LCD monitors for gaming.

Greenwit said:
Nope, no, notta, nein, negatory or nyet. I don't play any of those anymore but I can hold my own in SoF2 quite well. On good nites I don't lose a DM and on bad ones I don't get out of the top three or so. Then again, if you are using an LCD and I'm using a CRT....I have no motion hang-ups, I can dail in any resolution I want......and I'll camp you a$$ in dark corners 'cause your monitor doesn't resolve dark corners worth a crap. So, in other words, no fair for you. :p
Click to expand...

Just offering a challange....

EDIT: I used to play SOF 2 on dial-up, I actually liked it a lot, but servers died down, are there any still? It would take me a bit to get back in the swing of SOF 2 but I'd challange you to that as well. You know, so you can back up what you say and all.... :D
 
FlatLine84 said:
Just offering a challange....

EDIT: I used to play SOF 2 on dial-up, I actually liked it a lot, but servers died down, are there any still? It would take me a bit to get back in the swing of SOF 2 but I'd challange you to that as well. You know, so you can back up what you say and all.... :D
Click to expand...

Plenty of great SoF2 servers. Just forget the tough words.....anyone that plays on an LCD is not a serious gamer. Sorry.
 
Greenwit said:
Just forget the tough words.....anyone that plays on an LCD is not a serious gamer. Sorry.
Click to expand...

I must have been pretending all these years I guess. :rolleyes:
 
I'm gonna "casually" play some Far Cry tonight being i'm not a "serious" gamer and all because I have an LCD. I'll leave the "serious" gaming to you Greenwit. Give yourself a pat on the shoulder, you're a "serious" gamer. :D
 
Your black level is compromised, you have one resolution to choose from (or you can interpolate and who knows how much that screws your shooting accuracy and response time), and you *do* have response problems compared to CRTs. I know in SoF2 I come across countless encounters where I turn a corner and am face to face to another guy going where I came from. So many split second results...who gets off faster. You or him. I put my money on the guy with the faster monitor other things being equal.

These are undeniable facts. You can ignore them or admit the truth. Two players of equal skill....the one on the LCD is at a disadvantage. But, hey. You got the kewler monitor. You got the desk space, you got the energy efficiency....you got the slim panel. And you get owned in SoF2 and other twitch games.
 
anyone that plays on an LCD is not a serious gamer. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Hrm yea I probably wouldnt go that far.. however I did say this in another thread and it seems appropriate here:

'CRTs are still the king of gaming- anyone who argues that is being dishonest or they are ignorant.

There are plenty of debates on what is the better monitor overall- but it comes down to a lot of people finding LCDs 'good enough' for gaming and having advantages elsewhere.'

Of course I'm not one of those people ;) Im way to picky about image quality / framerate smoothness / response time and prefer the resolution flexibility CRTs offer with gaming.
 
I hate to be rude, but who really gives a toss if people here are twitch gamers or not.
It comes down to the fact that most people are not "serious gamers", the majority of gamers are casual ones out to have fun, en which an LCD monitor is fine.

Please, keep your nose out of LCD threads in the future Mr. Serious Gamer :)
 
I, for one, play SoF2 all the time, and actually believe am one of the best out there, period (clan consistently won Clanwarz and other various leagues, and I was the best in my clan, scoring/shot wise playing RD) I have a great 19'' Viewsonic CRT, and my beautiful 2405, and truthfully my scores really don't vary that much at all when playing on either one. I don't know how much of a "twitch" I'm missing with the 2405, but I really can't say I've noticed it all that much. I still take up at least half of the medals on any map I play, and that's a bad game, regardless of monitor. I'm just using it as an example to show that, I, for one, haven't seen a noticeable difference between the two.
 
Veritas616 said:
I, for one, play SoF2 all the time, and actually believe am one of the best out there, period (clan consistently won Clanwarz and other various leagues, and I was the best in my group playing RD) I have a great 19'' Viewsonic CRT, and my beautiful 2405, and truthfully my scores really don't vary that much at all when playing on either one. I don't know how much of a "twitch" I'm missing with the 2405, but I really can't say I've noticed it all that much. I still take up at least half of the medals on any map I play, and that's a bad game, regardless of monitor. I'm just using it as an example to show that, I, for one, haven't seen a noticeable difference between the two.
Click to expand...

