@ThanosReXXX I played the retro consoles on a 19" TV with knobs and dials from like 10 feet away. Then graduated to a 24" TV 10 ft away. When I moved to PC it was a whole new world for decades. The whole "cockpit play" was wonderful. Going back to consoles, frankly trying to play on TV is simply unfun. Regardless of how "big" it is. TVs are weird in that they should have just become giant monitors, but they keep doing all this weird stuff with them instead.
Part of it is, "short sighted"....literally....even on a larger TV playing from across the room I can't read the text without glasses, and that's just unfun
But also, personally I find 22+" sitting right in front if it is actually a lot more immersive than a giant screen on the other side of the room. Especially with some good headphones. I don't think I'd really want to trade that setup for even a 140" screen. Too much neck rotation to see it. (I have a front projector, a low-end one, I can do the big 100+" screen thign...I tried Uncharted 3 and MH 3 that way some years back. It was a cool effect being so big...but not nearly as immersive. A smaller screen right in front of you is like a reduced version of the immersion of VR.
There really shouldn't be the split there is between monitors and TVs though. TVs were going down the route of becoming large monitors, and there was no reason not to. There's basic things monitors have done from the beginning TVs are still not doing, or doing well, and there's all the fancy new stuff they put on TVs but never monitors, or at least not monitors under the "very large/gaming-oriented" class. 4k/8k...I just don't get the appeal as that would matter more on a monitor than a TV - I couldn't tell the difference between 1080p and 500k at a normal sitting distance from a TV. I'd kill to have it on the monitor where, as you know, they I see every blade of grass IF they ever find one that fits the right size and meets the mount's weight max I'd buy it. Still waiting on NEC. They're more industrial display oriented, but the quality of their displays, both in output and build and reliability is far beyond everything else I've seen. But they don't move to new trends fast, they're very stoic in their offerings and most new stuff is is more trade-specific (such as medical specific monitors for X-Ray viewing.) No joke I've seen 4k displays with worse output than my 1080p NECs of the same size. Not all panels are equal.
Though that's a can of worms even if I could upgrade - I'd love HDR too (not available in that format still), but then the complicated nest of HDMI switches/repeaters/EDID fakers neesd to be replaced and THAT is a complicated and expensive mess. And then they'd probably obsolete that in 2 years. And then I'd struggle for weeks getting the random "made in China" switch to work right (note MOST made in China switches you see on Amazon that say 4k are only 4k@30Hz. As in, not useful for gaming. Very very few say they work at 60Hz or faster....and often reviews from owners suggest those don't really do it either. Of course you can buy name brand switches from HT oriented companies meant for installers. So to get the "real" version of the $50 Chinese switch on Amazon, you can buy one for $1200 from a company like Geffen that sells to HT installers. Ugh.
I have forever hated HDMI though. I hated it day 1, I still hate it today. It's a disaster of a system, that was supposed to be a universal forever connector rather than constant format changes and then became a versioned nightmare with compatible versions, incompatible versions, pre-ratification non-compliant draft versions, spurious specs from Chinese manufacturers, power consistency/falloff issues, and the single most fragile connector ever conceived, that buckles under the weight of it's own cable mass. It's simply a poor design from beginning to end , designed by lawyers and politicians, not by EEs. It's a data format designed around DRM and visual appeal, not around the needs of the protocol and physical specs.
Ever get to play with SDI? It's the commercial/studio/production equivalent of HDMI. It's LIGHT YEARS beyond HDMI. But it's not built around DRM so it's off limits to consumers. Most often it uses locking BNC connectors. If it weren't for gaming consoles I'd just use SDI equipment and never look back.
BTW, can you guess the biggest player responsible for the utter mess that is HDMI being the mess it is? Your dear, dear, friend Sony. The company that hasn't produced a consumer device yet that actually outputs spec voltage levels on an HDMI out to date......... Nintendo can do it. Microsoft can do it. But no, PS4 always drops of the HDMI switches due to insufficient voltage even with repeaters....it's a know issue even on Sony's BD & DVD players.
Very clever move by Microsoft, put Banjo in Smash and then put Rare Replay into Game Pass. Banjo in Smash was the biggest Microsoft announcement of E3 after all.
@NEStalgia I suppose the whole HDMI conundrum is the thing that you described as "weird stuff that TV's keep doing" at the beginning of your comment? If not, then I have no idea what weird stuff TV's are doing. I've never had a problem with playing games on a TV. Then again: I don't have any Sony consoles with weird, HDMI-related quirks...
But I can understand your point, concerning having to wear glasses, to be able to see an image on a TV screen 8 to 10 feet away. Although on the other hand, as a contact lens wearer, I'd suspect that if you'd need glasses in the first place, you'd supposed to be wearing them most of the time anyway...
Never had the pleasure of getting acquainted with SDI, other than with the other meanings of that particular acronym.
But I'm quite satisfied with my current setup, and from the sound of it, the cost to obtain it, would probably be well outside my ballpark, let alone the effort to try and get your hands of it.
But other than all of that, consoles are actually made to be played on a TV, so there's also tech inside to see to getting the best results out of them on a big screen. The fact that you CAN connect them to a monitor, really means nothing in that regard, other than just being an extra option for a niche group of people that would rather prefer to connect/display it like that. I mean: my Dreamcast could also be connected to a monitor, seeing as my VGA box, as the name already makes you understand, has a standard VGA output, but I also have one of these connectors on my TV, and if I'd had to choose between a 24 inch monitor, where I'd have to sit up straight in a bog standard office chair on wheels, or a 42 inch full HD plasma screen and a comfy couch, well... seems like a no-brainer to me.
And where resolution or frame rate is concerned, it doesn't matter either. My monitor is 60Hz, and so is my TV, and none of my consoles displays anything higher than 1080p, other than 4K media output on the Xbox One, but I never use that anyway. The monitor (or rather: the graphics card in my PC) can display higher resolutions, but because these aren't relevant for any of the consoles, there isn't anything to gain for me there either. And my Dreamcast only displays a max resolution of 480p anyway, so the picture isn't any better on a monitor than on a Full HD TV.
But yeah, to each their own, I guess. I wasn't trying to convince anyone anyway. Just gave my two cents on the matter, and gaming on a monitor, other than the odd PC-only game that I play every now and then, just isn't for me. And for me PC gaming and console gaming, even though they are becoming more closely related with each new generation, are still two separate entities for me, and as such, they also offer quite different experiences.
As for Games with Gold: no such problems here, so must be a US thing?
Either way: whenever I find that the service is down on the console on my side of the globe, then I usually just visit the website and acquire my free games from there: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/gold#gameswithgold
Of course, you will still not be able to download them onto your console straight away, if the service doesn't work, but at least you won't miss out. And as you may have seen, they offered the first Xbox 360 Earth Defense Force game this month, and with the second one they offered last month, that completes the series for that console. And both are great arcade games, and fun games, also for those who are into the classic "giant alien insects invade Earth" type of movies.
I do still wonder why they offered us the games in the wrong order, though. Not that they have a really strict story line, so that you need to play them in the correct order, but the second game does offer some improvements in various areas, so playing them in a backwards order might make the older game feel more clunky or archaic, also graphics-wise. Oh, well. At least we've got both of them on backwards compatibility now, which is nice.
EDIT:
Made a small error on the refresh rates of my monitor and TV: max refresh rates are 85Hz and 100Hz respectively. Doesn't make much of a difference, though, because the TV still wins...
@ThanosReXXX For now, my near-vision is better than fine, so glasses are only for seeing far (that'll change eventually! ) So, yeah, I'll play until I'm leaving nose prints on the screen before I change
Well, "consoles made to play on TV" is true and not. Modern consoles are more or less just PCs. Not that PC video cards don't have a lot of TV/HDMI specific features now as well, and Steam Big Picture is of course popular etc. But the origins of a modern console are still PC...and of course the games are all developed on PC, so monitors are how the actual developers were viewing it outisde of feature testing externally. Plus I recall with X360 there were actually a few settings that were more monitor oriented, so there were perks with 360 on a monitor vs a TV. Not sure if that applies to the One of course.
