Wii, Playstation II & LCD TV advice needed

[jimincalif]

I know a lot of you know more about this stuff than I do. I found out today the kids are getting a Wii from their grandfather. Unfortunately the old tube TV we had in the bonus room died, so we are looking to get an LCD to replace it.I've heard that there can be some lag issues with LCDs and gaming. Is this true? Are there some LCDs known to be better than others for gaming? Is this what the response time statistic relates to? I know almost nothing about gaming, don't want to get something that won't work well.Thanks for any advice.

[northvibe]

here is where you really get what you pay for. I cant believe some people that get westinghouse and say the tv is the best, theres reasons its cheap...it uses cheap led diodes! My roommates have a westinghouse...when any video game is hooked up you get grainyness and discoloration, even tried it on component and composite same thing.The sharp aquos seem to be the best bang for the buck and quality. Friend just got the 42" one and its amazing. Sony's are always very nice and top notch but you pay for that and the name. Samsungs are good for basic needs as well. CR also rated panasonic's well.

[Mavrik]

I don't recall ever getting any lag playing my PS2 on our tv HD TV but no idea about the Wii.

[northvibe]

i think you really want a response (led diode refresh rate) of like 5ms or so. the pc monitors i was looking at getting were 19" widescreen samsungs at 2ms. which is wicked fast. 8ms is the highest id ever think anyone would want thats getting to be crappy for fast movement. IMO 5ms or lower.

[kunkstyle]

This might open up a can of worms, but for any videogaming, I'd go plasma. Took about two months of shopping to make my decision, so it was researched fairly thoroughly, which included getting the kid at best buy to hook up an xbox to the demo tv's there The refresh rate (which will cause your lag issue), on a good LCD (ie: Sharp Aquos) is around 4ms. Refresh rate on an average plasma is 0.01 ms. If you do go with LCD, I'd go with the aquos. Although if the shop tries to tell you you need the 120HZ frame rate for videogames, they're just trying to upsell you. It won't make a difference. That only comes into play when watching anything recorded on film (ie most movies). If you go plasma, I'd recommend the Panasonic Viera line. The new 1080p model released in Sept has a lower price point than any competing LCD, and looks fantastic.

[northvibe]

now i dont hate plasma and they are good...its just the burn in issue that keeps me away from them. I know its better but its still not fixed. i heard some where about like under 40" to go lcd and above 40" to go plasma...something like that. well my HDTV is a tube samsung 1080i, yeah only 1080i but it was $450 used 2 months from a friend and ps3/xbox360 look amazing in 1080i/720p and for the price...its my transition tv until i get my big huge lcd. Has more inputs than most other tv's, 2 hdmi, 2 component, 2 composite, 1svideo. but if you get lcd or plasma besure to get 1080p no doubt.Oh yeah...the plasma's prices did just drop didnt they!

[kunkstyle]

The burn in is really not an issue any more. Yes, it technically is possible, but it's also possible to burn in a crt. Don't leave on C-span all day or leave a dvd menu on. Just taking a common sense approach will prevent burn in. Although I do understand your concern.

[northvibe]

Quote, originally posted by kunkstyle »The burn in is really not an issue any more. Yes, it technically is possible, but it's also possible to burn in a crt. Don't leave on C-span all day or leave a dvd menu on. Just taking a common sense approach will prevent burn in. Although I do understand your concern.exactly, i dont fear id break it..its the other people that would use my tv hahah i think thats why the wii, ps3 and x360 have the auto dimming and standby's when you dont touch them for long periods of time. so yeah should be great if you dont leave it on the same channel for a long crazy time. personal use should be ok, its the business use where they just leave it on the same (weather, cnn etc.) all day. like at college their tv's had burn in from leaving it on the weather channel.....

[jimincalif]

Thx for the replies. From what else I've learned apparently it is a problem with Guitar Hero, but not something noticeable with most games. Not so much the response rate as it is the lag that the digital TVs have in buffering and then displaying a whole frame at a time. Apparently GH III is better than the earlier versions.

[northvibe]

oh GH3 has a setting in the game for those kind of tv's....handy

[kunkstyle]

I think that was regarding refresh rate. GHIII doesn't have as much motion. First person shooters, sports games, etc will be more noticable.

[tribalman]

Quote, originally posted by northvibe »i think you really want a response (led diode refresh rate) of like 5ms or so. the pc monitors i was looking at getting were 19" widescreen samsungs at 2ms. which is wicked fast. 8ms is the highest id ever think anyone would want thats getting to be crappy for fast movement. IMO 5ms or lower.yeah, definatly get something better than 8ms. you get lots of images tearing if you make a fast movement in a game. i have a 8ms LCD on my computer, shoulda just spent the other 150$ and gone with the 2ms time. if you can, go to best buy or whatever and just stand around and look at the t.v.s for a long time. don't let a salesperson try to say this tv is better than that one. they usually push one over another, even though another can be better, and also, they don't usually know what they are talking about. and burn in while watching tv is not possible. with different programs comming on, commercials the image is never the same. the issue is when a single image is displayed on it. or if you leave that annoying display up showing what channel you are watching(honestly, why do people leave those numbers on?) up. and the whole 1080i vs 1080p, all that has to do is how the image is refreshed.from the wiki on the entry for 1080p:"...in order to see the full benefit from 1080p content a display must be bigger than usual or the viewing distance needs to be closer than usual. The ability of the eye to resolve 1080p content also depends on the amount of contrast in the picture. For optimum viewing of resolution it has been recommended that viewers sit back approximately three times the height of the screen."

