Top
1020°

Turn 10: Forza3 Runs At 1080p 60 Fps

Microsoft's "Xbox 360 E309 Media Briefing" in the title was announced as one of the highlights of their "Forza Mortorsports 3". Realistic graphics and car models were more than his predecessor, 1080p/60 frame by DORAIBINGUSHIN brilliant, beloved vehicle customization features almost an inexhaustible, and CM TV stunt car video and feature reminiscent of the unspeakable, outstanding element of the full impact of some people's Xbox 360 Best of EKUSUKURUSHIBUTAITORU Press.

Read Full Story >>
translate.google.com
The story is too old to be commented.
sonarus3422d ago

60fps YES but 1080p No at least not announced.

40cal3422d ago

There has been no conformation of 1080p. Not saying that it cant be done between now and launch, just saying that as of now Forza 3 is not running at 1080p.

bnaked3422d ago

1080p??? Yes, like all the other 360 games lol

These news are bullsh!t..

aliveinboston3422d ago

Why not? It's not as if their lighting system is particularly impressive. The replay clips do look very good but the in-game videos are all rather disappointing. The lighting/shadows are low grade, the FOV is noticably narrower than notable competitors, and the environments are dull and lifeless. Perhaps the final version will fix some of these issues but as of now there's nothing impressive in terms of tech.

menoyou3422d ago

A lot of 360 games say 1080p on the box and none of them are ever natively 1080p. I hope it's native 1080p they're talking about but I doubt it.

7ero H3LL3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

"A lot of 360 games say 1080p on the box and none of them are ever natively 1080p. I hope it's native 1080p they're talking about but I doubt it"

yeah well this person who said it is obviously not a box, he intentionally highlighted it quite a few times. read it.

likedamaster3422d ago

"Why not? It's not as if their lighting system is particularly impressive. The replay clips do look very good but the in-game videos are all rather disappointing. The lighting/shadows are low grade, the FOV is noticably narrower than notable competitors, and the environments are dull and lifeless. Perhaps the final version will fix some of these issues but as of now there's nothing impressive in terms of tech."

-Are you sure you're not talking about GT5P? That sounds exactly like when prologue was released not to mention a terrible meta average. http://www.metacritic.com/g... Seriously, not even PGR series scored that low. LOL. Nice try fanboys. Forza Motorsport never left the throne.

majorsuave3422d ago

"Currently HDMI (versions 1.2a, 1.3) is the only commonly available connection that can deliver 1080p resolution from a video source to a television."

No way.... VGA has been around since the 80s (or before...? ) and is much more common. It supports 1920 x 1080, or 1080p (vga has always been progressive) since WUXGA was introduced back in the Win 95 days. Most HDTVs have a vga port (often called PC).
Besides that, Component connectors can also move 1080p video.

SaberEdge3422d ago

The lighting is every bit as impressive as in GT5. They both have HDR real-time light and shadows, anybody that says there is a difference in lighting doesn't know what they are talking about.

FamilyGuy3422d ago

When GT5 claimed it i saw no reason why it couldn't be done in other places/games.

The the person talking sh!t about Prologues Meta score:
Well it was OBVIOUS downplay by reviewers because of it being a $40 sample/demo. Had it been, say $15 at launch those reviews would be through the roof.

The comparison is pointless anyway, lets see what the Official GT5 actually gets. It might not even beat whatever Forza 3 gets (i hear it's customization is top-notch so...) but i Guarantee it will have a Good score and Plenty of *sales*

Game13a13y3422d ago

1080p? are you sure the DVD9 can fit? if Halo 3 can't do it, the megaton of Microsoft isn't running on 1080p, there's little chance this one will be...

pixelsword3422d ago

That's all I want to know, because if it is native, then this will be the first big (as in size) game for the 360 that I know of; which bodes well for the 360's future.

Narutone663422d ago

the version that was running on a PC. Or maybe the CG movie was running on that resolution. Come on now, just look at all the box for games on the 360. You'll know who's full of BS.

FamilyGuy3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

wrong quote

really duh3422d ago

Thats the worst SDF accusation I'v heard today are you joking? if so nevermind the comment.

MGSR THE HD VERSION3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

has any one played a pc game?

handling resolutions in games is up to the hardware, the only time when resolution and space need each other is when Multimedia comes into play "movies".

a good example of what I'm talking about would be this,

the Sonic Unleashed demo weighs 200 mbs on xbl whereas the video of THAT demo weighs 700 mbs.

http://www.gamersyde.com/le...

PS360PCROCKS3421d ago

"1080p? are you sure the DVD9 can fit? if Halo 3 can't do it, the megaton of Microsoft isn't running on 1080p, there's little chance this one will be..."

