I stand corrected on upscaling then. I didn't realize it applies any filters.

If you search up the game on the xbox it has some specs about the game.
the info stated includes things like 1 player with no co-op and that the game will be displayed in 720p
so, there you go guys =)

would anyone like a screenshot for proof =P

1080p for consoles and more than likly 720p for PCs

Note, again, that this specifies the standard output. As I recall, you can always select 1080i/p even for 720p games, it just upscales it again. What resolution it actually renders at is likely anyone's guess. Native 720p *IS* a possibility, given that this is what the screenshots are at.

However, I do have my doubts that the screenshots are necessarily from a console version of the game. They're not from the PS3, as the PS3 cannot do HDR+AA at the same time, and I'm 99% sure that they have HDR (can only know for sure if it's a video) and they're certainly using AA. It could tbe the 360 version, but it appears that there's more than 4 different steps of anti-aliasing, and the Xbox 360 only supports up to x4 AA. (meanwhile, modern video cards support x16 and beyond)

What the heck are you talking about? Console player much? It's the complete opposite. PCs are always superior.

A silly and factually disproven myth. Most people can tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps in video games. Given the right monitor/tv, people can even see the difference from 60 to 120 frames.


The difference between 720p and 1080p entirely depends on the game. Some are very noticeable depending on texture sizes, some are not.

First post has been updated about the upscaling etc. I truly had no idea the consoles "lie" to us abou the resolution like this. Oh well.

Considering how I own a 720p TV, I could care less if it's available in higher resolutions. I doubt it won't this day and age.

No, that's not true... at all. This PC I'm using right now would likely explode if I put Skyrim in it (:P, but it really wouldn't be able to handle it; couldn't handle Oblivion with graphics settings similar to my PS3's), but my PS3 will not. The OPTION for 1080p graphics will likely be available for PCs, but please don't delude yourself into thinking the PC is a static platform that somehow is always more powerful than the latest consoles because it's not true. Some people have more powerful PCs, but I'm sure a large majority of the world's people do not. PCs vary... immensely. A PC player would have no excuse for not knowing that. 720p will be a very valid resolution option for the PC version, as well, but I think Skyrim will likely support 720p and possibly whatever it is that they claim is 1080p on some of my PS3 game cases (Fallout 3 and Oblivion are stated to only support 720p resolutions on my game cases, but Assassin's Creed II and Final Fantasy XIII claim to support 1080p resolutions, for example, with my TV stating Final Fantasy XIII plays at 1080p resolution with all other games, including Assassin's Creed II, playing at 720p resolution and the XMB at 1080p resolution).

I love how people seem to think that there is a noticeable difference between 1080i and 1080p


Wrong


:blink: That doesn't make any sense at all




I think we can assume that most people who will buy Skyrim on the PC have a decent gaming rig. PCs will always have superior graphics. Or, at least they will have the potential for superior graphics.

Of course they will, but those people hardly represent all PC-owners. The potential is there because people can always go above and beyond with custom machines, but PCs are so diverse I don't think it's even fair to classify them under one category. I'm pretty sure what I'm using right now is a PC, and again, it can't even run Oblivion. Those buying Skyrim for their PCs likely have nice PCs, but not standard PCs. They get nice graphics, but PCs do not always get better graphics. I'm willing to bet most of the people on this planet who own PCs don't have a PC even as powerful as one of the current generation consoles. Potential does not equate to "always".

We are talking about the PC Gaming scene. I don't care about the people who have a PC and don't use them for gaming, those people are irrelevant in this discussion.

My friend has a computer that can't even run Minecraft, but that isn't relevant right now because he isn't a gamer. You see what I mean?

If you play games on the PC chances are you have a good gaming computer which means that you'll probably be able to play games with better graphics than the console versions.

That isn't always the case, but most of the time it's true.

You're not the one who made this statement without any "gaming" part in there. PCs (general form) and always (self-explanatory) don't work together at all. This is a PC I'm using. Therefore, PCs are not always superior. There is no point to what I'm trying to say beyond that.

:rolleyes:

We are on a gaming forum and discussing the graphics options in games so I thought that people could put things in context when they read my posts. My bad.

Then how can one express their thoughts on a forum without its meaning being taken differently based on the context when they didn't want to. If it must be taken into context, I play PC games. I'm a PC gamer, My computer can't compare to my console, hence I'm also a console gamer and hence the statement, which wasn't stated, of "gaming PCs are always superior" is also false. My friend is also a PC gamer with a similar situation. I know yet another person who is just a PC player and has a computer more powerful than my own, but not one of greater quality than that of a modern-generation console. He's in it for the mods, but his gaming PC struggles with newer games, sometimes. It's just a false statement, even with the "gaming" part edited in and that's all I'm trying to convey. It's not true, period. Ask me why I'm playing Skyrim on a console and I'll tell you its because the PC I use, even for gaming, can't handle it. I've nothing more to say beyond my conclusion of I think 720p will be the highest supported resolution on consoles but that I wouldn't be surprised if it was at least claimed to be higher, with the way Bethesda values their graphics.

