Definition Transition

By Rob Fahey Published 4 September, 2009

The HD transition is still a work in progress - and it's happening more slowly than expected.

Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.

The reshuffling of console offerings and price points by Sony and Microsoft in recent weeks has had a number of consequences - some more surprising than others. UK commentary has tended to focus on the unexpected price rise for the 360 Arcade model, which has actually raised the base level cost of entry to the current-gen console market, but another move which has raised eyebrows is the decision to bundle very basic AV cables with both the slim PS3 and the new Xbox 360 Elite model.

What this means is that, several years into the console generation which was meant to herald the glorious arrival of high definition, not a single console system is presently being sold with an HDMI cable in the box. Microsoft, at least, bundles a cable which can output component, which does enable some HD resolutions - the PS3 Slim simply doesn't come with any HD-capable cables at all.

Vocal consumers have voiced disbelief at the move, and many in the industry haven't been far behind. After all, years of visiting friends' houses to discover previous generations of console hardware plugged into perfectly decent TVs with dreadful composite cables or, worse, RF adapters, have taught us that most consumers will use whatever cable comes in the box and never bother buying a new one. Aren't Sony and Microsoft selling themselves - and this entire generation of hardware and software - short?

Perhaps not. From the perspectives of these companies, they want to include the cable which will be of most utility to the largest group of consumers possible, and it's clear that whatever research they have done suggests that the majority of consumers don't need - or rather, can't use - an HDMI cable. Neither firm wants to put an assortment of cables in the box "just in case" - each additional cable erodes millions from the firm's profitability, after all.

So something - and I'm going to assume that it's detailed research, rather than a cost-saving hunch - leads Sony and Microsoft to believe that the lion's share of their consumers aren't going to be plugging their consoles into HD-ready, HDMI-equipped TVs. But this is late 2009 - hasn't the world gone HD yet, as we were all led to believe it would?

Supporting evidence that all is not well with the HD transition comes from Epic Games' Mark Rein, who told Eurogamer earlier this summer that "over half the users who played Gears of War 2 so far do not have HDTVs".

Gears of War is a core gamer franchise, beloved of early adopters and the soi disant hardcore. If less than half of those users are playing on HDTVs, what must the percentages be like for games like FIFA and Pro Evolution Soccer - let alone Singstar and Buzz, or popular movie tie-in titles?

Listening to the vocal minority of upstream gamers who post on internet forums and make their voices heard, one would think that HD had reached a high degree of market penetration and that SD television remained only as a rapidly disappearing relic of the past. The reality, however, is that the landscape for HD television is still extremely fractured.

We've known for years that HD televisions were routinely being sold to users who didn't know that they needed additional hardware and cables to actually see HD programmes and content. It's extremely common, even today, to walk into a home and see an expensive HDTV hooked up to a DVD player (non-upscaling) and a standard-definition cable or satellite box. The owners are often convinced that they're watching in HD, simply by virtue of owning a HDTV.

What's becoming increasingly clear is that the inverse is also true. HD content players - such as games consoles - are being sold to households that don't have a HDTV suitable for them, and are therefore being left to run in SD. In cases where a consumer owns both a HDTV and a HD console, there's a strong possibility that they've used the wrong cable or the wrong settings, and are getting an SD picture anyway. It's interesting to wonder to what extent this problem also afflicts Blu-ray players, and may even fuel the lukewarm consumer response to BRD technology.

Faced with this reality, a few conclusions are inescapable. Firstly, Nintendo - as so often in recent years - is the company left laughing all the way to the bank. Sony and Microsoft bet heavily on HDTV adoption to drive their console sales, and many commentators confidently predicted that Nintendo would suffer for its decision to stick with SD technology in the Wii.

Now it seems that the expensive HD hardware in the Xbox 360 and PS3 is sitting idle in a majority of those consoles, a fact which also makes the oft-repeated suggestion that Nintendo is preparing a "Wii HD" revision as a matter of urgency seem a little silly, to say the least.

Secondly, the industry needs to rethink its approach to the HD transition. It was widely expected that the transition would be pretty much done by this stage, but the reality is that legacy devices and cables are holding it back - and the recession hasn't done any favours to the uptake of new televisions either.

Things will get worse before they get better. Sony and Microsoft are both comfortably through the early adopter phases now, and as a result, the percentage of HD-enabled customers is likely to fall sharply as they sell more and more consoles. The first 20 million consumers to buy each console were probably fairly tech-savvy and quite likely to be ready for HD. The next 20 million, however, will be far more likely to be plugging the Xbox 360 into an SD set, or using an inappropriate cable - or, perhaps most notably, plugging the console into a smaller TV in a bedroom.

For developers, this simply means that ensuring that games play well in SD resolutions is going to become increasingly important. For platform holders, it's an even bigger challenge - if the Xbox 360 and PS3 are outputting in SD, their perceived advantage over the Wii is eroded even further. They will have to compete on interface and experience (as they are attempting with their motion control solutions) rather than on visual fidelity.

The bottom line is this - the HD transition cannot be spoken of in the past tense. It's still happening now, much more slowly than many commentators seem to believe. We're probably less than halfway through, and the second half will be much tougher and slower than the first. It makes talk of a transition to 3D seem even more premature. Let's try and get the last transition finished before we worry about the next one.

For more views on the industry and to keep up to date with news relevant to the games business, read GamesIndustry.biz. You can sign up to the newsletter and receive the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial directly each Thursday afternoon.

Picture of Rob.

About Rob Fahey

Read more articles from Rob by visiting the Rob Fahey archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (106) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Pickster #1 3 years ago

    The Xbox 360 and PS3 still have a huge advantage over the Wii even displaying in 'SD'.

    And sorry, for the price paid for both the 360 Elite and PS3, a HDMI cable should not be an extra cost. The ONLY thing that is a positive is the fact that both consoles can use any generic HDMI cable, which is a step in the right direction.

    It should also be noted that using HDMI makes it much harder (on the 360 atleast) to be playing SD on a HDTV.


    Edit:

    I do realise this is about the transition to HD not being as quick as expected by some. Still, shame on MS and Sony for lack of HDMI in the box.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 03:53

  • ybfelix #2 3 years ago

    I think those who stupid enough plug a XBOX360 to HDTV with an composite cable deserve the loss. HDMI cable cost nothing compared to even a bargain game
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 03:56

  • KrissAkabusi #3 3 years ago

    @pickster and ybfelix

    You both sound like spoilt brats. This is an excellent article, it's a very accurate portrayal of where the market is at.

  • Pickster #4 3 years ago

    @ KrissAkabusi

    "You both sound like spoilt brats"

    I feel certain that your one of the devils advocates around here... but either way, how does saying MS and Sony should stick a HDMI cable in the box with their console make anyone sound spoilt?

    Would really like to see what you can whip up in response

  • KrissAkabusi #5 3 years ago

    The article perfectly details why an HDMI cable is likely not in the box Pickster.

  • Pickster #6 3 years ago

    My point is, the 360 Elite (Not arcade) is a premium console, as is the PS3. Sony even went to great lengths to add wifi and blu ray and marketed it as a premium console which is super value compaired to the 360 and Wii.

    Why on earth should it be wrong for anyone to expect these two consoles to come with a HDMI cable. Also you will note at no point did I say a HDMI cable should replce the composite cable.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 04:37

  • PapaSmurf630 #7 3 years ago

    I didn't realise there was anything wrong with composite cables up until reading this article :S Aren't they better then a scart lead? (non HDTV type person)

    To much money for something I don't really really need.

  • Spectral #8 3 years ago

    "I didn't realise there was anything wrong with composite cables up until reading this article :S Aren't they better then a scart lead? (non HDTV type person) "

    Composite is the worst connection available today, one step up from RF cables that you needed to tune the TV to use. A RGB scart cable offers a far better picture. It has to be a proper RGB one though, not just one of those adapters that comes in the box, that just does composite through the scart socket. Another common mistake is people often say they using composite when actually they are using component and vice versa(not saying you are). Component is better than scart and is the best connection available for SD sources, it is also capable of HD although VGA or HDMI are better for that in most cases.