You're clearly not a serious gamer!! :p
 
I game in a clan and have also participated in leagues when I had the time to do them.

I use a CRT. But I would give anything to have an LCD monitor now. Why? Because I do more LANs with friends now. And lugging this big hefty NEC Multisync M700 is by no means fun when you do it almost every weekend. And since his house is small, and my current deskspace is very limited, I really have no choice but to go to an LCD. It's easier to carry, for one, and two it is really nice when your deskspace is limited.

The thing I hate about CRTs is that over time it seems like the screen starts to eventually blur out. My mother has a CTX brand monitor that looks like someone took Photoshop to her desktop and used the smudge tool all over it. Reading things on a webpage, no matter how big the font is impossible. This current one I use now if I go any higher than 1024x768 results in very hard to read text, not because of size, but because of blurring. This is especially true at 1280x1024, which is the highest resolution it supports. And trust me, I clean it and keep it very clean.

My girlfriend's LCD doesn't seem to suffer that problem, even when the LCD is in use anywhere between 6 and 12 hours a day on average. And she's had it for about as long as I've had this monitor. I don't know what is causing my issue and what is preventing hers, but if having an LCD over a CRT has anything to do with it, I'm stepping up to an LCD.
 
ahem... can somebody get a measuring tape for those 2... or 3 or however many... serious gamers up there... :cool: :rolleyes:
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
I game in a clan and have also participated in leagues when I had the time to do them.

I use a CRT. But I would give anything to have an LCD monitor now. Why? Because I do more LANs with friends now. And lugging this big hefty is by no means fun when you do it almost every weekend. And since his house is small, and my current deskspace is very limited, I really have no choice but to go to an LCD. It's easier to carry, for one, and two it is really nice when your deskspace is limited.

The thing I hate about CRTs is that over time it seems like the screen starts to eventually blur out. My mother has a CTX brand monitor that looks like someone took Photoshop to her desktop and used the smudge tool all over it. Reading things on a webpage, no matter how big the font is impossible. This current one I use now if I go any higher than 1024x768 results in very hard to read text, not because of size, but because of blurring. This is especially true at 1280x1024, which is the highest resolution it supports. And trust me, I clean it and keep it very clean.

My girlfriend's LCD doesn't seem to suffer that problem, even when the LCD is in use anywhere between 6 and 12 hours a day on average. And she's had it for about as long as I've had this monitor. I don't know what is causing my issue and what is preventing hers, but if having an LCD over a CRT has anything to do with it, I'm stepping up to an LCD.
Click to expand...

It's possible your CRT doesnt have Dynamic focus circuitry, I know Sony monitors use this wich basicly means the monitor automaticly adjusts focus as needed over time. There should be a manual focus adjustment inside your monitor but I'd look for a schematic of your model before messin with that.

Ive got a 5+ year old 19" Sony G400 and 2 year old 21" G520 ,both still perfectly focused
 
mathesar said:
It's possible your CRT doesnt have Dynamic focus circuitry, I know Sony monitors use this wich basicly means the monitor automaticly adjusts focus as needed over time. There should be a manual focus adjustment inside your monitor but I'd look for a schematic of your model before messin with that.

Ive got a 5+ year old 19" Sony G400 and 2 year old 21" G520 ,both still perfectly focused
Click to expand...
I thought Dynamic Focus was something different. It is applied to "flat" CRTs to improve focus in corners so that the entire screen is more evenly focused. I don't think it means the monitor automatically adjusts itself overtime. Could be wrong though.
 
Roger said:
I thought Dynamic Focus was something different. It is applied to "flat" CRTs to improve focus in corners so that the entire screen is more evenly focused. I don't think it means the monitor automatically adjusts itself overtime. Could be wrong though.
Click to expand...

