The RESOLUTION will not be televised — When will 1080p gaming become standard?

So it’s 2012 and still no sign of 1080p. 1080p where are you? And while your at it can you bring 60 frames per second along with you.

[Nitrowolf2]

I believe next gen 1080P become standard and locked at 60FPS, and maybe possibly higher.

I would be disappointed if it were not.

[Scholla]

let's hope so, it's been too long.

[T900]

It already is standard..... on the PC.

[DeadIIIRed]

@T900 nothing is really "standard" on a PC.

[ForTheFallen]

Liquid!

[superadvanced]

once 1080p 60hz does become standard people will be demanding 3840x2160 @ 120hz. Even when tvs have surpassed the limit of what the human eye can even gather they will still want more, especially if its made by sony.

[Death]

No one is holding Sony to a higher standard. Sony is the one that set expectations to a level they couldn't perform. "We decide when the next generation launches" and "True HD 1080p" sound great if you actually deliver.

Blu-ray and "The Cell" did nothing for gaming this gen. Hopefully next gen will bring longer and higher def games to consoles. Faster Blu-ray drives should make a huge differance.

-Death

[T900]

@deadlllRed

Yes nothing is standard on the PC and thats a good thing, standards create limitations.

As for 1080p even the entry level GPUs manage it very well these days. Hence if you want to game on a PC, 1080p is very easy to acheive.

[ProjectVulcan]

Console games will probably never do 60 frames a second as a standard, more as the exception just as they are now than the standard.

This is because in order to get 60 frames, the designers have to compromise the visuals, AA or the resolution compared to the common 30 frame standard. Only when you have a powerful PC as a user can you go the whole hog and have everything, res, filters, framerate the works.

This is mostly a developer trend, they want their games to look as good as possible on console, so they aim for 30FPS. Most casual console gamers might not care or note the advantages of 60 frames, and you cant see it in stills or screenshots....so they would just say one game has better graphics than the other.

Which is why most devs aim for the best visuals and not a faster framerate, they want the casuals to be impressed with the graphics and screenshots rather than try and explain why 60 frames might be better for their game. Insomniac are another company explaining why they ditched 60 frames- http://news.softpedia.com/n...

You could expect 1080p for the next gen, nay, demand it- but don't expect every single game to run 60 frames a second too. They just won't and probably never will. As long as a bunch of racers and sports games do then that is the best you could ask for.

[solar]

great post vulcan. +bubble

[DigitalAnalog]

I'm surprised that only a "few" people actually get the meaning behind 1080p/60fps concept. Wipeout HD is an example of a 1080p/60fps model but as great as that game looks for a DL title, it doesn't really stand out compared to the plethora of great looking 720p/30fps games out there.

HD/60fps or graphics. There's really no way around it for consoles unless you buy yourself a capable PC.

[Persistantthug]

1. Neither you nor I know when the next Sony & Microsoft consoles will arrive, nor do we know what hardware tech they will house.

2. Typically when a console launches, the price of said console typically exceeds the cost of of what one could get on their own with the equivalent amount of money.

I fully expect 1080p & 60 frames for the next generation. And that's also why I'm in no rush for this gen to end......the longer the better for next generation consoles.

I'm rooting for 2014, myself :)

[DragonKnight]

Gotta love PC fan arrogance calling console gamers "casual." As if tech determines what kind of gamer you are. I guess if I own a 6 slot toaster complete with bagel sized slots and more toasting options that makes me a more hardcore toaster than someone with a basic 2 slot toaster used strictly to make bread turn golden brown.

I hate the buzzwords of this gen.

[Ducky]

^ He didn't use tech as the reason for calling them 'casuals'.
Rather, they're labeled 'casuals' because they don't know or care about technical details such as framerate.

... and he wasn't calling all console gamers as casuals;

[ProjectVulcan]

FatOldMan correctly interpreted my intention of the word usage. You should not assume the negative aspects so easily DragonKnight, but then i know your comment history so i guess i am not surprised...

Persistantthug- you didn't actually say anything relevant to counter my statement. No matter what specs the machine is, devs will more often plump for 30 frames. It isn't relevant what specs they are, because whether you have the power of wii or an ubermachine the link i pointed to shows modern developer insight, it is consumer attitude that demands better looking graphics, not higher framerates.

360 and PS3 being vastly more powerful than the previous gen, PS2 or xbox, also wii, did that mean most devs aimed for 720p and 60FPS...? Obviously this is not the case.

They virtually always have gone for 30 since the polygon era began on Playstation, Saturn and N64- this generation there are several well known examples of 60 frame games but they are very much in the minority. I would say at least 90 percent of games are targeted for 30 frames and its been that way for well over a decade now.