Omg, you need to leave now and never come back to a technical article ever again. Blu-Ray is hyped for uncompressed audio, video, textures. The hardware determines the resolution not the disc, just wow...

Game13a13y3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

apparantly you are the clueless one and needs to crawl back to your troll forest. do you know why Blu-ray holds more space than a DVD? have you ever brought a HD movie? have you ever downloaded anything off XBL/PSN? if so, do u notice the file size fo 720p is always less than 1080p? hm? have you ever downloaded a mp3 file? hm? its way less than a CD file, hm? have you ever used a digital camera? hm? the higher resolution of the picture, the more space its gonna take. lol, get a clue please. uncompressed 1080p file demands more disc space than anything less, period.

Game13a13y3421d ago

huh.... nice try pal. how about the texture of the character, background, etc etc. are you telling me that a PSP game will turn into 1080p once its being played on the PS3 because PS 3 got stronger hardware cause it will automatically upscale it to 1080p? if so, why wouldn't they just release all their game on UMD and it will come out to be 1080p anyway. ohhh my....

BobbySaget3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

@Game13a13y the.. retarded guy.

The RSX does not have enough bandwith to render high definition textures in real time. If you don't believe me look up the bandwith yourself. In fact, the RSX poses such an extreme bottleneck that it is hardly capable of streaming regular high-quality textures in real time. This is why you see higher-resolution textures in EVERY SINGLE 360 vs PS3 comparison. The game with the highest quality textures happens to be KZ2, and even its ambient textures are very low quality.

This is one of the main reasons i didn't buy a PS3. Because the most intriguing use for Blu-ray is High-definition textures. But the system is unable to stream HD textures in real time. This is only one issue on a VERY LONG LIST of bottlenecks that the PS3 has. They may as well have mixed a Intel Quad-core with a Geforce FX.

So before making yourself look like a COMPLETE idiot, maybe you should learn about your own God [email protected] console.

The reason HD videos take up more space, is because they actually ARE 1080p images. The RSX does not need to stream/render a 1080p image in a 3d environment. It simply needs to show it on screen. Therefore , clearly space is not the issue(in this situation), when it comes to gaming, as you may have noticed, computers have supported massive amounts of storage space for the last 10 years, yet are not necessarily capable of High-definition gaming. While, in the case of video, my 5 year old laptop can run 'HD VIDEO', if you hadn't noticed most Monitors are higher than HD. The CRT im using right now came with a Compaq i bought about 9-10 years ago, and even it supports higher resolution than 1080p.

Therefore the only "benefit" of having Blu-ray is uncompressed audio, and 'more content'. However uncompressed audio sounds exactly the same as compressed audio (unless your using 7.1), and 'more content' can easily be made up for by using additional disks.

Thus far, Blu-ray has rarely resulted in 'more content' for example if you take a look at the components on several games you will see sloppy coding, and the over use of uncompressed data. The developers have no space limit, so they essentially take a bunch of short cuts and allow Blu-ray + The cell to do the work for them. The Cell helps with sloppy coding and Blu-ray allows for a slew of uncompressed and duplicate data.

This reminds me of an example a while back. I will look for the article. A hardware guru was looking through the content on a Blu-ray disk and they noticed that the developers had duplicated the same textures/objects/sprites/etc for every single level. So instead of having one "brick texture" the developers intentionally duplicated the same "brick texture" for each level thereby increasing the amount of spaced used. Either they are stupid, or were trying to give credibility to Blu-ray.

But i digress. learn your Fuc#$ng system. Dont confuse 1080p resolution with 1080p textures. If the PS3 WAS CAPABLE of streaming HD textures in real time, then yes space would be an issue. But it cant.

MGSR THE HD VERSION3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

"huh.... nice try pal. how about the texture of the character, background"

i don't think you understand much about this, a game like crisis has many highly detailed textures for both environments and characters all on 1 dvd, and people have said that they can run that at 1080p. it's cause in reality textures really don't weigh that much.

example,

these are textures to use on character models, now tell me how much do they weigh,
http://www.noctua-graphics....

these textures are used in really high quality graphics work.
http://www.noctua-graphics....

" etc etc. are you telling me that a PSP game will turn into 1080p once its being played on the PS3 because PS 3 got stronger hardware cause it will automatically upscale it to 1080p? if so, why wouldn't they just release all their game on UMD and it will come out to be 1080p anyway. ohhh my...."

........no where did i say that,

i said it's up to the power of the hardware, my god.

first things first the hardware has to support it, next the game it's self has to support it along with your TV. that's how it's done.

and it seems that a member of turn 10 has reveled that forza3 can run at 1080p at 60 fps.