Just got done Google'ing and you're right , Thats what I get for listening to other people without doing the research myself :rolleyes:

Copy/Paste:

""I have 2 identical monitors. One is razor sharp from edge to edge. The other is blurred at the corners- not from convergence problems, but just plain out of focus. In this monitor, the focus adjustment on the flyback can improve the focus at the edges, but then the center of the screen becomes worse..My question is : Is this a problem in the electronics and presumably a fixable flaw or is it caused by variance in the picture tube itself and not correctable ? Or is it some other issue?"

(From: Bob Myers ([email protected]).)

The adjustment on the flyback sets the "static" focus voltage, which is a DC voltage applied to the focus electrode in the CRT. However, a single fixed focus voltage will not give you the best focus across the whole CRT screen, for the simple reason that the distance from the gun to the screen is different at the screen center than it is in the corners. (The beam SHAPE is basically different in the corners, too, since the beam strikes the screen at an angle there, but that's another story.) To compensate for this, most monitors include at least some form of "dynamic" focus, which varies the focus voltage as the image is scanned. The controls for the dynamic focus adjustment will be located elsewhere in the monitor, and will probably have at LEAST three adjustments which may to some degree interact with one another. Your best bet, short of having a service tech adjust it for you, would be to get the service manual for the unit in question.

It is also possible that the dynamic focus circuitry has failed, leaving only the static focus adjust."
 
Folks ghosting and streaking is very user dependent just like refresh rates on CRTs. Some people see it better then others depending on the specs of the display and the end-user.

It is fact is LCD displays are gaining sales over CRTs, even more so as price goes down and quality goes up. Will LCDs totally replace CRTs? maybe someday, but CRTs will fill a nitch market for a longtime to come. CRTs are going to become more and more "special displays" and price will go up on them as a result of it...
 
All LCDs blur. The guys here won't tell you this, but they do. Blurring is different than ghosting. You don't see a ghost image, you see the entire screen sorta blur when in motion. This makes LCDs (yes, even those with the best response times) sub-par for games when compared to a good CRT. Not to mention the fact that no LCD can hold a candle to a CRT when it comes to contrast ratio.
 
wow.. lots of differences of opinion... imagine that. ;) I personally love my 23" LCD, I game on it like crazy, and I love the extra real estate I have on my desk and the fact that I don't have to use a crane to move it when I go to a LAN... lol Honestly though, you guys can pick apart LCD tech all day long... it's a little flawed when it comes to comparing it to CRT, but you're not blasting electrons into your face, and the latest gen LCDs are really amazing... honestly... the rise and fall times are so fast now (minimizing blur), color depth is amazing... and really good clarity. before you slam them some more, you should go check them out first hand, good ones on good machiens... I bet you haven't... ha! don't be a hater!! :p
 
revenant said:
wow.. lots of differences of opinion... imagine that. ;) I personally love my 23" LCD, I game on it like crazy, and I love the extra real estate I have on my desk and the fact that I don't have to use a crane to move it when I go to a LAN...
Click to expand...

^^ File this one under dishonest & denial at its finest ^^

Honestly how many people take there $1,000 LCD's to LAN partys. and the real estate claim is a bunch of crap to ,what exactly do people put BEHIND there monitors? because thats the only extra real estate you get with an LCD. I dont know of any 23" LCD's with excellent repsonse times either ,the best so far is the 24" 2405FPW and even that one has motion blur. Color accuracy is getting a lot better on LCD but they still cant touch a good CRT's contrast ratio / black level performance wich is VERY important to overall picture quality.

Blah :)
 
mathesar said:
^^ File this one under dishonest & denial at its finest ^^

Honestly how many people take there $1,000 LCD's to LAN partys. and the real estate claim is a bunch of crap to ,what exactly do people put BEHIND there monitors? because thats the only extra real estate you get with an LCD. I dont know of any 23" LCD's with excellent repsonse times either ,the best so far is the 24" 2405FPW and even that one has motion blur. Color accuracy is getting a lot better on LCD but they still cant touch a good CRT's contrast ratio / black level performance wich is VERY important to overall picture quality.

