Printable View
I found something very weird with my samsung tvs.....On my 52" 1080p 120hz samsung, my genesis actually looks really good just hooked up with composite....I was shocked at how good it really looked......
I took my 22" samsung, 720p tv, and hooked up the genesis. Holy crap did it look horrible. It was a pixelated mess. I figured it would look even better on the smaller tv. I was wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrbigreddog
Like j-factor mentioned, you only need a SCART cable and the converter:
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/scart+mega+drive
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/scart+hdmi+converter
Just buy one with 720p if you can't find one with 1080p.
this is a lie, I have had both first off games on plasma is crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guntz
lcd is the way to go imo.
LCDs got motion blur and poor colors in most cases...
I was referring to the LCD v. Plasma thing, CRT wasn't being taken into account. It beats out both of them in most areas, but these days I find the newer sets produce better color with no bleeding. Reminds me of my DS Phat when compared to a DSLite. The latter has a much more vibrant and colorful screen. I'd buy one of the rest of the unit wasn't so crappy (buttons, grade of plastic, shape of the system, D-Pad etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by kool kitty89
TMEE said it already. LCD's tend to have bad refresh latency (otherwise known as motion blur or ghosting) and color issues. They're less expensive and less power hungry, but those advantages come at a cost. Plasma all the way! (behind CRT of course)Quote:
Originally Posted by adamx
Plasma TVs are a much better TV i put my Mega Drive (jp) on a 42 Panasonic (scart) and it looked alright. Not great but alright. On my girls SamsungLE32 it looks Craaaaaaaaap.
But back to Plasma VS LCD Plasma wins everytime
I have two Panasonic 1080p plasma TVs (42 inch and 50 inch) and they both blow my only LCD (37 inch) set out of the water in terms of picture quality. The black levels are much better (not as great as a CRT) and I get no motion blur or delays when playing games on them. It's sad a lot of electronic store sales clerks push LCDs more than plasmas.
They say that Plasma's don't last as long as LCD's... And plasma's have a burn in problem, which could pose a problem for us retro gamers... But that's just hear-say!Quote:
Originally Posted by JFLY
Thanks for all the opinions guys!!! :cool:
I've been gaming on my plasmas for two years now and have never experienced any burn-in. I did get some occasional image retention (damn you History Channel watermark!) when I was first breaking in the TVs, but now any image retention disappears within 3 to 5 minutes. Also my plasmas are promised 100,000 hours (30+ years) before showing any signs of the display dimming.
This. I hate image retention. I've seen it a lot with plasma displays, which is why I never bought one. Plasma FTL. I've actually seen it just as bad for an LCD 28" that was given too me. For that reason, I don't even use the thing. LCDs have gotten a LOT better. But I'm stilling waiting for them to evolve (the LED TVs were looking pretty decent at the store, but that's not saying too much). Hope my 53" CRT HD set lasts at least a few more years.Quote:
Originally Posted by JFLY
On the case of RGB out. The crisp output is nice, but the lack of any simulated scanline gaps sucks ass on new displays.
I HATE simulated scan lines! Case and Point! http://www.sega-16.com/forum/image.p...ine=1217468276Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
Yeah, it's not that Plasma has a burn in problem, it's image retention. On most Plasmas the retention only appears when black is displayed (I.E. no signal). Even then you have to stand right in front of the display and look really hard to see the image retention, when there's color it looks crisp and colorful. Anyone who chooses LCD over Plasma is either uneducated or doesn't care about quality... Or received it as a gift from someone who is uneducated or doesn't care about quality. :p
I hate simulated scanlines too. On CRTs they were barely noticeable, only if you sat right in front of it. When it's simulated you can clearly see the scanlines and it ruins the entire image.
Plasma/LCD Fight = SNES/Genesis FightQuote:
Originally Posted by Guntz
And CRT have REAL scanlines, not simulated! Emulators have the simulated scan lines for PC's and HDTV's... But i'd rather not see that crap!
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by mrbigreddog
So which is the SNES? :p
Well, that's a pretty ignorant thing to say. What you deem as quality is still subjective. Plasma DOES have few down sides, like fairly large "pixels" and larger than normal mask width between pixels. It doesn't hold the monopoly in quality in every category/aspects. Else, higher price LCDs wouldn't really exist. Not to mention the whole Plasma thing is base on high speed "flickering" to get *all* the levels of brightness - as opposed to LCD doing two phase alternating. LCD still has quite a bit room to grow in the technology department. Not to mention other technologies that will are/will compete with Plasma. 240hz LED TVs already are looking much better than Plasma - in every category, so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guntz
Maybe if you have your face pressed up against the screen. People that like big square pixels are uneducated or don't care about quality. Or just plain prefer things looking like ass ;)Quote:
I hate simulated scanlines too. On CRTs they were barely noticeable, only if you sat right in front of it. When it's simulated you can clearly see the scanlines and it ruins the entire image.
I hate nasty ass looking large square pixels. Even the Saturn, I run to the SDTV because it looks nasty on a large TV as such. But, to each their own.
mrbigreddog: Don't confused blurriness with scanlines. ;)