Azuren said:
I never said the choice was bad; on the contrary, the 850C was our single most popular TV last year. I was only stating that, as far as gaming is concerned, the lower-priced 810C is more ideal due to its speed. For overall use, the 850C is a superior TV, it's only when in relation to gaming that the 810C performs better. Heck, I personally went with the 930D, and that TVs got a very unimpressive 50+MS on the input lag. I only ever notice it when I look for it.
As far as the 9XXC models are concerned, they're all good except the 900C. They made the panel on it too thin, and there's some nasty light bleed in the bottom corners. Samsungs I don't typically recommend, and LGs I recommend to avoid. As far as smart TVs are concerned, having that X1 processor makes a huge difference and puts Sony TVs at the head of the pack. |
I didn't assume you said it was bad... I assumed you were giving tip on what I should buy (but I already bought) no hard feeling.
I like to game, but watching series, movies and other things with the family I love as well so input lag isn't an issue (and I have played on Panasonic Viera Plasma, those less than 1ms input lag... Sony Bravia LED mid-tier), perhaps I suck at gaming or my eyes don't notice it, but lag never disturbed me (well I even accept screen tearing and artifacts if they aren't too severe)
If the end product attract me a lot I can live with the drawbacks.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







