A debate on whether or not HDMI is needed in this generations consoles.
so y do i need this i play my xbox n ps3 n wii n a black n white tv connected 2 a vcr
Important enough for SNE to include it from jump. And not important enough for MS to say it's not needed and then all of a sudden important enough to include it on it's *new consoles. hmm..wtfh? 0_* So how important it is depends on the mental aptitude of the company making the decisions regarding this technology, its future direction, and it's attitude towards its customers - which evidently MS thinks have a HIGH, HIGH threshold for pain.
my tv doesnt have a hdmi input (price of being a early adopter) but it does have vga and it is wonderful... i dont feel as though im missing out on anything.
Is the same thing that happened years ago with coaxial cable and the splitter box. At the time when it first came out, it was not needed. But as technology advances it will be. At the time the 360 came out HDMI was not something that was necessary. Even when the PS3 came out it was not necessary. However in a few years when HD becomes the new standard. Then it will be necessary. At this moment while HD tvs are not the majority I would say not yet.
Im in the same boat my friend. Sure HDMI may be alittle better if any at times, but not far enough for me to go buy a new HDTV! By the time the next consoles come around it will be getting close for a new set and i will look for what ever is the in thing for that time. As for right now this Gen HDMI don't really mean a thing for me at least and most likely countless others as well! I believe HDMI is good and great, but to stay on topic here. No it is not that important this Gen. Very usefull if you can use it, but this Gen is more about getting people to at least get some kind of HDTV first before worring about HDMI.
there is no discernible difference in the image quality that I have seen between component and HDMI, so I dont think it's important right now but in the future it could become more important I guess
look closer! there is a considerable difference.
The difference is analog(component) and digital(hdmi). Analog signals lose quality faster vs digital. The best way to see this is Cable vs Dish. Cable (even Digital Cable is not true digital) looks noticeably worse than dish service. Component audio quality also suffers due to only having stereo outputs. Hdmi allows for more informational output.
there is no difference, you can get your defective 360 with sucky games while i play ratchet 5 with full HDMI support, plus you are only saying that because 360 has no HDMI, burned
it's only coz your so broke that you cant afford to have both consoles that you think HDMI gives better image quality, burned
At the moment you ain't playing shtt.
HDMI does make a difference. A huge difference. If you want to watch high definition movies the way they were meant to be seen - and don't kid yourself so you can sleep at night - there is a huge difference, then you need HDMI. The issue arises that if you want to see them on a 360 the way they were meant to be seen then you have to spend more on your system than a PS3 owner. End of argument. This isn't about which console has the better stable of games right now (360 - if you don't count B/C titles) or which will wind up with th most technically advanced and a larger stable (PS3). This is about image quality right now. The only place HDMI is a must have right now is movie playback. I own both consoles and just pre-ordered another 360. It isn't about being a fanboy. The same jackasses that say HDMI doesn't matter for visual quality are the same morons saying framerate differences in PS3 and 360 versions of Madden do matter. Well Fanboy Jimbo, you can't have it both ways. You can't say it doesn't matter when it makes your console look bad. The leg up PS3 owners have is the framerate issues are not the matter of hardware shortcoming but rather dev team failure. Especially when more and more dev teams are turning out tabasco on the PS3. I really like my 360 but I am so glad I picked up a PS3.
lol @ fanboy nubs
You are very intelligent and we all respect you
PS: You seem really stoked for playing Ratchet. I would like to offer up some praise to you on your writing skills. What you wrote in this forum was really quite legible and readable. That's pretty good for someone who is what 7 or 8 years old? Well done!
All I'm saying.
thats fine with me i have 42inch sharp, i just use the speakers on the tv, don't need 5.1, 7.1 surround sound
You don't need a 42" to see it but its still nice to have. Same with the audio. (I have a Bose companion 3 speaker system, 5.1 is for when I have a house)
depends on the tv, if it works well with Analog then the diff is minimal but if it su(ks at that then there can be quite a difference in image quality
but then again, all I've ever used for an HD cord has been HDMI anyway, and since you can get them for as little as 10 dollars, why not? I'm not one that likes to quote reviews...but at least from what I've heard is that it's either the same as component OR better...NEVER have I heard that HDMI is in any way, shape, or form worse. With that in mind it's probably a safer bet just in case, but necessary, I wouldn't say so.