Most of the console games you yourself would claim to be best looking, Gears of war, Killzone, Uncharted, Battlefield 3, Crysis 2, Skyrim, Assassins Creed, etc are 30 frames. Only a handful might try 60. How many articles or comments on here argue about 'teh bestest gfx'? Versus how many talk about which games have smoother framerates...

[morganfell]

Rather than focus on 1080p gaming I would prefer developers bring us next generation gameplay...which isn't the same thing as a graphical improvement.

The Sony/CCP venture is one forthcoming example of a better direction. I would rather see more of this type of endeavor.

While not 1080p, we can find bargain bins and abandoned game collections which are rife with great looking, well advertised, yet utterly craptastic titles.

The emphasis on graphics this generation has cost us many a great gaming experience. The relevance of a game engine lies too often with the rendering ability while the AI engine is a sham, last minute collection of abandoned code. Recurrently we find AI in commercial engines gutted in favor of an equally incompetent substitute chosen for the ease of implementation rather than it's contribution to the player experience.

I love great graphics and some games demand a certain fidelity in order to provide proper gameplay elements. An example of this may be draw distances in games such as Arma 2 or shadowing in certain titles to provide proper cover in stealth situations.

That said, this focus on image driven development shows little sign of abating and I fear our favorite, would be immersive game time will be the poorer for it.

[tehnoob3]

@persistantthug

This trend of 30 fps for consoles will undeniably exist until games are almost indistinguishable from reality because as long as visuals will get better, developers will compromise as vulcan said.

[roguewarrior]

Agreed, but this Gens "locked 30fps" always goes over budget, and we start with screen tearing and frame rate drops. Give me Epics Samaritan Demo, truly locked at 30fps with V-sync, next gen and I don't think anybody will complain about the lower fps.

[Shane Kim]

To be honest dragonknight, that would make you a hardcore toaster :P

[ProjectVulcan]

@ roguewarrior

What we really need is triple buffering on 30 frame games with vsync- all the time. Uncharted 2 had it. Triple buffering basically would eliminate screen tear and also if a frame goes over budget helps minimise the noticeable speed drop you would see. Like for example from the recent ME3 demo, which is only double buffered and vsynced so when the console misses its 30FPS target it automatically crashed down to 20FPS to match the next display sync.

If it were properly triple buffered, chances are it would still run 26-28FPS and you would barely notice the framedrop.

I think this is much more likely next gen because enough memory should exist. While you still only have 512mb of memory this generation, using another 15mb or so to triple buffer seems fairly costly. Not to mention 360's eDRAM complicates the issue. We have seen how tight developers are with memory constraints, if Skyrim has taught us nothing else it is always on a knife edge.

However if you happen to have 2GB or more memory in your machine, then of course an extra 30mb for 1080p triple buffering is virtually inconsequential and a far smaller percentage of total resources.

There is only so much you can demand from developers as a manufacturer but again if you deliver a machine with that much memory you should probably tell developers that every game MUST be triple buffered.

If you have given them a machine with 3 or 4Gb of memory they would most likely just shrug their shoulders and say "okay" because it wouldn;t be a big deal.

[DeadlyFire]

I am betting we see more 720p at 60 fps. If 1080 then it will be 30 fps. All depends on the hardware though which is still a mystery.

[Mystogan]

i know for 99% sure that 1080p and 60fps will become a standard. and possibly there will be games that support 120fps

[BubloZX]

Yeah...... even a i7 2730 with a nvida gtx 590 and 8 gig of ram can't do high Res 1080p gaming with 120 fps. Don't expect the next Xbox and PS to do it either.

[lsujester]

I'm running an i5-2500 and a GTX580. On BF3, I average around 60fps. No way a console released in the next year or so going to double that and keep those high visuals.

[raztad]

What I like of next gen is that devels will be capable of doing more if they decide so, or can downgrade the visuals but keeping a decent resolution (no more 500p please)

My expectations for the PS4 (2014):

Standard on every game: 4-8xMSAA + postprocessing like MLAA, full res transparency support (PS3 doesnt have this).

Realistic looking games (KZ4, UC4/LoUS2, Batman, BF) will be full 1080p/30fps (2D) and (720p/30 in stereoscopic 3D). Lots of shaders. Cloth/hair real time sim. More particles effects. Even better water, surface fluid dynamic.

I expect next gen GT to be full 1080p/60fps (2D) and 720p/60 (stereoscopic), both likely including Motion Blur.

Arcade games could be 1080p/60 fps as a norm or 720p/60 (stereoscopic). SSHD is a proof of this.