But the weird thing is, again, why are TVs any different from monitors at all? I still find it weird that both of them are essentially HDMI output displays...yet they still treat them as separate animals. A decade ago I thought the two markets would essentially merge. Of course monitors tend to be more expensive per inch. Usually. And are more performance oriented. TVs get all the crazy fast refresh stuff, but a lot of TVs cheat on the inside to do it, while monitors are expected to be pixel perfect. Particularly professional moitors.
As for comfort though, I think I mentioned it before, but no I'm not doing the whole desk thing from back in the PC days, that stays with the keyboard and mouse era. No this is couch play still. I rigged a DIY monitor mount stand so It can swivel around in front of me like a Star Trek console. That's why I have weight requirements...it's on a heavy iron base (for a studio boom mic) but too much weight and it would get top-heavy. But it's seriously awesome to flop on a couch, swing out the monitor in front of you, toss headphones on, and play. I would still love a 4k HDR monitor in the right size/weight class....but it's a mixed want because if it's ever available I'll hover over the "buy" button and then second guess if I want to go through the nightmare of switch/cabling/adapter/repeater upgrades and the blood, sweat, tears, and probably a lot more blood involved in crawling around setting it up
As for PC vs. console, other than RTS, sim, and MMO I don't really think of them separately anymore. Heck with the AOE announcement pretty much everything from back in my PC days is on console now and with PC you can use XBox controllers now. Not much feels different at all about them (which is of course why I bought an XBox to begin with ) And heck, the 1X is a lot more powerful than my last gaming PC was. And cost 1/6 the price.
GwG yeah, US thing I assume....it's been weird....late 2018 had all those problems, and then it got better for a while. Seems there's issues again. This time it wasn't the licensing system, just the store, so you couldn't buy games or DLC (or browse the store) but patches, downloads (if already in your library), and activations were working fine.
TVs & refresh rates, one thing with the TV industry that doesn't seem to apply to the monitor industry is the sleezy measuring standards. So many TVs have "xxx refresh rate" and "xxx resolution" and what they really mean is they accept the input on the HDMI and then downscale everything for the much more limited display and processing hardware, or their own variations on the kind of idea that "checkerboard rendering" is (i.e. not rendering every pixel directly, interpolation, etc.) Monitors don't get away with that junk. Some TVs of course are legit on specs, but they also tend to cost a fortune. I love when people look at TVs loaded with features at Costco for like $1200, and can't figure out why the one in the home theater store is $4800 with the same specs. The answer is because that one actually does what they both say they do....
@NEStalgia Yeah, you've told me before about your specific setup, so you've got a nice amalgam of the two, but my example was of course of my own situation, so desktop PC or couch console are the only two choices that I have...
And consoles made to play on TV is still very much true. Even those extra settings on Xbox 360 you mentioned don't do anything to take away from that. Besides those monitor settings, you also have standard, "comes in the box" video cable and HDMI video settings, so the monitor display settings are simply one of the three available choices. It's not like it's featured as a separate pro setting or something like that.
And there is indeed no such setting on the Xbox One, but in all fairness, that's because features on both monitors and TV's are becoming more interchangeable, so stuff like HDR settings and so on are both valid for TV's and monitors.
Also, far as I know, there's no additional hardware in monitors, that would make them superior in comparison to TV's, especially not high-end models. And besides: most TV's, if not all, are smart, nowadays, so it's actually the TV's that are more powerful, and more versatile as well, because they need to be able to do all that stuff and still offer the required video, refresh rate and lag-free quality. And of course, their innate plug and play nature. No blood, sweat and tears needed to set up a new TV screen, unless you're a complete and utter n00b...
