or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added) - Page 304

post #4546 of 37466

Any other alternative (maybe 2-3) to the K701/DT880/HD670/HE-4 for gaming? (I don't mention music as I naturally expect good sound at this price level) I could go up to 400 (Euros) but then I have to stop.

 

Here in Germany this stuff is more expensive with lesser chance of bargains than in the US.

post #4547 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

I much prefer 16:9, than 16:10 or whatever PCs are using nowadays. Hell, I'd get an ultra wide-screen display if it was standardized. The wider, the better.
And my edit was just that, an edit to add how super high res isn't for anything other than PC related stuff, which is generally not stuff that the majority of gamers, movie, or TV show watchers are going to ever utilize.
Believe it or not, PC resolutions have no place for anything OTHER than PC, whereas a resolution like 16:9/1080p has a broader and longer lasting appeal.
Consoles won't be going over 1080p for a good while, nor will TV or movies. Nor should they. In real applications, NO ONE outside of PC users will gain anything from going higher than 1080p from a non PC seating distance unless you own a massive display (talking about front projector size) and like to sit uncomfortably close. The benefits of 1080p are barely seen by most people as they sit too far away, in 720p discernable distances anyways. Most people think they're gaining any benefit from a 55" 1080p display from 9 feet away. Lol. They aren't. That's 720p territory. I have a 65" that I sit about 7-8 feet from. Any further, and I start losing the benefit of 1080p, any closer, and I may as well stick my nose up to the screen. 1440p and higher is just overkill, and just bragging rights unless you own a fornt projector. Try watching a 65" from 6 feet. It's ridiculious. And yeah, that's 1440p territory.


That's why PC resolutions should continue to exist on PCs, instead of dropping pants and bending over. 16:9 is incredibly awful and unusable for PC usage, but it's passable for TVs.

 

But you're right MLE, I didn't remember that this is a console related thread, a fact easily misunderstood due to the lack of any mention of consoles on the title. And "infected" was used deliberately to state how consoles at their current state are a laughing matter due to being devices dedicated for the sole purpose of gaming, yet they struggle to maintain half of the frame rates they should have. Apparently I hit a nerve, so take a chill pill.

And it's due to consoles that we now have more horrible than not game ports that are poorly optimized for all the resources available on PCs.

 

BTW MLE, you're the only one who brought "bragging" to the discussion, while I prefer to acknowledge that PCs can actually have results from higher specs. But continue using your ridiculous consoles with even more ridiculous "HD" claims.

 

EDIT: Before you offend someone in the future, try to be respectful since no one offended you in the first place.

 

I'm out.


Edited by Roller - 3/6/12 at 10:49am
post #4548 of 37466

Am I the only one who has a nice PC and a Xbox?

post #4549 of 37466
Thread Starter 
Now you came here belittling console gaming, and how 16:9 INFECTED PCs. 16:9 is a perfectly fine resolution for PCs.

You definitely came off as a PC fanboy and by your last post, was proven right.

But I forget, we live in an ADD world, where everything now is about GRAPHICS, not actual gameplay.

Gone are the days when JRPGs took 80 hours to beat with everything. Now, it's 40 hours, with very little in the way of actual diverse in game content.

Play Final Fantasy VII, VIII, IX, and then play FFXIII or XIII-2. XIII-2 on the PS1 or PS2 with the same gameplay, but lesser graphics would have been laughed at back in the day. It's so barebones in comparison, but graphics are EVERYTHING now. A shame. I love graphics as much as the next guy, but not at the expense of gameplay.

To expand on that, what does PC do better than consoles other than graphics? Hmm...

Not hating on PC gaming, just the PC gamers that have a stick pretty far up where the sun don't shine.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 3/6/12 at 11:01am
post #4550 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

To expand on that, what does PC do better than consoles other than graphics? Hmm...
Not hating on PC gaming, just the PC gamers that have a stick pretty far up where the sun don't shine.


Better is subjective- so nothing, really. I've got my PC for the keyboard/mouse RPG games (Fallout, Dragon Age, etc.) and I've got my Xbox for playing FPS's (Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc.) with friends. Best of both worlds.
post #4551 of 37466
Thread Starter 
You, are a true gamer. smily_headphones1.gif

Watch out that consoles don't infect your PCs by putting them close together though. wink.gif
post #4552 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Now you came here belittling console gaming, and how 16:9 INFECTED PCs. 16:9 is a perfectly fine resolution for PCs.
You definitely came off as a PC fanboy and by your last post, was proven right.
But I forget, we live in an ADD world, where everything now is about GRAPHICS, not actual gameplay.
Gone are the days when JRPGs took 80 hours to beat with everything. Now, it's 40 hours, with very little in the way of actual diverse in game content.
Play Final Fantasy VII, VIII, IX, and then play FFXIII or XIII-2. XIII-2 on the PS1 or PS2 with the same gameplay, but lesser graphics would have been laughed at back in the day. It's so barebones in comparison, but graphics are EVERYTHING now. A shame. I love graphics as much as the next guy, but not at the expense of gameplay.
To expand on that, what does PC do better than consoles other than graphics? Hmm...
Not hating on PC gaming, just the PC gamers that have a stick pretty far up where the sun don't shine.


Ok, so you insult me again. Better learn some respect before talking to grown ups, kid.

 

And to make things clear, 16:9 isn't a PC resolution, but if you don't know that, maybe you should try talking to anyone who works with multimedia.

 

The way you talk almost makes it sound like you know things. Alas, you don't, and live on a console fanboy world. More power to you.

 

It's funny you mention graphics, as you seem to have issues following logics being discussed. I was talking about resolution, as in usable screen real estate, but you mistakenly thought about game graphics.

 

What can a PC do better than a console? Hum, let me think... how about everything? All peripherals that are used on consoles can be used on PCs, including motion sensitive controllers and varying analog pressure sensitive controls. Graphics (like you crave to talk about) are obviously superior on PCs due to upgradability being a reality, sound is also superior due to the hardware available and (again) only limited by the game development that's linked to consoles.

But I'm curious, what do you think a console does better than a PC? Now that should be interesting...

post #4553 of 37466
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

You, are a true gamer. :)
Watch out that consoles don't infect your PCs by putting them close together though. ;)


 

 

Yeah, I keep a 1/2" piece of MDF between my Xbox and my PC. The universe could implode if they see each other. tongue.gif

post #4554 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebel975 View Post

 

 

Yeah, I keep a 1/2" piece of MDF between my Xbox and my PC. The universe could implode if they see each other. tongue.gif



Lol :) Well, technically a Xbox isn't so different from a PC, o that should be ok wink.gif

post #4555 of 37466

To disturb the system war. beyersmile.png
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fegefeuer View Post

Any other alternative (maybe 2-3) to the K701/DT880/HD670/HE-4 for gaming? (I don't mention music as I naturally expect good sound at this price level) I could go up to 400 (Euros) but then I have to stop.

 

Here in Germany this stuff is more expensive with lesser chance of bargains than in the US.


 

and now back to it: evil_smiley.gif

 

16:9 allows more FoV and is cheaper in production. Once again. PC Gaming can't cover the huge productions costs except for rare ocassions like MMOs, Blizzard titles. Even Bioware titles now sell better on consoles. Multiplatform is a MUST. Understand economy and then come back and try to flame. Everyone knows that PC is technically superior, it's just the audience which is smaller and actually more prone to copy and pirate like dirty rats.

post #4556 of 37466
Thread Starter 
Never once said that consoles do anything better than PCs. However, consoles are more commonly used for gaming due to their accessibility, affordability, and broader appeal. I can sit back on my couch and enjoy games playing on my controller, whereas playing certain games with a controller on a PC is just asking to get destroyed by the K&M users, giving you a serious handicap. No fun when you have to sit up, rely on the less comfortable K&M just to compete on an even level.

I grew up gaming. Started with an ATARI. So yes, I am, and will always be pro-console. Gaming will always be something that I prefer with a controller in my hands, laying back and enjoying.

I understand that graphics aren't everything, so the benefit of PC gaming does NOTHING for me. What does it do aside from being able to post specs of how my $3000 rig can run Crysis at 2400p at 120fps. Lol.

Usable real estate? Yeah, 1920x1080p is SUCH an atrocious resolution with very little real estate rolleyes.gif. Go back to your overpriced 6000p display so you can display the task bar in Ultra HD... lol.


In all seriousness though, I wouldn't mind games running sub-HD IF they ran at 60fps. FPS is more important than screen resolution to me. I guess that's why I think the consoles CoDs look better than the consoles BF's, even though BF runs at a higher res.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 3/6/12 at 11:17am
post #4557 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fegefeuer View Post

To disturb the system war. beyersmile.png
 

 

and now back to it: evil_smiley.gif

 

16:9 allows more FoV and is cheaper in production. Once again. PC Gaming can't cover the huge productions costs except for rare ocassions like MMOs, Blizzard titles. Even Bioware titles now sell better on consoles. Multiplatform is a MUST. Understand economy and then come back and try to flame. Everyone knows that PC is technically superior, it's just the audience which is smaller and actually more prone to copy and pirate like dirty rats.



Yes, 16:9 is cheaper in production, but only because of the multitiered HD TV phenomenon. I would be perfectly ok with consoles if they didn't cripple PC versions of the same games. I understand that at this point in time, crossplatform development is required, but there is too much skimping on porting. The piracy point though is a bit irrelevant because those who pirate, do so regardless of platform.

post #4558 of 37466
16:9 is perfectly fine when you have 1440 lines of vertical resolution anyway. It works out for me since it doesn't have to stretch my Xbox games out in weird ways. (I also hate having black bars- so screw that).
post #4559 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Never once said that consoles do anything better than PCs. However, consoles are more commonly used for gaming due to their accessibility, affordability, and broader appeal. I can sit back on my couch and enjoy games playing on my controller, whereas playing certain games with a controller on a PC is just asking to get destroyed by the K&M users, giving you a serious handicap. No fun when you have to sit up, rely on the less comfortable K&M just to compete on an even level.
I grew up gaming. Started with an ATARI. So yes, I am, and will always be pro-console. Gaming will always be something that I prefer with a controller in my hands, laying back and enjoying.
I understand that graphics aren't everything, so the benefit of PC gaming does NOTHING for me. What does it do aside from being able to post specs of how my $3000 rig can run Crysis at 2400p at 120fps. Lol.
Usable real estate? Yeah, 1920x1080p is SUCH an atrocious resolution with very little real estate :rolleyes:. Go back to your overpriced 6000p display so you can display the task bar in Ultra HD... lol.


Apparently I really hit a nerve, so just relax. Consoles are cheaper indeed, but I'm curious as to what you mean by accessibility.

Yes, 1920x1080 is an atrocious resolution with little real estate for people who actually need screen real estate. But you wouldn't know anything of that by using 1080p screens stretched to infinity with your 55" TV LOL. Go back to your gaming pit little boy.

And your console fanboyism kinda reeks, so I'll just leave you being unreasonable and worshipped as you seem to be.

post #4560 of 37466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebel975 View Post

16:9 is perfectly fine when you have 1440 lines of vertical resolution anyway. It works out for me since it doesn't have to stretch my Xbox games out in weird ways. (I also hate having black bars- so screw that).


You talk of a curious point Rebel975. There isn't really a consensual opinion on whether aspect ratio scaling should be fixed or variable through stretching. Different people just have different preferences.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Games Discussion
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added)