Does resolution have anything to do with how good graphics look?

[Canada]

I know resolution has a lot to do with how graphics will look. But I mean will NHL 2K9 look better than NHL 09 based on the fact that 2K9 can do 1080p and NHL 09 only does 720p. Or does it have to do with animation department and the polish EA puts on the game.


I know some of the best looking games are 720p only all Insomniac games Resistance and Resistance 2, then there is Naughty Dog's Uncharted: Drake's Fortune one of the most beautiful games I've seen.

[JonD7]

I believe 720p is the best resolution as of right now for gaming, unless its 1080p native but then you'll still miss more detail then with 720p... *shrugs*

EDIT: I can't really comment on EA games as I don't even own any! lol but no doubt the most stunning games will definitely be PS3 exclusives.

[Mr.Sparkle]

well the higher the resolution then the more clear and less blurry the picture looks. Now of course the animation team has a TON to do with how good the graphics are, I know at least with PC games, I could play a game like Half-Life in 1680x1050 (pretty much 1080p) and a game like Crysis in 800x600, and Crysis even though being in a MUCH lower resolution would look a ton better because it has much better animated graphics.

[SkillzthatKillz]

Originally Posted by JonD7

I believe 720p is the best resolution as of right now for gaming, unless its 1080p native but then you'll still miss more detail then with 720p... *shrugs*

EDIT: I can't really comment on EA games as I don't even own any! lol but no doubt the most stunning games will definitely be PS3 exclusives.

as long as the textures, animations, anti-aliasing, etc. hold up in 1080p, how would you "miss more detail then with 720p?"

[JonD7]

Originally Posted by SkillzthatKillz

as long as the textures, animations, anti-aliasing, etc. hold up in 1080p, how would you "miss more detail then with 720p?"

because no developer has achieved/perfected it yet, all they do is upscale... Wipeout HD looks great but it doesn't look like Uncharted or Killzone 2.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by JonD7

because no developer has achieved/perfected it yet, all they do is upscale... Wipeout HD looks great but it doesn't look like Uncharted or Killzone 2.

Wipeout HD looks as it should. I don't think it was meant to like any more different than what we have. Plus, Wipeout HD had a MUCH smaller budget, of course. I would like to submit GT5P garage area and replay mode for amazing 1080p visuals.

Bottom line is that the more resolution you have, the finer the details and sharpness CAN be. Of course, this takes a lot of power to achieve. That means less overall power left for other things. However, if the developer team can achieve all they want at that resolution (1080p), then there is no problem. In that case, 1080p would always be the best way to go. When developer teams CAN'T achieve what they want at 1080p, then, they would choose 720p. It can continue on down the resolution line like that depending on their experience (or lack there of) with the system or they have hit the processing limit of the hardware.

I hope that helps Canada.

[dk3dknight]

Originally Posted by Mr.Sparkle

well the higher the resolution then the more clear and less blurry the picture looks. Now of course the animation team has a TON to do with how good the graphics are, I know at least with PC games, I could play a game like Half-Life in 1680x1050 (pretty much 1080p) and a game like Crysis in 800x600, and Crysis even though being in a MUCH lower resolution would look a ton better because it has much better animated graphics.

No.. The animators make the animation look good, not the graphics.

The graphics are based on several key important combinations.
How good the Art team is, how good the texture artists are, how good the lighting specialist are.

Then you have two more factors, Limitations of your dev team, and limitations of your engine.

Now you have the people who model out your characters, there purpose is to make the models look good but that is not the graphics that will look good its still the skin given to those models that will good... by your texture artists..

Then you have the people who create the maps for the levels that require months of dedicated rebuilding and rebuilding..

Then you have the texture artists who build the texture library's for the mappers to use, the hues the colors, the combinations, cold hot etc etc..

Alot goes into the game, communication can be very important, but your animators can animate all they want and can push out the best animations ever made by man, and the graphics can still suck..

A stick figure that dances is still a stick figure..

The original half life has met the end of where it could keep up, there is a limitation in resolution on textures how big the levels could be etc etc..

The original half life I think used one of the quake engines, half life 2 uses the source engine and it continues to grow each year, changing, updating etc..

[Pepelutivruski4]

having not read anythign else posted thus far i will say that i played pixeljunk monsters on an SDTV 480i and it looked like little dots runnign around killing other little dots making their way to other dots with the towers having no detail to them other than the names and different ammo.

jumping onto an HDTV 1080p, i can see significant detail, model detail, infact is is detailed enough to where i can see every blade of grass moving independently.

hopping back down to 720p, model detail was pretty much the same, just a fuzzy. just the anti aliasing i'm sure, but the grass was just one green solid spot.

to answer your question directly, i would say a definate yes. maybe doesn't directly make the graphics better, but it makes the experience much more enjoyable, and why not make the best of the games you have paid for?


as for hte EA games, don't forget those are made to fit on a DVD for the suckbox 360, so don't expect as much detail from those compared to PS3 exclusives.