    As for them taking the cables out of the box, its stupid. Had they never included them then fair enough, buying an HDMI cable from ebay is easy and cheap. However it is more the perception that now you're getting less than they previously offered that could hurt them. The same applies to the arcade model, raising the price yet removing the arcade games means you're paying more and getting less than people who bought the same thing a month ago. That wont sit well with most people.
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 07:03

  • spidermanalf #9 3 years ago

    And don't forget they will sell 'officially branded' HDMI cables for about 20quid! And people will buy them instead of buying a cheapo one for about 2-3 quid!

    Also I have family and friends who have HDTVs and not done any research and say they look rubbish, and when I go round I have to faff with all their settings and get them to buy new cables to get it looking decent.

    If you are on this forum, you have a certain level of 'geekness', you have to remember all those people like your parents and siblings out there, you know, the ones that ask you to fix their computers etc, that have no idea about technology and will buy the el cheapo flat screen TVs from Asda as they are on sale, and they cannot buy their old CRT TVs anymore and have no idea about resolutions/refresh rates etc.

    Sometimes I think people on here forget that not everyone in the world is techsavvy!

  • Errol #10 3 years ago

    I'll get an HD TV when it can match my Sony Trinitron sdtv in EVERY department.

    Picture, colour, handling of movement etc.

  • Alkeno #11 3 years ago

    A very good and focused article, maybe MS and Sony missed the point and have been too worried about providing something that most of their customer base can't use... In any case I believe that a HDMI cable should be included on all Xbox 360 and PS3 systems, even only one in ten were going to use them, because HD is the defining feature of the generation! Although everybody knows by now that not including them is just a trick to have stores happy to sell HDMI cables for 30€.

    Let's just hope that the industry gets its ideas clear and we just get rid of the hustle (RF, composite, scart, component... and all those HDMI 1.x), HDMI needs to be the only option available for the next decade at least of people will just start banging their heads into the nearest wall.

    By the way, how are people expected to understand if even the basic advertising is so wrong? I understand that "720p" and "1080p" are good and meaningful names for techy people but are horrible to advertise to normal people, but who thought that calling them "HD Ready" and "Full HD" was any better? It's misleading! HD-Ready? Ready for what? Ready for HD but not Full? If not Full, is it half? How can something that is not Full-HD be HD at all? A cat is only a cat if it is a full cat! Can it become Full with an upgrade? They are so unclear that some people think that they are the same (HD is HD) but from different brands... that IS bad!

  • AaronTurner #12 3 years ago

    The amount of people I know that have their sky / freeview box feeding a 4:3 ratio to a widescreen TV is unbelievable. If people can't even set-up a menu correctly, what hope do they have of selecting the right cable?

  • Emmit_Assassin #13 3 years ago

    @ybfelix
    It's not that people are stupid, its just that the true idiots are the ones selling the HDTV's. All they are bothered about is convincing people that once they buy their tv, they are viewing everything in HD. It's all about the money.
    A local shop to me had an advert on the radio stating that they would take people's tv's away for them when they bought a new HDTV from them. The tag line was 'We will take your tv, even though it will be useless after the digital switchover!' This blatent lie therefore makes them a predator on peoples misconceptions of the digital switchover. Companies don't care if you understand what you are supposed to do with your spanking new HDTV, they have their money, so who gives a flying squirrel s**t? There were many other companies telling people you need a new TV for the switch.
    It's the same with Xbox 360, PS3 and HDTV. The salesman doesn't need to tell you exactly how to hook everything up, they just need to mention the magic word HDTV, or Full HD, and it's sold.
    And the, IMO, is the reason the switch to HD has been so slow. No one seems to know what the hell is going on. They just buy the HDTV and then sit and watch SD TV, and play SD games. But it's because it's not been properly explained to them, not because they are stupid.

  • Stormflood #14 3 years ago

    If people want to spend big money on devices without learning about what they can do, or how they work, let them. The rest of us can enjoy HD in its full glory.

  • FooAtari #15 3 years ago

    Pretty decent article. I can't believe people thought the transition to HD would only take a couple of years.

    Between 720p, 1080i and 1080p, DVD and Blu Ray, Sky+, Sky HD, Cable, Freesat and Freeview, it's no wonder it all confuses many people.

    And people don't want to learn about it. Like many people here who prefer the simplicity of console gaming over the perceived difficulties of PC gaming, people just want to go in, buy a TV, plug in and watch it. And who can blame them?
    None of us are experts in everything. I bet there a lot of people here who put little thought into buying a car other than what it looks like and how it feels during a test drive.

    There are several problems that have caused a slow transition.

    1. Most people are not going to rush out and spend several hundred quid on a TV as soon as new technology is released. Especially when you go into a shop where the TV's are poorly setup and often have terrible images.

    2. Many can't see the difference. It doesn't matter how obvious it looks to you, a lot of people just can't tell the difference of a higher resolution image

    3. It's expensive, you don't just need a new TV. You need a BluRay player, Sky HD or whatever. More than most are prepared are to pay.

    The 360 and PS3 can't handle HD anyway, it's a lot of PR bollocks. Many games are upscaled. Until all games are native 720p AT THE VERY LEAST, and running at a smooth and solid 60fps it's not HD. the 360 and PS3 is NOT HD in full glory.

    Finally, my HDMI cables cost a few pounds. Buying in huge bulk this would probably cost MS/Sony pennies to include in their £299 consoles. No excuse.
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 08:50

  • Emmit_Assassin #16 3 years ago

    @Errol
    I agree. My Panasonic SD TV has the best picture of any SD I've seen, although I'm guessing yours will be a little better, even.
    The only reason I do not have an HDTV as yet, is that the only thing I'd need one for is my Xbox360 to have a slightly better picture. When mine breaks, I'll get one, but untill then, I'm quite happy with SD.
    I think MS and Fony were too quick to advertise the 'new way'. The transition to HD is still a while off whilst companies are more interested in selling HDTV's for no reason, and not telling people how to get the best out of them.
    And, as this excellent article states, they are already touting 3D TV. I thought HD was the next best thing? Does that mean that the machines they are trying to sell us are already about to be outdated?

  • CreepinJesus #17 3 years ago

    "...can output component, which does enable some HD resolutions" - you mean like... the same HD resolutions HDMI can output?

  • Emmit_Assassin #18 3 years ago

    @spidermanalf
    I completely agree! All the youg-un's on here seem to think that if someone isn't tech savvy, they shouldn't exist and deserve everything they get. What a childish thing to think.
    Most people don't want to know how it works, they just want to know that it WORKS. They just want to be told what to do. The amount of peoples laptops and Pc's I've fixed lately, I've given out advice to three work friends on how to set up their Xbox Live, why their router won't let them connect, why their HDTV picture is shite (forgive the latin) why Norton is the biggest rip off this century, why they need an HDTV ( most don't), what TV to buy, when the digital switchover is happening, why it's happening, why his mum moans a bit sometimes at night, (oh, no, sorry that's my son).
    There are so many people who just don't care enough about new tech to read up on it, but yet they don't want to be left out of any new fangled machine their next door neighbour has. Which is why so many people have a Wii, but haven't played it for the last few months. And this is what all companies are preying on at the moment, including MS and Fony.

  • ChocNut #19 3 years ago

    Eh, hello? Did any of the geniuses think that maybe the stats indicate a high percentage of SD users BECAUSE of the in-box cables? Gears shows people just using the cables they got (limiting them to SD automatically) but there could be way more HDTVs.

  • dominalien #20 3 years ago

    Component is better than scart

    This is actually not true, because SCART has a lot of pins and CAN include composite, s-video and component video, if the cable has all the necessary pins connected. Heck, it even includes a pin that tells a 4:3 TV to switch to 16:9 mode if the device on the other end requests it.

    Component (RGB or YCbCr or YPbPr or whatever else there is) has three signals which contain image information and is arguably better than S-Video which has two (although I see no difference - but haven't made any direct comparisons or measurements) and Composite which has only one (and offers decidedly inferior picture to S-Video or Component).

    I am currently visiting my Mum for a couple of weeks and brought my PS3 with me to connect to her 29" CRT TV (first time I'm connecting it to a 4:3 device) and I must say I'm very positively impressed!

    First, image quality is very good (S-Video cable), although the drop in resolution to 576i hasn't made Tomb Raider Underworld any smoother - it still regularly drops frames just like it did in 720p.

    Second, TRU and any other game I put on it are especially tailored to fill the entire screen in 4:3 (although of course I can't say if all games are like this). I fully expected to get a 16:9 picture with black bars on the top and the bottom. A nice surprise and, if anything, shows that a lot of care is given to how the games look in SD and on 4:3 screens (which confirms what the article says).

    All in all, it's been a very positive SD-PS3 experience for me :-)

  • sarcasmoidosis #21 3 years ago

    Cables in general are hard to handle on a console. I got a HDMI with my Elite, but since I only had a LCD, I went shopping for a VGA cable... I could only find one 200 miles away.

    So I bought a HDTV :)

  • dominalien #22 3 years ago

    I completely agree! All the youg-un's on here seem to think that if someone isn't tech savvy, they shouldn't exist and deserve everything they get. What a childish thing to think.

    I don't think that. If everyone were tech savvy, I'd be out of work.

    Oh, and on topic: I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out the lack of HDMI cables with the consoles is due to retailer pressure, where they can tell the consumer "ah, but to get the full experience you need this here 30 € cable". A bit similar to printer makers not including a USB cable.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 09:14

  • kendoji #23 3 years ago

    I love my 35kg standard def tv.

    edit: negged for having a standard def tv - awesome!
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 09:47

  • dominalien #24 3 years ago

    What do you mean "arguably better" there's no argument about it. Component supports 1080p with no issues, SCART and S-video can't support a HD feed at all without significant losses in quality, as any quick look at wiki will tell you.

    You're right, of course. What I meant was "arguably better on an SD CRT screen". My bad.

  • Eraysor #25 3 years ago

    Good article. The idea that people use whatever cable that comes in the box is especially true, I had a friend who had a 50 inch Bravia with a 360 attached on composite cables. Changing it to HDMI made him realise what HD actually was.

  • nickthegun #26 3 years ago

    An old, but relevant, example being the uproar when Dead Rising stuck two fingers up at people with SD TVs.

    I dont think anyone made that mistake again.

    Except, maybe capcom again for lost planet...

  • Retroid #27 3 years ago

    I'm sure most of the people on here are the "tech person" in their families and even, perhaps in their social circle too. If they can be arsed ;)

    Some people I know are perfect example of tech ludditeness; eg being their widescreen TV being fed a 4x3 signal from their Sky box, and their little portable kitchen TV being fed a widescreen signal from a Freeview box. Honestly, they couldn't have set it all up worse if they'd tried. Oh, when I sat down I noticed their widescreen TV was set to 'Cinemarama', thus ensuring that no matter what, NOTHING WAS EVER, EVER IN THE CORRECT ASPECT RATIO.

    /Bursts into tears

  • captain_monk #28 3 years ago

    "It makes talk of a transition to 3D seem even more premature. Let's try and get the last transition finished before we worry about the next one."

    Rubbish! I have not gone to HD yet as my current SD TV is still fine for what I do and is working with very few problems. When the time comes for me to upgrade, if 3D TV's are not stupidly more expensive then a comparable HD TV with no 3D then I'll go for the 3D version. Why wouldn't I?

    People do not need to upgrade their equipment 1 step at a time you know.

    Also, to me the transition to TV's having depth (going 3D), is a much bigger, more obvious transition and bigger selling point than getting a few extra pixels (going HD).

  • UKwoods #29 3 years ago

    Why don't Microsoft/Sony put a voucher in the box which entitles owners of new machines to claim a free HDMI cable? This way, they will not waste money on the people who don't need it but the people who do will more likely start playing in HD. Also i'm very confused by the lack of people with an HDTV. When was the last time you walked into Curry's and saw a CRT or SD only TV for sale? Apart from the tiny portables used by lorry drivers ect they are all HD. Maybe in the USA they may still buy SD tv's but not most countries in Europe.

  • Retroid #30 3 years ago

    Exactly, most of the none-tech people I know have 'gone HD' accidentally, really, as all they wanted was one of them new-fangled flat TVs to replace their ageing CRTs. There are quite a few 32" LCDs on sale in supermarkets and the like which're around the price people are used to paying for TVs.

    Of course, most won't have anything HD plugged into them, but the display is there. That's why it's so annoying to me that HD cables now aren't included; most people don't know, they'll just think the cables in the box are good enough. Even though I've always had to point out (and someone has beaten me to it on these comments) that composite is just about the worst quality connection a modern system can use.

    :(

  • Freek #31 3 years ago

    The Xbox 360 looks lovely using the component output. So they've actually done the right thing there. If you have HD, it works out of the box, if not, the composite cable has that covered aswell. The best of both worlds.
    And remember the 360 diden't have HDMI output at all untill recently.

    But the fact that they have removed the HDMI cable from the Elite box is still a little strange. I mean this is supposed to be the Premium, high end package. You pay extra for a reason, it would be nice if they did give you all the right cables from the start.


    I don't know how true that "people can't tell the difference"' argument is. A friend of my mom dropped by a while ago, she's well into her 60s and absolutly not a techy person but Open Season was on the TV, running of blu-ray in full HD. She was amazed at the quality. And came to me for advice when their TV broke to get an HD tv.
    I gave her a clear list of the requirments and what to look for.

    It could verry well have to do with what the article points out: many HD TVs are set up the wrong way, so obivously people aren't seeing the difference if there is no proper HD image being displayed.
    That's could be a verry big problem with HD in general.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 09:51

  • LilithsCurves #32 3 years ago

    I think it's not only about people not knowing how to hook up an HD device to an HD Tv properly. (if i get a Blu Ray Player with a HDMI cable i will plug one end where it fits on the player and the other end where it fits in the TV). one could argue that the missing HDMI cable in the Xbox360 and PS3 (both currently) will drive people to hook up their HD Tv with a scart cable but i am very sure that the lack of HD experience is the lack of HD television sets in the households. that's the reason why MS and Sony decided to leave out the HDMI cable and use a model that works on both (older and newer televisions). if they had 3 possibilities hdmi cable or sd cable or both cables. and if they didn't want to spend money on both cables, the logical way is to include the sd cable. it is far more likely that a "geek" (said with full respect) will buy a hdmi cable (admitted, he will be cranky but also happy to have now better resolution) then the average citizen buying a scart cable or adapter. he will just be frustrated and return the product. i thought the article was well on spot.

  • Freek #33 3 years ago

    The logical way is what MS has done with the 360: a cable that does both HD and SD. It should be the standard sollution that Sony also adopts.

  • dr_zoidthrob #34 3 years ago

    With the SD TV's still being used, why are more developers/ publishers sticking with HD fonts?

    Trails HD, I'm looking squarely at you - I own a perfectly good SD TV and Trials' font is incredibly hard to read, specifically the times. I have to guess what times my friends have done due to the similarity of the 1, 7, 6, 8, 9 & 0. Saying 'well get an HD TV' isn't a viable option, it should've been noticed at the playtesting stage.

  • Retroid #35 3 years ago

    There's a problem even with MS' solution of a combined composite & component cable: some people just didn't notice the big switch on the cable and used the composite mode.

    I mean, hell, let's face it: some people will always need someone to set things up for them, whether through daftness of 'tech terror' they just want it hooked up as quickly as possible and never to have to look at the back of their hardware ever, ever again.