Perkel3421d ago

@ bobby sagget

yes and uncharted 1 didn't stream any mindblowing textures.. rotfl

http://www.freewebs.com/zac...

http://www.vgblogger.com/wp...

Game13a13y3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

bubbles to you, Perkel, for pointing out my point for the mentally challenged fanboys. :)

hey, 360 fanboys, let the games do the talking, lets wait and see if forza 3 really runs on 1080p @ 60 FPS natively and it all fits on one DVD disc. i repeat, ONE DVD DISC.

prunchess3421d ago

Why don't you email MS and ask them if Forza3 Runs At 1080p 60 Fps and settle this. Personally I believe that if this was the case MS would have been repeated this a number of times during E3. I mean they spent about an hour on Natal at the conference.

Christopher3421d ago

No way in hell is any game this generation going to run at a native 1080p resolution. It'll be upscaled 720p at best.

siyrobbo3421d ago

surely 1080p is overkill? they could get a lot more details in if they stick to 720p, and the difference is neglegable. Look at MGS4, that only renders at 1024x768 and thats ont of the best looking games this gen!

Montrealien3421d ago

these articles are always funny. I see uncharted 1 beeing thrown around here, and the power of the Blue ray for 1080p. yet mostly all of sony's first party games are in 720p. Can some one tell me why that is? And lets not forget, when we point out that Killzone 2, Uncharted, Infamous, Ratchet and Clank are all in 720p, we are reminded that 720p is just fine.

I am sure that Forza 3 will not be native 1080p, but it will at least be upscaled 1080p, like all 360 games. I have always wondered why games like Killzone 2, Uncharted and the rest, are not at least Upscaled, but then again, it does not matter, 720p native is just fine.

Anon19743421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

I've got a new home theater projector and the second I punch 1080p with my 360 it just goes blank. No issue with my PS3 through HDMI though. I'd been told before that 1080p was possible through component cables but I have yet to see it work. Anyone have their 360 doing 1080p with component?

Edit Below: Thanks, Montrealien. I wasn't sure if it was the case or if it was just an myth. It's weird though, because before I shelled out for a longer HDMI cable, my PS3 was hooked up and putting out 1080p through the same cable I have my 360 plugged into now. Maybe it's just my Sanyo projector and 360 don't play nice.

Gam713421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

I was going to post a comment in this thread about the article but then I realised its a 360 thread so only the SDF are allowed to post here.

I was going to post some facts but then I realised I don't own a PS3 and this being an SDF thread with me not being a member of the SDF that means only FUD and lies can be posted here.

I was going to post something to contribute to the discussion but then I read the post in here and realised the only thing that's welcome here is trolling.

Instead of giving in to your insecurities and trying to convince yourselves the fud you're spreading is true by having other clueless trolls agree with you why don't you play games instead of hating them.

You know like the Nazi's should have read books instead of burning them.

I'm sure GT5 will still be pretty and a good game you don't have to feel threatened and scared when you see the words "Forza 3" and "360"

Be gamers for once and play. I hear you have a game to play now so enjoy it.

Montrealien3421d ago

I have an LG 47" and my 360 is plugged with component cables and displays in full 1080p. I have heard that some TVs dont allow component cables to display in 1080p, I may be wrong though. However like I said, I am not having any issues on my TV, so I don`t know.

Tito Jackson3421d ago

...is that ive still been enjoying Forza 2. Still. :)

slinkey1233421d ago

"1080p? are you sure the DVD9 can fit? if Halo 3 can't do it, the megaton of Microsoft isn't running on 1080p, there's little chance this one will be..."

ROFL.. Games and software can run at any resolution and it wont increase the size. Nearly all games on PC run at 2560x1600 and fit on a single DVD9, with the exception of a few. Content like textures, models, audio and video is what increases the file size.

just to prove my point I can run n64 games using an emulator on my PC at 1080p or more and it doesn't increase the file size of the game.

sloth4urluv3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

you really have no clue what you are talking about.

The resolution that a game is rendered at is independent of model detail and texture resolution.

Yes if you can play a psp game on a PS3 and the emulator supports it you can play the game at 1080p.

I have a N64 emulator on my computer and I can play N64 games at 1920x1080 with 8xAA etc...

All the examples you listed dont make any sense. Of course a 1080p VIDEO!! is going to take up more space than a 720p one. Same with a pictures. But that has nothing to do with how a game engine works.

