widescreen support

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen monitor or if they
can output letterboxed to a standard 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge
difference over 480i? is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment?
the hd that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Khee Mao wrote:
> just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen monitor or if
they
> can output letterboxed to a standard 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a
huge
> difference over 480i? is (true) widescreen gaming worth the
investment?
> the hd that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.

IMHO, there is a very noticeable difference between 480i and 480p. As
for widescreen enabed games displaying on a 4:3, I believe any game
that supports true 16:9 also has a 4:3 mode as well, so you'd be fine
there.

Now is true widescreen gaming worth it? Perhaps not for gaming, as
there aren't that many true 16:9 games that I can recall, but for DVD
movies and HDTV programming it is worth it in my opinion.

I'd suggest stopping by www.hdtvarcade.com and www.avsforum.com to get
more answers.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
news:1112127718.610143.156350@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> Khee Mao wrote:
>> just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen monitor or if
> they
>> can output letterboxed to a standard 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a
> huge
>> difference over 480i? is (true) widescreen gaming worth the
> investment?
>> the hd that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>
> IMHO, there is a very noticeable difference between 480i and 480p. As
> for widescreen enabed games displaying on a 4:3, I believe any game
> that supports true 16:9 also has a 4:3 mode as well, so you'd be fine
> there.


yeah, but I'd really like to be able to play 16:9 games in 16:9, despite
(potentially) having a 4:3 hdtv. I totally wouldn't mind letterboxing to
accomplish this, I just don't know if this kind of setup is supported.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Quote:
From: big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com (Khee Mao) is 480p a huge
difference over 480i? :Quote

This will depend on the TV. Some tv's (like my sony) will convert 480i
to a higher res. automatically. Like my sony converts 480i to 960i. Im
not ever really watching a 480i picture. When I play game in 960i then
go to 480p there really is not much of a difference.
 

Jordan

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2004
406
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I don't see the big deal about 480i, 480p, 720p or 1080i. I really
can't see the difference between any of them. The problem stems from
having low res graphics shown at high resolution. The graphics will
still look low res regardless of the screen resolution.

You're better served just getting component or S-video cables because
those will make a night and day difference from standard coax or
composite.

- Jordan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I would love some of that crack you are smoking Jordan!? No difference
between 480i and 1080i? I just moved my xbox from a reg tv with
component, to a reg tv with composite and the difference is noticeable
even to my wifes completely casual observance of picture quality....

as for whether or not to go widescreen, for gaming I say no, for movies
I say yes.....my parents have a 65 hdtv widescreen and it just has
never looked right to me for games, unless they have a widescreen
cam(madden, ncaa), and when you set your x-box to widescreen, it can
sometimes get screwy with the stretching scheme your tv uses.....

Chuck
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Jordan wrote:
> I don't see the big deal about 480i, 480p, 720p or 1080i. I really
> can't see the difference between any of them.

Perhaps this will help?

http://www.lenscrafters.com/
 

robin

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2004
246
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d2cbma$mrk$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
> just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen
> monitor or if they can output letterboxed to a standard
> 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge difference over 480i?
> is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment? the hd
> that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>

If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
That would be a waste of screen.
 

robin

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2004
246
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d2cbma$mrk$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
> just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen
> monitor or if they can output letterboxed to a standard
> 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge difference over 480i?
> is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment? the hd
> that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>

If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
That would be a waste of screen.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Rmn2e.114832$r55.49448@attbi_s52...
>
> "Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:d2cbma$mrk$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>> just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen
>> monitor or if they can output letterboxed to a standard
>> 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge difference over 480i?
>> is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment? the hd
>> that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>>
>
> If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
> the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
> all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
> That would be a waste of screen.
>
>

1) direct-view crts still have the best picture
2) direct-view crts still have the best service record and have a proven
track record of longevity
3) direct-view crts don't lag or have audio/video synchronization problems
4) stretching/zooming or in any way altering the source material to fit
your screen is usually ugly
5) the 16:9 area on a 36 inch 4:3 crt is just barely smaller than the
largest 16:9 direct-view crt widescreen
6) the lack of a standard widescreen aspect ratio means even widescreen tvs
will letterbox certain material
7) the vast majority of programming is still 4:3, and the 4:3 area on a 36
inch 4:3 ratio tv is almost double that of a 34 inch widescreen.
8) a 36 inch 4:3 crt hd is only $1700 (with stand)


I'm not exactly crazy about the aesthetics of the unit itself, or the bulk,
but I'm convinced that a 4:3 hd is the best (least flawed) transitional
solution...at least until there's a lot more widescreen
programming/games...in 5 years, when 1080p sets are the norm and all of the
service and performance issues are ironed out with dlp/lcd/d-ila, I could
move this to the bedroom, or elsewhere...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Khee Mao wrote:
> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:Rmn2e.114832$r55.49448@attbi_s52...
>
>>"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:d2cbma$mrk$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>>
>>>just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen
>>>monitor or if they can output letterboxed to a standard
>>>4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge difference over 480i?
>>>is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment? the hd
>>>that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>>>
>>
>>If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
>>the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
>>all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
>>That would be a waste of screen.
>>
>>
>
>
> 1) direct-view crts still have the best picture
> 2) direct-view crts still have the best service record and have a proven
> track record of longevity
> 3) direct-view crts don't lag or have audio/video synchronization problems
> 4) stretching/zooming or in any way altering the source material to fit
> your screen is usually ugly
> 5) the 16:9 area on a 36 inch 4:3 crt is just barely smaller than the
> largest 16:9 direct-view crt widescreen
> 6) the lack of a standard widescreen aspect ratio means even widescreen tvs
> will letterbox certain material
> 7) the vast majority of programming is still 4:3, and the 4:3 area on a 36
> inch 4:3 ratio tv is almost double that of a 34 inch widescreen.
> 8) a 36 inch 4:3 crt hd is only $1700 (with stand)

What brand and where are you buying one at that price $1,700?
You can get one cheaper than that...


>
> I'm not exactly crazy about the aesthetics of the unit itself, or the bulk,
> but I'm convinced that a 4:3 hd is the best (least flawed) transitional
> solution...at least until there's a lot more widescreen
> programming/games...in 5 years, when 1080p sets are the norm and all of the
> service and performance issues are ironed out with dlp/lcd/d-ila, I could
> move this to the bedroom, or elsewhere...
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"massivegrooves" <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote in message
news:424A1296.9020607@massivegrooves.net...
>
> What brand and where are you buying one at that price $1,700?
> You can get one cheaper than that...
>
sony kd36xs955. superfine pitch. $1700 to circuit city includes stand,
delivery, and a place to return it if there are problems.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Khee Mao wrote:
> "massivegrooves" <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote in message
> news:424A1296.9020607@massivegrooves.net...
>
>>What brand and where are you buying one at that price $1,700?
>>You can get one cheaper than that...
>>
>
> sony kd36xs955. superfine pitch. $1700 to circuit city includes stand,
> delivery, and a place to return it if there are problems.
>

gotcha, I was thinking it might be something like that...a Sony.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:21:34 -0800, "Khee Mao"
<big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote:


>yeah, but I'd really like to be able to play 16:9 games in 16:9, despite
>(potentially) having a 4:3 hdtv. I totally wouldn't mind letterboxing to
>accomplish this, I just don't know if this kind of setup is supported.
>

You can just set the xbox to output the graphics in 4:3 even tho
16:9..
thats what i do on the roomies hidef sony 4"3 tv
 

Eric

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,373
0
19,280
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" wrote in message
> just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen monitor or if they
> can output letterboxed to a standard 4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge
> difference over 480i? is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment?
> the hd that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.

My eyes can easily distinguish 480p over 480i, especially when there is text
on-screen. All the artifacting that is normally around text at 480i is
virtually eliminated at 480p.

As for 4:3 versus 16:9 for HD, I guess it depends on what size HDTV you are
looking at. If its small, 4:3 probably makes better sense than 16:9. If
its 30" or more, I'd go with 16:9.

Cheers,
-Eric
 

Eric

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,373
0
19,280
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Robin"wrote in message

> If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
> the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
> all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
> That would be a waste of screen.

2007? Your glass is half full. :^)

I'm thinking more like 2015.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Jordan" <lundj@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1112148215.917088.5170@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>I don't see the big deal about 480i, 480p, 720p or 1080i. I really
> can't see the difference between any of them. The problem stems from
> having low res graphics shown at high resolution. The graphics will
> still look low res regardless of the screen resolution.

It all depends on the quality HDTV you have.
I own 5 HDTV's and 5 SDTV's. On my "lower end" HDTV's 480p DVD's and
console games don't really look any different over SD 480i.
However, on my better quality sets the difference is "almost" night and day.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Boody Bandit" <lightenup@francis.news> wrote in message
news:-MudnarFx9l0PNffRVn-gQ@suscom.com...
>
> "Jordan" <lundj@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:1112148215.917088.5170@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>I don't see the big deal about 480i, 480p, 720p or 1080i. I really
>> can't see the difference between any of them. The problem stems from
>> having low res graphics shown at high resolution. The graphics will
>> still look low res regardless of the screen resolution.
>
> It all depends on the quality HDTV you have.
> I own 5 HDTV's and 5 SDTV's. On my "lower end" HDTV's 480p DVD's and
> console games don't really look any different over SD 480i.
> However, on my better quality sets the difference is "almost" night and
> day.

In defense of my lower end (less expensive HDTV's) hi-def sets, "all" of my
SDTV's are Sony Wega's and Panny Tau's.
They are excellent (IMO the best) direct view sets on the market.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Boody Bandit" <lightenup@francis.news> wrote in message
news:eqmdnbGhX4wVP9ffRVn-ow@suscom.com...
>
> "Boody Bandit" <lightenup@francis.news> wrote in message
> news:-MudnarFx9l0PNffRVn-gQ@suscom.com...
>>
>> "Jordan" <lundj@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:1112148215.917088.5170@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>>I don't see the big deal about 480i, 480p, 720p or 1080i. I really
>>> can't see the difference between any of them. The problem stems from
>>> having low res graphics shown at high resolution. The graphics will
>>> still look low res regardless of the screen resolution.
>>
>> It all depends on the quality HDTV you have.
>> I own 5 HDTV's and 5 SDTV's. On my "lower end" HDTV's 480p DVD's and
>> console games don't really look any different over SD 480i.
>> However, on my better quality sets the difference is "almost" night and
>> day.
>
> In defense of my lower end (less expensive HDTV's) hi-def sets, "all" of
> my SDTV's are Sony Wega's and Panny Tau's.
> They are excellent (IMO the best) direct view sets on the market.
>

I have a Wega but what the hell is a Panny Tau? It sounds like a line from
Pooty Tang.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)> wrote in message
news:OO-dnW2x8uSvddffRVn-2g@comcast.com...
>
> "Boody Bandit" <lightenup@francis.news> wrote in message
> news:eqmdnbGhX4wVP9ffRVn-ow@suscom.com...
>>
>> "Boody Bandit" <lightenup@francis.news> wrote in message
>> news:-MudnarFx9l0PNffRVn-gQ@suscom.com...
>>>
>>> "Jordan" <lundj@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:1112148215.917088.5170@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>>>I don't see the big deal about 480i, 480p, 720p or 1080i. I really
>>>> can't see the difference between any of them. The problem stems from
>>>> having low res graphics shown at high resolution. The graphics will
>>>> still look low res regardless of the screen resolution.
>>>
>>> It all depends on the quality HDTV you have.
>>> I own 5 HDTV's and 5 SDTV's. On my "lower end" HDTV's 480p DVD's and
>>> console games don't really look any different over SD 480i.
>>> However, on my better quality sets the difference is "almost" night and
>>> day.
>>
>> In defense of my lower end (less expensive HDTV's) hi-def sets, "all" of
>> my SDTV's are Sony Wega's and Panny Tau's.
>> They are excellent (IMO the best) direct view sets on the market.
>>
>
> I have a Wega but what the hell is a Panny Tau? It sounds like a line
> from Pooty Tang.

LOL!
Pooty Tang was funny.
Panny = Panasonic
 

Jordan

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2004
406
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

garciyalater@hotmail.com wrote:
> I would love some of that crack you are smoking Jordan!? No
difference
> between 480i and 1080i?

If you have a 640 x 480 image it doesn't matter if it's being shown at
480i or 1080i, you're limited to seeing 640 x 480. At 1080i it will be
the cleanest, sharpest 640 x 480 you've ever seen, but it won't be
anything more than that.

The problem is that the best HD display in the world is still limited
by the source material.

- Jordan
 

robin

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2004
246
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Eric" <nospam@nospam.not> wrote in message
news:fQo2e.56$tI6.28@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
>
> "Robin"wrote in message
>
>> If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and
>> get
>> the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard
>> for
>> all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in
>> 16:9.
>> That would be a waste of screen.
>
> 2007? Your glass is half full. :^)
>
> I'm thinking more like 2015.
>

Somebody correct me if I am making things up, but isn't it
some type of government mandate that they want all TV
broadcast in digital by 2007? They want to convert the
bandwidth currently used for analog for cell, radio,
emergency, etc.
 

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Robin wrote:
> "Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:d2cbma$mrk$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>
>>just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen
>>monitor or if they can output letterboxed to a standard
>>4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge difference over 480i?
>>is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment? the hd
>>that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>>
>
>
> If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
> the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
> all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
> That would be a waste of screen.
>
>
>
>
>
I personally dont think its going to happen (total convergence to
broadcast) by 2007. There's already been talk they are going to extend
that deadline a few more years. I remember watching something on CNN on
it about a month back.

Dont get me wrong though, I would agree to buy a HDTV for my next
purchase. I'm personally hoping Organic LED tvs are
mainstream/reasonably priced (like LCD now) by then.
 

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Khee Mao wrote:
> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:Rmn2e.114832$r55.49448@attbi_s52...
>
>>"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:d2cbma$mrk$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>>
>>>just wondering if widescreen games require a widescreen
>>>monitor or if they can output letterboxed to a standard
>>>4:3 monitor. also, is 480p a huge difference over 480i?
>>>is (true) widescreen gaming worth the investment? the hd
>>>that I'm leaning towards is 4:3.
>>>
>>
>>If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and get
>>the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard for
>>all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in 16:9.
>>That would be a waste of screen.
>>
>>
>
>
> 1) direct-view crts still have the best picture
> 2) direct-view crts still have the best service record and have a proven
> track record of longevity
> 3) direct-view crts don't lag or have audio/video synchronization problems
> 4) stretching/zooming or in any way altering the source material to fit
> your screen is usually ugly
> 5) the 16:9 area on a 36 inch 4:3 crt is just barely smaller than the
> largest 16:9 direct-view crt widescreen
> 6) the lack of a standard widescreen aspect ratio means even widescreen tvs
> will letterbox certain material
> 7) the vast majority of programming is still 4:3, and the 4:3 area on a 36
> inch 4:3 ratio tv is almost double that of a 34 inch widescreen.
> 8) a 36 inch 4:3 crt hd is only $1700 (with stand)
>
>
> I'm not exactly crazy about the aesthetics of the unit itself, or the bulk,
> but I'm convinced that a 4:3 hd is the best (least flawed) transitional
> solution...at least until there's a lot more widescreen
> programming/games...in 5 years, when 1080p sets are the norm and all of the
> service and performance issues are ironed out with dlp/lcd/d-ila, I could
> move this to the bedroom, or elsewhere...
>
>
I think you're right. But I have my eyes peeled for OLED... I think it's
the LCD killer. It's Brighter, Less Power Consumption, and cheap when
becomes ubiquitous.
 

robin

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2004
246
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:puy2e.2457$kT5.2214@attbi_s21...
>
> "Eric" <nospam@nospam.not> wrote in message
> news:fQo2e.56$tI6.28@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
>>
>> "Robin"wrote in message
>>
>>> If you are going to get an HD TV, why not go ahead and
>>> get
>>> the widescreen? In 2007 when digital TV is the standard
>>> for
>>> all broadcast TV, the vast majority of it will be in
>>> 16:9.
>>> That would be a waste of screen.
>>
>> 2007? Your glass is half full. :^)
>>
>> I'm thinking more like 2015.
>>
>
> Somebody correct me if I am making things up, but isn't it
> some type of government mandate that they want all TV
> broadcast in digital by 2007? They want to convert the
> bandwidth currently used for analog for cell, radio,
> emergency, etc.
>

I even remember seeing a segment on TV where they were
talking about subsidizing the tuner boxes that would then be
required for those too poor to have cable or satellite.