  • BigJonno #36 3 years ago

    The big problem with HD adoption (that many gamers seem to forget when they're being derisive of people without HDTVs) is that an HDTV doesn't do anything new. If you want to play the latest games, you have to buy a new console or keep your PC relatively current. An HDTV just gives you a better picture. For someone like me, who already has a couple of decent SDTVs and a very limited budget, forking out the cost of two 360s (at least) to get an HDTV of the same size as my existing TVs just isn't going to happen.

    I'd love to upgrade, but I rarely have that kind of money available and when I do, there is always going to be something my family needs or wants more.

  • kungfool #37 3 years ago

    To anyone playing games on SD TV: for the love of god, please make sure you're using a proper RGB SCART cable (NOT a composite cable plugged into a SCART adaptor) - and that it's plugged into the main AV input on your TV. On a lot of SD TVs, the only AV SCART input that takes RGB is the first one. The rest just display the composite signal.

  • ParanoidZombie #38 3 years ago

    Not sure about this, HD ready TVs have reached the "good" price, if you wanna buy a new TV now you're bound to buy something HD, it's just about the same price as a big 4/3 SD. Which means the transition shall be done sooner than later.

    But it's so true that people just don't know how to use their HDTVs, it's like they can't read a fucking manual, went to a friend's house to see his new HDTV and his x360 was set to 4/3 and 480p. Wattafuck???

  • Freek #39 3 years ago

    @DFawkes

    Yes, the old Xbox Elite came with an HDMI cable, they have since removed that from the box.

  • makeamazing #40 3 years ago

    HD is where Widescreen TV's were a few years ago (albeit a few years on from that).... its the same situation. Early adopters buying it, price descreases, then anyone who needs a TV gets HD as standard. HD TV are cheap as chips now so its unlikely thats a problem. I also find it strange that Sony and MS are not including the right cables, but then its not a surprise because its not an actual requirement, so it is extra cost.

    Gears of War is a core gamer franchise, beloved of early adopters and the soi disant hardcore. If less than half of those users are playing on HDTVs, what must the percentages be like for games like FIFA and Pro Evolution Soccer - let alone Singstar and Buzz, or popular movie tie-in titles

    Well i dont have GOW but i have Singstar :) , I think in TVs case there might actually be a larger amount of HD tv users from those that wanted stuff like Sky HD etc.. I didnt have a HD TV downstairs, but the TV that was in Warrenty broke we replaced it with a flatscreen HD TV... i suspect that more people get into HD without actually going out and replacing the current TV for the tech.

    I think HD TV has got alot to thank Sky, Blu Ray format and TV manufacturers for rather than any particular AAA games.

  • Bagpuss #41 3 years ago

    For me its simple ..... i wont go HD so long as i have to pay those fascist cunts the Murdochs at SKY for the privelge of watching a decent amount of HD content.

    Freesat dosent (yet) have enough on it to justify the expense, when it does, i'll buy an HD set.

    Buying an HD set 'just' for a console isnt justified in my world.

  • mattius30 #42 3 years ago

    What HD needs is a single mouthpiece to extoll its virtues and explain in clear, simple language how to get HD - in a similar vein as the Digital TV Switchover group. Because for some, the information on going HD is just bewildering.

    It has been difficult explaining to some friends and family the benefits of HD. Not only how to get it and set it up but also its benefits. People have already been told that DVD is better quality than video and that digital TV is better quality than analogue - and now there is another even better quality??? I remember my mum saying 'why would I want to see every bit of detail on a person's face?'

    Also - when I was a newcomer to HD, I Googled the subject and the amount of information bewildered me. All the different resolutions, the connections, the refresh speeds, the contrast settings. It took me a good while to trawl and filter all the info and opinions to decide upon which TV to get - and in the end that was dictated mainly by price, not the features.

    At the moment, for most people it just isn't easy to go HD. You go to the TV shop and say you are interested in a new TV and you would like to 'go' HD. You pick a TV and ask the assistant, 'so if I buy this I can watch HD TV.' 'No,' is the reply. 'It depends what HD you want. If you want to watch movies or play games then you need to get an HD console or bluray - like a PS3.' Say the person doesn't want a PS3, they want a 360. 'Then if you want to watch blu-rays then you need to get a dedicated player as well. Unless you want to download HD movies through Xbox, which they charge for and you need a decent internet connection.'

    So that is more expense, so the person says, no I just want to watch HD TV, like BBC, movies and sport etc, I can do that with that TV yes?'

    'No,' is the reply. 'You need to get an HD box.'

    'I have freeview...'

    'You need a proper HD box, either FreeSat, where you get a dish put up - its free, but you only get 2 HD channels. Or you can subscribe to Sky HD. Its an extra £10 on the basic sub and then you pay for extra HD channels.'

    You can't just go into a shop, buy an HD TV and go home laughing. There is layer and layer of ifs, buts and potential expense. I'm really glad I took the trouble as I could never give up my PS3, TV and surround set up now - but for most people it just isn't worth the expense and hassle.

  • TRUTH #43 3 years ago

    Having played GoW 2, Fable 2, Wipeout HD, SF IV, UFC, Fight Night 4, Motor Storm, the excellent Shadow Complex(This is my fav game) all on HD, then, playing on SD due to curiosity to compare to HD; I have to say HD has a fairly big advantage in quality in detail and disply...I did find standard def games downloaded on Xbox360 & PS3 did look more pixelated compared to SD when played on HD : Guro Mark Of The Wolves, King Of Fighters 98, Street fighter Alpha, Castlevainia etc.

    As for HD movies I honestly believe this has been fairly over hyped!!!!...Yes the films look sharper, but, not to a standard how advertisements for HD is the ultimate experinece. Batman The Dark Nights (probably the best HD example) looks great in HD as well as SD - with SD with not so much loss in picture quality compared to HD.

    In gaming HD has made an improvement... In movies - not so much when compared to SD.

  • Lankyn #44 3 years ago

    People should just read the damn user manual! Tells you everything you need to know....

    And what length of HDMI cable should they include? 1m is useless for me and you might need 4 meters or more....

  • FooAtari #45 3 years ago

    Also i'm very confused by the lack of people with an HDTV. When was the last time you walked into Curry's and saw a CRT or SD only TV for sale? Apart from the tiny portables used by lorry drivers ect they are all HD.

    I bet most people only by a new TV every 8 - 10 years. Shops only got rid of all SDTV's within the last couple of years.

    Bagpuss
    For me its simple ..... i wont go HD so long as i have to pay those fascist cunts the Murdochs at SKY for the privelge of watching a decent amount of HD content.

    +1. My TV can display an SD picture pretty damn well when set correctly. Well enough that I refuse to pay another tenner on top of the £45 I already pay Sky just to watch a FEW of the SAME channels in high resolution.

    Scamming Fucks.
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 11:21

  • jimboton #46 3 years ago

    What this means is that, several years into the console generation which was meant to herald the glorious arrival of high definition, not a single console system is presently being sold with an HDMI cable in the box. Microsoft, at least, bundles a cable which can output component, which does enable some HD resolutions - the PS3 Slim simply doesn't come with any HD-capable cables at all.

    If Microsoft is still bundling component cables, then it is providing perfectly good 720p out of the box in every console. It may not be as trendy as HDMI but in my experience 720p is every pixel just as pretty in component as it is in HDMI, and it works with every HDTV there is. You make it sound like that's just barely a step above composite but that's not quite right: it allows any 360 game in existence to look as well as it possibly can..

  • StooMonster #47 3 years ago

    an expensive HDTV hooked up to a DVD player (non-upscaling)

    An expensive HDTV probably does a better job of upscaling to its native resolution, and using 10- or 12-bit per channel colour, than most "upscaling" DVD player.

