[QUOTE="soulreaper-4"][QUOTE="rastan"]I'll have to research this, but the colors on plasmas are normally better than LCD's and I haven't heard or read anything about plasmas not being able to produce pure white. Maybe that limiter is a setting designed to minimize screen burn-in on older plasmas or to limit maximum power consumption?rastanEH? That was a long time ago that the colors were a lot better. Today's LCDs are almost on par and in some cases on par with plasmas. One drawback of plasmas is the cheaper lifespan and lots of reflection when using it in a room with a lot of light. They need to be used on a darker room to take advantage of the image. Actually newer plasmas have a half life longer than most LCD's now. In addition, many newer LCD's have reflective plastic added above their screen now that enhances perceived native contrast ironically at the cost of reflection-doing away with one of LCD's strengths. Anyway we most people, most of us fall for all these marketing thinks. Many of these so call problem are exaggerations and created just to sell more of the completions. This is like a war in which each side fight for what they want, in this case to sell more than the competition. One big problem is THE INTERNET now a days someone tells something isn't good in a forum then everyone keep repeating the same thing until almost everyone that read it end believing it. One example are the so called dynamic and contrast ratios. You get a new tv this year and the package says 60,000 then next year they say 250,00. You buy a Sony LED LCD and the package says infinite contrast and the Samsung LED LCD says they have millions of contrast ratio. DON'T TELL ME EACH SIX MONTHS or year the tv you bough is garbage. This my opinion on the subject.
soulreaper-4's forum posts
Well i do like the image quality of the Sony HDTVs. Newegg.com doesn't ship to were i live. As for the tv i prefer 32or 37 inches since it is for a small bedroom and i wont be sit that far from it. Any suggestions?For starters don't waste more money on a Sony TV. The markup just for the Sony name is already bad enough. I would say the Panasonic S2 42inch 1080p for $499 on newegg. The Panasonic is a MUCH better TV and costs less. Its actually insulting how much Sony charges for their TVs, taking advantage of the consumer's trust from when they actually produced top of the line, quality products.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889187153
NVIDIATI
I'm already using a Sony Bravia TV with not noticeable lag. I don't see any. Now i am going to upgrade but with all this input lag info i am not sure with one will be the best choice. More since i like playing fighting games. I was thinking of getting a 32 or 40 inches Sony Bravia EX500. It is 1080 and 120hz. If any of you have one is it great for gaming?
does the response time on a tv matter at all? cuz i noticed my old lcd was 4ms and this led is 6msdixon7800I personally don't really know. I think the response time is overrated by people. I play on a Sony Bravia i bought years ago, it doesn't specify a response number and i haven't had any problem, everything moves normally. If this were so dramatically important today why the heck all gaming companies show demos of their latest games to the public on LCDs in conventions like E3?
I'll have to research this, but the colors on plasmas are normally better than LCD's and I haven't heard or read anything about plasmas not being able to produce pure white. Maybe that limiter is a setting designed to minimize screen burn-in on older plasmas or to limit maximum power consumption?rastanEH? That was a long time ago that the colors were a lot better. Today's LCDs are almost on par and in some cases on par with plasmas. One drawback of plasmas is the cheaper lifespan and lots of reflection when using it in a room with a lot of light. They need to be used on a darker room to take advantage of the image.
Same after calibration. And it depends on the game.I'm playing the Wii on my 32 inch LCD, with component cables the image is very impressive, including Netflix.
thomasward00
[QUOTE="Jamisonia"]
[QUOTE="Jurassic85"]
Because these are the exact same games that have been released over and over again through the years. They are currently on virtual console so the argument that "newer gamers who didn't get to experience the originals now can" is invalid.
kenakuma
I'm pretty sure this is the first rerelease of the graphically enhanced versions. However, I agree they could and should have done more with it.
I think he was talking about the games in general being released over and over again, graphic enhanced or not.
Though I guess you could say All-Stars had already been rereleased if you count the Super Mario World combo version that came out for the SNES. That is technically a rerelease. Then theirs also all the GBA ports, those are rereleases of some of the graphically enhanced versions as well!
Dude the mario world version was not a re-release. It was available on any store to get it you needed to buy a new SNES System at the time of the promotion, you needed to send a receipt and $35 dollars too.Why is everyone complaining about this game? Its a $30 anniversary Limited Edition game. $30 will buy you the original Super Mario All-Stars cart for SNES. They kept the original songs and included sound effects for the fans to have fun with.[QUOTE="PersonNinja"][QUOTE="DJ_Lae"] Padding. It's pretty damn lazy, especially considering the wealth of songs the could have included.Jurassic85
Because these are the exact same games that have been released over and over again through the years. They are currently on virtual console so the argument that "newer gamers who didn't get to experience the originals now can" is invalid.
Wow so many ignorants on the internet these days. Dude Mario Allstars was release on the SNES only. A year later Nintendo launched a promotion for new buyers of the SNES Console. After getting a brand new SNES and sending a receipt with $35 dollars they send you a version of Mario Allstas with Mario world. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THEY HAVE RE- RELEASE MARIO ALLSTARS. Oh and ingnorant people are missing something: You can download Mario Bros. 1-3 on Virtual Console but they are the NES versions not the updated Allstars version. Each one of the for $5 plus The lost levels for $8 which equals $23 dollars.
Log in to comment