[ninjahunter]

Just to put it in perspective, that would require about a 10x horsepower jump by next gen (based on raw numbers). This is easily done, that horsepower has been available for years, but to break even, competitive pricing and all, such a system would likely cost well over $600 at launch.

This is all doable, but the question is, would you be willing to shell out the money for it?

[IRetrouk]

Yes, if I think it's worth the money I will bite

[HappyGaming]

10x power to run a 720p/30fps game at 1080p/60fps game... Why would you want that if you just used all your power to upgrade the resolution and the framerate?

What about all the other visual effects which are far more important?

I say make 1080p and locked 30fps a standard and forget about 60fps so that you can make your games look even better!!

[QuodEratDemonstrandm]

I paid $600 for my ps3, plus another $400 for a tv to connect it.
All totalled, with games and sales tax, I spent $1204.

$600 for a ps4 won't be a problem. I probably won't be able to get it day one, but I'll get it.

[GraveLord]

There will be devs that will prefer graphics over framerate. We will be getting games that are 1080p at 30FPS with amazing graphics. That's fine for a single player game. But for a online multiplayer 60FPS is a must.

[novcze]

You would be disappointed, 1080p output will be probably standard, but native rendering resolution is another thing. 60fps will be also scarce just like in this generation.

[SilentNegotiator]

I don't really care. I just want pop-in reduced by about a 100 times. And 2xAA or more standard (like Microsoft promised with the 360).

Make that happen and keep the great games coming, and I'd buy another 720p console. I'm not going to cry over not playing in 1080p, especially since it will probably just mean more hardware ill-equipped for the task, and we'll just end up playing 23fps, 880p, no AA.

[ATi_Elite]

laughed so hard my tummy hurts!

Who plays games at 1080p? That's so old, old like using telegrams.

1600p is where the cool kids game at. "Oh so Pretty"!

seriously Next Console Gen better be 1080p and 60 fps with 4xMSAA and 8xAF. Anything less and i will just shake my head in disbelief and laugh some more.

[Marquis_de_Sade]

You really find it that funny? How sad.

[JsonHenry]

1080p (at 120hz+) is already standard on my gaming rig. That is if I don't hook it up to something even higher in resolution.

[ForTheFallen]

Can I ask why 60 fps? Why not just 40? Or 45?

[Crazyglues]

Why would this be standard when the number one selling game on both consoles is not even 720p and people ran out and bought it like hot cakes....

so no this won't happen until next gen, and even then there is no guarantee that we will see it become the standard..

.____........___...____
.____||......||.......____||
||.........___||.......____||

[LX-General-Kaos]

As of now 1080p is on the PC and a few arcade games for the PS3 and 360. Im pretty sure when i played wipeout on psn it was 1080p

[Scholla]

Correctamundo! Wipeout is in 1080p...I mentioned it in the article.

[NobleRed]

Sorry to burst your bubble but Wipeout has a variable resolution. It's not all the time 1920*1080P.

1728×1080, 1645×1080, 1600×1080, 1440×1080

[ProjectVulcan]

Wipeout is pseudo full 1080p. I mean yes, natively it does render at 1920 x 1080 a lot of the time, but not all of the time. It has a dynamic framebuffer which means it will render from 1280 x 1080 up to 1920 x 1080 and a few steps inbetween depending on how much load the engine is under. More load = less resolution for the next few frames. The effect is excellent though, it is not easy to tell the game isn't 1920 x 1080 all the time such is how the human eye works (focusing on one spot, your brain filling in details). This should be tried more....

Metal Gear Solid 4 software upscales to 1080p. Its actual native rendering resolution is believe it or not 1024 x 768. Yes- this is not widescreen. So the frame is rendered squashed then scaled and 'stretched' a bit like anamorphic to get 16:9. You can even sometimes see the scaling in game, like in the darkest places in say Act 3 you can detect faint macroblocking of the scaler at work.

Ninja Gaiden Sigma also upscales...it is not 1080p native. 1280 x 720...the sequel as you mention is 1280 x 718 on PS3, even less on 360.

Wipeout HD is the closest thing to proper full 1080p you mentioned there, 1080p is even rarer than you imagined on console.....

It is likely even if the next gen consoles standardise 1080p gaming, we will see a whole host of games rendering below this. Just like all the sub HD games now. Maybe like 1600 x 900 etc. 16 x 9 wouldn't be so bad TBH, if the manufacturers could just demand this was the lowest anyone could do that would be good.

PC is the only place you can get full 1080p all the time right now. It makes a massive difference when you see it with your own eyes.

Alan wake is the recent game i played in 1080p. 360 manages 960 x 540, so when you see the game finally on PC in 1080p after playing the original on console in sub HD, it is mind blowing how much crisper it is. 4 times the resolution.....