I guess using your logic a webpage will load faster if I have the screen windowed instead of full screen... Idiot.
If you dont really know what you are talking about please dont pretend you do.

aliveinboston3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

It's just not in the same class as GT5 Prologue. It only draws half the cars. And the material shaders are simply inferior as everything looks like it's made of just the same one or two materials.

The light and shadow effects are simply nowhere near as good as GT5: Prologue. Pull up actual c***pit gameplay videos of each game and it's just glaringly obvious. Even the few real-time replays shown (not the prerendered DIY trailer segments) betray signs of an engine under stress with blurry pseudo-reflections, flashing textures, etc... What's more there's no actual HDR. At best it's RGB FP10 MDR (medium dynamic range) because that's the best the 360 hardware is designed to perform whereas GT5:Prologue has superb, true HDR (High Dynamic Range).

Turn10 has maximized the art for Forza 3 within the constraints of the 360 hardware but it's obvious they've hit a ceiling. There's simply much less being rendered on-screen and what's being rendered is simply not of the same quality.

It's no wonder that they keep running away from direct comparisons with GT5 not just in their original presentation but even when directly approached by the press.

In their preview, Eurogamer stated that it's visuals are slightly "less clinical" (read: insipid, dull and lifeless) than Forza 2 and don't achieve the "near-photorealism" of GT5 or the excitment of a couple of high profile arcade games.

Gam713421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

And do you have any proof of that boston or is it what you wish to be true?

""less clinical" (read: insipid, dull and lifeless)"
No that's what YOU read into it.
What you read and the truth are clearly two different things. Take how you read the article as proof if you want.

EDIT ABOVE:
Now I know you're a sony fanboy you lying mess.
Here's the full quote
"Forza 3 looks a little less clinical that its predecessor - but still quite clinical, and despite Turn 10's confidence that it has the best-looking racing game in the world on its hands, it can't quite match GT5 Prologue's near-photorealism, GRID's bustling track drama or Need For Speed Shift's thrilling in-car view."

Less clinical than it's PREDECESSOR!!!
"Microsoft has three tracks on show, all originals, all set in a vertiginous, rocky and green alpine setting. A road circuit, a test circuit and a Formula One-style track, they are relatively fast and sweeping with some interesting bumps and camber changes - and pretty, too: lush, crisp, colourful and brightly lit, just like the cars, which sport full damage-modelling (cosmetic, simulation or intermediate) and can even roll."

Seems they liked the graphics and wasn't downplaying them as you "READ" it. They didn't say insipid dull and lifeless Nasim, they said "lush, crisp, colourful and brightly lit, just like the cars, which sport full damage-modelling (cosmetic, simulation or intermediate) and can even roll."

see that a quote.

Now go take your damage control elsewhere and be grateful you have GT coming someday, a beautiful impressive game (see how I READ things) and enjoy it instead of trolling and spreading spin and fud here.
You lost all credibility and made yourself look like the lying nonsensical fool you are.

edgeofblade3421d ago

The amount of ignorance in this thread is just STAGGERING!

-VGA and component can do this just fine, so HDMI has nothing to do with the discussion.

-1080p has everything to do with processing, and nothing to do with disk size, so Blu-ray has nothing to do with this discussion.

-There is positively no reason a 360 couldn't put out a 1080p native signal.

Now, if we can stop quoting Sony's junk PR word for word, maybe we can consider the CONTENT of a game before we go off making irrational generalizations that pander to our preconceived, ill-developed sense of what's "better". And that's not necessarily what Sony TELLS you is better.

aliveinboston3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

1) I never said they "downplayed" the graphics. That's entirely your interpretation of what I said. What I pointed out was say that there are at least three games out there which they think have better visuals. One for it's relative photorealism (GT5) and the other two for the sense of speed and excitement conveyed.

In other words, although they said the game looked good, when they, for the sake of the article, compared Forza 3's visuals with the visuals of three other games, they placed Forza 3 fourth.

2) Who the hell is Nasim?

Gam713421d ago

They don't compare the graphics of all four games just Forza 2 and 3 and say it doesn't quite match GT5 Prologue's near-photorealism.

But the main comparison is between Forza 2 and 3.
You said
"It only draws half the cars. And the material shaders are simply inferior as everything looks like it's made of just the same one or two materials."

Sounds like you're down playing to me.
Then read the rest of your dissection of Forzas graphics. All downplaying. You barely say anything nice and when you do you take it back with the next sentence

"
Turn10 has maximized the art for Forza 3 within the constraints of the 360 hardware but it's obvious they've hit a ceiling. There's simply much less being rendered on-screen and what's being rendered is simply not of the same quality."

I could've used the first quote by including the "The lighting isn't bad, it's actually good
It's just not in the same class as GT5 Prologue" that preceded the comment.