As far as the ps3 is concerned more beneficial due to the fact when more electronics adapt to hdmi 1.3. For the 360 no clue why they went hdmi.
For most consumers it probably isn't too much of an importance, but I'm pretty glad to have it since it is very good for my audio/video setup.
I own a 360 and ps3, and I dont think the xbox needs hdmi, rather it needs more fans to cool it off. Mine crapped out yesterday after only 6 months. I need a fan right now gates, thanks for making me overheat. Im sorry but a $400 machine should last at least 3 years and I am now sorry I purchased this piece of crap...... A broken 360 plays no games, so hdmi doesn't even come into play.
its the best connection for hd, so it is vey important.
i personally don't like HDMI because my audio and video go to to different inputs. (i've got a sick customized sound system 6 speakers and a home built 24 intch subwoffer) FTW!!!!!!! p.s i like audio better than video if you have not noticed
I'm a game head, not a tech head. Could'nt care less...
HDMI has a slightly sharper picture quality than component. It cleans up the image a bit and makes it a little brighter. Even tho there was just a slight enhancement to the picture, you feel like you would never go back to component when you have the choice between hookin something up with HDMI or component.
Yeah, I noticed a difference too. It's slight, but noticable. So, if you have an HDMI port, why not use it? I'm not going back to component.
I have an 1.2 HDMI for the PS3 and I won't ever use my Components for it again (unless the HDMI cables gives).
I like HDMI for 2 reasons: 1: It's a digital signal as opposed to an analog signal. 2: The main reason: It's just bloody convenient you know? No composite cables for HD Picture, No optical cable for HD/Multiple Channel Audio. I plugged in the HDMI for my PS3, bam automatically detected the max resolution, max sound quality and I was set in HD video and audio within seconds. All that in one wire, other then that, to the regular person who doesn't have eagle-hawk eyes, there isn't a difference between a HDMI picture, and Composite picture, it's all about the convenience in my opinion.
Its not neccessary by any means. Its definately a benifit and its definately better. Thats just fact. I used to have a Toshiba 1080i with just Component (my PC occupies the VGA) and thought the picture was pretty good. I now have a Bravia 1080p with HDMI and even on 720p games the difference is very noticeable. Its just a lot cleaner and crisper. I dont know if the TV is most of the difference (probably) or the connection but I still say my picture now is a lot better and if HDMI has anything to do with that, I'm not going back. I wish my Xbox had HDMI in it, as I have 2 ports but I guess not. I might use that second plug for my DVD recorder which upscales as well.
HDMI for me is just more convenient because it's one plug and it's cheaper than component. The only way i can get my external and internal speakers working together is when I use HDMI.
I don't have HDMI for my 1080i TV, so I don't care. But if I had it, I would want it, even if the difference was marginal. I always want to exploit the full potential of my electronics.
I don't have HDMI nor does the average gamer. Most people that own a next gen console either have an SD TV or HDTV that doesn't support HDMI. Sooo yeah. ._. I mean as long as my TV is in color and the screen is atleast half the size of my torso I'm not complaining. I have a huge plasma but I hate getting burns in the screen so I hardly play games on it. http://s19.photobucket.com/...
let me get this straight- a 26-30 inch SD color tv is what you consider adequate to play HD games on? man, you should just get out of this conversation. you're in over your head.
people are flaming ps3 for lots of things blueray not needed HDMI not needed. man it looks like are lot of people are not happy with this gen (manly xbots) it ain't even 1 year in. one thing that realy gets me is they then say it wont be needed till next gen well people THIS IS NEXT GEN!!!
what I like about the PS3 is that it was designed to be future proof with technology like HDMI 1.3 from the start. That means PS3 gets the latest sound and the best picture.
Best part of the article "But the important things to fix on the 360 are the red rings of death and the jet-taking-off sound the system makes when it's turned on. I think they should have focused on those things first and then added HDMI."