Now, could someone explain to me how a console game can be stated to be 1080p but not actually be? I don't understand how that works (unless it's just a direct lie, but I can't see that happening).

Well my TV is 40" 1080p, my xbox settings are set to 1080p on the dashboard, and all my games look sweet so for me its fine what ever res they bring it out on. Prop be 720p which is fine.

Some games are marketed as 1080p even though their native resolution is lower, but they can be upscaled to 1080p with minimal quality loss.

What exactly is upscaling, then? In what way is it different from having something be true 1080p or true 720p?

That's the question I've been trying to get an answer for too by reading page up and page down here, this "upscaling" sounds like the lower resolution graphics somehow just put in a few more pixels or something somewhere. Google be my friend, I must research 'bout this:


"""""""""The Upscaling Process

Upscaling is a process that mathematically matches the pixel count of the output of the DVD signal to the physical pixel count on an HDTV, which is typically 1280x720 (720p) or 1920x1080 (1080i - and, some cases, 1080p).

720p represents 1,280 pixels displayed across the screen horizontally and 720 pixels down the screen vertically. This arrangement yields 720 horizontal lines on the screen, which are, in turn, displayed progressively, or each line displayed following another.

1080i represents 1,920 pixels displayed across a screen horizontally and 1,080 pixels down a screen vertically. This arrangement yields 1,080 horizontal lines, which are, in turn, displayed alternately. In other words, all the odd lines are displayed, followed by all the even lines.

1080p, on the other hand, represents 1,080 horizontal lines displayed sequentially. This means all lines are displayed during the same pass. 1080p is the highest quality HD display format.

The Practical Effect Of DVD Upscaling

Visually, there is very little difference to the eye of the average consumer between 720p and 1080i. However, 720p can deliver a slightly smoother-looking image, due to the fact that lines and pixels are displayed in a consecutive pattern, rather than in an alternate pattern.

The upscaling process does a good job of matching the upscaled pixel output of a DVD player to the native pixel display resolution of an HDTV capable television, resulting in better detail and color consistency.

However, upscaling, as it is currently implemented, cannot convert standard DVD images into true high-definition images. In fact, although upscaling works well with fixed pixel displays, such as Plasma and LCD televisions, results are not always consistent on CRT-based high definition televisions.""""""""


What ever that means...

It basically means that the image is stretched to fit the higher resolution. There is a more technical explanation somewhere but it doesn't really say anything else. :shrug:

Sometimes a filter will be applied to upscaled images to remove jagged edges and other things that appear when you stretch the image.

So, it's as if the resolution of an upscaled 720p image is equivalent to some resolution between 720p and 1080p (not technically, but rather just as a way to give an idea of what graphical difference is being made)?

Something like that, not sure though. From how I understood it it's like this:

If a game supports 1200x600 resolution, but your TV is not in proportion of having the longer side 1200 and shorter side 600, so instead of having larger pixels upways, it now upscales the 600 to the maximal it can be for it to be the right size, possibly leading to 720. This is however my 10 minute anolyzis of this and is 99% surely 50% wrong.

It makes perfect sense - it's 1080p in that it has 1080 vertical lines, but it only has 1280 horizontal lines. Obviously you can't use this resolution for widescreen gaming, but if you're rendering, say, a center element for a menu, you can do it, and then say your game is 1080p. All marketing.


No, an upscaled 720p image is 720p. There is no quality improvement from upscaling - this isn't CSI. In very simple terms, upscaling is just stretching the image to a bigger size. Both consoles "filter" their upscaling, though. Wheras just making an image bigger results in bigger pixels, filtering this lets you... sort of blur the difference. It doesn't introduce any more detail, but it does make the upscaling less obvious.

And just for effect: You can not ever introduce more detail into an image. If you render at 720p, that's your level of detail, and upscaling does not add any more.


Console manufacturers don't lie to you when they say things are 1080p, they just don't tell the whole truth. If they lied, they could get into trouble - but just telling you a little and letting you assume the rest? Apparently that's fine. Ain't marketing great, kids?

Resolutions aren't connected to TV/monitor sizes in any way, are they? If not, as I thought they weren't, I don't understand what you mean by "stretching the image to a bigger size".

Oh, when I say size I mean resolution. It's like zooming in, if I took a picture that was 50x50 and wanted to put it in a 100x100 hole, that would be 'upscaling' it. Indeed, the word itself gives a good hint - "up" "scaling", scaling up!
The basics of it really are that simple, the filtering is to reduce the obviousness of resizing, and can work quite well in hiding the fact - but you can never introduce new information. Rendering at 1080p gives a significantly better image than rendering at 720p and upscaling, but rendering at 720p and upscaling looks better than rendering and outputting at 720p.