high res gamign wow !!

Perfect_Chaos · 7 Dec 2008 at 10:13

psychas said:
every time when u switch from smaller monitor to bigger u get wow zomg ! so cool but then u get used to it.

same happened to me when i switched from 19 to 22 inch. i will stick with 22 inch as output lag is important to me

same here, and you dont need a X2 or GX2 to keep the native res and look good.

james.miller · 7 Dec 2008 at 10:54

moomoomoo said:
I have a big hd tv in my living room which i can plug my pc into, but still prefare my monitor for gaming. You can get up close with it and involves you in the game far more imo.

I would love to see the 30 inch 2560x1600 monitors in action.

i will disagree with you there

i got a big plasma on the wall, thats ace. far better sitting in a beanbag in front a big plasma than it is sitting at my desk in front of my 24". then if you move up to say....a projector......monitors really dont compare

MikeHunt79 said:
agreed, most games are awesome at 1080p on a 46" screen... Also having the house shake with the explosions is nice also...

eeeexactly

sharpygsxr · 7 Dec 2008 at 10:57

see this is an interesting thread to me cuz ive been gaming on 1680 for 2 odd eyars now and i love it.

To be honest the main reason i havenet upgraded is simply due to my monitor size and the fact that my GTX is still running everything superbly.

Has anyone even made the jump from 22 to 24 and if so is it a jump or not, id imagine a jump from 22 to 30 would be enough to warrant a nice new 280

james.miller · 7 Dec 2008 at 11:03

22 to 24 is quite a difference as it is. if you get a decent panel (not a tn film) you get all of the pros and no real drawbacks - bigger screen, bigger desktop area, better image quality, smaller pixels that mean a shaper image, sharper text ect....i replaced my old 22" dell with a 24" DGM and after comparing the two, i now never recommend a 22" to anybody.

incidently, ask people whether they'd rather watch a film on a 28" monitor or a 50" screen in part of an av setup - you know which one they'll choose. its no different for gaming

Will Lucky · 7 Dec 2008 at 11:09

Remember when I got into PC gaming I never actually knew what the resolution did so left it alone, when I finally learnt I put it from 1024x800ish to 1260x1024ish. Couldn't believe the difference it made, especially on a lot of my older games, looking forward to the day I get something much better.

Zogger · 7 Dec 2008 at 11:09

I use my 32" bravia with both my pc and xbox connected

. Am typing this post laying in bed now...

The tv is only 1360 x 768 but it is still pretty decent for games.

thegoonden said:
Name ONE driving simulation on a console?

None of the silly arcade games I've seen on them even support a clutch never mind an H-gated gear shift. None of them have decent FF.

The only thing consoles have going for them in that respect is that the ultimate abuse of the name "racing game", GRID, is not out on them (186mph in a formula three car....why do they even bother FFS).

well done on the misinformation

GT5P does support the G25, the clutch and the H-shifter
And GRID is available on PS3 and Xbox.

I do race sims on the pc (all driving aids off etc.), but the consoles have some fun games. GRID is a fun game regardless of how realistic it isn't. I dont' think I would play it again because it would be bad for my other racing, but I enjoyed it when I played it. Just not deep enough. Forza and GT aren't as realistic as pc sims but they are good games

Lyon85 · 7 Dec 2008 at 11:59

Was your 22" not high res? Are you talking about XHD?

Zogger said:
GT5P does support the G25, the clutch and the H-shifter
And GRID is available on PS3 and Xbox.

I do race sims on the pc (all driving aids off etc.), but the consoles have some fun games. GRID is a fun game regardless of how realistic it isn't. I dont' think I would play it again because it would be bad for my other racing, but I enjoyed it when I played it. Just not deep enough. Forza and GT aren't as realistic as pc sims but they are good games

I think this was the issue:

AcidHell2 said:
Racing sims, console it's the only way...

It's just not very accurate.

Spunj99 · 7 Dec 2008 at 12:54

Zogger said:
well done on the misinformation

GT5P does support the G25, the clutch and the H-shifter

Doesn't disguise the fact that the physics are straight out a 6 year old arcade game, does it? Forza 2 is the best attempt yet at a "sim" type game on the consoles.

If you want genuine driving sims, PC is the only option.

(Don't even get me started on GRiD, euruugghhh)

thegoonden · 7 Dec 2008 at 16:18

Zogger said:
I use my 32" bravia with both my pc and xbox connected . Am typing this post laying in bed now... The tv is only 1360 x 768 but it is still pretty decent for games.

well done on the misinformation

GT5P does support the G25, the clutch and the H-shifter
And GRID is available on PS3 and Xbox.

