StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Okay, a friend and I were talking, and we may seem like a complete pair of morons but:

The Microsoft XBox has a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 (we have discovered this is without the use of a high-definition television, or HDTV), however we have been informed that the maximum resolution for a television is 640x480.

How, then, do console games through a television set look as good as (if not better than) games played on a PC through a monitor? If I set a game on my PC to 640x480 resolution, the game looks like an absoloute travesty. But if I play the same game on my XBox (or other console) it looks the same as on the PC in higher resolutions.

Could anyone explain this, and clue us in to what we're missing?

Embracer Of Darkness wrote:Okay, a friend and I were talking, and we may seem like a complete pair of morons but:

The Microsoft XBox has a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 (we have discovered this is without the use of a high-definition television, or HDTV), however we have been informed that the maximum resolution for a television is 640x480.

How, then, do console games through a television set look as good as (if not better than) games played on a PC through a monitor? If I set a game on my PC to 640x480 resolution, the game looks like an absoloute travesty. But if I play the same game on my XBox (or other console) it looks the same as on the PC in higher resolutions.

Could anyone explain this, and clue us in to what we're missing?

Actually, I believe the TV resolution is 525 lines. But TVs are fuzzy, which is ironically why they look better in some ways. The pixels are fudged, so you don't see sharp edges and jaggies.

The resolution on a computer monitor is typically much higher, and the images are far sharper. However, XBox games make up for the low resolution with lots of flash and sizzle: wildly kaleidoscopic colour displays and tons of objects moving around onscreen, which makes you think you're looking at higher quality graphics.

In effect, the computer monitor is less forgiving because it's more accurate. It's like hooking excellent speakers up to a shitty amp; they demand far more of the source.

Thanks Mr. Wong that actually clears alot up. So basically, what you're saying, is that the on-screen resolution of an XBox game is the same low resolution as the television but disguised to look better?

NTSC has 525 scanlines, but only 480 are actually visible (for an effective 720x480 resolution). However, NTSC is so low quality that it effectively masks many of the flaws that would be visible on a computer monitor.

phongn wrote:NTSC has 525 scanlines, but only 480 are actually visible (for an effective 720x480 resolution). However, NTSC is so low quality that it effectively masks many of the flaws that would be visible on a computer monitor.

How does that equate in terms of PAL? (I'm in the UK, and we don't use NTSC over here.)

Embracer Of Darkness wrote:

phongn wrote:NTSC has 525 scanlines, but only 480 are actually visible (for an effective 720x480 resolution). However, NTSC is so low quality that it effectively masks many of the flaws that would be visible on a computer monitor.

How does that equate in terms of PAL? (I'm in the UK, and we don't use NTSC over here.)

PAL is 625 lines, but if it's an American or Japanese game it will be in NTSC no doubt meaning you have borders. PAL is better quality but lower refresh rate, not that you notice it in games that are compensating for that flaw.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

Embracer Of Darkness wrote:How does that equate in terms of PAL? (I'm in the UK, and we don't use NTSC over here.)

PAL is 625 lines, but if it's an American or Japanese game it will be in NTSC no doubt meaning you have borders. PAL is better quality but lower refresh rate, not that you notice it in games that are compensating for that flaw.

Thanks dude, in-fact thanks all of you, it's cleared alot up.

Hehe, Admiral Valdemar, I don't get borders because I can't play American or Japanese games on my XBox anyway without a mod-chip. European games will do just fine anyway, hehe.

Normal TV/Video is 512x384. standard wide screen is 512x288. I think anything on a TV is feral because it looks so interlaced and AA

Attached is my little sheet of resolutions i use for DVD ripping

==================================================

All resolutions must keep aspect ratio and both numbers be divisible by 16

The following aspect ratios have factors, min increments, original res and compatable resolutions attached:

----------------

16:9 aka 2.53:1 | 1.777* X .5625 | 256 & 144 | normal wide screen ratio


768*432 [DVD native]

512*288 [wide screen on 4:3 TV inside bands]

256*144

----------------

4:3 | 1.333* X .75 | 64 & 48 | normal TV and monitor ratio


768*576 [DVD native]

704*528

640*480

512*384 [TV]

320*240

----------------

5:4 | 1.25 X .8 | 80 & 64 |

720*576 [DVD native]

640*512

560*448

480*384

400*320

320*256

A completely different factor might be that one usually sits about two feet or less from a computer monitor and six to ten feet+ from a TV.

