• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Is the Wii U Game Pad 480i and not 480p?

Kokonoe

Banned
When you play the Wii U without a Component or HDMI cable plugged in the only resolution you may select is 480i. It's forced from what I can see, and there's no other way around it unless you plug a Component or HDMI cable in.

Is the screen on the Game Pad only 480i and not 480p? Or is this just a software overlook?
 
It's a software overlook. You see, fixed-pixel displays such as LCDs are always gonna be progressive (show all lines at once). What we need to know is if it's just a software oversight like you said, or if what is being displayed just de-interlaced rendered 480i shit, like Wii U does with 480i-only games such as MegaMan 9 (last I checked anyways). If it's the latter, than that sucks for people whose only TV is a composite capable one, and they want to make their games look as good as they can on the gamepad.
 
The resolution you set is only for the main display. 480i is the only option as there's no other feed. Gamepad is 480p (854 x 480 which is 16:9; 640 x 480 been 4:3).
 
It's a software overlook. You see, fixed-pixel displays such as LCDs are always gonna be progressive (show all lines at once). What we need to know is if it's just a software oversight like you said, or if what is being displayed just de-interlaced rendered 480i shit, like Wii U does with 480i-only games such as MegaMan 9 (last I checked anyways).

Hmm. Interesting. Well, I suppose in Game Pad only mode it would be streaming that I think since it sets the whole Wii U to 480i. Nice to know about LCD being progressive. Hopefully Nintendo patches a fix in for us Game Pad only users.
 
When you play the Wii U without a Component or HDMI cable plugged in the only resolution you may select is 480i. It's forced from what I can see, and there's no other way around it unless you plug a Component or HDMI cable in.

Is the screen on the Game Pad only 480i and not 480p? Or is this just a software overlook?
I don't have a WiiU, but my guess would be that 480i is the default main output resolution; this is VERY common for compatibility reasons. 480i has historically been extremely widely supported, so a lot of things default to it so that you can always interact with your console even if options get messed up (for instance, the original Xbox menu always outputs 480i even with YPbPr cables, and Xbox 360 component cables have a 480i switch right on the hardware).

It wouldn't make a huge amount of sense for the WiiU to send video interlaced to the gamepad, even if we're talking about Nintendo and their awful history with video output.
 
I don't have a WiiU, but my guess would be that 480i is the default main output resolution; this is VERY common for compatibility reasons. 480i has historically been extremely widely supported, so a lot of things default to it so that you can always interact with your console even if options get messed up (for instance, the original Xbox menu always outputs 480i, and Xbox 360 component cables have a 480i switch right on the hardware).

It wouldn't make a huge amount of sense for the WiiU to send video interlaced to the gamepad, even if we're talking about Nintendo and their awful history with video output.
The signal itself wouldn't be interlaced, but the progressive signal being sent to the gamepad might just be a de-interlaced 480i feed instead of true-rendered 480p.

Question is, what is a good test game to prove or disprove this?
 
The signal itself wouldn't be interlaced, but the progressive signal being sent to the gamepad might just be a de-interlaced 480i feed instead of true-rendered 480p.

Question is, what is a good test game to prove or disprove this?

Mario Kart Wii? Or any game with fast motion in general
 
The signal itself wouldn't be interlaced, but the progressive signal being sent to the gamepad might just be a de-interlaced 480i feed instead of true-rendered 480p.
That would be an extremely weird content output pipeline. Instead of just merging fields before output, you'd be scaling then splitting then merging then outputting. Merging when the game natively generates as fields makes sense as a simple solution, this seems like it would likely take more work on a system design level than the obvious "correct" approach.

Question is, what is a good test game to prove or disprove this?
An FPS game, since it gives you the fine-tuned camera control to gauge combing. Or if you look at the sides of objects in a racing game. Or something. Since the gamepad likely wouldn't try to cleverly deinterlace content in a progressive stream, just about anything should be blatantly obvious.
 
The resolution you select doesn't affect the GamePad display in any way, so the 480i is just referring to TV output if you had it hooked up to a TV. It's just the lowest option and means a display will appear if you do then plug a cable in.

Regardless of what you select there, the GamePad is always a 480p picture. Basically, you can't alter what the GamePad gets at all.
 
same reason for capacitive vs. resistive

"it's nintendo"

Nintendo chose resistive over capacitive because capacitive is over sensitive and commonly results in accidental input, the main detractor for quality inputs in smartphone games.

Have you ever tried to play Mario on a capacitive touch screen? It's a mess.
 
Nintendo chose resistive over capacitive because capacitive is over sensitive and commonly results in accidental input, the main detractor for quality inputs in smartphone games.

Have you ever tried to play Mario on a capacitive touch screen? It's a mess.


oh, yeah? not because its cheaper, huh

the only legitimate reason is because its cheaper, the other stuff is "goodhearted" justification for their main decision. and no, i wouldn't have played a mario game on a capacitive screen, because the DS/3DS are also resistive AFAIK, so i don't know what you're playing a mario game on that has a capacitive screen.


also, they would have made mario work if they did have a capacitive screen. because it's nintendo.


What are you even trolling about. Resistive screen is much better for non-gesture gaming (and certainly for drawing) and this "interlaced LCD" thing was just hypothesised here on the spot.

?

you don't even know what i'm "trolling" about yet all of a sudden i'm "trolling."
 
same reason for capacitive vs. resistive

"it's nintendo"

What are you even trolling about. Resistive screen is much better for non-gesture gaming (and certainly for drawing) and this "interlaced LCD" thing was just hypothesised here on the spot.

you don't even know what i'm "trolling" about yet all of a sudden i'm "trolling."

Either you're trolling and you're not very good at it or you're being uninformed and throwing your personal hate around, just because someone posted a made up hypothesis that supports your hate. Either way, your posts seem quite worthless.
 
The resolution you select doesn't affect the GamePad display in any way, so the 480i is just referring to TV output if you had it hooked up to a TV. It's just the lowest option and means a display will appear if you do then plug a cable in.

Regardless of what you select there, the GamePad is always a 480p picture. Basically, you can't alter what the GamePad gets at all.
What about Wii mode though?
 
1. You can't alter the resolution of the gamepad screen. Why should you? And of course it's 480p.

2. Nice strawman with the capacitive vs resistive fanboy nonsense.
 
oh, yeah? not because its cheaper, huh

the only legitimate reason is because its cheaper, the other stuff is "goodhearted" justification for their main decision. and no, i wouldn't have played a mario game on a capacitive screen, because the DS/3DS are also resistive AFAIK, so i don't know what you're playing a mario game on that has a capacitive screen.


also, they would have made mario work if they did have a capacitive screen. because it's nintendo.

Nintendo put a Hundred Dollar tablet in the box, I'm quite certain the extra twenty dollars for a capacitive screen was not an issue. The simple fact is capacitive sucks for control and Nintendo, and more specifically Miyamoto, demand precision.
 
oh, yeah? not because its cheaper, huh

the only legitimate reason is because its cheaper, the other stuff is "goodhearted" justification for their main decision. and no, i wouldn't have played a mario game on a capacitive screen, because the DS/3DS are also resistive AFAIK, so i don't know what you're playing a mario game on that has a capacitive screen.


also, they would have made mario work if they did have a capacitive screen. because it's nintendo.

This is absolute garbage. Resisitive is much better for what they need it to do. Capacitive doesn't have the accuracy for miiverse and we don't need pinch to zoom so it's useless.
 
Nintendo put a Hundred Dollar tablet in the box, I'm quite certain the extra twenty dollars for a capacitive screen was not an issue. The simple fact is capacitive sucks for control and Nintendo, and more specifically Miyamoto, demand precision.

Don't feed etc etc, but whatever: Nintendo doesn't cheap out on anything. They don't pay for it, you do. Whenever you ask someone to list some advances of capacitive screens they always mention pinch to zoom and virtual buttons. Two things you obviously don't need with a full gamepad at hand. Resistive offers you precision, you can actually draw with a pen. It's pixel perfect. / thread derailed.
 
Nintendo put a Hundred Dollar tablet in the box, I'm quite certain the extra twenty dollars for a capacitive screen was not an issue. The simple fact is capacitive sucks for control and Nintendo, and more specifically Miyamoto, demand precision.

"yeah, increasing the cost of hardware by 10% is no biggy"


...huh?



This is absolute garbage. Resisitive is much better for what they need it to do. Capacitive doesn't have the accuracy for miiverse and we don't need pinch to zoom so it's useless.

if you say so. but has anyone actually complained about an ipad's screen being inaccurate? there are plenty of games on there that require accuracy and no pinch to zoom.


the actual BENEFIT would be multi-touch. who the hell cares about pinch to zoom for games?
 
The resolution you select doesn't affect the GamePad display in any way, so the 480i is just referring to TV output if you had it hooked up to a TV. It's just the lowest option and means a display will appear if you do then plug a cable in.

Regardless of what you select there, the GamePad is always a 480p picture. Basically, you can't alter what the GamePad gets at all.

I'm certain it does because I notice when I play 720p the games look better than in 480p due to the downscaling to the 480p screen. I don't think the Wii U renders 2 separate things, that would require a lot of resources.
 
I'm certain it does because I notice when I play 720p the games look better than in 480p due to the downscaling to the 480p screen. I don't think the Wii U renders 2 separate things, that would require a lot of resources.

Now I really want to see some experiments being done/tests being run. Sadly, I lack the time to do it myself.
 
if you say so. but has anyone actually complained about an ipad's screen being inaccurate? there are plenty of games on there that require accuracy and no pinch to zoom.

ipad doesn't have miiverse and art academy, so why would anyone?

the actual BENEFIT would be multi-touch. who the hell cares about pinch to zoom for games?

The wii u gamepad has these things called "buttons", so I have zero interest in multitouch. Accuracy is far more important.
 
the actual BENEFIT would be multi-touch. who the hell cares about pinch to zoom for games?

1/ I think you should start a new thread for this
2/ in the OP, you can tell us in which situations did you feel that you needed multitouch while playing on your Wii U Gamepad
 
I guess since we've resolved the "mystery" about the Gamepad resolution we have to discuss why Nintendo are the worst thing to gaming since Tim Langdell...
 
I'd appreciate it if the bickering could come to an end, I didn't create this thread for the intention to people to argue with each other, only to discuss the tech/specs of this. Thanks.

Now I really want to see some experiments being done/tests being run. Sadly, I lack the time to do it myself.

I just attempted this, but unfortunately, Miiverse uploads images to the same size and JPEG's them thus they lose all their quality.

Hard to make much of these due to this.

720p on left, 480p on right.

Zcy6nQf.png


The thing I did notice were the eyes.

hCdWsQA.png


I'm not sure how else you could test this, maybe with a camera.
 
I just attempted this, but unfortunately, Miiverse uploads images to the same size and JPEG's them thus they lose all their quality.

Can't see much different myself, other than maybe a slightly different animation frame.

However, don't use Miiverse to upload, go to abload.de instead and upload from there. It should preserve at least some of the quality.

Like this.

wiiu_screenshot_gamep08jun.jpg
 
Can't see much different myself, other than maybe a slightly different animation frame.

However, don't use Miiverse to upload, go to abload.de instead and upload from there. It should preserve at least some of the quality.

Like this.

wiiu_screenshot_gamep08jun.jpg

I'm confident in saying, if you own Monster Hunter, play it in 720p on the game pad for a few seconds, then switch to 480p and play Monster Hunter and you'll notice the different. Actually, Monster Hunter runs a small bit better at 480p.

How do you upload to abload from Miiverse? I have a capture card but that won't work with the Game Pad.
 
I'm confident in saying, if you own Monster Hunter, play it in 720p on the game pad for a few seconds, then switch to 480p and play Monster Hunter and you'll notice the different. Actually, Monster Hunter runs a small bit better at 480p.

How do you upload to abload from Miiverse? I have a capture card but that won't work with the Game Pad.

I'll give it a go later. Be interesting to see.

To upload to abload, you just need to open the web browser and visit the page. Then when you hit browse, the current frames of both the TV and the GamePad are an option to upload.
 
I'll give it a go later. Be interesting to see.

To upload to abload, you just need to open the web browser and visit the page. Then when you hit browse, the current frames of both the TV and the GamePad are an option to upload.

Thanks!
 
if you say so. but has anyone actually complained about an ipad's screen being inaccurate? there are plenty of games on there that require accuracy and no pinch to zoom.


the actual BENEFIT would be multi-touch. who the hell cares about pinch to zoom for games?

Nope, nobody ever complains about ipad controls being inaccurate.
 
Nope, nobody ever complains about ipad controls being inaccurate.

People complain that virtual controllers are inaccurate, not the screen response. It's impossible to have a working virtual controller on a resistive screen so this isn't a good comparison.
 
Why would anyone release a game console after 2005 without proper RGB options over hdmi?

It's Nintendo. I'd believe nearly anything.

That wouldn't be a cost-cutting thing though. They would have to specifically invent a new type of LCD screen, something which has never existed before.

Of course you can display interlaced video on an LCD, but the screen is not in itself interlaced. Interlaced is where you fake a bigger number of lines by displaying half the field each frame. No LCD operates like that.
 
Nintendo chose resistive over capacitive because capacitive is over sensitive and commonly results in accidental input, the main detractor for quality inputs in smartphone games.

Have you ever tried to play Mario on a capacitive touch screen? It's a mess.

I thought they chose resistive due to cost.
 
People complain that virtual controllers are inaccurate, not the screen response. It's impossible to have a working virtual controller on a resistive screen so this isn't a good comparison.

Regardless, the fact that capacitive screens have such a low effective input resolution is one of the main reasons that ipad gaming controls are so maligned. Touch-screen gaming works so much better on Nintendo handhelds because the resistive screens are many, many times more accurate than ipad screens.
 
That wouldn't be a cost-cutting thing though. They would have to specifically invent a new type of LCD screen, something which has never existed before.

Of course you can display interlaced video on an LCD, but the screen is not in itself interlaced. Interlaced is where you fake a bigger number of lines by displaying half the field each frame. No LCD operates like that.

That's not the same as inventing designing an entirely new and backwards display type though :D

I know how LCD tech works. I was just using this as a platform to vent over them still having yet to fix that garbage >.>
 
Top Bottom