Now THAT is HD gaming.

Discussion in 'Console Games' started by spyker3292, Nov 19, 2008.

  1. spyker3292 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Location:
    Michigan
    #1
  2. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #2
    Well, technically there were 2 demos, one super HD and one at 240p. At least according to that Kotaku report.
     
  3. sikkinixx macrumors 68020

    sikkinixx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Location:
    Rocketing through the sky!
    #3
    Too bad he was sitting so far from the screen.
     
  4. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #4
    240 fps was using four PS3s on a 1080 screen. Impressive for a "console," well four "consoles."

    Now if only the PS3 had enough texture memory. :eek:

    You wouldn't want to sit much closer, like any HD screen. :p
     
  5. angelneo macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Location:
    afk
    #5
    That was impressive.....

    but seriously, I don't see it of any use other than showing it off in demos.
     
  6. spyker3292 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Location:
    Michigan
    #6
    Well.. that is what is was for so..... Yup :p. It's just to show off.
     
  7. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #7
    Sony could always setup some GT5 Arcade machines for that ultimate experience. Looks like something that would be at Dave & Busters.
     
  8. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
  9. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #9
    synchronizing 4 ps3 to run a single game .. that sure took some serious developing .. how about spending the manpower and cash on getting the game released Sony ?
     
  10. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #10
    There are so many different reasons as to why that is completely pointless.
     
  11. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #11
    Forget that, give me a PSP version :( I'd really love one. Daft place to say but the PSP's has really grown on me in the last few months.
     
  12. r1ch4rd macrumors 6502a

    r1ch4rd

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Manchester UK
    #12
    The human eye can generally only perceive about 72fps, any more is just a waste.
     
  13. Chone macrumors 65816

    Chone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    #13
    There's no real evidence to support that claim.

    The general scientific consensus is that it depends on the type of image and context, I don't remember the exact number but some tests done on air force pilots showed that they could identify an object shown for sometime in the 200ths of a second or something similar to that.

    Since real life images can't be measured in "frames", there's really no telling to the limits of the human eye, at least not yet.
     
  14. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #14
    doesn't it depend on brightness and state of mind too? Or at least from what I barely remember from a lesson on stop motion back in 2002. We see things between 50-70fps, the mind recognises more and it will look smoother since when the eye does take the picture it ensures that the image has moved.

    Should have paid more attention in college.
     

Share This Page