Add me, info in sig.

[QUOTE="WiiRocks66"]Save money and get yourself a plasma.Messiahbolical-

Panasonic Viera G15 ->half the thickness of the G10 series - 2" vs 4". So 2" is too thick? Do some research. Check out some videophile forums. You're wrong in every way. They are dying because initially, plasmas had a lot of problems. The general public doesn't tend to do too much research. When you walk into a store that's full of LCDs and you still think plasmas have burn-in and lifetime problems of course you won't buy one. Do your own research.

[QUOTE="VoxteX"]

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

i have seen the Kuro next to Samsung 8 series and Sony6 xbr 8... the difference was minimal at best. it did have better black levels, but besides that, i didnt see much difference... not worth the price difference imo

ogvampire

One thing about plasmas (and any flat panel TV) is that they require calibration. A stock Kuro won't necessarily look impressive but if you calibrate it yourself or better yet get it professionally calibrated it will be the best looking TV you can have, hands down. I own a Panasonic Viera Plasma, Sony LCD, and my friend has a Kuro plasma. Kuro definitely looks the best (less flickering, better blacks, no need for 2:3 pulldown as far as I know) but the difference is mostly negligible. Vieras do have an ugly 'feature' which increases backlight intensity after certain periods of time which can diminish picture quality but I would say it still looks far better than any LCD TV you can find.

Like the poster above said, LED TVs aren't new tech. They use a different backlight which more evenly distributes the lighting but LCDs still have all the same downfalls. Bad blacks, ghosting, and bad viewing angles to name a few. You really have to see 2 calibrated TVs side by side before making a judgement. Plasma > LED > LCD until OLED is reasonably priced and sized. Any videophile forum will support these claims with meters and statistics that are used to objectively rate TVs based on color reproduction, luminescence, etc.

thats fine, but like i said, only videophiles can tell a difference

all those stats and numbers they throw at me wont mean anything if i cant tell a difference

If my dad can tell the difference so can you :)

[QUOTE="JonnyHomer1987"]

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

too bad they dont make Kuro's anymore...

also, the difference between the kuro and top-of-the-line samsung/sony lcd/led is tiny at best, only videophiles can tell a difference (plus that was 2 years ago.... lcd/led tech has improved since)

ogvampire

The difference between a KRP and LCD/LED is huge. LCD/LED tech hasn't really progressed very far, when it comes to picture motion, colour and black levels there isn't an LCD/LED that can touch a KRP or the new Panasonic 12G panels, this is the reason they are considered the best TV's in the world.

i have seen the Kuro next to Samsung 8 series and Sony6 xbr 8... the difference was minimal at best. it did have better black levels, but besides that, i didnt see much difference... not worth the price difference imo

One thing about plasmas (and any flat panel TV) is that they require calibration. A stock Kuro won't necessarily look impressive but if you calibrate it yourself or better yet get it professionally calibrated it will be the best looking TV you can have, hands down. I own a Panasonic Viera Plasma, Sony LCD, and my friend has a Kuro plasma. Kuro definitely looks the best (less flickering, better blacks, no need for 2:3 pulldown as far as I know) but the difference is mostly negligible. Vieras do have an ugly 'feature' which increases backlight intensity after certain periods of time which can diminish picture quality but I would say it still looks far better than any LCD TV you can find.

Like the poster above said, LED TVs aren't new tech. They use a different backlight which more evenly distributes the lighting but LCDs still have all the same downfalls. Bad blacks, ghosting, and bad viewing angles to name a few. You really have to see 2 calibrated TVs side by side before making a judgement. Plasma > LED > LCD until OLED is reasonably priced and sized. Any videophile forum will support these claims with meters and statistics that are used to objectively rate TVs based on color reproduction, luminescence, etc.

Edit: Burn-in is a thing of the past. Any modern plasma made in the last 2 years will have no burn in at all. There is temporary image retention which will last a few hours at most, but that's the worst of it. A feature called pixel orbiter actually moves the pixels around slightly when they are displayed to more evenly burn in the TV. All plasmas 'burn-in', it's a feature of plasmas. Most plasmas won't reach peak viewing quality until 100+ hours of consistent use. This is because the gas has a burn in period where it settles in. There are even DVDs you can burn that display a rotating color image to evenly burn in new plasma TVs and videophiles will use these to achieve optimal picture quality.

If there is any misinformation in this post I apologize and anybody is free to correct me.

i think i'll stick with all my steam games and valve games and weekly discounts

88mphSlayer

No reason to be a fanboy. If Amazon provides a better service at equal or lower cost, why wouldn't you switch? Why not wait and see what they have in store before making your decision. I have 2k worth of Steam games and I'd STILL consider it.

PSN: voxtex1

This is my GOTY. Graphics definitely have some issues but it doesn't really matter when the game plays so good.

[QUOTE="VoxteX"]

[QUOTE="STurn21"]

You fail at logic...I was saying that arguing about things that can not be proven is pointless. You need to improve your reading comprehension skills.

STurn21

You fail at logic. Why are you defending baseless claims? It's ridiculous to go around making claims that have absolutely no proof to back them. You tried to defend his claim by saying there was no proof against it, only continuing the argument that you claim is "pointless". Hypocritical at best.

The original reply was a good one, don't say things only because you want them to be true. Going off of past evidence (Halo 3, Halo 3: ODST): Halo: Reach's graphics won't be anything out of the ordinary.

Why was he attacking baseless claims by making statements that he knows there are no answers to? I was not trying to defend his claim, I was simply stating that both sides of the arguement have absolutly no proof and therefor the arguement is pointless.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. He was right in asking for proof.

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"][QUOTE="STurn21"]

Do you have any proof that that isn't true? No one has seen Reach yet, so arguing about it is pointless.

STurn21

You fail at logic...I was saying that arguing about things that can not be proven is pointless. You need to improve your reading comprehension skills.

You fail at logic. Why are you defending baseless claims? It's ridiculous to go around making claims that have absolutely no proof to back them. You tried to defend his claim by saying there was no proof against it, only continuing the argument that you yourself said is "pointless". Hypocritical at best.

The original reply was a good one, don't say things only because you want them to be true. Going off of past evidence (Halo 3, Halo 3: ODST) Halo: Reach's graphics won't be anything out of the ordinary.