Lol the dirt WAS what I was looking at to begin with

@GameLord08
Summed up my thoughts exactly(sort of) but without the 'Dudes' and 'Radicals', shame on you.

Add Stereoscopic 3D into the mix and it amplifies the immersion factor by a land sland, making the experience feel like a realistic virtual playground, as if you're looking through a window into a whole new world. Imagine playing a Wii U-remake of RE: Revelations in 3D on the big screen with pointer controls. The amount of realistic depth provided would make the experience feel far more envolving and engrossing than ever. But that could be said for any game. Didn't Nintendo mention that the Wii U was 3D capable but that it wasn't their main focus due to most people not owning 3D capable HDTV's?

Well seeing how you can purchase a 3DTV for a quarter of the price they were 1 or 2 years ago I'm hoping Ninty is still supporting this feature. I don't own one at the moment but might possibly look into upgrading next year

Don't think they will. On the TV front 3D is mostly dead in the market with very low adoption. 3D I. The Tv sector wont become popular until they are able to do it glasses free. But by then the price would be high and the market would be moving kn to afforadble 4K. That and with the expection of a few movies 3D tticket sales are down as well.

Maybe they should stop doing Post Production 3D on live action films and actually film them in 3D like Avatar, Saw 3D and RE: Aferlife(terrible movie, just sayin. ) Post Production 3D is just lousy cheap looking crap in comparison. If a movie can delier realistic depth than i'm ALL for it. Why would i want to chose flat unrealistic 2D when i can have that kind realism and depth perception be it live action or cartoon?

Also i'm not even sure if HDTV's can ressolve 1080p in each eye with Shutter or Passive 3D Glasses. One offers less res' than the other while delivering a faster frame rate while the other is more crisp but delivers less frames.

@MadAussieBloke
Man, I'm excited to get a 3D HDTV, which i'll be getting right before the wii u launches. I'm dieing to see The Beauty and the beast which as been described as having some of the most amazing 3D to ever grace film. Along with Nightmare before christmas, coraline and those other Imax 3D Sea adventure(whatever they're called) movies. Who wouldn't want to be staring at a 50-60" 1080p 3D plasma with a giant gold fish popping out of the
TV screen as if it's swimming into your living room haha.

@Sony_70 Yeah thats why I didn't really want to be an early adopter of the 3DTV craze + $8000 for something that is not heavily supported was just fully out of the question. I know people that bought theirs in the first year of release and now just use it with the 3D turned off and are sick of wearing the glasses, which I could imagine would be bloody annoying. I would hate to see the price when glasses free 4-8k sets get the go ahead, you would have to be the king of england to own one

@Wavesta Not much of a film/TV buff anyway so I would only use mine for gaming alot of those 3D flicks are imo poorly acted/scripted turds wrapped up in a glossy presentation. Look at Battleship, Rhianna? what the hell were they thinking

there's a big difference between HD as you see it on blu rays and TV and "HD" as you see it in video games. with movies and televison, HD just means a higher signal resoultion so that you get a clearer, more detailed picture. video games running in HD have this same advantage too, but they also have all of the polygons and textures rendered to an HD resoultion as well. it means the actual content of the game itself changes with the resolution. comparing a video game rendered to 480p to a video game rendered to 1080p is a far, far bigger jump than comparing a DVD to a blu ray.

i'ts not about just a few jaggies, it makes a huge difference in how much of the game world you're able to see and how many details you can appreciate while you play. again, just in case you're not convinced that it makes a difference....
RE4 in 480p:

RE4 in HD: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Hdebrucxu74/S_Avr3szX6I/AAAAAAAADyY...

To me HD seems like just a minor update, like all consoles go through. Like how the wii did from GCN, it's just PS3 and 360 did it higher, nothing more

Now you're just trying to be incongruous.

I think what LordOtakuWiiU is trying to say is, while HD may improve the image quality of a game (and this is talking about upscaling, not making a game from the ground up in HD) it doesn't change the actual game. Using Resident Evil 4 as an example, if the game is fun in 480p, why would it being in 1080p or 720p make the game any better? There are games made in HD that may not work for one reason or another in 480p, but this thread is talking about upscaling games originally in 480p. Unless they made actual changes to the gameplay for the better, the picture resolution shouldn't hinder one's enjoyment. And if someone can't enjoy a game unless it is in 1080i, I am sad to say that I feel sorry for them.

720p games, True Widescreen(unlike the Wii's crappy soft, dull and blurry anamorphic WS), HDMI and the Power of the Wii U will no doubt be a giant game changer visually speaking. PS3/360 owners already have this, but they don't have it with Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, Metroid, SSBros, Wario Land, Punch-Out, Kid Icarus ect ect and that's what i mostly care about.

