HiDef?

Bogrollbloke · **Posted:** September 4th, 2008, 8:46 am

I'm thinking of getting a new TV, because my current one is annoying me because it makes a high pitched whistle every time I turn it on.

What I want to know is, does HD actually improve the picture quality of video games and television by a significant margin, or is it just a marketing gimmick that really has no outstanding features?

Adbot · **Posted:** September 4th, 2008, 8:46 am

Pfkninenines · Global Moderator 12/4/08

If the TV supports higher quality, and the game is supposed to be high quality, and the cords from the console to the TV are decent, yes you should be getting higher quality gaming images. If you're expecting to get HD quality TV if you're not paying for it, don't expect much. Supposing you're getting a good cable signal, you should expect a bit of an increase in quality of picture, even if it's not *that* much. The quality of the TV should show its true performance though, if you're doing something that is full HD (blu-ray, etc).

Kenny · **Posted:** September 4th, 2008, 11:35 am

I currently have a HDTV, and my xbox is set to HD. It makes such a difference in my opinion. The dashboard looks much clearer and sharper. The stars glow a little on your rep. Everything in the games look so much nicer. In my experience, even if it doesn't support HD it still looks a hell of a lot nicer. I haven't noticed anything different in the TV shows and DVDs and stuff. I'm not really mind, since I can go downstairs and watch it on my 42".

Kyle · **Posted:** September 4th, 2008, 1:41 pm

I bought a 32 inch plasma for my room last year, i love it. The tv picture is good but the movie and 360 picture is beautiful.

jrdgames · **Posted:** September 5th, 2008, 10:44 am

I think it is mostly a way for them to get more money I do not own an HD TV or get HD signal but for the picture to look better both the signal AND the TV would have to be HD.
If you take an HD TV and hook it up to rabbit ears (two antennas that usually go on top of a TV) then the signal may look a little better but not enough to be worth the money, and likewise if you take an HD signal and hook it to an analogue TV it may look a little better but it wouldn't be worth the money that the HD signal cost you over the standard signal.

So what I am saying is, if you want an HD TV to look better then you will need an HD source for it.

Shane · **Posted:** September 5th, 2008, 1:12 pm

jrdgames wrote:

So what I am saying is, if you want an HD TV to look better then you will need an HD source for it.

Here here. =D>

There's only 3 reasons you should get a HD TV:
1. You like watching your news and animal planet in HD

2. You have access to blu-ray movies.
3. You want to go around shooting people on XBL in HD.

Those are the only reasons I'd get a HD TV. But still it's not enough, it's a joke here... You have to pay $400 for a HD cable box (tuner) and pay an extra $15 more a month for 20 or so not-so-great HD channels. So that's why I havn't forced an upgrade yet in my house. So rightnow there's really no point as you have to pay more (here at least) and out of the local channels none of them are in HD yet.

About 7 or so years ago when HDTV's came out the scaling was crap, though I am told they have improved this? Most SD signals should look fine on it. If your current TV is dying you'll most likely end up with a HD LCD or Plasma, there's not much you can do anymore to not buy one.

Adbot · **Posted:** September 5th, 2008, 1:12 pm

Kirby · **Posted:** September 5th, 2008, 3:23 pm

I have a 50 inch plasma and I see quite the difference. I was watching Smallville 6 in HD and then recorded Smallville season 7 recorded on a non-hd channel, it looks horrible. So I definitely recommend HD