[AKLGT]

Quote, originally posted by northvibe »here is where you really get what you pay for. I cant believe some people that get westinghouse and say the tv is the best, theres reasons its cheap...it uses cheap led diodes! My roommates have a westinghouse...when any video game is hooked up you get grainyness and discoloration, even tried it on component and composite same thing.The sharp aquos seem to be the best bang for the buck and quality. Friend just got the 42" one and its amazing. Sony's are always very nice and top notch but you pay for that and the name. Samsungs are good for basic needs as well. CR also rated panasonic's well.we have a Westinghouse 26" 720P LCD HDTV that I stood in line all night for at Best Buy 2 yrs ago. Yes, it's not the greatest quality, but for $500 (2 yrs ago) it's been a great TV. the DVI hook up doesn't work, nor does one of the two components but again, you get what you pay for. I'm still happy with the purchase albeit not the greatest quality. However, I also don't believe it's necessary to spend $2500 on a 42" HDTV when another good quality unit can be had for less on sale. I'm a big fan of the Samsung and LG units personally. It would be a toss up if I had to choose between the two, and would probably go with the lesser priced at that point, both units being 1080P and 5ms refresh of course. If you are talking about gaming however, keep in mind most games right now are actually made for 720P. The Wii is only 480P so you don't necessarily have to spend a fortune to get the best results. I will say the 720P's are all on sale right now, and the quality in your bang for buck is pretty reasonable if you don't need the latest and greatest. IMO, if you are looking for a 1080P, spend the extra bucks and get a good quality unit vs the cheap Westinghouse unless of course, it's just too good to pass up. However, having said that, once you get into the $1000 price range, I'd rather spend that extra $500 and get the better unit vs wasting $1000 on the very low end model. Just me, you could be different.

[kunkstyle]

Quote, originally posted by AKLGT »keep in mind most games right now are actually made for 720P. The Wii is only 480P so you don't necessarily have to spend a fortune to get the best results.Half the PS3 games I've got are 1080p. True, the wii is only 480p. Not too sure what the 360 games are putting out. However, the trend is going towards 1080p, and you're not going to see that trend regress.Quote, originally posted by AKLGT »IMO, if you are looking for a 1080P, spend the extra bucks and get a good quality unit vs the cheap Westinghouse+1Quote, originally posted by AKLGT »unless of course, it's just too good to pass up-1 I've been burned by 'too good to pass up' deals in the past. I don't bother with them anymore. Chances are there's a reason for the smokin' deal, and buying a great $500 deal every year because the last one conked out generally costs more than dropping the $1500 on the quality deal in the long run. [note: not ragging on anyone who prefers the low price point deals - just my own personal experience]

[AKLGT]

Quote, originally posted by kunkstyle »Half the PS3 games I've got are 1080p. True, the wii is only 480p. Not too sure what the 360 games are putting out. However, the trend is going towards 1080p, and you're not going to see that trend regress.really, when I poke my head thru best buy, out of curiousity, i take a look at the various games. so far, majority i've seen all say 720P.Quote »I've been burned by 'too good to pass up' deals in the past. I don't bother with them anymore. Chances are there's a reason for the smokin' deal, and buying a great $500 deal every year because the last one conked out generally costs more than dropping the $1500 on the quality deal in the long run. [note: not ragging on anyone who prefers the low price point deals - just my own personal experience]I still have my 2 yr old Westinghouse LCD TV. Though not all the components work on it, i still like it and the picture quality is pretty good. Most people comment how nice it looks, especially now that it's hooked up to the HD DVD player, that I also bought for $99 at Walmart. that was also a too good to pass up deal so I bought 2 of them. You can find some great tech items for relatively good price as long as you understand it's not the greatest quality. If it suits your needs and serves you well, then who cares if you didn't pay ungodly $$$ to get it. Hell, most of my insane Christmas shopping was all on items that I consider "too good to pass up." I can't post what I got obviously, but every thing I bought I paid a great price for from either just finding good sales, or working with friends who can get me smoking deal discounts.

[kunkstyle]

Quote, originally posted by AKLGT »I can't post what I got obviously, but every thing I bought I paid a great price for from either just finding good sales, or working with friends who can get me smoking deal discounts. Now that's a different story all together.

[WaveAction]

im purchasing a 37" sharp aquas 1080p LCD early this week for my xbox 360, cant wait, theirs some pretty decent deals at bestbuy right now, it's got some good features and it's only 5ms refresh rate, or maybe it's 6ms..something like that, but sharp makes amazing tv'sedit** after searching abit more, im getting a 42" LG 1080p tv for cheaper then the 37" sharp is..and has more features..so im gonna be in line at 4am at bestbuy on boxing day