Blah :)
Click to expand...

There is no arguing with the LCD apologist. For them, it all starts and ends with a slim panel and weight. Kewl rules over performance. Even the technology itself which they claim is superior to that of CRTs.....just because it is newer they think it is better. Again, more of the 'kewl' philosophy. You have bright lamp shining through three panels.....and what you see in the end is what isn't blocked out by the panels. The lamp is so bright that backlighting is a rampant problem in the LCD world, contributing to its rather poor performance with blacks. Followed closely by bad pixels. BTW, pixels which make up only 50% of the surface area of the screen. The rest made up of filler to hide the electrical contacts made to each pixel. This is significantly more than either the DLP or SRDX technology. And this is suppose to be so much better than scanning electrons? I don't see it superior at all but it does appeal to the shallow masses despite all the compromises (bad blacks, one resolution, poor contrast ratio, response, et. al.).
 
Greenwit said:
There is no arguing with the LCD apologist. For them, it all starts and ends with a slim panel and weight. Kewl rules over performance. Even the technology itself which they claim is superior to that of CRTs.....just because it is newer they think it is better. Again, more of the 'kewl' philosophy. You have bright lamp shining through three panels.....and what you see in the end is what isn't blocked out by the panels. The lamp is so bright that backlighting is a rampant problem in the LCD world, contributing to its rather poor performance with blacks. Followed closely by bad pixels. BTW, pixels which make up only 50% of the surface area of the screen. The rest made up of filler to hide the electrical contacts made to each pixel. This is significantly more than either the DLP or SRDX technology. And this is suppose to be so much better than scanning electrons? I don't see it superior at all but it does appeal to the shallow masses despite all the compromises (bad blacks, one resolution, poor contrast ratio, response, et. al.).
Click to expand...

Oh give me a fucking break.......
 
With current technologies, if you have to ask if there is any difference, you won't notice if there is...
 
mathesar said:
^^ File this one under dishonest & denial at its finest ^^

Honestly how many people take there $1,000 LCD's to LAN partys. and the real estate claim is a bunch of crap to ,what exactly do people put BEHIND there monitors? because thats the only extra real estate you get with an LCD. I dont know of any 23" LCD's with excellent repsonse times either ,the best so far is the 24" 2405FPW and even that one has motion blur. Color accuracy is getting a lot better on LCD but they still cant touch a good CRT's contrast ratio / black level performance wich is VERY important to overall picture quality.

Blah :)
Click to expand...
While I don't go to LAN parties, the extra desk real estate is a God send for me. It's the space I get in front of my monitor to put books and stuff on that I desperatly needed. The screen is also further back, which has helped me with eye strain problems. Not to mention that my old CRT had gotten blurry. At least my 19" LCD has excellent response times for all games that I play. Color accuracy is almost as good as my trinitron, and the black level is actually better. So for me, at least the LCD wins on almost all counts against my old trinitron. I know you had a different expereince, but no need to push your personal resutls on to others.
 
Slider19 said:
While I don't go to LAN parties, the extra desk real estate is a God send for me. It's the space I get in front of my monitor to put books and stuff on that I desperatly needed. The screen is also further back, which has helped me with eye strain problems. Not to mention that my old CRT had gotten blurry. At least my 19" LCD has excellent response times for all games that I play. Color accuracy is almost as good as my trinitron, and the black level is actually better. So for me, at least the LCD wins on almost all counts against my old trinitron. I know you had a different expereince, but no need to push your personal resutls on to others.
Click to expand...


Seriously your CRT was in very bad shape if it had worse black levels.
 
