 pixels high, progressive scan
Native 1080p means no up scaling (no scretching, no "trying to make it 1080p.")
---
blogFAQs specialist
#12snake_5036Posted 12/20/2013 5:34:36 AM(edited)
1080p is just a resolution to fit larger TVs. You could have NES graphics in 1080p, in all honesty. It doesn't necessarily mean that the characters, backgrounds, etc will be high end.
---
Anything is possible when your man smells like Old Spice and not a lady.
#13knightimexPosted 12/20/2013 5:36:48 AM
Manservice posted...
Graphical fidelity=/=resolution

knightimex posted...
A good resolution makes any game far more enjoyable.
Jaggies kill all the fun.
Regardless of the quality of graphics.

720p resolution looks good as long as there is a solid level of AA present.
Anything below 720p progressively looks more and more disgusting with each event that has no AA involved.

This is why the majority of Xbox 360 games are borderline unplayable.


You have no idea what you're talking about.


Of course I know what I'm talking about, you just happen at accept mediocrity better than me.
---
I spanked you as a baby, I'll spank you now. B****!
-Evil Betty
#14DreDayyPosted 12/20/2013 5:53:26 AM
ronfare posted...
knightimex posted...
A good resolution makes any game far more enjoyable.
Jaggies kill all the fun.
Regardless of the quality of graphics.

720p resolution looks good as long as there is a solid level of AA present.
Anything below 720p progressively looks more and more disgusting with each event that has no AA involved.

This is why the majority of Xbox 360 games are borderline unplayable.


Summarized: I am a spoiled turd of the modern age.


ITT spoiled is wanting to play games at decent resolutions. Just because you are ok with paying money to play games at sub 720p with framerate drops and low FOV, doesn't mean other people are. Stay in the past console pleb.
---
|i7 4770k|Gigabyte UD4h|8gb RAM|GTX 780 Lightning|Samsung 840 Evo 256/ 830 128gb|Crucial M4 128gb|3TB WD Black|540 Air|AX 850|h100I|
#15MrSpaM111Posted 12/20/2013 5:55:23 AM
The most noticeable difference is with particle effects. Higher resolution means better quality particles.
---
"Exactly correct TC..."
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/691088-xbox-one/66274628
#16Joey-ZazaPosted 12/20/2013 6:08:39 AM
DreDayy posted...
ronfare posted...
knightimex posted...
A good resolution makes any game far more enjoyable.
Jaggies kill all the fun.
Regardless of the quality of graphics.

720p resolution looks good as long as there is a solid level of AA present.
Anything below 720p progressively looks more and more disgusting with each event that has no AA involved.

This is why the majority of Xbox 360 games are borderline unplayable.


Summarized: I am a spoiled turd of the modern age.


ITT spoiled is wanting to play games at decent resolutions. Just because you are ok with paying money to play games at sub 720p with framerate drops and low FOV, doesn't mean other people are. Stay in the past console pleb.


This is a real post.
---
"I guess you could say I BLUE... myself!" - Tobias Funke
-StarTropics- -Golden Sun- -Ocarina of Time-
#17schmarkenheimerPosted 12/20/2013 6:49:00 AM(edited)
Oh and OP, fidelity and resolution aren't the same thing. For example, say you have infinite rendering power, running a game in 720p/1080/4k and you compare. Same settings, same FPS, the higher res will look better. Unfortunately we don't have that luxury, so you have to choose between fidelity, FPS and resolution, because they're the major things. For example this FPS chart:

http://media.bestofmicro.com/J/R/362295/original/Battlefield-3-Ultra-4X-MSAA.png

From here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/budget-gaming-do-it-yourself-computer,3364-10.html

Same settings, just a higher res is more taxing. Lower the eye candy and voila, higher FPS at the same resolution. You'll have to sacrifice one of FPS, res or fidelity if you want the other. Can't make Crysis 3 maxed @ 4k60 w/ 8x MSAA, just not feasible atm. Then you have art style. The "realistic" games don't hold up as well as stylised games (as you know). For example Journey, Wind Waker, OoT and Super Mario 3D World v CoD, MoH, Gears, MGS and whatever else. Sure, WW isn't that impressive technically, but would you say CoD 2 has held up better? X1 and PS4 can definitely do 1080p, it's just if they want super "next gen" fidelity they'll have to sacrifice res or framerate.

userfrigginame posted...
Polygon count is what comes to mind when I think "graphics." Ppl are talking about resolution wayy too much. It's the polygon count that really makes a big difference. Resolution can complement that nicely, but it just isn't the main component to me.