And what I meant with the difference between console and PC gaming, was the obvious difference. One that I left out, because I figured that's pretty much common knowledge: the whole mouse and keyboard thing.
Nowadays we've got chat pads for controllers, or even bluetooth keyboard and mouse options, but it isn't standard. And control settings, or even underlying gameplay mechanics/settings that we can't get to, are adapted to that different style of play, such as stick travel vs mouse pointer travel: developers often make corrections for that in console versions of games, especially in cross platform games, so as not to give PC gamers the upper hand by default, because they can move their mouse quicker than you could move the thumb stick on your controller...
As for the head phones: for people gaming or even living alone, I never got that, to be honest. I don't have to adjust my volume for anyone except for the neighbors (although my TV is never set that loud to begin with, so I already take them into account by default), and the only time I'd use head phones or ear phones, is when I game online with my friends, so we can chat. For me, it's not needed for the immersion: Panasonic Viera TV's are not only known for their perfect picture and color quality, but also for their well above average sound qualities, so coupled with the big screen, I've got all the immersion that I need right there...
Concerning the cost of TV's, I don't see it as black and white as you seem to do: when I bought my TV, it was a "last year's" model, so I got it on a discount for $1000, whereas the year before that, it would have cost me around $1700, and it's a plasma TV as well, which by default is already better in a lot of areas than other kinds of displays.
Well, except for heat dissipation, that is. It totally acts as an extra heater in the winter time, and in the summer, you could probably bake an egg on the back of it...
In short: TV's really don't have to cost more than $2000 for them to offer you your money's worth in quality and performance. Especially not if you do like I do, and just suppress the in my opinion rather stupid urge of some people that simply MUST have the latest of the latest.
If you want some more info on it, just for reference's sake (because you won't be buying one anyway, now will you? ) you could always check out Digital Foundry's in-depth video's on TV's for gaming, in which they compare only the best models currently available. The accompanying article can of course be found on EuroGamer.
@ThanosReXXX I'd argue the "high end TVs" are essentially gigantic monitors. With a price tag to match.
TV blood sweat and tears comes from receivers, switches, repeaters, etc in the chain to connect all relevant devices.
EEWWWW TV sound? I don't care how good the TV is...nope nope nope nope! You're either going full 5.1 with floor standers and at least one 15" sub, maybe two, and at minimum a 100W/ch amp/block setup, or it doesn't count. Therein is the blood sweat and tears part. The amplifier/processors/speakers, etc, etc that go with a full HT setup. I may not have a fancy 4k plasma HDR, but doggoneit that Jurassic Park foot stopp will hit 15Hz and you will FEEL that rumble, and it sounds like a movie theater. The audio cost a lot more than the screen...but it also lasts "forever" unlike the screen (amps don't last forever, speakers do unless you damage them, but amps can last decades.)
BUT that's really not suitable for endless gaming. Headphones give you the same clarity, detail, rumble, and bombast (short of the 15Hz feeling-only range) without blasting anyone else nearby. GOOD headphones though. With a proper headphone amplifier. Good headphones cost as much as consoles. Or more (but, pads aside, last forever.) I don't care how good your TV is, you will never go back to using it's speakers after hearing that immersion
@NEStalgia I actually have, and I did. The cost is just not worth it for me. I'm not a massive audiophile, so basically I don't care enough to save up such an amount of money, so that I can have my own home theater experience. And far as I'm concerned, it would also make me enjoy going to an ACTUAL cinema far less, if the only difference would be sitting in a darkened theater and an even bigger screen then at home. And 3D...
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
@NEStalgia That's just an opinion, my friend. It's only bad if you're that heavily invested into having the greatest audio setup, and as I explained, I simply am not. It isn't that I wouldn't like to own a home cinema, it's just that I can't justify the cost to myself, when I have other, FAR more important things to use my hard-earned money for, so the small amount that's left, is reserved for games.
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
@NEStalgia What other consoles other than Xbox One X can output variable refresh rate even if you had the monitor? None. And what TVs other than new LG TVs have HDMI 2.1? None. So it is a big deal for everyone else buy you.