Darth Wong wrote:

Embracer Of Darkness wrote:Okay, a friend and I were talking, and we may seem like a complete pair of morons but:

The Microsoft XBox has a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 (we have discovered this is without the use of a high-definition television, or HDTV), however we have been informed that the maximum resolution for a television is 640x480.

How, then, do console games through a television set look as good as (if not better than) games played on a PC through a monitor? If I set a game on my PC to 640x480 resolution, the game looks like an absoloute travesty. But if I play the same game on my XBox (or other console) it looks the same as on the PC in higher resolutions.

Could anyone explain this, and clue us in to what we're missing?

Actually, I believe the TV resolution is 525 lines. But TVs are fuzzy, which is ironically why they look better in some ways. The pixels are fudged, so you don't see sharp edges and jaggies.

The resolution on a computer monitor is typically much higher, and the images are far sharper. However, XBox games make up for the low resolution with lots of flash and sizzle: wildly kaleidoscopic colour displays and tons of objects moving around onscreen, which makes you think you're looking at higher quality graphics.

In effect, the computer monitor is less forgiving because it's more accurate. It's like hooking excellent speakers up to a shitty amp; they demand far more of the source.

You know I have always wondered about that....but was to lazy to look it up thanks Darth Wong for adding to my education

This is more suited to the Gaming forum. It is being moved there.

Embracer Of Darkness wrote:Okay, a friend and I were talking, and we may seem like a complete pair of morons but:

The Microsoft XBox has a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 (we have discovered this is without the use of a high-definition television, or HDTV), however we have been informed that the maximum resolution for a television is 640x480.

It's actually 720x480 if you want to talk in terms of square pixels.

How, then, do console games through a television set look as good as (if not better than) games played on a PC through a monitor? If I set a game on my PC to 640x480 resolution, the game looks like an absoloute travesty. But if I play the same game on my XBox (or other console) it looks the same as on the PC in higher resolutions.

Could anyone explain this, and clue us in to what we're missing?

Chances are that the game on your X-Box is doing antialiasing. This is not enabled by default on any PC games because it's a giant framerate hit.

If you want to compare properly...get a setup like mine....
TV Out on your PC (mostly used for X-Com games....it compensates for the old graphics a bit...)
Set it to dual moniter, showing the same on both the TV and the real moniter, set them both to 640x480 and them open a webpage...now try and read written text on the TV....

Have fun

Durandal wrote:Chances are that the game on your X-Box is doing antialiasing. This is not enabled by default on any PC games because it's a giant framerate hit.

Newer cards can deal with it. But it's not that much of an advantage; hardcore gamers tend to run at very high resolution rather than turning on anti-aliasing. A lot of FPS gamers like to run 1280x1024 or even 1600x1200 on bleeding-edge hardware with AA off so they can see every little thing (good luck trying to duplicate that on a TV set ...)

Not even an HDTV can put up the theoretical maximum resolution of the Xbox. Not like this max resolution is used very often, anyway.

In fact, I can't think of any use for such a high resolution in a console, anyway. Probably just a side effect of the graphics chip they have in there (kinda like how people brag that their car has 400 horsepower, even if they never get a chance to let it exceed 45 mph on surface streets).

SPOOFE wrote:Not even an HDTV can put up the theoretical maximum resolution of the Xbox. Not like this max resolution is used very often, anyway.

In fact, I can't think of any use for such a high resolution in a console, anyway. Probably just a side effect of the graphics chip they have in there (kinda like how people brag that their car has 400 horsepower, even if they never get a chance to let it exceed 45 mph on surface streets).

The NVidia graphics chip in there is considerably weaker than the ones you'll find in PC video cards nowadays, and the CPU is downright pathetic compared to a modern PC CPU.

SPOOFE wrote:Not even an HDTV can put up the theoretical maximum resolution of the Xbox. Not like this max resolution is used very often, anyway.

Wait, isn't HDTV capable of 1080i? That should put it at the XBox's maximum capabilities. (There's 24P mode as well, but I doubt that any console will use that).