"Microsoft has three tracks on show, all originals, all set in a vertiginous, rocky and green alpine setting. A road circuit, a test circuit and a Formula One-style track, they are relatively fast and sweeping with some interesting bumps and camber changes - and pretty, too: lush, crisp, colourful and brightly lit, just like the cars, which sport full damage-modelling (cosmetic, simulation or intermediate) and can even roll. Forza 3 looks a little less clinical that its predecessor - but still quite clinical, and despite Turn 10's confidence that it has the best-looking racing game in the world on its hands, it can't quite match GT5 Prologue's near-photorealism, GRID's bustling track drama or Need For Speed Shift's thrilling in-car view."

Where do they compare the graphics in all 4?
Where did they place it fouth?
If they did from that the GT surely didn't finish top as it was beaten for excitement, speed and in car view.

Nasim is one of the worst ps3 trolls on this site. Always uses a new name due to being constantly banned.
You sounded like him.

aliveinboston3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

Statement:
"Forza 3 looks a little less clinical that its predecessor - but still quite clinical"
Breakdown:
"Clinical" is not a compliment. In the context of aesthetics it's a term commonly used to liken something to the bare and basic decor of a clinic and here the term is clearly being used as a criticism. I've provided the formal definition of "clinical" at the bottom of the post.

Statement:
"and despite Turn 10's confidence that it has the best-looking racing game in the world on its hands"
Breakdown:
This means they are directly disagreeing with the claims of the developer that it's the best looking game in the world and they are about to explain.

Statement:
"it can't quite match GT5 Prologue's near-photorealism"
Explanation:
1st game that has better visuals

Statement:
"GRID's bustling track drama"
Explanation:
2nd game that has better visuals

Statement:
"or Need For Speed Shift's thrilling in-car view."
Explanation:
3rd game with better visuals

For your convenience:

Definition of "clinical" taken from thefreedictionary.com
clinical
Adjective
1. of or relating to the observation and treatment of patients directly: clinical trials of a new drug
2. of or relating to a clinic
3. logical and unemotional: they have a somewhat clinical attitude to their children's upbringing
4. (of a room or buildings) plain, simple, and usually unattractive

tatical3421d ago

If you take a 720p game and render it natively at 1080p it won't use any more disc space. The game can run at natively at 1080p (not upscaled) BUT, it'll still have 720p "textures". Replacing "720p textures" with "1080p textures" WILL USE MORE DISC SPACE. 1080p textures use about 2.25 times the disc space (a 4.44MB 720p texture = 10MB 1080p texture).

Rally car example:
1080p render/720p texture=
Sharp edges all around the car/blurry logos and decals on the car.

bobbysagettwo3420d ago

Ironic, isnt it. That the PS3 fanboys are the ones OBSESSED with hardware, yet the 360 fanboys are the ones that understand how the hardware works. They understand how the hardware in the PS3 works, better than PS3 owners do.

Just goes to show you the "type" of audience, each console has.

Anyways please refer to my post (on Bobbysaget) above. The ONLY REASON "HD" would take up more disk space, is if the textures are HD textures. But the PS3 (RSX) cannot, i repeat, cannot, render HD textures in real time. In fact it even struggles with regular high quality textures. Therefore the textures in a PS3 game are generally the SAME SIZE as the textures on a 360 game, or smaller.

So in THIS REGARD, no HD does not take up more space. at all.

This isn't "my opinion" however you will still take away my bubbles and disagree with me. Your animosity only is only paralleled by your lack of knowledge.

The point is, this is a statement of FACT. This is how the hardware works. This is the truth. Call it whatever you want. HD gaming Does not take more disk space unless the elements on the disk take up more space. This means.. audio... video.... textures....etc. So yes, Blu-Ray has more room to hold HD audio files, HD videos, etc. But it doesn't hold HD textures (which apply to the ACTUAL game). BECAUSE THE RSX DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH BANDWITH.

60FPS/1080p have no dependence on audio or video files. So this isnt relevant.

Gam713420d ago

Boston how does any of that prove the 360 has been maxed out which was your original point?

Using a dictionary ref to prove your already tenuous point shows desperation.
Or do you think I am so stupid I don't know what clinical means when you're the one twisting the use of the word and the context it was taken in to illustrate your point?
So you do agree by using the WHOLE quote that you admit you was deliberately misleading everyone nitpicking the first few words of a paragraph and the last few words then splicing them together and passing that of as a quote?

You know what that is? use a thesaurus if you don't.