"needed" ? nope, but neither are component cables, the minimum needed is the ugly composite cable you get with every console... convenient and nice to have? yes, why not go with the best signal if available And as its a fully digital transmission system the picture quality will always be better than component cables, and even better than VGA(analog) Its a simple matter of source(digital) -> cable(HDMI:digital) -> screen (digital:lcd) compared to source(digital) -> lossy DA-module(digital->analog) -> cables (analog:vulnerable to noice and el.fields) -> lossy AD-module in the TV(analog->digital) -> screen(digital:lcd) less AD modules = less artifacts, less noise, better picture People with a CRT SD/HD TV set could care less though, as this systems display analog, not digital
HDMI is better, but barely noticeable. some people will swear to you that what they have looks so much better than what you have and then when you finally see what they have been yelling about for so long, its like meh OK, I've seen both side by side on the same hdtv and I'm will to bet if you did a comparison in your local best buy most people couldn't pick out the hdmi version 5 out of 10 times, seriously pretend you going to buy one of the most expensive hdtv's at best buy and you could get one of the sales guy to show you.
first it was 720p or 1080p....ok then it's component or hdmi.....ok then it's hdmi 1.2 or 1.3 ..........ok and things haven't settled down between blueray and hd.. xbox360...a version with no HD and one with a hard drive. then a version with hdmi but it's not 1.3 playstation3,,,,20 gigs with no wifi, no gloss and no card readers then there is the 60 gigs with all the former stuff, and now 80 gigs version. let's not forget directX10 and the new 10.1 with cards that support it not compatible with 10. I HATE THIS GEN. long live the wii(the system i have 2 weeks after lunch and i haven't touched since).
you forgot to mention the x360 and its' 4-6 different models. sorry, ms is adding one every week so it's hard to keep track.
HDMI 1.3 is one of the weapons that will win the war for PS3. I'll let you in on a little secret, in a future firmware update PS3 will offer 2440p resolution.
LMAO, Sony according to you must have worked with the Martians
"I'll let you in on a little secret, in a future firmware update PS3 will offer 2440p resolution." Maybe higher resolutions can be used for blu-ray playback (upscaled?), but not for games. M$ is absolutely right in this: The sweet spot for this generation is 720p for sure. The best games with great graphics (detailed texures,effects ...) and a lot things going on utilize a lot CPU power and all the memory. I can live with it. ;-)
ms also said at the same time that HDMI was'nt imp. or necessary for gaming but now they're adding it. ms said that a hard drive wasn't a necessity.(which is why they started out with a core system and no hard drive in it)but now the core system is going to be phased out and hard drive size is increasing in the new ms sku. i won't get into the lack of quality in the 360's construction or going with a dvd9 drive. ms being right? not about much i don't think. their actions now are proving this and screwing over all the 360 owners who bought systems before the changes.
I can't use deep color or 7.1 surround, but most HDTV's don't have deep color or 7.1 surround yet. look it up in wikipedia the 1.3 is rarely needed in this situation. but I would say VGA=HDMI
NOBODY ever heard of vga until ms started shouting that they have it.(their response to sony having HDMI) and the only people who use it are 360 owners or anyone who bought a cheap hdtv. and no, vga doesn't compare to the COMPLETELY UNCOMPRESSED SIGNAL that HDMI provides. so to put it in your equation form: compressed signal<uncompressed signal
The way I see it, the HDMI standard was created for the sole purpose of copyright protection. With all its glitches and incompatibilty issues, I would sooner stick with analog component connections. If your equipment is high end, the built in scalers can produce great quality on par with HDMI connections. It is a shame that the PS3 can only ouput video and audio via HDMI. I would have preferred video HDMI and separate analog PCM outputs for the audio. That way, my high-end receiver can bypass any HDMI hiccups on the audio side of things.
uh, wrong. really, really, really wrong. analog component connections?built in scalers? wow, is there a stronger word for wrong. there should be just for this guy.
I tried normal TV VS HDMI TV. Difference is a lot. DVDs (Blu Ray) Look way better. So good I don't even want to go back to cinema quailty of sound and image is low near HDMI While you can work with normal TV and connection you really enjoy the enterenatiment in full HD.
because the TV and the component does matter, and boon tarkas, im so glad you can spell, and read for a kid who what? 5 or 6? burned by your own joke, xD, lol man just playin but seriously, it does make a difference, Im playin resistance on a standard tv (30in), then i was playin it at my friend's crib with a 60' HDTV with sourround sound blasting, it makes a huge difference. Xbots say it doesnt matter because 360 doesnt support, and VGA (oooooooo) so amazin, sure. And i respect my sony soldiers like adropachric2, PL3Y B3YOND, hopefully you are one, xD
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.