  • StooMonster #48 3 years ago

    Back in the days of the HD DVD versus Blu-ray format war this was a point raised by many an HD DVD fan boi ... of all those PS3 that are Blu-ray players, many of them will be connected to SD displays and give no Blu-ray benefit and punters will not be HD optical disc purchasers. Moreover, from what I understand the volume of sales of dedicated Blu-ray players (i.e. not PS3) has still to overtake the sales of HD DVD players that were sold.

    Recent customer surveys have show that even in August 2009 more than half of PS3 are connected to SD displays, and we know similar is true for Xbox 360; and as the article points out as sales increase this is going to be further exaggerated, the percentage adoption rate of HD will go down. Furthermore, many games consoles are connected to non-primary display in the house, so that even if main household television is HDTV the console is in kids bedroom / play room / cellar / office / anywhere but the living room.

    All of which goes some way to showing that the market for people actually choosing HD content is still small, regardless of movie watching or game playing habits. :(

  • Buran #49 3 years ago

    Want to play in HD? Play in PC.

    Anyway, my 1080p 46" plasma works well in both PC titles and sup-720p Xbox 360 and PS3 games.

    Funny thing is when people is spending money in large size True HD displays to see tv shows in low res and sup-720p and then claiming that PC gaming is expensive. Big LOL to me.

  • SeesThroughAll #50 3 years ago

    Back in the days of the HD DVD versus Blu-ray format war this was a point raised by many an HD DVD fan boi ... of all those PS3 that are Blu-ray players, many of them will be connected to SD displays and give no Blu-ray benefit and punters will not be HD optical disc purchasers. Moreover, from what I understand the volume of sales of dedicated Blu-ray players (i.e. not PS3) has still to overtake the sales of HD DVD players that were sold.

    That was indeed very amusing. The quoted advantage was that HD DVDs could be recognized as regular DVDs by any DVD player. The same tech is possible on Blu-Rays, but it never came to be wide-spread. Still, Blu-Rays still carry an SD version of the movies.

    EDIT: Had a big mistake up here.

    I'm not sure about the relevance of the point that standalone BD players are still to sell more than standalone HD DVD players. The PS3 has always been marketed as a Blu-Ray player from day one, and most people who bought it early on, were looking into BD playback. It used to be the cheapest too, in comparison to the standalone ones.
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 11:55

  • dirk_aircool #51 3 years ago

    FooAtari

    I totaly agree whith both your posts . You forgot about 100hz whatever that means . I dont understand HDTV, dont know what benifits compent conection has over HDMI or the other ones . I'm a bit of a geek but still dont get it . ( I use the VGA lead for my 360 'cos its all I understand ) I think the TV makers have a lot to answer for re - confusion as they seem to continualy change the rules as they go , when HDTV's first came out I just remeber them being refered to as HDTV , now its full HD but even that seems to come in different flavours , its harder than ordering breakfast in america .


    ( off topic ) my SKY box went bad in april so we got all stressed and opted to go for SKY HD , they fucked about for so long ( 3 months ) that we got used to just having freeview so we cancelled it completley , Dont miss it at all . used the money saved to buy up the super cheap DVD boxed sets . just dump sky. unless your a sports addict .
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 11:56

  • Retroid #52 3 years ago

    SeesThroughAll: "The quoted advantage was that HD DVDs could be recognized as regular DVDs by any DVD player. The same tech is possible on Blu-Rays, but it never came to be wide-spread. Still, Blu-Rays still carry an SD version of the movies."

    They do? I hadn't heard that. Only that some were starting to off 'portable' encodings on the disk for compatible devices. Also, with HD-DVD it was something which *could* be done, I don't think it was as part of the spec. But then I wouldn't know, I've never owned an HD-DVD drive :)

    (But I did pick up an HD-DVD disk just for the sake of owning one, seeing as they're a dead format)

  • Ryze #53 3 years ago

    The following should still be pushed over the next 2 years:

    Larger panels
    1080p
    3D
    LED
    OLED
    Laser
    HD projection

    Why? Because the early adopters will snap these up (depending on the recession), and push down the prices of smaller HD panels and HD-LCD TVs.

    This will get teh second half of users into the HD era. If they can go to Asda, Argos, Currys and Comet and pick up these screens for less than £300, or second hand for £150 at 32" or greater.

    Then there's Freeview HD, which will begin gaining momentum starting early next year. THe new technologies should definitely be pushed ASAP, as they'd spur the filtering down of current technology to the dumb masses.

    Shame on the console manufacturers for not including at least a component cable with their HD consoles.

    Their loss, anyway - as when Joe Bloggs plays his first Blu-Ray and it looks just like a DVD, he'll not bother buying any more.

  • MrWonderstuff #54 3 years ago

    I use my 360 via component to my very nice SDTV (Toshiba 32ZP48), however I always feel I am getting a less than perfect picture and am planning of buying an HDTY next year (after Mr Taxman is paid)...my concern the difference in quality between VGA and HDMI (360 is the standard version) and whether its better to have a pure digital signal than analogue. Once example of this is the difference between hooking my PC to my 24" monitor via VGA (blurry) and DVI (very nice). I assume the same will be for VGA vs HDMI on a 1280p 42" screen?

    Anyhow my reluctance to upgrade has been financial as the benefits of spending £1000 on an HDTV for the extra resolution bonus is hard to justify (oh and I know I can get a cheaper HDTV but I like the Samsung LED LCD HDTV unless there is cheaper and just as good however).

    I intend to keep my SDTV for standard def broadcasts until such time as HDTV is broadcast regularly without the need of a daft satellite dish. HDTV will only be used for gaming and possible BR if and when I buy a PS3 in a seperate room.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 12:21

  • TheJuriel #55 3 years ago

    "if the Xbox 360 and PS3 are outputting in SD, their perceived advantage over the Wii is eroded even further"

    HD doesn't make or break that advantage. Actually HAVING GOOD GAMES is what does it. What a dumb statement.

  • TheJuriel #56 3 years ago

    Personally, I'm getting a HDTV when I have a totally extra 1000€ to spend on such a little luxury item, but it's not a huge priority.

  • curtlikesmeat #57 3 years ago

    I am one of those idiots who has had an Xbox with an HDTV for several years and has only recently realised (although it has always been a nagging suspicion) that using the cable that came in the box, despite the fact that it clearly says HD on it, is not giving me a HD picture.

  • GreyBeard #58 3 years ago

    Optimal cabling has ALWAYS been a premium item, certainly SONY have always only boxed in basic composite with all their consoles from day #1. And I'm 99.9% sure that both my Gamecube and both my original Xboxes only came with composite too. I surely remember buying better cables for them after the fact.

    I cant think of a single instance where a true RGB SCART lead was boxed, you might have got an external RF modulator but again that's absolutely a minimal hook-up.

    The difference between RGB and composite is less pronounced than going to HDMI, but it still a major impediment - especially as back in the day very few TV's supported PAL60 over composite - and of course modulators were rigidly 50 or 60hz depending on region.

    Storm in a teacup imho.

  • GamesConnoisseur #59 3 years ago

    With consumers leaving tv in factory settings (4:3 etc) n using cable out of box, NOTHING will changes, as always will have people like those. So only solution is to have HD leads in box and consoles to automatically detects resolutions or changes res at test screen at first boot up and ask which is best quality?

    If the same for BD player Sky HD etc then we will see BIG uptake.

    Idiot proofing is the only way to go instead of relying on self-education route only.

  • BadBoyBonner #60 3 years ago

    Ryze Makro are already doing a 32" LCD tv for £199 ex VAT and a standalone Blu_Ray player for £49.99 ex vat - which is good news for the masses.

    Talking of being the tech-support to friends and family - a favourite of mine was when a mate decided to redecorate his front room and then "put every thing back exactly as I had set it up" but "think I have knackered the 6 month old 50" plasma as the screen now flashes". After some discussion of not worrying as it was obviously under guarantee - when he said it only went funny when watching movies or playing on the 360 I was stumped for a few minutes.