[Ocelot525]

You want money , thus you write VG articles , and you use N4G to get hits. I have no problem with this... unless your article is full of BS (mgs4, wipeout 1080p).

Your lucky that n4g is full of mentally retarded 12 year olds who make N4G the only place where the craptastic articles hit the frontpage.

[OpenGL]

@ vulcanproject

Yeah I recently got Alan Wake on the PC despite already owning it on the 360, and I must say the graphics are phenomenal at 1920x1080 with 8xAA.

[kaveti6616]

Okay. One or two games in 1080p mean nothing.

[LX-General-Kaos]

There are alot more than one or two. Those are just the ones that i happened to remember.

[Surfaced]

Maybe next generation.
Or maybe not.

[room414]

you really went out on a limb with that prediction

[MySwordIsHeavenly]

Dude. Just leaf him alone...

[-Mika-]

It doesn't matter. Games look great regardless and plus making a game 1080p hurts the performance of the titles so they usually just go with 720p to get the best framrate.

[crazypicklemonkey]

who cares about resolution, 480p is good enough ....

.....

.....

XD

[FinaLXiii]

if you own a CRT TV that´s true games will always look great on those with some exeptions like Uncharted for example.

[ZippyZapper]

Next gen, but if you can't wait a PC will do just fine.

[Jihaad_cpt]

sorry games are more important to me than resolution

[bumnut]

Then why ignore the largest platform on the planet with the most games?

[Jihaad_cpt]

because it just so happens the games I like playing are on console.

[ShaunCameron]

Maybe when 1080p TV's start selling for cheap.

[Megaman_nerd]

resolution is more about size. You can easily buy a 32" HDTV 720p for the same price as a PS3 and even if it had 1080p you wouldn't see a difference at that size. But if you own a 50" plus TV then 1080p is more or less a necessity and these are expensive because the size, not the resolution.

[lashes2ashes]

They are cheap now. You can get a crappy brand name 32inch 1080p tv for 300$ and under

[GamingTruth]

i would expect higher than 1080p on the almighty pc, but since tvs can at best prior to the 4k and 8k displays only go to 1080p then 720p looks just fine especially in exclusive games actually they are the most impressive games i have ever seen

[bumnut]

You can get 1600p monitors for PC (2560 x 1600) but they are expensive.

[ATi_Elite]

I game at 1600p on a 30" inch monitor

and

I game at 5760 x 1080p across 3 1080p monitors.

30" 1600p monitors are dropping price and look so much better than 1080p cause of the huge amounts of detail that can be seen very clearly and without use of lots of MSAA.

Quad Full High Definition (3840×2160) and Ultra High Definition UHD (7680×4320) are the future!

[ShaunCameron]

Maybe when people can get a 19" 1080p TV for less than $200 total.

[lashes2ashes]

You can. I have a vizio that I payed 170$ for.

[mttrackmaster38]

I bought a 24" Viewsonic for only $150. Where have you been these past years?

[Sobari]

1080p will be the standard for next-gen consoles. The Wii U Zelda tech demo was running in 1080p at a smooth 60 FPS, and the PS4/Xbox 720 will probably be even more powerful than that, perhaps even future-proofed with support for resolutions up to 1920x1200.

[STONEY4]

1920x1200 probably won't be supported. It's the 16:10 equivalent of 1920x1080 (1080p), only used in monitors. Thing is, nearly all HDTVs have a 16:9 aspect ratio, which is what consoles are aimed at. The resolution itself isn't an upgrade to 1080p, it's just designed for a different aspect ratio.

Along with that, 16:10 is being phased out in monitors too in favor of 16:9 now. Even some newer PC games are starting to drop support for it.

[ginsunuva]

4k tvs are coming soon. I think 1080 will be next gen's 720 and 4k will be next gen's 1080, where most games run in 1080 with a couple in 4k.
I thought 4k was gonna be just a tech demo, but they're soon gonna sell them. And with 4k, when the screen splits for 3D, it produces 2 1080 images.

And I think resolution will stop increasing after 4k. The difference between 1080 and 4k is like that of the retina display on the iphone 4 compared to the previous screens. But after 4k, eyes cannot tell the difference.

[STONEY4]

You DO realize that even some of the highest end multi-GPU PCs struggle at 2650x1600? And 4K is 4096x2160. For gaming, it's not happening. 1080p is fine for next-gen.

[Bounkass]

Why do you guys even care? 720P works just fine the way it is. If they don't upgrade, fine, if they do upgrade, prepare yourself for more YLoD's and RRoD's...