Greenwit said:
There is no arguing with the LCD apologist. For them, it all starts and ends with a slim panel and weight. Kewl rules over performance. Even the technology itself which they claim is superior to that of CRTs.....just because it is newer they think it is better. Again, more of the 'kewl' philosophy. You have bright lamp shining through three panels.....and what you see in the end is what isn't blocked out by the panels. The lamp is so bright that backlighting is a rampant problem in the LCD world, contributing to its rather poor performance with blacks. Followed closely by bad pixels. BTW, pixels which make up only 50% of the surface area of the screen. The rest made up of filler to hide the electrical contacts made to each pixel. This is significantly more than either the DLP or SRDX technology. And this is suppose to be so much better than scanning electrons? I don't see it superior at all but it does appeal to the shallow masses despite all the compromises (bad blacks, one resolution, poor contrast ratio, response, et. al.).
Click to expand...
Coming from a trinitron, I noticed its 2 black damper (?) wires and don't notice any "electrical contacts" on my LCD. Also no dead pixels and better blacks than my CRT. And what problem do you have LCD technology? How do you think CRT's work btw?
 
mathesar said:
Seriously your CRT was in very bad shape if it had worse black levels.
Click to expand...
Yes, it had lost its black level (might have been burning in of some sort) and clarity over the 5 years I owned it. When I first got, it was almost perfect. Except for the slightly non-straight edges that almost every CRT suffers from.
 
Greenwit said:
There is no arguing with the LCD apologist. For them, it all starts and ends with a slim panel and weight. Kewl rules over performance. Even the technology itself which they claim is superior to that of CRTs.....just because it is newer they think it is better.
Click to expand...

Not once has anyone claimed that LCD's are superior to CRT's in performance in this thread, so you just pulled that from up your ass. Show me where any LCD owner in this thread said that LCD perfomance is SUPERIOR to CRT perfomance? That's right, no one said that, you're putting words in our mouths. LCD owners choose LCD's because they like it. It's a cost to benefit ratio, and with the advances in LCD technology today, gaming for us is just fine with it. Factor in the aesthetics of the LCD and it's a no brainer for us, totally win win situation for us. We have no problems with them, if you do, then fine, don't buy an LCD. Keep it moving. But what we do hate is condescending dweebs who always want to dictate that they are right all the time regardless of the wants and needs of the person inquiring.

In case you did not notice the title of the thread, i'll remind you, it's called "LCD monitors for gaming". Get it, the thread starter is interested in an LCD for gaming, not a CRT. He didn't call it "Condescending wankers who like to spoil an informative thread with their BS opinions that no one asked for." Why can't guys like you just leave it alone and keep it moving? Funny, you never see LCD guys jumping on CRT threads with a snooty, condescending attitude, it's always you guys. I never understood guys like you in all honesty, and probably never will. Guys that always love to flex their internet penis.

Enjoy your CRT, just leave us non serious LCD gamers alone with our monitors, our damn sexy monitors. :p
 
btf1980 said:
Why can't guys like you just leave it alone and keep it moving? Funny, you never see LCD guys jumping on CRT threads with a snooty, condescending attitude, it's always you guys. I never understood guys like you in all honesty, and probably never will. Guys that always love to flex their internet penis.

Enjoy your CRT, just leave us non serious LCD gamers alone with our monitors, our damn sexy monitors. :p
Click to expand...

Leave it alone?

Quoting Icewind in this thread:

"Let me be the first to say the the world of CRT"s is officaly over with. With the upcoming technologies of SED and OLED displays in final stages of testing, the CRT world is over with, LCD"s are king, period."

Who is being "condescending?"

Whoever starts whatever thread, this nonsense will get a response. Somehow, I'm not surprised you have problems understanding things. Do you finally get it, sport?
 
Greenwit said:
Leave it alone?

Quoting Icewind in this thread:

"Let me be the first to say the the world of CRT"s is officaly over with. With the upcoming technologies of SED and OLED displays in final stages of testing, the CRT world is over with, LCD"s are king, period."

Who is being "condescending?"

Whoever starts whatever thread, this nonsense will get a response. Somehow, I'm not surprised you have problems understanding things. Do you finally get it, sport?
Click to expand...

An important part of the quote you need to understand......