You have obviously never spent a decent amount of time with an HD system if you truly believe that. The demo at Target or Walmart for Uncharted 2 alone was enough to show me how huge of a gap there is between Wii and PS3. This is embarrassing, but when the cutscene ended and the gameplay began in the demo, I literally couldn't tell the difference so I died from not moving. Try naming one Wii game where that might happen to anyone.

Gaming is an audio/ visual experience.

So, yes, the artistry of games, and the ability for developers to do more with games is directly enhanced by more powerful computers and graphics chips.

Limbo would have been impossible on any console but the PS3 and Xbox 360, for instance, simple as its artistic design is.

[/div]

[/div]

Exactly, I don't get why people are attacking me for liking SD, besides it's my...... GET READY FOR IT........ OPINION! I'm not trying to change your minds im just saying I don't think HD is all its cracked up to be, hey at least I'm not saying WOW HD now that the wiiU is out

I'm not saying it doesn't make the game look better. It clearly does. And it allows developers to put more on the screen without worrying about people not being able to see it. Even Miyamoto, who was against HD before, is embracing it with pikmin 3.

BUT, my point is, how good a game is does not depend on HD, or the number of polygons, at all. A bad game is still a bad game and a good game is still a good game. There's a lot of people that put way too much emphasis on resolution and polygons. And like I was saying, there are a plethora of good games that do not have a high resolution or lots of polygons. So it's already been proven to me that a game does not need those things to be good.

And, again, I don't have an HD tv, so HD is literally meaningless to me.

HD does fundamentally change the way the game is rendered, to a point where it can change how you play. when you can see enemies and details clearly from a long distance it does enhance your ability to aim, or spot important objects much more easily. i have bad eyesight, and to me the difference between games rendered to SD or HD is the same as taking my glasses off and on. everyone should be able to agree that being able to see things is a plus.

i get your point. the thing that makes games fun is the way they play, not how they look, but you can't completely separate visuals from the rest of the experience as if they're a meaningless component. the art and visual design of a game have a huge impact on how fun it is to play. do you think the metroid prime games would be the same without that awe inspiring art direction and detail? and do you think the conduit would have sucked as badly if it had the same level of visual polish retro puts into their games, instead of repeating the same beige halls over and over?

gamecube games may have been created for a 480i/p resolution, but like i said, developers work at higher resolutions than the final product. there are still a lot of things in those games that are lost in SD. case in point- capcom sent teams of artists to spain to study architecture in preparation for resident evil 4. in the HD screenshot, you can see every nuance of their results in all its glory, while you can't even see half of the engravings and textures in the SD shot. all of that work and attention to detail is lost in blotchiness.

TL,DR version- art direction is a major part of the game and it gets severely compromised in SD. it doesn't matter if you still enjoy games in 480p, you'd enjoy them more in 1080p. i don't even really know what the argument is here... if GC games do show up on the wii u VC, is anyone really saying they want them in 480p instead of 1080p? is it that bad of a thing to be interested in getting better versions of these games?

This is silly.

A child draws a picture of a house. The parents of that child love the picture of the house. They pin it on the fridge and tell the child that he/ she is a wonderful artist.

They're not going to go to an art gallery and demand the curator replace the Mona Lisa with their child's picture because "they don't care about graphics."

A powerful graphics chip allows for a deeper, richer visual experience. Games are audio/visual interactive experiences. To say that a game doesn't need a good art style is like saying a book doesn't need good grammar.

Some Wii games do have great art styles. Art style is a consequence of using the tools (graphics chips) well, not a consequence of those chips existing. However, the HD consoles are the equivalent of having a store room filled with art tools, rather than a small box of them (SD consoles) - with more tools you can do more things.

Can we stop this silly debate now? Anyone who is claiming graphics don't matter are deluding themselves, since I can guarantee that their favourite games have good graphics - Wii or HD, or any other console.

@LollipopChoSaw You do not understand what an opinion is. You know that? Art style has NOTHING to do with resolution.

You do not understand what an opinion is. You know that? Art style has NOTHING to do with resolution.

Opinions and be unsubstantiated. And unsubstantiated opinions are still incorrect.

So for instance, the opinion that the world is flat is incorrect because the scientific evidence says that the earth is a giant golf ball.

Similarly, the opinion that art style and resolution are not related is wrong because the reality is that high resolutions enable art styles that standard definition is not capable of emulating.

This is provable. The fonts that many HD games use are illegible in standard definition. These are often great fonts.,

[/div]

But right.