[SneeringImperialist]

You obviously haven't tried 1080p 60fps gaming.

[MetalNCarnet]

Dude, once you try 1080p/60fps, you can never go back. I don't look at console games the same way as I did a year ago once I built my new PC.

It's like going from color to B&W tv.

[kwicksandz]

so true norad. console games look like jaggy blurry aliased mess after experienceing pc gaming.

its made me shift to almost all pc multiplat. i have trouble going back even for multi games with my friends on console

[SneeringImperialist]

@kwiksandz indeed this is one of the reasons i pre ordered Mass effect 3 for PC instead of xbox, as well as the 1080p/60fps.

[andyboy13]

It's funny, I get whinny over 1920 x 1080 at times now lol. I used to game on a 22" 1680 x 1050 monitor and then I upgraded to a 27" 1920 x 1080 and pixel density went down. I never really found the need for AA until I went to a larger screen. Now it's just gross without 4x AA. I don't know how console players can stand 720p without AA man....

[ExitToExisT]

well thats why i switched to pc gaming 6 months ago.

[MegaMohsi]

Lol the guy in this article is not very informed. Neither one of the games he mentions is actually native 1080p, ninja gaiden sigma is 720p upscaled, MGS4 is 1024x728 upscaled and Wipeout although the closest to native 1080p is not as the above poster mentioned. The resolution varies. I believe the only native 1080 console game is Virtua Tennis?

Upscaled =/= Native

[IHateYouFanboys]

There are a few non-psn/xbla games that are native 1080p, but they're pretty much all sport games with very little going on - virtua tennis, NBA street, mlb the show. That's about it from what I can remember.

I'm surprised noones brought up GT5 yet, its usually the ps3 fanboys "go to" 1080p game, despite being upscaled 1080p.

Next gen will be 1080p/30fps standard. 4k is a dream that won't happen as the tvs won't be affordable for a decade.

[NotSoSilentBob]

You would need to play the game to actually see how well the upscaled 1080p is.

[_LarZen_]

Been gaming in 1080p and higher for yeeeeears.... :P

[SandwichHammock]

I would rather pop in (both object and texture) be eliminated as opposed to resolution. I foolishly thought that at the beginning of this gen that would be a thing of the past... . Hopefully with this next gen.

[REALgamer]

That's related to storage and RAM access speed, not graphics processing power.

[FuchiBOT]

Been playing at 1080p for a few years now, with fps anywhere between 60 and 120 ... 120hz monitors ftw!

[Scholla]

Look, everybody concerned with my statements about certain games being 1080p, it was not a absolute statement, I was more going with what was advertised and what my tv screen says. Do developers false advertise sure! That’s not the point.

Speaking of false advertisement and the point you guys need to focus more on the issue at hand which is 1080p gaming is non existent which means our TV’s and machines (mind you that we went a whole generation w/o) that advertise 1080p are not the end result.

Even bigger than that no one answers when u think we will see 1080p. Yall choose to focus on these 3 little games. I rather you say “MGS4 is not 1080p” cool good to know, then follow it up with “I think we'll see 1080p — fill in the blank” than just leaving a blanketed statement wrapped up in a insult.

[clrlite]

lol when gamers seem to be more concerned about graphics than gameplay.

[hellvaguy]

Want both. Who wants Atari graphics? Not me.

[C_Menz]

It's standard on PC's...

[Ace_Man_6]

Isn't learning basic puntuation standard as well…?

[C_Menz]

Wow you got me there! OMG I am crushed by your smug insult! *Cries*

And while we are at it, it is spelled punctuation not puntuation.

[QuodEratDemonstrandm]

Too funny.

[Ace_Man_6]

I don't even remember the last 1080p game I bought… *has a look*… Gran Turismo 5 on release date… wow really? Both BioShock games supported 1080p, lol even The Darkness did. What happened?!

[theeg]

none of those games you mentiioned were native 1920x1080p, the only one that was kind of close was gt5 which did support true 1080p only when in the garage, everything else was much, much less in gt5

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue = 1080p mode is 1280x1080 (2xAA) in-game while the garage/pit/showrooms are 1920x1080 with no AA. 720p mode is 1280x720 (4xAA)
Gran Turismo 5 = 1280x720 (4xAA), 1280x1080 (QAA, TAA selectable), 1280x720 (QAA) in 3D mode

Bioshock = 680p (no AA, blur filter pre-patch)

Darkness = 1024x576 (no AA)

so yeah, just because the box says 1080p, that doent mean anything except it upscales to 1080p, a $20 dvd player does that too, but still looks like crap comparedd to a true native 1080p image, which is really only on pc, and much higher of course, also some psn mini/indie games are 1080p, but the ps3 and 360 do not have nearly enough power to do a full 3d game with modern textures in 1080p,

lol...heck, most of the remakes from ps2 they are making are not even 1080p 60 frames, the ps3 and 360 have 8 year old hardware in them, there are like 8 year old pcs, the cannot run anything in 1080p at 60 frames

time for new consoles!