""Clinical" is not a compliment. In the context of aesthetics it's a term commonly used to liken something to the bare and basic decor of a clinic and here the term is clearly being used as a criticism. I've provided the formal definition of "clinical" at the bottom of the post."
Really? the definition is right but out of place here.
He says "Forza 3 looks a little less clinical that its predecessor - but still quite clinical" You see that. A WHOLE quote. Not parts twisted to suit my argument try that... oh wait you can't.
If something is clinical it can be a compliment and it was here. Basically they're saying it's not quite as polished as it's predecessor. When a sports team puts on a clinical display is that not a compliment? In you world no but in the real world yes. It means an almost perfect display.

You used that (when you was misleading people) to compare it to GT5 and as proof the 360 was maxed out. Of course the 360 being maxed is your opinion with no proof and you deliberately searched for one other person to backup your OPINION but couldn't find it so you found what you wanted by reading into things that aren't there and misquoting people people by deliberately giving your definition of that quote you "found".

You ignored how the person said the graphics were lush and colourful, pretty etc.
Spin spin spin.

Of course you couldn't include that. Then you would be wrong and have no point.

With all of your quotes from that article why don't you use the ones on how good the game looks? You spend enough time making things up you could save some of your energy for giving people facts.

Statement:
"and despite Turn 10's confidence that it has the best-looking racing game in the world on its hands"
Breakdown:
This means they are directly disagreeing with the claims of the developer that it's the best looking game in the world and they are about to explain.

Second opinion - IT'S THE REVIEWERS OPINION. It isn't any more proof it's not the best looking than yours. A shock I know but look out of your window.
The universe still here?
See you're not infallible and your word isn't the what gives the universe life.

Statement:
"it can't quite match GT5 Prologue's near-photorealism"
Explanation:
1st game that has better visuals

Second opinion - Subjective. Have Turn 10 ever said the want photo-realism? If they have and you can provide a quote, a FULL quote with a link so I can check as you have a habit of lying and twisting someones quotes to suit yourself then I will agree, but you're only using that to diminish the quality of the graphics in the game something that quote doesn't achieve or has the intent to. Have you never heard of differing styles? People are saying U2 is the best looking PS3 game but does it have the realism of KZ2? How can it be better then?
In your world it can't.
Differing styles.

Statement:
"GRID's bustling track drama"
Explanation:
2nd game that has better visuals

Second opinion - How? They don't mention graphics just action. You're seeing that as graphics but can't explain how. Remember Turn 10 said the have the best LOOKING game not the best graphics. DMC4 has far more action than LBP so it must look better than LBP right?

Statement:
"or Need For Speed Shift's thrilling in-car view."
Explanation:
3rd game with better visuals

Second opinion - Better visuals for the in car view yes but not overall as you're implying. Also doesn't mean it has better graphics. Have you seen NfS in car view. The motion makes it look so realistic thats how it beats GT5 and Forza. Not graphics but the overall VISUAL effect.

You took one word in a statement that you made up to suit you and have based all your argument around that.
Again I say ignoring the previous comments taking about how good it looks.

Again to everyone sorry about this long post. Wonder if it's the longest on here?

+ Show (38) more repliesLast reply 3420d ago
DevastationEve3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

1080p 60 fps confirmed with polygon models 10X times better than forza2.

"Will be introduced in order, the graphics and physics for the first operation, the previous frame 720p/60 from view, 1080p/60 frame viewing has evolved, with 400 real KOKKUPITTOBYU all models. Car models, and using the previous 10 times more polygons, is beautiful enough differences at a glance. Logo MANIFAKUCHARA, BENCHIRETINGU, and stop lamp, are all enhanced to include details of drawing, while achieving the necessary quality of live.The update these terms of graphics, "Gran Turismo 5 Prologue" will be raised to levels equivalent to or greater than."

sonarus3422d ago

lol so you really think 1080p is coming and microsoft turn 10 and every other e3 covering site "conveniently" forgot to mention it except for this random foreign website

common guys i know you are smarter than this

DevastationEve3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

why don't you go and prove it wrong, go find something that can say different. other than that it remains 1080p (said by a person working inside turn 10)

sonarus3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

The fact that the article has no source or quote means i won't waste my time

But hey go ahead and believe foreign website when microsoft announced ONLY 60fps and not 1080p. No harm done in fooling oneself

DevastationEve3422d ago

look, what made you believe that GT5 is 1080p?

it wasn't god or your instincts, it was the developers right, they said it. so are you going to turn down an other developer just cause they make games on an other console?

40cal3422d ago

1080p resolution requires a high level of bandwidth that only HDMI can provide. There are however other means of delivering a 1080p signal via Ethernet (using various video compression technologies) and a possible future Component Video solution that is currently under study and review by various industry associations.

sonarus3422d ago

WTF are you talking about. I didn't condem forza 3 i never mentioned SH1T about GT5 all i said was no confirmation of 1080p and all of a sudden i have condemned forza 3 as a trash game?