I've always been unlucky with Sony products, like they are extremely fragile or something. From CD players to PS4, they all had issues like my PS4 randomly ejecting discs and video output turning into a black screen for half a second every now and then, funny since Sony was one of the HDMI founders and developed Blu-Ray.
@ThanosReXXX blech. Try good headphones... You'll never go back. X1 has windows Sonic which is pretty good if a bit exaggerated. X1x has dolby atmos headphone for like $15.... It's sooo good, even on games that don't use object sound. Though even plain stereo.... Just.... Try it. Good ones, reference ones, not gaming junk. Not something with thumpy exaggerated bass. Just friendly advice... If you havent really seen what you're missing out on, you don't realize how much more immersive a game can be. Might not matter for jrpgs other than just being more pleasant, but Forza, gears, etc, atmospheric and horror games.... (And competitive games because missing sound cues kills), i wouldn't hesitate to say the sound contributes to the experience far more than fancy video output. Put the 4k 8k hdr money into sound. Heck, put the x1x money into sound if you were still going to get one someday. If you value immersion, anyway.
Similarly, if i don't use good audio, horror is almost bearable to me . Sound changes the experience more than one realizes. Don't bother for shenmue though.., that Dreamcast compressed audio is almost painful that way
@BlueOcean but....PCs have done that forever (pre hdmi with it's drm handshake......). That handshake is evil and is half the problems of hdmi....
Yeah Sony disc drives have always been junk. Funny since they and Phillips invented them...
The video issue sounds like the low voltage hdmi striking again!
@NEStalgia I am trying to finally beat Kingdom Hearts II (then I'll play Dream Drop Distance and I will be done with my PS4 backlog) and the disc is being ejected again even after removing the rubber around the button! It's more than simply annoying because the game closes when the disc is ejected! So if I hadn't saved at that time progress is gone. Thank heaven my Wipeout copy is digital. Needless to say, I'll play Kingdom Hearts III on Xbox One X.
@BlueOcean ouch! If there is one thing in gaming that annoys and enrages me more than any other its having to redo ANYTHING I've already successfully done. I don't even mind something being brutally hard if it just sets me to retry endlessly... But if i even have to beat one enemy I've already beaten i probably put the game away... That's why i quit shovel Knight, and, ironically the final bosses of kh2....
I'd have smashed the DS4 with a sledge hammer if i had your disc problem!
I have the same kh backlog... Except i generally never finish the final bosses because they get too frustrating. I did in DDD, but that remains the only one.
Edit: hollow Knight, not shovel Knight, though both, really
@NEStalgia Exactly my feelings. I just beat II on Proud. Man, that was hard. Next one to beat chronologically is Dream Drop Distance and then I can move to III on Xbox One X. The bosses are ridiculously difficult because they're ridiculously fast and it's all real-time fighting with commands selection and reaction commands... wtf. It's ridiculously demanding and chaotic (on Proud) but the story is what really made me beat all these games.
EDIT: I even beat 358/2 Days on DS and I should play Re: Coded on DS before Dream Drop Distance. So yeah, I will beat every single KH game.
@NEStalgia Man, you're stubborn...
I'll tell you one more time: I've tried head phones at a friend, he also has a game room with a Dolby Digital surround set, and although I really LIKED it, I can't JUSTIFY the cost to myself, and I am not that invested in having a superior sound setup for playing games, which for me is just a hobby, and not something that has to be dissected into something that HAS to be as perfect as it can be. Period.
Perhaps, when I'll buy my next TV, I'll get a soundbar to go with it, or one of those wireless Sonos setups, as long as it doesn't cost me too much...
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
Nothing more immersive than using the default TV speakers, with fan going at max speed right into your face, and someone else watching a weirdly loud YouTube video on their phone in the next room.
Forums
Topic: The everything Xbox thread
Posts 7,461 to 7,480 of 11,914
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic