Do Gamers Really Need HDTV?

Gamasutra has up an article, their latest in the 'Analyze This' series, exploring whether gamers are really clamoring for the HD era ... or if the only people looking forward to HD gaming are the game makers. All three analysts seem to think HD is very important, but with varying levels of fervency. From the article: "On the Nintendo front, Nintendo has sacrificed graphics that can be viewed by the minority for a price that can benefit the majority. So, no, I don't think that they've made a mistake in the short run. Over the long run, we'll have to see: If HDTV adoption rates accelerate, the differences between the Wii and the Xbox 360 and PS3 may become more important, and it may end up that sell-through of the Wii begins to decline. That's a couple of years away, and my crystal ball isn't quite that clear."

Not so good journalism

[steveo777]

or photography at least. Not sure what you would call a bad screenshot. But on the second page they complain for the second time about how Capcom's Dead Rising had illegible print on standard (even 480p) TVs. Yet, they do not show what the text looks like, just a shot of Frank smooshing some zombies with a park bench. I'm not in need an example, I've played it on a 36" 480p TV (and yes it's still very difficult to decypher most of the words). The game has text on the bottom of the screen well over half the time you're playing, it wouldn't be hard to get a screen capture of the script.

Re:Nintendo will eatch and adapt

[SpookyFish]

Um, no. They are commonplace enough. HDTV sales will outpace SD sales for the first time this year. Morgan Stanley estimates that approximately 26% of households will have at least one set by the end of the year. That number rises to ~68% in 2010.

You can say that 26% this year and 33+% next year isn't wide spread enough, but I beg to differ. Those are also the households with the disposable income to afford not only the console, but the real expense of accessories and games for it.

Nintendo is making a mistake. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't mean the games won't be fun, but based on perception alone they are missing a major marketing 'checkmark'.

Re:...umm...

[nlawalker]

A better question would be to ask a PC gamer to choose between a 18 or 19 inch monitor and a 40 inch behemoth, considering all factors such as price, space, heat, etc.

It's stupid to hold televisions and monitors to the same standards because they evolved in very different directions. TV's got bigger and not clearer because the medium doesn't have a great emphasis on text or fine detail, and people enjoy their large home theaters. Monitors got clearer because no one needed the size when you are inches away from the thing, and text and finely detailed graphics are very important on a PC.

That was all before games came along. Now, since both standards are used to play video games, they are being held up against each other. PC users don't care because they already have what matters to them: resolution. Most people wouldn't know what to do with a 30" monitor if they had one, which wouldn't be the case most of the time anyway because they are so expensive. If you really want more space, you can even get two regular size monitors for cheaper than one huge one and have more screen real estate. The TV viewers on the other hand, they get to keep the size of their screens, AND new technology is making them clearer as well.

Re:Nintendo will eatch and adapt

[kolding]

Actually, Nintendo is probably safe. If I remember correctly, they are supporting 480p TV in 16:9 aspect ratio. That, realistically, will support the vast majority of gamers just fine.

IMHO, HDTV provides 4 major video improvements over "Standard Def" TV, or more precisely, over standard NTSC TV. These are:
1: Improved color model and accuracy. NTSC color is hideous (people say NTSC stands for Never The Same Color). HD's color system allows more accurate color, and more precise changes in the color from pixel to pixel.
2: Progressive Scan
3: Widescreen aspect ratio
4: More scan lines.

Of these, more scan lines is actually the least important. Unless your TV is huge, you really don't see a huge difference between 480p and 1080p until you're far closer than you would be for watching TV or gaming. Even still, motion covers a plethora of sins. It's hard to discern fine detail at all in a moving image. Static images, sure, but not moving ones.

Wii, with a 16x9 progressive scan 480p image will be just fine once people sit down and play it. It may not look as sexy on the spec sheet, but in reality, it will work great. The guys with 108 inch TV's might be able to say "My PS3 looks so much better", but the vast majority of the population, with 42" TV's and smaller, will really say "looks fine to me".