    Then I realised "do you mean when you watch movies through the 360?" "Yes" - I had sneaky suspicion what it may be but offered to go over.

    Fired up a game on the 360 and watched a picture that certainly looked like the TV was knackered - then noticed that the flickering and noise was happening in a sort of rhythm.

    That's right he had reconnected the red sound of the stereo lead to the red of his component in (sound was unaffected as he had managed to put the optical lead back in on his 5.1 set-up). Made him change the leads himself as punishment for lying to me about reconnecting it back exactly as I had shown him to do.

    Retroid - going round to friends/families house and noticing that they have their Sky/NTL box set to 4:3 and then having their TV on some sort of zoom mode is a pet hate of mine - makes Eurosport SD look even worse than it does normally - needless to say it never stays like that for long after my arrival!

    Never mind the fact that half the 360 owners aren't tech savvy - half the non tech savy people I know seem to think a certain button, or combination of buttons, will some how make the TV/DVD player/Set Top box somehow self-destruct "don't break it!" lol - shakes head slowly in mild amusement
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 13:06

  • Whizzo #61 3 years ago

    The component cable in the box will give you a HD picture, as long as you plug the right cables in and set the switch to HD.

    The Arcade and now the Elite don't come with the combined composite/component switchable cable (the Arcade never has), it comes with a composite only cable (with a SCART adaptor in Europe), it's rather rubbish really.

  • Ryze #62 3 years ago

    ^
    ^

    Then, continuing from what I posted earlier, the even newer technologies should continue to be pushed, as most people will wait until their current TV dies before investing in something new immediately.

    The dumb masses probably don't even like their widescreen CRT's that they were ripped off for @ £800-£1000 in 2000. They probably have everything set to 4:3 composite, rather than 16:9 RGB. Many can't afford to upgrade yet - until their monthly payments have finished, or the TV dies.

    Remember that some people would have bought the following over the last 10-15 years

    - large 4:3 Trinitron or rear projection SDTV
    - large (32"+) projection or CRT 16:9 widescreen
    - large (+ v. expensive) SD Plasma @ 40" or bigger

    Many of these will remain in place until the replacement offers a big enough improvement or unmissable value for money.

    52-56" 1080p LCDs are still quite expensive, and many cheaper sets do an awful job at upscaling SD source images.

    Until Freeview HD, HD consoles and Blu-ray all become cheap and easy to feed with value HD content (Blu-rays are still expensive - and most movie buffs have massive DVD collections), then those pre-HD big spenders may not jump on board yet.

    ...especially when their black level is going to turn into a dark grey.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 13:21

  • curtlikesmeat #63 3 years ago

    The component cable in the box will give you a HD picture, as long as you plug the right cables in and set the switch to HD.

    Mine was one of the old premium ones (the middle range model) so it had that switchable thing in it. Does that mean there's no need for me to get an HDMI cable, it just has multiple leads going ino all different things?

  • curtlikesmeat #64 3 years ago

    So I AM watching in HD then, hooray! Thanks very much for the advice - with that in mind, I give HD a giant meh, it's alright, nothing spectacular (I remember when people were saying it's the same as the leap from black and white to colour - HAH!).

  • Ryze #65 3 years ago

    ^ You've probably got your console set to 480/576i

  • SeesThroughAll #66 3 years ago

    @ Retroid:

    Many HD DVDs featured a regular DVD side as well as the high definition side. This gave people the possibility to purchase HD DVDs and still use them on regular DVD players, and was marketed as a huge advantage over Blu-Ray. Of course, nothing prevented Blu-Rays from being printed with a DVD side as well (the formats were so similar that there were few technological distinctions - aside from BD optics), but the BDA never pushed this.

    The "portable encoding export" has recently been advertised as an upcoming feature for Blu-Ray players, but so far we haven't heard of any implementation.
    Edited by 2 at 05/09/09 @ 13:55

  • kongzi #67 3 years ago

    The HD transition has been blown out of proportion. It was supposed to be a revolution, but it's just an increase in resolution. An increase that also means making games is a few times more expensive than it used to be. I play on both SD and HD screens, and really.. it doesn't matter. I still maintain GTA looks better (okay, maybe not better.. more attractive) in SD. HD just magnifies it's graphical shortcomings .
    Sony and MS are realizing this, and they are done with pumping money into the console business. Sony is doing poorly across the board, MS is losing to Apple and Google. So they are turning their business model around to make money on consoles for once. The 360 arcade price hike is only due to the bad pound/euro exchange rate (the UK is incredibly cheap for us eurodummies right now).
    And yeah, they should just put in all the cables you need.... that's a little thing called 'service to the customer'. It used to be normal practice for pro audio gear not to include cables, but even that's going out of style.

  • NorUraeus #68 3 years ago

    Well for those wanting a bundled HDMI cable I noticed the other day that Amazon.co.uk bundle a free HDMI cable with the new PS3 Slim (they also bundle an older game).

  • Sharzam #69 3 years ago

    I used to work in technical for a telecommuncations company, and what i found was that the vast majortiy of the british public are very stupid what i mean by this is that pure common sense is lacking. I would have to often bang my head aganist a wall just trying to explain the basics like how to use a phone book on a mobile for example. Yet i was setting up modems and reprogramming firmware with other people so was massivly wasting my time with stuff like basic phone operations.

    So it really is no surprise that alot buy a HD tv and think everything on it is HD and dont think for a second that maybe the signal is not HD. However this will not change, for decades new things have come out and people have not learnt look at VHS how many people couldnt use videoplus+ or timer record, even once been around for a decade and now died out.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 14:22

  • BadBoyBonner #70 3 years ago

    Kongzi

    "GTA IV looks more attractive in SD"

    I couldn't disagree more - I think GTA looks better the more you increase the resolution.

    [link url=http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,694111/GTA-4-Mods-and-Downsampling -for-possible-GTA-5-graphics/News/&menu=browser&image_id =1185768&article_id=694111&page=1&show=original
    ]http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,69411...[/link]

    [link url=http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,694111/GTA-4-Mods-and-Downsampling -for-possible-GTA-5-graphics/News/&menu=browser&image_id =1185766&article_id=694111&page=1&show=original
    ]http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,69411...[/link]

    [link url=http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,694111/GTA-4-Mods-and-Downsampling -for-possible-GTA-5-graphics/News/&menu=browser&image_id =1185772&article_id=694111&page=1&show=original
    ]http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,69411...[/link]

    [link url=http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,694111/GTA-4-Mods-and-Downsampling -for-possible-GTA-5-graphics/News/&menu=browser&image_id =1185770&article_id=694111&page=1&show=original
    ]http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,69411...[/link]

    http://ww w.pcgameshardware.com/aid,69411...
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 14:25

  • EuroStalker #71 3 years ago

    Games in HD impact gameplay in a good way. For example, I love racing games. On the PS2, turns in the distance appeared pixellated and you couldn't quite tell if it was a left or right turn. Playing in HD, you can tell a left or right turn early on and this changes how you play the game.

    Another example would be in Tomb Raider where you can clearly tell where exits/entrances are and platform edges where as in the old Tomb Raider games, it was all jumbled up with the textures on the walls/floors.

  • kestral #72 3 years ago

    What's needed is a cable that outputs both SD + HD, one cable, two endpoints. That way MS + Sony just add 1 cable, people won't have to buy a new one, it's not misconnected (just label the endpoints clear) and the console can automatically adjust its settings if the cable communicates.

    Simples.

  • Captain_Jono #73 3 years ago

    This really isn't that surprising.

    Games are, and always have been, about the gameplay, with everything else being secondary importance. Take, for example, Fallout 3. It's still Fallout 3, whether you play it in HD, SD, or in some kind of space-age VR suite. Conversely, rendering a pigs ear of a game in HD does not make it a silk purse! HD looks nicer, but as long as the game is functional most people don't care about what resolution it’s being played at.