Poly count isn't that important. A well detailed 20k will look better than a 40k model that's just a smoothed out 10k (hopefully that makes sense). A few pages of technical presentations:

http://dice.se/publications/

http://www.unrealengine.com/en/resources/category/presentations/

http://www.crytek.com/cryengine/presentations

Then just look at the focus on light, shadows and particle effects in the UE4 one for example:

http://www.unrealengine.com/files/misc/The_Technology_Behind_the_Elemental_Demo_16x9_%282%29.pdf

ronfare posted...
knightimex posted...
A good resolution makes any game far more enjoyable.
Jaggies kill all the fun.
Regardless of the quality of graphics.

720p resolution looks good as long as there is a solid level of AA present.
Anything below 720p progressively looks more and more disgusting with each event that has no AA involved.

This is why the majority of Xbox 360 games are borderline unplayable.


Summarized: I am a spoiled turd of the modern age.


Wanting a high amount of AA at 720p/1080p with 2x MSAA with 60fps for example is not that spoiled:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/budget-gaming-do-it-yourself-computer,3364-10.html

Oh look, a $500 PC last year could get >40fps average at 1080p ultra with 4x MSAA in BF3 stock, 55 OC.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/budget-gaming-do-it-yourself-computer,3364-11.html

Oh look, Skyrim maxed with 8x MSAA, 60fps at 1080p. If a $500 PC can do this, I don't see why expecting a similarly priced console to do it is "spoiled".
---
Post of the ****ing year. - crimsyn_76 Best. Example. Ever. - Veliconis
Epic. - Xade76 Want to run that by us in English instead of Derp, champ? - pies12
#18triple sPosted 12/20/2013 6:47:15 AM
Tenzhi posted...
1080p means you can sit a bit closer to the screen and it will look just as good as 720p did from slightly farther away.


This is not true at all. Compare any two TV's at the exact same size, native 1080p looks much better than native 720p on the same source.
---
GT:Triple S 06
Steam ID:triples22
#19triple sPosted 12/20/2013 6:48:44 AM
knightimex posted...
A good resolution makes any game far more enjoyable.
Jaggies kill all the fun.
Regardless of the quality of graphics.

720p resolution looks good as long as there is a solid level of AA present.
Anything below 720p progressively looks more and more disgusting with each event that has no AA involved.

This is why the majority of Xbox 360 games are borderline unplayable.


Jaggies don't kill the fun...

Obviously the better the resolution, the better the image clarity but unlike the PC, on the consoles you're usually sacrificing something to obtain the higher resolution.
---
GT:Triple S 06
Steam ID:triples22
#20triple sPosted 12/20/2013 6:56:04 AM
apollian24 posted...
I brought call of duty on my PS4, and had to sell it because I wanted the maps on Xbox One.
Trust me, unless your TV is over 55in you won't even be able to tell the difference without having a massive screen.and if anyone tells you any difference they seriously have no idea how high resolution works.
It's like 4k, you'd need a massive 70 in to see the true benefits.


I don't trust you at all. Having a 55" HDTV it is massively obvious that 1080p looks better than 720p. It it also massively obvious on smaller sets. Pixel density is what people don't understand. I have a 27" 1080p PC monitor and my kids have a 20" 1600x900 monitor. Guess which monitor has a sharper image? The 1600x900 monitor because it has a higher pixel density. So in order for 720p to look on par with 1080p, you would have to be viewing on something that has a pixel density that matches the 1080p display, in which be default would be a smaller TV. So no, the myth of only being able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on 50"+ sets is a lie.
---
GT:Triple S 06
Steam ID:triples22