[GamingTruth]

and yet not one ps3 exclusive on pc so thats saying pc is pretty sad since its as new as this month in 2012

[tehnoob3]

@gaming truth

wth did you just say?

Why the hell would a Ps3 exclusive be on PC? Doesn't logically make any sense.

[IaussieGamer]

Another pathetic article from someone who knows jack shit. GT5 is in 1080P and at 60FPS. Fail article thats for sure.

[tehnoob3]

GT5 is 1280x1080 and it's not locked at 60fps; there is a good amount of screen tearing. True 1080p is 1920x1080

[Zephol]

Its only 720p man. Its not 1080p. Not real 720p

[IaussieGamer]

Nup completely wrong buddy. GT5 is indeed Full 1080P 1920x1024. So before you try be smart trying to prove someone wrong you better get your facts right and yes it does run at 60FPS.

[RandomDude655]

This discussion made me wonder why variable resolution, like Wipeout, isn't used more. I think Rage might be the only other game that uses it. I wonder if they have some research into which is noticed more dropped frames or resolution.

[Mr Tretton]

In order to maintain 60 fps on all console games the graphics have to stay watered down or the worlds simple. People who keep asking for 60 fps in all games don't know what they're asking for.

[OcularVision]

I'm pretty sure they're asking for 60 fps games.

[kornbeaner]

1080p standard for consoles will not exist for some time. A PC has to be pretty monstrous in order play a game in 1080p with all the nice effect turned up to max. Hardware like that found in big PCs will not be standard, ever in consoles, so it will probably be three generations (yes, I know roughly 15 years), before 1080p HD standard can be had on a Console. Now if you don't really care about graphical quality looking the best we can already have 1080p games, but they will be jaggy and pretty ugly. For consoles at this point I prefer A standard of 720p with top-notch effects and filtering going on instead of playing a 1080p game that looks alright.

[Braid]

Excuse me, did you just mean that companies are, and have been, selling us 1080p HDTVs the advertised technologies of which can only be used properly in the following... fifteen years?

That's what I call a "hardcore" longevity planned for our TVs by some benevolent companies right there.

[kornbeaner]

Blu-ray movies have been out for just as long. Get your head out of gaming. 1080p is already standard when it comes movies and other HD media but as far as gaming goes it will not exist for sometime. Take a look at all HD high-profiles games most of them, run in a sub-hd resolution and are then upscaled. If most consoles games can't manage a 720p native resolution how are they going to manage 1080p native? And on top of that manage 1080p with full effects like you see on top PC games. Also, a PS3 can play 1080p movies but when it comes games there are few that play at 1080pthe native. So your TV can enjoy HD movie goodness but games are not as fortunate.

[MegaMohsi]

I can run every PC game at 1080p with an i7 930 gtx 460 1gb and 8 gb of RAM. Most of those parts should be inexpensive by the time new consoles are made. I'd be very disappointed if 1080p/30fps wasnt a standard for next gen

[Somebody]

I upgrade my PC with the most affordable parts I can find and it's not the super expensive monster that people seem to think of PC all the time. An i5 2500k, 8gb of ram and the cheapest motherboard I can find (no wallet busting multi graphic card mobo for me) and a GTX570. The cpu and gpu are the only parts that cost the most and the selections that I got impressed me a lot compared to the previous parts. Cool even using stock heatsink, power efficient, a tiny bit overkill for the multiplatform games that make up the majority of the games out there.

[IaussieGamer]

my pc is no Monster and I still play games nice and smooth in 1080P max detail (1920x1024) so your argument is already failed there.

[kornbeaner]

What games? I doubt its Metro 2033 or any other high profile Graphics buster known to bring PC's to their knees. Take a look at Crysis, this game is old as dirt but consoles as they stand cannot deliver close to max resolution. My PC is med grade and I can play most games on High with high settings minus shadows @1680x1050. Doing 40+ frames on Deus Ex, Battlefield 3, Starcraft 2 (ultra settings). The first two games look way better on my PC than on the PS3. Consoles are meant to come out at a standard price, cramming it with hardware that can do 1080p gaming with PC like Max settings will cost the consumers too much. Look at the PS3, thought to be a super powerful console, came out at $600 and struggled to sell in the beginning. The sweet spot for the PS3 has always been 720p at 30frames with filtering and effect turned up. Honestly, to this day, MGS4 is the only game that has somewhat delivered on Sony's promise. Uncharted series is a close second followed by God of War 3. Other than that not really much pushing for HD graphics.