    Pushing HD as THE thing in this generation is a ludicrous idea. It stands in opposition to every trend in the history of consumer-driven technological development. From transistor radios (the sale of which, incidentally, made Sony the company it is today) , cassette players, iPods, to Miniature TVs; Consumer goods have always been about the small, the portable, the private and the affordable; the pursuit of which often meant willingness to sacrifice sound and picture fidelity. To fly in the face of that trend is to risk making the 360 and PS3 a toy of the wealthy and/or technology geeks.

    Luckily Sony and Microsoft have the right idea. If people want to invest in HD equipment, their consoles are ready to go in HD. Otherwise, you can still play your Fallouts and your Oblivions and your Gears of Wars in SD without compromising on the gameplay.

  • thefinn #74 3 years ago

    Why anyone would think the general population gives a rat's arse about resolutions and image quality, in an age where people walk around listening to mp3s on their cell's tinny little external speakers, is beyond me.

  • SlackMaster #75 3 years ago

    Early adopters have gone out and brought their HDTV's. You can only buy flat screen HD TV's now anyway so when TV's pack up more will be sold. Makes sense really.

  • Retroid #76 3 years ago

    It still remains that 'the masses' will upgrade to HD without really realising it, at least with their TVs. HD will eventually become the standard too for transmission but that's a good while off yet.

    As for the rest of us, I bet we've all got HD displays of one flavour or another and have done for years.

  • StooMonster #77 3 years ago

    SeesThroughAll: the point with dedicated player numbers is that if one bought an HD DVD player its purpose would be for movies; if one buys a dedicated Blu-ray player its purpose would be for movies; whereas if one buys a PS3 it may or may not be used for playing movies, hence one could not count a PS3 as 'Blu-ray player' sold as one does not know if it is going to be used as one. However, PS3 was often lobbed in with dedicated Blu-ray player sales to show that installed base was higher.

    Still it's over and done with now, although I'm still sad as I liked region-free HD optical discs although Disney and Fox didn't (and still do not).

  • SeesThroughAll #78 3 years ago

    As far comparing those numbers is concerned, you're right. It's true that a console that also plays HD movies is not the same as a dedicated HD movie player. It's just that it wasn't enough to indicate any real preference over either format.

    Still it's over and done with now, although I'm still sad as I liked region-free HD optical discs although Disney and Fox didn't (and still do not).

    It will always be like that. Even if HD DVD had won, I believe special consessions for Disney and Fox would eventually be made, and eventually result in returning to the old region lock. But that's my speculation.

  • hiddenranbir #79 3 years ago

    Not surprising.

    I mean, there are so few HD channels, why would anyone think HDTVs have become the common deal?


    I also think TV upgrading happens with a delay. Only getting a new TV when the old one is finally falling apart or broken.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 17:58

  • Pickster #80 3 years ago

    @GreyBeard (& for all you fact fans out there!)

    "I cant think of a single instance where a true RGB SCART lead was boxed, you might have got an external RF modulator but again that's absolutely a minimal hook-up."

    The (original) Saturn came with a fully wired RGB scart cable.

  • EuroStalker #81 3 years ago

    I think the HD TV info is confusing. For example, I have a HD TV with a freeview receiver built-in connected to an outside aerial. Can I receive BBC HD or do I need something else?

  • BadBoyBonner #82 3 years ago

    You need something else

  • Stegofreak #83 3 years ago

    "Firstly, Nintendo - as so often in recent years - is the company left laughing all the way to the bank. Sony and Microsoft bet heavily on HDTV adoption to drive their console sales, and many commentators confidently predicted that Nintendo would suffer for its decision to stick with SD technology in the Wii."

    I find that an unusual sentiment to be honest. Surely the additional HD ability of the PS3 and 360 allows them to ply both the SD and HD markets while the pure SD of the Wii would remove them from the HD market. Sure the additional content goes to waste on sales to people without HD but the "growing" HD market should surely cover it...

  • secombe #84 3 years ago

    We shouldn't blame the general consumer, I wouldn't expect the average person to know how to deal with HD - it can be quite confusing for the relatively tech-savvy - any more than a plumber would expect me to know what the hell he was doing when I call him out. Calling them stupid or the "dumb masses" is massively missing the point, some of the most intelligent people I've ever met still wouldn't have a clue when it comes to setting up or understanding new 'technology', in theory you should buy an HD telly and expect HD, the amount of research required to actually get HD once you have an HD TV is mind boggling, I wouldn't expect anyone uninterested in technology to want to bother with that, any more than I would want to read up on the latest plants for my garden.

    You buy a console, plug it in and expect it to work to the best of its ability...95% of console buyers will go by that statement, and to be honest, I can't blame them, that's how it should be. EG visitors are by their very nature going to have a very skewed view of the gaming world, much like the analysts - everyone here was predicting that the lack of HD would kill the Wii.

    It's probably already too late, but surely it wasn't beyond the skill of man to design some industry standard cable that sends data both ways, ensuring the output is always optimized (i.e.widescreen on a widescreen telly, etc), computing has USB, which facilities the attachment of just about anything with minimal fuss, so why can't home entertainment do it?
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 20:32

  • FooAtari #85 3 years ago

    I can't watch DVDs anymore. It's like going back to black & white after seeing colour.

    What a load of crap... Knowing your bias, I see through that statement, and it's pish. DVD to Blu Ray or HD-DVD is NOTHING like the leap of B&W to colour.

    A decent upscaling DVD and/or a well calibrated TV gives a very good picture from a DVD. Sure a Blu Ray gives a sharper image, IF you buy the right film (I have some Blu Rays where the picture quality is pretty poor), but I can't believe anyone would the find DVD unwatchable, the difference simply isn't that huge, not even close.

  • KayJay #86 3 years ago

    @FooAtari
    "The 360 and PS3 can't handle HD anyway, it's a lot of PR bollocks. Many games are upscaled. Until all games are native 720p AT THE VERY LEAST, and running at a smooth and solid 60fps it's not HD. the 360 and PS3 is NOT HD in full glory."

    Things like Wipout HD are a move in the right direction though. I've also been playing COD4 in 1080p for quite some time now. Upscaled or not its still a rather nice experiance on my 42" Samsung.

    Some good points though. I certianly agree that its an information overlaod for the as said "Non TechSavy" out there. I only have to look at my Mum & Dad, Sister, Girlfriend and her parents too. They need plenty of help understanding.

    Im fine and happy that im as HD as I can get but its just a little to much for others.

  • Ryze #87 3 years ago

    Yes, these are HD transition era consoles, just like the next ones will be 3D transition era consoles.

    To expect that everyone across the planet wil snap up 3D TVs 3 years after the PS4 is launched would be equally ludicrous.

    I'm a 'techie', and have only owned an HDTV for about 16 months. I need a newer and bigger one, but I've many other important things that need my attention and cash for the next year or so while I wait for the right deal.

    Many don't have a clue what HD is. They just see big, expensive TVs with labels and brands on them. My cousin thinks that HD is a 'scam'. He hasn't a clue what HD even means, and what it entails. Probably because he hasn't seen anything from an HD source.

    edit:

    @secombe

    It's called HDMI, but it's only been standard for the past 3 years.
    Edited by 1 at 05/09/09 @ 22:33

  • KayJay #88 3 years ago

    "the difference simply isn't that huge, not even close."

    Sorry I don't agree. I counter that with if you have the right set up and lets say Kill Bill Part 1 on BluRay then you simply cant touch BluRay. Its a long long way from DVD.
    Even HD TV channels are noticeably better. I was watch the Suprs game on ESPNHD last week on my Virgin V+ box and was switching between the SD & HD versions of the station and the picture was 100% better. Sweat on Brow, Numbers & names on shirts clear as day, compared to the all rather fuzzy picture from the SD channel.

  • KayJay #89 3 years ago

    Here you go try it now. BBC One & BBC HD. POTC is on right now and the difference between the two SD & HD pictures is unmistakable, and this is only in 1080i (I believe).