Forza 3 will be a great sim racer and you will love it the same running at 720p. I have no idea what you are going on about. We aren't here to compare two games or even pass judgement on whether or not forza 3 will be good. I am simply stating the FACT that if microsoft, turn 10 and other respectable media outlets don't say Forza 3 runs at 1080p then it doesn't run at 1080p

really duh3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

You're full of it. The extra bandwidth you mention with the HDMI versions you mention are only needed for cross talk, Deep color features etc and HD Audio. Games use RGB color format. Nothing wrong with using a TOSLINK cable for audio. Forza 3 is a two disc game.

I use a cable that is 4.95Gbps for the 360 because it doesn't need that much bandwidth and I use a 10Gbps HDMI cable with my PS3 because it plays Blu-Ray movies and has features like 120hz, deep color/ x.v.color, that need more bandwidth even though the only needs 6.68Gbps?.

GiantEnemyCrab3422d ago

For those implying the 360 is not capable of 1080p you need to go do some research.

1080p is old news for the 360 and it can be done with HDMI 1.0 and also via VGA for the early non-HDMI 360's.

I feel like I'm back in 2006 here.

cmacdonald3422d ago

My 360 doesn't have hdmi, and the same is true for 80% of 360 owners.

40cal3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

http://www.sync-blog.com/sy...

So all 10 of you guys or gals are telling me that Robert Gumiela, Sr. Product Manager, CE Division at Samsung Electronics does not know what he is talking about. That's what you are saying right?

40cal3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

Yes HDMI 1.0 can output 1080p video. You are right, that was the point of HDMI, but the HDMI output on Elite cannot pass multichannel LPCM, Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD master Audio. It is is useless for HD audio.

But we are not talking about audio right now.

7ero H3LL3422d ago

i don't think people should be so surprised that 360 can do 1080p, a couple of new games are now beginning to use that resolution, and rare is using that resolution and fps for a xbla game. (perfect dark)

I_am_rushin3422d ago

Speaking logically. If it was 1080p I am sure Microsoft would have taken the extra 10 secs to highlight that.

IdleLeeSiuLung3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

Sorry, that guy is sorely mistaken. 1080p is fully capable to be output on regular VGA and even on Component connections. For HDMI 1.0, see here:

http://marchignoliantonio.n...

By the way, 1080p only specifies the vertical resolution not the horizontal. Thus no game to date that looks amazing is running at Full 1080p (1920x1080) on a console.

Basically you can mess around with the numbers since it has two dimensions. This applies to both PS3 and Xbox 360.

FamilyGuy3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

The absolute ONLY reason not to believe this is the fact that it wasn't mentioned while the head dude was on M$ stage during their conference.
Why wouldn't he spend the extra 5 seconds to say "and it's running at 60fps and Full 1080p!" ? maybe he just forgot to and if it does turn out to be upscaled it will be outted as such upon it's release by some tech head.

Other than that I can fully believe this.
Component can't do 1080p but the 360 does have VGA that works with every model as long as your tv accepts it.

IdleLeeSiuLung
You're wrong about 2 things:
Component CANNOT due 1080p, it's like fake or something. For example: can get a tv that only supports 720p/1080i to support 1080p through component but NOT through HDMI or VGA. It works through component only because it it not truly 1080p. It just claims to be.

Second thing: "Thus no game to date that looks amazing is running at Full 1080p (1920x1080) on a console."
You're either completely wrong or being too subjective with your use of "that looks amazing". Not only is GT5P true 1080p (horizontal and vertical standard) so is Wipeout HD. And i guess Super Street Fighter HD remix can fall into category of not looking amazing, in other words "simple graphics".

IdleLeeSiuLung3422d ago

No, component cable is capable of full 1080p60. It just isn't enabled due to movie studio restrictions in most if not all devices.

FamilyGuy3422d ago

FIRST HAND that is NOT true
component does not due true 1080p, the difference is more than obvious when you compare its 1080p output to HDMI, DVI or VGA. The picture quality is MUCH lower. It looks like 720p plain and simple.

I suspect that it's bitrate is simply lowered in comparison to the others and thats what causes it's lower looking video quality so by that probability it DOES do it but just not worth claiming.

1080p through component looks identical to 720p through component and looks the same as 720p through HDMI but not the same as 1080p through HDMI.

When i say "first hand" i mean that i literally tried this out on my tvs when my smaller (32in 720p tv) claimed it was doing 1080p through component but was scrambled with HDMI. I then tested it all on my 47in 1080p tv.