[theeg]

1080p, 1200p, 1440p, 1600p

only on pc

always next gen!

[SignifiedSix]

I'm thinking next gen, most games will probably be 1080p at 30fps.
I would be okay with that, but if I'm wrong, I'd be even happier!

[Ducky]

I wish they'd give players an option.
Have two graphical presets that let you pick between 1080p/30fps or 720p/60fps.

[MegaMohsi]

I wouldn't be surprised if they have that option next gen, consoles are slowly becoming PC's

[TardcoreGamer]

1080p/60fps will be standard I'd say probably right around the time when they decide to launch 4k TV's. In other words they don't want standards they want you desiring the next best thing.

[NnT3291]

30 fps is fine for me, except for competitive online games.

[stragomccloud]

He said regarding 1080p, "Will it be standard for both systems?" What does he mean both, doesn't he mean all 3? Wii U will be the first 1080p standard system, and I assume the PS4 will be too, so surely he's implying that the next-box won't right?
I swear, ignorance sometimes...

[MegaMohsi]

I doubt Wii U will be a 1080p system, it's only slightly more powerful than the 360/PS3

[stragomccloud]

If you believe that, you need to check your sources. While the system is likely only half of what the PS4 will be, it's GPU alone is several times more powerful than the Xbox 360's, which is actually a better GPU than the PS3's 7800GTX.

Of course I imagine that when the other systems roll around, the Wii U will be outputting games at 720p, while the more powerful systems will output at 1080p. But for now, with only the Xbox 360 and PS3 out, Wii U will be the system playing multiplatform games at 1080p.

[Shok]

Reggie, Iwata, and Miyamoto have all confirmed that the Wii U will have NATIVE 1080p as a standard.

And nobody knows the specs. Heck, even if we were to go off the rumored specs it would show that the Wii U is much stronger than the current gen. The Wii U being only slightly more powerful is this false mindset created by fanboys.

[Batzi]

if they could have done it they would have done it. Not this generation and definitely not on current generation consoles. Hopefully next generation consoles will be able to do higher resolution locked at 60 FPS at least.

[spirited]

Most of the games will be 1080p 30fps and 720p 60fps next gen.

1080p 60fps very very very few.

I will be surprised otherwise.

[Ck1x]

Well unlike PC's consoles don't just have graphics cards in them so one can't just compare nextgen consoles to current graphics cards. Consoles are optimized to utilize the custom hardware inside at a fraction of what beloved PC's cost. So how did resolution and framerates become the guidelines of determining who's hardcore or not? To be honest I just wanna play great games, there are many really crappy games that look good, but are just horrible to play...

[PixL]

From the comments above I see that for most people (PC guys posting here a lot) higher resolution = better graphics. I don't agree. If you have low polygon count and simple textures, games will not look more realistic. They will look just more artificial. For example all those GTA4 mods. They look great on screenshots but in motion the overall impression is cartoony, not realistic because higher res textures can't cheat your eye without proper dynamic range of lighting and shadows.

Resolution doesn't matter much to me. What matters is art direction, skilled designers who know how to cheat your eye (until we really get photorealistic displays), additional effects like FOV, HDR, bokeh, particles, blur, occlusions and, most of all, realistic physics.

For those that will disagree with passion: I've tried 1080p@60 gaming (1200p in fact is my display's horizontal resolution). The only game I know (so far) which visually surpasses consoles by a generation is Battlefield 3, because it uses PC hardware to benefit from enhanced effects and lighting, not only resolution. The rest of them look very similar, sometimes even worse as higher res reveals lack of detail in textures and rough 3D modelling. This is, of course, due to the fact that publishers don't spend money on PC versions because PC games don't sell enough to justify that.

[Main_Street_Saint]

The answer is easy: Next gen!

[Neurotoxin]

60fps??!? Its 2012 ffs, we should be at the stage now where frames are so fast its like GOD just sniffed coke outta your arse crack.

[RevXM]

IMO Next gen standard should be atleast native 1080p at 60FPS.
Since SONY/Microsoft is likely to push 3D more, 60FPS would be the standard I think since it gives a quick enough refresh for each eye to not look choppy.

And then comes some odd games that wil do something better above the standards, higher res, more frames and better 3D like a lot of sports and racing games does today.

And I like the approach that Wipeout took with render resolution. I think Higher than standard res games should do this to maintain a fluid and responsive performance.
Sligthly lower resolution when the hardware is put under stress by far beats, dropping AA, having screen tearing or unstable FPS.

