adriane23 said:
Lol no offense, but I honestly don't remember the last time I quoted you or have even acknowledged your posts, so I don't get what you're talking about when you say I follow you around. But I'm delusional? Lol, whatever you say. Also, you obviously don't understand why I pointed out your hypocrisy. You chastized the sentiment that console gamers have to make do with not having the best gaming experience in terms of performance compared to PC in the Driveclub thread, but then turn around and defend the general population being satisfied with lower quality media in this thread. Your hypocritical stance was just hilarious to me that's all. No need to get so offended. P.S. When you say plasmas have better response times over LCDs, I hope you don't mean input lag because that is just false. LCDs generally have far lower input lag times than plasmas. |
You are referencing a post where I said something along the lines of..."Imagine how awesome it would be if they made PC version of Halo and didn't hold back to console spec limitations"...and are calling me a hypocrite because I am saying that general public doesn't care about high end, best of the best cool stuff. That is all I will say about that reference.
However, in terms of your last statement...
Reponse Time: time taken for a pixel to change value and back again. Plasma rapes LCDs when it comes to pixel response time.
Input Lag: delay in time between signal input to a display and that same signal being displayed on-screen
I was referencing the first.
And no, generally LCD's don't have far lower input lag. Input lag goes up the better picture processing technology is. High end LCDs have just as much input lag as high end plasmas, if not more. Low end brand name LCDs have less because because their picture is easier to process and display. Very few plasmas these days are low end. Same goes with monitors, TN panels typically have lower input delay while IPS monitors have better color quality.