  • FooAtari #90 3 years ago

    I wasn't trying to deny there is a difference. HD is obviously noticeably better than SD, particularly SD v HD TV. But that doesnt make DVD bad in comparisson to BR, just not as good.

    I just found it laughable that the difference was similar to the leap to colour from Black and White.
    Edited by 1 at 06/09/09 @ 00:53

  • TRUTH #91 3 years ago

    Most 360 games are standard 720p - it's most PS3 games that are lower then HD ready usually 640p.

  • KayJay #92 3 years ago

    Where did you pull that one from TRUTH. There are probably an equal amount of games on each system with Sub HD resolutions. One that springs to mind on the 360 is Halo 3. In fact very few are Native HD... All the fancy gubbins inside the 360 & PS3 handles most of the resolution scaling(?!?)

    Anyway most of the Dev's will tell you there is a perfectly good reason for this Downscaling. Better Framerates,less this more that...etc.

    So lets not turn yet another thread into a my willys bigger than yours war... ;-)
    Edited by 1 at 06/09/09 @ 02:17

  • KayJay #93 3 years ago

    "I just found it laughable that the difference was similar to the leap to colour from Black and White."

    Agreed that is a little silly. But im sure you would agree thats its important that the infromation given to Joe Consumer be clearer, to ensure all can enjoy the vastly superior HighDefinition experinace lots of us already do. Its here but you just need to look for it a little... :-)

  • KayJay #94 3 years ago

    In fact had a little google and your comment seems even stranger now...
    360 Resolutions
    PS3 Resolutions
    The two little linkys (Dont know how old or when last updated) pretty much put the 360 ahead with Native HD resolutions but not much.
    Also I like the fact the PS3 games only state the native resolutions, unlike the 360 games which talk about the upscaled resolutions... Interesting.

    Edit: Ahh, Last updated Jan 08. So I imagine there are a few more on both consoles now. Dont know if MS have changed their policy on their game boxes but its seems a little misleading (a lot of that going on it seems) :-)
    Edited by 1 at 06/09/09 @ 02:33

  • superdelphinus #95 3 years ago

    Wwould have been nice to see some actual numbers for all the premise made in this piece really

  • TheNinkyNonk #96 3 years ago

    I've never bought an electric guitar that came with a cable.

    Just saying...

  • secombe #97 3 years ago

    The fact that stores don't even be able to set the darn things up correctly doesn't really help either. I've only ever seen two screens in a store that made me stop and stare in amazement, and both seemed to be specific show reels (one was football, but beyond anything I've seen on Sky Sports HD, and the other was nature footage - which again was beyond anything I've seen before it.

    They both had an amazing 3D quality about them, and even on incredibly close inspection still looked exceptional. If the other 99% of 'HD' TVs I've seen on my shopping travels looked 75% as good as that, I wouldn't have been able to resist buying one by now. As it is, my Panasonic 28" SD telly is serving me just fine.

  • davey_wells #98 3 years ago

    The whole HD thing has been a horrible mess for years.

    The whole industry is responsible for HD not taking off as quickly as they thought, though in fairness, HD is so over-rated its laughable. Sony and Microsoft themsevles are as much to blame as others by not including the HDMI leads. The likes of GAME, Currys, Comet et al will be loving it, getting the chance to upsell at every purchase to gullible parents buying their kids an "Xbox" or "Playstation". I do a lot of store audits each week and regularly walk past people in Tesco, Morrisons & Asda who have no idea whether they are buying a game on the PS2 or PS3 or PSP for their kids, let alone whether they have unwittingly picked up a Blu-Ray of Mamma Mia rather than the DVD version without knowing any difference between the two anyway.

    As for playing SD on HD TVs, I find it practically impossible. Playing an original Xbox game on my 360 through a HDTV via component is horrific, far, far worse than playing the same original game on my old 4:3 ratio SD old television.

    Any why don't television manufacturers state what the exact correct settings should be for running various hardware? I've had a HDTV for a while now but still don't really know what settings show the 360 off best. Even googleing the question comes up with complete randomness, wildly different answers and mixed messages, so I just set it to something that looks OK. Is that really good enough?

  • Chazmeister #99 2 years ago

    Until regular TV broadcasts start appearing in HD and don't require you to subscribe to a HD package to view them, I think most of your average households will still quite happily hang on to their old SD CRT sets.

    Currently HD is still to expensive and too much hassle for your average consumer to buy into. First of all HD sets are still quite pricey, and you're still looking at about £300 for a decent 32" set. Then on top of that, in the UK at least, you need to subscribe to a service and TV package from the likes of Sky or Virgin, and then you have to pay another premium on top of those packages to get the HD content. You could go for a Freesat HD box, but you'll need a dish installing and a decent Freesat HD box will still set you back about £200.

    So any way you look at it, your entry into the world of HD is going to set you back at the very least about £500+, and all for what, a better TV picture, is that really worth it to your average family?

  • pinochet_cz #100 2 years ago

    Wasted chance IMHO. There should never been an option for SD output on this console generation. I understand why Wii have a scart output (it can't handle much more), but our next-gen..turning to old-gen? For what reason? Joe Redneck, who bought xbox on sale somewhere?

  • Spectral #101 2 years ago

    @pinochet_cz

    Thats the single stupidest idea that has been posted on here. Its already been shown that most people don't have an HDTV, why the hell would they make a console over half the target audience can't use? It'd be financial suicide.

  • triple_a #102 2 years ago

    Even at SD resolution the PS3 and Xbox360 can output hell of a lot better looking graphics than Wii. It's not only about resolution, folks. Think about old PC games. Sure you can play them at very high resolutions on todays monitors and video cards. But do they look as good as the latest games? A huge majority of them don't.

    Things that matter are quality of textures & lighting, number of polygons, art direction, shaders etc. The Wii is a lot less powerful than PS3 or Xbox360. It simply can't compete in 3d graphics even at SD resolutions. Games like Muramasa on the other hand would propably look about the same on SD resolutions no matter which hardware it runs on. Perhaps the more powerful consoles could squeeze in some nicer effects on top of the 2D but that's it.

  • MorkfromOrk #103 2 years ago

    The best answer to the question of why HD hasn't caught fire is price. If it wasn't for the USA stimulus check last year, I wouldn't have bought my 42in Pano. But, a close second place reason is lack of info for the common "tech-tard". If more people saw a demo of the difference between 1080p HD and standard 420, a lot of folks would save their cash to get upgraded. And since a lot of over the air stations here in the States are in HD, why not? Try reading player names or numbers at a distance on standard def compared to HD and it really makes a BIG diff. Nature programs or golf: amazing! In closing, Sony and Micro$ not putting HDMI cables in the box is lame, but I bought a $24 six-footer and I'm happy with my new Slim.

  • comissars_handgun #104 2 years ago

    @ Davey_Wells the best thing to do generally is set the 360 to your tv's native resolution, (usually either 1366 by 768 or 1920 by 1080). Look up what resolution this is in your tv's manual, or if you have lost that you can check on the manufacturer's website. Each game will have it's own resolution but the 360 will handle upscaling and downscaling.

    I think HDMI will do this automatically, but I have a pre-HDMI 360 so I'm not sure.
    Edited by 1 at 08/09/09 @ 01:37

  • robson_wii #105 2 years ago

    Very interesting article and one reason I have resisted HD. Until a market settles on a particular specification and the products and services really support the specification I won't be upgrading. I agree with comments about the HD transition being a complete mess.

    Got to love the confusion over component and composite. I remember years ago being told that composite was the best picture. Fortunately I knew better.

  • thesombrerokid #106 2 years ago

    why would people make a transition to HD for cnsoles that can't run HD games? the transition to HD is driven by games not movies and for most games, the consoles have poorly tailored hardware for HD, if the consoles could run 1080p people would buy more 1080p tv's.