I do race sims on the pc (all driving aids off etc.), but the consoles have some fun games. GRID is a fun game regardless of how realistic it isn't. I dont' think I would play it again because it would be bad for my other racing, but I enjoyed it when I played it. Just not deep enough. Forza and GT aren't as realistic as pc sims but they are good games

I stand corrected on the clutch/H-gate thing, as I have not tried the very latest console games. I play GT4 a lot on my PS2, it's lots of fun.....I just objected to the word "simulation" being applied to it.
I find that after a couple of days on GT I am RUINED for everything else.....Jump into a 1988 F1 car in Rfactor, and try to jump on the pedals like in GT......hellllllooooo Mr Armco :lol:

GRID's just a hilarious joke.

BTW, I have the Hanns-G 28". Getting a mounting arm for it for Xmas, that will be amazing. Now if only I could get a reliable VGA convertor to plug my sky-box into it without having to use my ghastly ancient TV card, life would be just perfect.

starfighter · 7 Dec 2008 at 17:10

1920 x 1200 via PC on my 24" Dell is much better than 1080p via xbox on my Sony 40"

I have all the gear and PC is the obvious choice. Console fanboys are generally just n00bs or poor.

Alexrose1uk · 7 Dec 2008 at 20:18

starfighter said:
1920 x 1200 via PC on my 24" Dell is much better than 1080p via xbox on my Sony 40"

I have all the gear and PC is the obvious choice. Console fanboys are generally just n00bs or poor.

Part of the reason its worse is that the Xbox image is NOT true 1080p, it is a lower figure then scaled using the xbox scaler. That's why it's nowhere near as good. A PC running those games on your Sony 40" would probably look a lot nicer

Final8y · 7 Dec 2008 at 22:18

moomoomoo said:
I have a big hd tv in my living room which i can plug my pc into, but still prefare my monitor for gaming. You can get up close with it and involves you in the game far more imo.

I would love to see the 30 inch 2560x1600 monitors in action.

It would blow your socks off some more.

I went from 21" CRT to Samsung SM-305T 30" 2560x1600 17 months ago & it still puts a smile on my face when gaming.
The GPU power needed is demanding with 4 million+ pixels= 12 million subpixels.

Well Splattered · 7 Dec 2008 at 22:50

The only problem with large screens is the fact that some LAN host's do not allow them due to desk space

On topic, high res gaming is awesome. Big screen gaming is good at a res above 1024x768. I have only used my projector for gaming twice maybe :/

james.miller · 7 Dec 2008 at 23:34

starfighter said:
1920 x 1200 via PC on my 24" Dell is much better than 1080p via xbox on my Sony 40"

I have all the gear and PC is the obvious choice. Console fanboys are generally just n00bs or poor.

who said anything about console fanboys or being poor?

Hades · 7 Dec 2008 at 23:39

I must admit it was only with the move to my 30" that I agreed LCD's had finally put CRT in the shade. Unfortunately my graphics card isn't really up to the job of running modern games at 2560x1600 but 1280x800 is a second 'native res' due to it being exactly half the resolution in both directions. So I tend to run most things at that. It's still very sharp and the size of it only a few inches away is fantastic

snowdog · 8 Dec 2008 at 10:51

james.miller said:
who said anything about console fanboys or being poor?

Not me but I do notice most console fanboys refuse to spend money on their pc and have some ancient single core excuse of a pc and they think it should run games fine :rolleyes:

.

Damien. · 8 Dec 2008 at 11:38

Just a little bit off topic:

Would someone mind explaining what a lower MS would do for me. For example, the screen i have now is a 17" LCD with 8MS but im thinking of buying the 20" Samsung OCUK have on offer, that has 2MS.

skullman · 8 Dec 2008 at 12:58

less lag/ghosting?

Hades · 8 Dec 2008 at 23:11

Damien. said:
Just a little bit off topic:

Would someone mind explaining what a lower MS would do for me. For example, the screen i have now is a 17" LCD with 8MS but im thinking of buying the 20" Samsung OCUK have on offer, that has 2MS.

Lower ms will reduce ghosting. Lag is a different issue and monitors don't tend to be advertised with any figure which could be used to determine it without looking at reviews.

Final8y · 8 Dec 2008 at 23:21

Hades said:
I must admit it was only with the move to my 30" that I agreed LCD's had finally put CRT in the shade. Unfortunately my graphics card isn't really up to the job of running modern games at 2560x1600 but 1280x800 is a second 'native res' due to it being exactly half the resolution in both directions. So I tend to run most things at that. It's still very sharp and the size of it only a few inches away is fantastic

If there was as 30" CRT monitor i would take it over my 30"LCD still with no native res to worry about with better blacks & MS response times.
I still notice the 5ms ghosting even after all this time...well its free motion blur.