The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ok so HD's being pushed to death and the next-generation of games certainly do look good on a standard tv, but it'd be interesting to see the difference between non-HD and HD with regards to games.
I know tv programs in HD are/can be 4x more detailed but is this generally the case for games? Obviously games aren't up to the standard of real footage (although some might give Pixar movies a run for their money!) so is the difference really worth forking out for a new £500+ tv?
Clearly people can offer opinions until they're blue in the face but I'd rather see a link to some pictures that can accurately portray the differences between a game being displayed on a HD television and the same game on a normal tv.
Also, are computer monitors able to display games in HD? Would a VGA box be able to take a HD signal and display it properly on a monitor?
As you can see I'm not up on the technical stuff, perhaps some of you can help answer these questions and/or provide a satisfactory link so I can really see what all the fuss is about? :)
I know tv programs in HD are/can be 4x more detailed but is this generally the case for games? Obviously games aren't up to the standard of real footage (although some might give Pixar movies a run for their money!) so is the difference really worth forking out for a new £500+ tv?
Clearly people can offer opinions until they're blue in the face but I'd rather see a link to some pictures that can accurately portray the differences between a game being displayed on a HD television and the same game on a normal tv.
Also, are computer monitors able to display games in HD? Would a VGA box be able to take a HD signal and display it properly on a monitor?
As you can see I'm not up on the technical stuff, perhaps some of you can help answer these questions and/or provide a satisfactory link so I can really see what all the fuss is about? :)
Page:
pb wrote:
>
> My only bugbear with Digital, by the way, is the inability to
> watch and record different channels without an extra box and an
> extra subscription (for Sky) or a new 2 or 3 channel Hard Disc
> recorded with a built in freeview tuner.
Doesn't Sky+ do all that from 1 box? It's their version of TiVo I think.
>
> My only bugbear with Digital, by the way, is the inability to
> watch and record different channels without an extra box and an
> extra subscription (for Sky) or a new 2 or 3 channel Hard Disc
> recorded with a built in freeview tuner.
Doesn't Sky+ do all that from 1 box? It's their version of TiVo I think.
Mumbai Duck wrote:
> When it feels like companies are forcing new technology on people
> without any real justification, that feels pretty crap.
>
> The gimps want to turn off the analogue tv signal soon, don't
> they?
> I'm not a big tv watcher, and I was happy with analogue. Instead
> I have to buy a box (okay, they're pretty cheap now, but that's
> not really the point), and if I have a bad signal, instead of
> getting a usable low quality feed, I 'll get no feed at all.
>
> Will my radio be redundant too?
>
>
> Then again, when you look at cassettes and VHS tapes, you
> wouldn't want to ditch your CDs and DVDs - even though they
> seemed fine at the time.
Heh heh, feeling a tad old now are we? :P
> When it feels like companies are forcing new technology on people
> without any real justification, that feels pretty crap.
>
> The gimps want to turn off the analogue tv signal soon, don't
> they?
> I'm not a big tv watcher, and I was happy with analogue. Instead
> I have to buy a box (okay, they're pretty cheap now, but that's
> not really the point), and if I have a bad signal, instead of
> getting a usable low quality feed, I 'll get no feed at all.
>
> Will my radio be redundant too?
>
>
> Then again, when you look at cassettes and VHS tapes, you
> wouldn't want to ditch your CDs and DVDs - even though they
> seemed fine at the time.
Heh heh, feeling a tad old now are we? :P
Heh, not that old. I was just beginning to buy music just as everything went from tapes to cds, so I only had a couple of cassettes.
We were quite poor when I was a kid, so we didn't have a VCR. However, I sometimes buy videos for cheap films I'd like to see, but don't want to pay much for, and don't care if they're in the old format.
We were quite poor when I was a kid, so we didn't have a VCR. However, I sometimes buy videos for cheap films I'd like to see, but don't want to pay much for, and don't care if they're in the old format.
Makes sense to me, blank videos are about 1.20 each now, I'm too lasy to program the VCR so I just let a tape run on long play to record a later program.
And getting ex-rental videos at £2 each is great, especially if you have no interest in all the extra guff you get on a DVD. Plus with the new VCR quality you get crystal clear auto-tracking from a 60 quid VCR. :)
Also if you don't like the movie you can just plug up the holes and tape over it!
And getting ex-rental videos at £2 each is great, especially if you have no interest in all the extra guff you get on a DVD. Plus with the new VCR quality you get crystal clear auto-tracking from a 60 quid VCR. :)
Also if you don't like the movie you can just plug up the holes and tape over it!
Is Hedfix a happy little boy?
Nope, don't think most of my questions (if any) have been answered.
*corrects a few mistakes*
*corrects a few mistakes*
Sky + is an extra £10 a month unless you have the whole sky channels (which I can't afford).
Recordable DVD is the cheapest way bar VHS to get a good recording. Recorders at £80 and discs at £5 for 25 (or £1 each for DVD-RW). Can't complain with that...
Recordable DVD is the cheapest way bar VHS to get a good recording. Recorders at £80 and discs at £5 for 25 (or £1 each for DVD-RW). Can't complain with that...
Hedfix wrote:
> Nope, don't think most of my questions (if any) have been
> answered.
>
> *corrects a few mistakes*
Put three across simply in one post and I'll try and answer.
> Nope, don't think most of my questions (if any) have been
> answered.
>
> *corrects a few mistakes*
Put three across simply in one post and I'll try and answer.
Meh, they're in the title post.
Hedfix wrote:
> I know tv programs in HD are/can be 4x more detailed but is this
> generally the case for games? Obviously games aren't up to the
> standard of real footage (although some might give Pixar movies
> a run for their money!) so is the difference really worth
> forking out for a new £500+ tv?
Not just for games, I don't think so. Apparently games look amazing on them, but they just cant be worht getting something that costs more than a PS3.
> Clearly people can offer opinions until they're blue in the face
> but I'd rather see a link to some pictures that can accurately
> portray the differences between a game being displayed on a HD
> television and the same game on a normal tv.
> Also, are computer monitors able to display games in HD? Would a
> VGA box be able to take a HD signal and display it properly on a
> monitor?
I doubt VGA can at the moment. But my laptop's LCD screen can support a medium resolution HD signal.
> As you can see I'm not up on the technical stuff, perhaps some
> of you can help answer these questions and/or provide a
> satisfactory link so I can really see what all the fuss is
> about? :)
> I know tv programs in HD are/can be 4x more detailed but is this
> generally the case for games? Obviously games aren't up to the
> standard of real footage (although some might give Pixar movies
> a run for their money!) so is the difference really worth
> forking out for a new £500+ tv?
Not just for games, I don't think so. Apparently games look amazing on them, but they just cant be worht getting something that costs more than a PS3.
> Clearly people can offer opinions until they're blue in the face
> but I'd rather see a link to some pictures that can accurately
> portray the differences between a game being displayed on a HD
> television and the same game on a normal tv.
> Also, are computer monitors able to display games in HD? Would a
> VGA box be able to take a HD signal and display it properly on a
> monitor?
I doubt VGA can at the moment. But my laptop's LCD screen can support a medium resolution HD signal.
> As you can see I'm not up on the technical stuff, perhaps some
> of you can help answer these questions and/or provide a
> satisfactory link so I can really see what all the fuss is
> about? :)
Page: