Half life 2. ???? Bah humbug (Off subject and angry !)

Matrix · Post by **Matrix** » 29/12/2004 - 15:43

The reason LCD and Plasma screens dont look so good is because of their bit depth, its usually 10 bit... I own a Techwood 42 inch plasma, and i LOVE IT.. the only time it lets you down is where there are subtle gradiations, like steam, smoke, a skyline, or gentle close up skintones.

You COULD go Rear Projection CRT at 51 inch, but its a 2nd hand blurred image and wont take a pc input like a plasma or LCD. If you buy a projector, youre spending as much as a plasma tv for a really decent one, and its Ã‚Â£400 a year for bulbs....

If you want a BIG screen that you can plug a pc or console into - you have to go plasma or LCD. As technology improves, so will the quality. To get a decent image out of RP/CRT you have to employ a SHITLOAD of focusing tricks, if you turn em all off, youll see how crap it really is.

I love playing games on my plasma tv and i have no problems at all with the resulting quality since most of my games are action / driving anyway and the image moves too quick to be spoiled by the limited colours.

Also, having played PC games on it in1280x1024, i can say youre right that pc's having the better quality - but what a pile of shit hasstle getting everything to work as it should.... background software, limited resources, AVs, buggy installs, the list just goes on and on..... and best of all, console games dont suffer the drop to desktop bug.

Between the 2, given that i have both setups to compare, i would always go for the xbox and plasma setup over the pc and 19 inch anyday.

Also.... without things like MAME.... show me a good fighter on the PC

that matches upto the quality of MK Deception or Soul Calibur 2. PC's are good for driving, sims and RPG's - little else really works well on them. Some things are better left to the consoles....

As for HALO2 making you feel sick, maybe u had a bad curry... I LOVE IT ON THE BIG TELLY !!!!!

Lagerfeldt · Post by **Lagerfeldt** » 29/12/2004 - 16:26

DHS, my 41" is not plasma or LCD, which are both way too slow for games. It's rear projection. The pictures is not quite as sharp as plasma, but the movements are smooth and precise just like CRT. It did set me back a hefty $3.600 but not $400 a year in bulbs, Matrix

Running Halo 2 in 60 Hz mode runs very smooth, Burnout 3 almost insane! Picture quality is excellent with the correct cable and the correct input on the TV, I get crystal clear pictures and excellent contrast and colours.

While the selection of games on PS2 is bigger than Xbox or GC, I wouldn't trade down to a PS2 and miss out on games like Halo, Panzer Dragoon Orta, KOTOR, Fable, etc., which are all console exclusive on Xbox.

Actually I find both plasma and LCD too slow for anything else than 60 Minutes, I don't like them at all because of the sloow jagged movements onscreen. Hopefully one day they will catch up, but probably not in the next 2-3 years IMO.

DHS · Post by **DHS** » 29/12/2004 - 16:31

Matrix wrote:The reason LCD and Plasma screens dont look so good is because of their bit depth, its usually 10 bit... I own a Techwood 42 inch plasma, and i LOVE IT.. the only time it lets you down is where there are subtle gradiations, like steam, smoke, a skyline, or gentle close up skintones.

Look, a friend of mine just got a 7000 euros Sony plasma tv.
Fantastic design, big screen, and all the frills.
The image quality is beaten totally by my ultra-crappy Hitachi 32" (CRT).
Problems with the bit depth (as you said), neiter with the horrible
white saturation problem the "7000e" plasma tv has.
Not to talk about the degradation a plasma tv has during time for using.
What about spending from 4000 to 7000 euros for a screen that will last 5 years?

Matrix wrote:To get a decent image out of RP/CRT you have to employ a SHITLOAD of focusing tricks, if you turn em all off, youll see how crap it really is.

Yep, you're right. But since the tricks are there and work, who cares?

Matrix wrote: I love playing games on my plasma tv and i have no problems at all with the resulting quality since most of my games are action / driving anyway and the image moves too quick to be spoiled by the limited colours.

Ok, again on that Plasma/Xbox experience of mine.
It was a pain in the ass to look at. Take my PS2, connect it to a CRT tv *without* an RGB cable (but with the standard CVBS one) and you're still not even close to how awful the image quality was.

Matrix wrote:background software, limited resources, AVs, buggy installs, the list just goes on and on..... and best of all, console games dont suffer the drop to desktop bug.

Sorry, i can't disagree more.
If one has got a pc and can't get it work stable, installing only the right software, updating drivers, avoiding crap, then he should have been without a pc from the start. Or get a Mac instead, so you can't do anything bad (well, you can't do anything anyway...

).

How comes i don't have any probz with BG software, resources, AV, install, and so on?
Am i a lucky guy or simply i'm not the average user installing every kind of shit he get from the web? (and believe me, i have a tons of programs installed on my pc. Only those are installed the right way and aren't crap..).

Matrix wrote: Between the 2, given that i have both setups to compare, i would always go for the xbox and plasma setup over the pc and 19 inch anyday.

Well, world is full of different tastes and colours

Matrix wrote: Also.... without things like MAME.... show me a good fighter on the PC that matches upto the quality of MK Deception or Soul Calibur 2.

Well, there's simply no one for pc.
In my view, there are games that are better played on PC (FPS, for instance) and others on consoles, maybe in the warmth of your bed. That's why i have a PS2 after all

And no, i'm not gonna take am Xbox for halo (played on pc) or Riddick (played on pc) or tecmo's bouncing boobs (still prefer the real thing

).

Matrix wrote:PC's are good for driving

PS2 is for driving: GT3 and 4. period.

Matrix wrote:sims

Agreed.

Matrix wrote:and RPG's

Final Fantasy and Star Ocean on ps2... period

Matrix wrote: - little else really works well on them. Some things are better left to the consoles....

Yep.

Matrix wrote: As for HALO2 making you feel sick, maybe u had a bad curry... I LOVE IT ON THE BIG TELLY !!!!!

I enjoyed Halo a lot on my PC and i'm waiting for the 2. Still, o want to play it the way it was meant to be from the start, not the way Bill wants you to play it (Halo1 was developed for PC, then Bill got the xbox esclusive, delaying the exit of it for 1 year...).

Ciao.

Lagerfeldt · Post by **Lagerfeldt** » 29/12/2004 - 16:33

"Halo1 was developed for PC", actually is was for Mac originally.

DHS · Post by **DHS** » 29/12/2004 - 16:37

@Lagerfedt:
Then, it's another story and is much better that way

Still prefer CRT anyway (i want a sharp and clear image).

I don't want to start a console war (needless to say, if one wants the best of both world, just buy both the consoles..).
I know there are some great games for xbox.
But while for ps2 there are a huge amount of title (and much of them are crap), there are simply too many "you can't miss" ones between them.
Same story as xbox, only with good quantity margin for the ps2.

Ciao.

Lagerfeldt · Post by **Lagerfeldt** » 29/12/2004 - 17:00

Yes you are right, actually I would like to also buy a GC just to get the new Resident Evil game, it looks stunning!

Right now I have no more room for computers or consoles under the tv, it's filled with Xbox, PSOne, Amiga 500, DVD player, video recorder (which nobody actually uses anymore except for the odd porn flick), and the surround receiver. Argh

Matrix · Post by **Matrix** » 29/12/2004 - 18:30

Maybe it was a shite plasma tv then, they come in differing resolutions and image qualities - take the Sony WEGA for example.... interpolation technology in them gives twice the resolution and 16 bit colour.

Given that i own CRT monitors, a 28 and 32 inch CRT tv and a flat screen plasma 42 inch.. i have to say youre right, CRT is better... like i said, technology will catch up and get better.

As for degredation - everything degrades, even CRT.... just takes longer - all im saying is that for that big image effect, "I" would rather have my plasma.... unless you can point me at a 50 inch flat CRT that is.... If youve had a bad experience with them then i dont blame you for your bias, but dont shit on all models just because u were unfortunate enough to test the one with cerebal palsy.

For big screen, id rather have plasma or LCD than projection which produces a 2nd hand image with colour bleed and sidebanding, not to mention the fact that you get a bright centre and dull edges, you cant watch it from the side, and if you went the way of a DLP projector, a good one, 5 years of bulbs at Ã‚Â£400 is 2 grand plus the Ã‚Â£1500 it costs to get the unit in the first place.

Simple maths based on preffered image quality, cost and longevity.

Feekzoid · Post by **Feekzoid** » 30/12/2004 - 14:19

First.... Tomsk.. I would recommend you persevere(sp?) and get HL2 working... I thought it the best game I've played yet. The story is infuriating and will have you wanting to know more at the end... another sequel or mission disk would be most welcome for this game I think!

It also does seem to be very forgiving hardwarewise. It works ok on me laptop (AMD XP2000+, pants ATI radeon graphics, 512mb), ok on a pals lowly PC (P4 1.5ghz, 512mb, Geforce 5600) and su-weet on my main PC (P4 3.2, Geforce6800GT, 1gb ram)

As for displays...

Well.. I bought a 42" plasma, and would say that I'm 90% happy with it. I'm very protective of it... (due to 2 nephews (9yrs and <1yrs) and a 3 yr old in its proximity a lot)

I was disappointed with the "blacks" tho, in a darkened room (ie prime viewing environment) it the screen is not absoloute dark/black when there is supposed to be darkness on the screen. It emits a glow, which is initially quite irritating.. but the same problem that you get with projectors.

However, it is lush, and was the final addition to my setup:

42" Vision Plasma
HTPC (AMD2500XP, 512mb, Geforce5200) with TV, DVD, Divx playback, MP3, shares from my main PC in other room.
Keyboardless MAME functionality via remote control + Gamepad.
Optical audio output to DTS-ES 6.1/DD-EX amp receiver

It would be ideal to play all my big PC games with it, but I like to keep em seperate since its with my main PC that I do my music, internet and gaming on, and since I've got 7.1 audio and a 21" sony trinitron monitor through here.. it does just fine ;)

I think the thing with consoles is that they are cheap, and very easy plug and play. What you get with the PC is far more functionality, vastly improved graphics and sound... but you get what you pay for essentially.

DHS · Post by **DHS** » 30/12/2004 - 14:55

Lagerfeldt wrote:Yes you are right, actually I would like to also buy a GC just to get the new Resident Evil game, it looks stunning!

Capcom announced it for PS2 too.

Lagerfeldt wrote: video recorder (which nobody actually uses anymore except for the odd porn flick), and the surround receiver. Argh

Sadly, i'm gonna use my one again, since Sky Italy decided to impose his own decoder to all italian users, so i won't be able to use mine again (with PVR functions).

tomsk · Post by **tomsk** » 30/12/2004 - 15:51

@ Feekzoid

Oh yeah man - I'll be really trying to get the thing working, after all I lashed out Ã‚Â£30 quid on it !

I'm gonna opt for a new graphics card because I'm pretty sure my MSi TNT2 is only DirectX6 - and there are no drivers to support higher versions of DX.
Once I do that, my system should be decent enough to run it.

As for the comments of the rest of the lads - yes I really do need an upgrade in the OS, Ram and Chip dept - and probably the motherboard too.....

So anyone wanna sub me ?

That's the trouble with PC's and games. Instead of the programmers' writing more efficient code to handle the graphics, they just rely on hardware manufacturers to tempt us with a higher spec gfx card and processor to run the damn things. Lazy arsed b**tards !
At least with the PS2 and Xbox you have a defining standard across the board - and if you want the best garphics, the programmers have to work at it to get them. It was the same with the C64 too !
So good points and bad points about PC's and consoles, but at least when you buy a console, you know every game off the shelf will run the same as your mates' PS2/Xbox.
Just my thoughs.......

Oh, and please everyone, stop telling me how good HL2 is !

Nothing like rubbing salt into the wounds

DHS · Post by **DHS** » 30/12/2004 - 17:30

Ok Tomsk, good reasoning, but on the other side you can't bash a game not running on your system when on the package it's clearly stated "minumum DX7" card and you have got a DX6 one (shite, i can't believe someone still using one!

).

It would be like me insulting Paramount 'cos their DVD don't work on my old VCR.

ciao.

skitz · Post by **skitz** » 30/12/2004 - 19:00

Screw you lot - I'm still happy with my Amstrad GX4000

She still looks sexy

Matrix · Post by **Matrix** » 30/12/2004 - 22:38

The reason plasma blacks arent as good as crt is to do with the selective colouring of each picture element, its totaly different to how CRT works.

Cool Amstrad

Vosla · Post by **Vosla** » 30/12/2004 - 23:13

Feekzoid wrote:It also does seem to be very forgiving hardwarewise. It works ok on me laptop (AMD XP2000+, pants ATI radeon graphics, 512mb), ok on a pals lowly PC (P4 1.5ghz, 512mb, Geforce 5600) and su-weet on my main PC (P4 3.2, Geforce6800GT, 1gb ram)

Yeah, I can play it on a P3 1GHz, 384mb with a GeForce 2 MX 400 (Shared Memory). Don't have all the eye-candy like realistic Shaders and the water effects and it stutters at very little locations but it's playable like Far Cry.
(I got my very own copy as a gift.)

xo · Post by xo » 31/12/2004 - 12:14

Graphics sells man. Deal with it.