SaberEdge3422d ago (Edited 3422d ago )

No, Familyguy, I'm sorry, but you're wrong on this one. Component is fully capable of passing a 1080p signal, it is the output device (Blu-ray player, DVD upscaler, etc) that often restricts such resolution to HDMI output.

Some devices, however--The Xbox 360 HD-DVD player, for example-- CAN output 1080p via component, provided the content has no encryption.

The restrictions applied to the passing of a 1080p signal are due to DRM measures and not a physical limitation of the component output itself.

For games there are no such restrictions. The 360 has already had some games that output at 1080p resolution.

evrfighter3422d ago

"No, component cable is capable of full 1080p60"

This is 2009 right? Or did I click on an old article?

FamilyGuy3422d ago

I am NOT talking about video restrictions i am talking about the ACTUAL QUALITY of 1080p video produced through a component cable. It is downgraded and no where near the visual quality of HDMI, VGA or DVI. If it's quality is not the same then how can it be on the same level?
TRY IT OUT FOR YOURSELF.

Im not saying it does not work, im saying it's a facade, fake, untrue, not what is to be expected. It produces a picture but the quality of that picture is questionable.

There's no argument against something i've experienced first hand. I've seen it with my own two eyes so my judgment cannot be swayed.

Mo0eY3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

Honestly, who really cares?

Here's what I'm thinking: Most people who bought an Xbox bought the Xbox Arcade... aka the cheapest console on the market right now. Do you honestly think that the 13 year olds and preteens whose parents bought the console have a HDTV they can see this crap on? Maybe like 1% of them and they are probably apart of the Vizio brand which manufacture some of the crappiest looking HDTVs you can afford.

It's also been proven that a huge portion of people cannot tell the difference between 480p and 1080p (I honestly don't know how...). All this arguing over component, vga, dvi, hdmi is pointless.

really duh3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

"Most people who bought an Xbox bought the Xbox Arcade"

Thats not true at all Microsoft's data tells them the Xbox 360-60Gb console sells more than the others.
Your Vizio/HDTV/parents/wealth comments are ignorant as fu*k dude. Are you a kid? or are you joking?

The difference between 480p and 1080p are vastly deferent my legally blind aunt can see that the quality shines with the higher resolution thats not a joke. Are you saying because Vizio's picture is not on par with other displays 1080p doesn't matter?

projectile3421d ago

Lol Family guy. You have no technical understanding and state your "source" as you tried it yourself?
Some TV's are not have optimized for 1080p over component hence not great quality.
If you tried this with your PS3 its understandable because the PS3 component video is not very good. 1080p over component on 360 looks the same as 1080p over hdmi on the ps3. The reason for hdmi is not better quality but DRM.

Most old high resolution projectors costing 100 000 $ used component.
Barco 1209 had 2500x2000 at 120Hz. It came in 2000 LONG before HDMI was even thought of.

Se product sheet here:
http://www.curtpalme.com/do...

And read this:
http://www.tomshardware.co....

FamilyGuy3421d ago (Edited 3421d ago )

Actually the test was with my HD-Dvd player. (i already knew sony screwed their component cable users for some strange reason (unless they fixed that low-color-wash in a firmware update i wasn't aware of))

I have 3 HDTVs, 2 32inchers and one 47incher

On the 32in tvs they will NOT play any 1080p signal through HDMI or VGA, Period. Will not at all. But with a component cable, viola! "1080p" on tvs that supposedly only support as high as 1080i/720p

So i took the test to my 47in to see what the quality looked like as it was a better judge on 1080p signal comparisons.

Beyond that i guess your projector facts prove me wrong but what about the quality of the picture shown on those old projectors? which was my point of all this anyways. The quality isn't the same through component to a level that i would hardly call components 1080p output "Full" 1080p output.

I could probably test out that "lower bitrate" theory with my PS3 though, as it show the bitrate in mbps when you press info on the menu while watching digital video files. I could watch a short scene (from a converted mkv HD file) in a movie and see its rate over HDMI then check with component. But im more interested in arguing than testing i guess :P

projectile3421d ago

I would think 2500*2000 looked better than hdmi does running 1080p
2500*2000 = 5 000 000 pixels
1920*1080 = 2 073 000 pixels
1280*720 = 921 000
That is a huge difference, if component did not improve over 720p I do not think they would support any higher resolutions. It would just be a waste.

You say you used a hd dvd player, I think they deliberately make the component quality worse because they want everyone on HDMI where they have DRM control. This is why many people like component cabels. they have no DRM issues and work everywhere.