They can even tout it to be part of a game effect like when the game world seem to go down in explosions and chaos and you experience it like a near death experience. much like BF3 does when a sniper almost hits you in the campaign the screen kinda blurs for a second and at the same time highlights to you whats going on.

That way dynamic res in some scenes will perhaps add to the experience or reslism if you will since thats the kind of scenes or scenarios when a hardware is stressed the most so it makes sense to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[Somebody]

Why would the TV vendors now are designing HDTVs with huge resolutions (4K) if they are not thinking of the future? Why do they want to be stuck on the 1080P when they can go further to leave their competitors behind.

[Ck1x]

Because all though manufacturers are planning to launch 4k tv's soon, they have to find a way to get these nice people that just bought their first hd 1080p tv last year to wanna upgrade! Which isnt going to be an easy feat... why would I or let alone the average consumer want to buy a tv that at this moment nothing supports? No movies, netflix, hulu, games systems, no current media is pushing for this yet. People are just really warming up to blu-rays and replacing their trusty dvd players. So some of this tech sounds cool and im sure it will be when it has a great selling point, but im not ready to spend $70-$80 for next-gen games...

[Somebody]

Yeah. Kinda obvious problems for new tech but something have to start somewhere even if it is an expensive piece of hardware that no one supports. Like the 3D "revolution".

I don't want to look down on technology that seem to be too expensive, irrelevant or too early for the masses. Sooner or later it'll be standard. Don't forget, everyone laughed at Bil Gate and his attempt to promote something called a PC tablet. Most hardware vendors gave up supporting his silly idea.

Now...there are tablets everywhere.

[TheCryptKeeper]

i buit a gaming PC not to long ago, i do own a PS3 but after experiencing what the PC can produce i wont buy another console until it has at least 2X antialiasing, 2X anisotropic filtering, v-sync, and a resolution that doesn't look like a water painting on a full 1080p TV.

[Hliouxas]

Consoles will NEVER have a standart of 60FPS cause game developers will make serious compromises in the graphics department... Just give as TRUE 1080P(not some upscalled bullshit) 4X Antialiasing and AF and keep the frame rate at 30...

[J_Cob]

I agree. Games on the next consoles might start out at true 1080p/60fps, but after awhile they'll start lowering the frame-rate cap and/or resolution. As they amp up the graphic quality something will have to give so they can get more power out of the systems. After a few years games will go back to the resolutions/frame-rate caps they're in right now. Hopefully not up-scaled. True 1080p/30fps or 720/60fps would suffice but I doubt it. Like you I don't want that up-scaled garbage.

[Kos-Mos]

If only games were about graphics...and them teens/americans.

[PersonMan]

1080p doesn't make a game have better graphics. I thought playing GTA IV on the PC would be better than the PS3 version but once I cranked up the resolution, it was so easy to see all the pop in and poor draw distance. I put it back to 720p and it helps hide the imperfections.

I'd rather have 720p with amazing graphics at 30fps than a 1080p game with less detail and 60fps.

[Jason143]

been running above 1080p for long time now on pc. maybe you should come to the dark side. Hell Alan wake even came out few days ago and looks semi decent in 1900

[J_Cob]

I honestly wouldn't mind true 1080p/30fps or 720p/60fps next gen. I just hate all this sub HD up-scaling to push the graphic fidelity in games this gen. The graphics in the Mass Effect 3 demo @ 720/30fps looks pretty astounding for old hardware. Although it took a long time for consoles to reach this point. I would expect them to be able to do true 1080p/60fps next gen right from the start with the graphic fidelity of ME3 and UC3. Down the road though is when they might start up-scaling again to 1080p or even 720p again to continue to push the graphic fidelity for new games. When developers have to keep pushing the hardware without the ability for the hardware to upgrade their best bet is to upscale the resolution to amp up the graphics.

[StraightedgeSES]

The Wii U is 1080P and I'm sure that the next Xbox and Sony console will be 1080p.

[Ulf]

Ask yourself... which would you rather have, a this-gen game at 1080p and 60fps, or a game that looks like Epic's Samaritan demo, but at 720p and 30fps?

1080p is possible now, but won't be much more appealing next gen.

[gypsygib]

I rather 720p and 60 fps than 1080p and 30 fps

[Ck1x]

Well i for one want to see competent hardware that is efficient enough for developers to be able to get every ounce of power to create amazing games at ease. Not just theory numbers of what the gpu could maybe run or how many cores or threads the cpu has. This means nothing if the hardware is complicated to develope for...

[TheOtherTheoG]

Well, it's been the norm over here for a while... *smug face*