I hate pixel counting. I don't care if a game's 1080p or 1080i or 720p. I care if it looks good, and you don't need pixels to make a game look good. That is what art directors are for. Look at the Wii's Muramasa: The Demon Blade. It's a fantastic looking game. Same with Mario Galaxy. And they're not in HD. This is thanks to their art direction. Valkyria Chronicles' distinct look also sets it apart (it is in HD, but I bet it would look striking in standard defs as well). Again, it's a case of art direction over pixel count. I'd love to see more studios put resources into art direction.

I think the whole pixel counting thing is nothing really more then fanboys looking for ways to give some games a edge, or hate on other games.  But we then again, it kind of reminds me of the 'bit war' nearly 20 years ago. When people thought more bits = better games.

Pixel counting is important.

Here's what I want for all games: Native 1080p at 60 fps.

It's a tough choice for developers. I hope next gen consoles output true HD at 60 fps without sacrificing special effects.

For all intents and purposes, Tim, pixel counting isn't remotely important to the vast majority of consumers. It's an obsession of a select niche of of graphics-obessed people that notice things the average person buying a game or TV wouldn't be able to notice on their or would care that much about if you brought it to their attention. to Jason's point, all the tech advancement in the world means nothing if not crafted artisitcally in a way to make an experience that people care about. In that sense, pixel counting obsessed people often miss the forest for the trees in their need for a tech fix.

Is it important to you and people like you? Absolutely. Is there going to be a games-industry crash if we never get there? Absolutely not. It's not that important, but it's a admirable aspiration to have developers get there at some point to push that aspect of the experience forward for the people that care. It's a hell of a lot more important developers get the entire "game" thing down than a pushing a visual tech demo.

Gerren, it's all about what people know. If they saw the same game on two machines and on one machine it was running at 60 fps and the other was running at 30 fps, they would choose 60 fps every time.

The same is true with resolution if the display is large enough. On a 50in display, people will notice that 1080p is better than 720p. If they had a choice, they would choose 1080p.

Going to extremes, like comparing the Wii to the 360, there would be a game industry crash if games continued to look like they do on Wii.

A key part of video gaming is fidelity. More polygons, higher quality textures, better lighting, etc, are required to avoid a crash. That's an historical fact. The Wii seemed to buck that trend, but we can't ignore the success of 360 and PS3 which maintain fidelity and they have higher game sales and console usage.

If the 360 or PS3 didn't exist, I would not own a Wii. I have no desire to play games with Gamecube graphics or physics.

Pixel counting matters because everything matters.

Tim, trust me. I've had these conversation before with people. People in these groups that ALWAYS think it's a matter of people not knowing. A lot of people legitimately don't care that much. Part of it's penetration and the people that have what will optimize everything. A lot of it is not everyone cares that everything is optimized if they are happy with that's there. Bear in mind done test cases have been repeatedly done where people couldn't tell the difference between 720p and full 1080p. If they're having fun with a game, which is the more often than not the endgame anyway, and the graphics are serving their purpose.

No one here's said the visual fidelity isn't important. But there's a segment of gamers that have this idiotic notion in their heads that if a game doesn't push the limit of everything a system is capable is doing, it's somehow not up to standard and is bad when something being in true HD and running at 60 fps does not a good game make. It sure as hell makes a good game more polished, but it sure as hell isn't anal pixel-counting important.

I agree that pixel counting today is a minor factor. In other words, there is not a fundamental difference between 540p and 1080p. 1080p is just "sharper". Most people don't care much about resolution. But, I can tell when a game is running sub-hd and it does bother me when I play it. Resolution is particularly important in video games since the edges are not blended like they are in movies.

My personal gripe is about frame rates. Too often, developers let poor or inconsistant frame rates slide. After playing a game at 60 fps, like Call of Duty or Ninja Gaiden, I never want to see bad frame rates again. Shipping a game with poor frame rates is like being invited to a party and then told to clean the toilet.

So, my reaction in defending pixel counting is out of fear that developers will slack off.