"With the upcoming technologies of SED and OLED displays in final stages of testing, the CRT world is over with"

Well, correct me if i'm wrong but upcoming means THE FUTURE doesn't it? He's talking about the future. Maybe it's you who can't read. He's clearly stating that with the technology and the way it's heading, CRT's will be done.

With the amount of 2405's, 2005's and many other LCD displays selling like hotcakes, to many people LCD's are king. Deal with it.

Why are you even in an LCD thread? I mean you don't care for them, why are you here? What's your purpose here? Can you answer that? Ask yourself that. Seriously.
 
btf1980 said:
An important part of the quote you need to understand......

"With the upcoming technologies of SED and OLED displays in final stages of testing, the CRT world is over with"

Well, correct me if i'm wrong but upcoming means THE FUTURE doesn't it? He's talking about the future. Maybe it's you who can't read. He's clearly stating that with the technology and the way it's heading, CRT's will be done.

With the amount of 2405's, 2005's and many other LCD displays selling like hotcakes, to many people LCD's are king. Deal with it.

Why are you even in an LCD thread? I mean you don't care for them, why are you here? What's your purpose here? Can you answer that? Ask yourself that. Seriously.
Click to expand...

The problem with Icewind's comments was that no one ever even brought up CRT displays....his post was the second in the thread. But he saw it fit to build LCD technology up by tearing CRT technology down. I engaged in the debate by pointing out, among other things, all that is wrong with LCD technology. Which you take offense. And now you complain about my posts here. It's kinda like the sorry-a$$ed bully brother smacking the younger brother in the face. When he gets smacked back he whines and cries to mama.

What is my purpose here? I really don't give a dam* that you think I should justify my comments in this or any thread. Seriously. :p
 
Well, it is pretty much a fact. LCD sales have increased, CRT sales have decreased. If that offends you, I'm sorry.
 
Slider19 said:
Well, it is pretty much a fact. LCD sales have increased, CRT sales have decreased. If that offends you, I'm sorry.
Click to expand...

LOL! To restate my previous reply, "I engaged in the debate by pointing out, among other things, all that is wrong with LCD technology. Which you take offense." It's you all that feel offended! If that fact "offends you, I'm sorry." Wheeeeee.....
 
That's the thing. Much of what you have said about LCD technology is subjective and your opinion, not fact. Same can be said for people's experience with LCD's or CRTs. Either side trying to pass their opinions as fact simply makes them look desperate and in denial.

In fact, the only real fact here is that LCD's are gaining market share, CRT's are not.
 
Slider19 said:
That's the thing. Much of what you have said about LCD technology is subjective and your opinion, not fact. Same can be said for people's experience with LCD's or CRTs. Either side trying to pass their opinions as fact simply makes them look desperate and in denial.

In fact, the only real fact here is that LCD's are gaining market share, CRT's are not.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? You mean that it's not a fact that LCDs have a contrast ratio that is normally 1/10th - 1/15th that of your average CRT?

It's not a fact that all LCDs still blur and ghost, even those with 4ms response time? This is not an opinion, it is a fact. Some can see it, some cannot, but that doesn't mean that it isn't there.

Oh, and I guess it's not a fact that LCDs can't handle more than one resolution (or two if you really, really wanna reach) without interpolation?

Wait, I almost forgot one. It's not a fact that dead pixels are a problem on LCDs and not on CRTs, right? Nope, just an opinion. I mean, who could possibly prove that LCDs sometimes have problems with dead pixels!

None of those are facts. Just subjective opinions.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
All of which does not seem affect the vast majority of people who have switched from CRTs to LCDs. That's the fact that people who hate LCDs seem to miss over and over again. No one is telling people to throw away their CRTs and switch to LCDs even if you don't want to, but some people just can't seem to accept that some of us prefer our LCDs over CRTs.

You can keep believeing that LCD owners are half-blind idiots who have 20 dead pixels and 5 tone colors to work with, but it still won't change the fact that CRTs are effectively on the death bed for computer use. I'm sorry, but this is how it is.
 
I don't believe that. I have a nice LCD on my inspiron 9300.

I just don't think that you should pass off facts as opinions, that's all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top