I wish online gaming had an IQ test to put you in different tiers of player intelligence.
I wish online gaming had an IQ test to put you in different tiers of player intelligence.
Taiden wrote: I wish online gaming had an IQ test to put you in different tiers of player intelligence.
QFT!
Oh come on, taunting the mouth breathers is fun sometimes.... even though the insults tend to go over their heads.
Javelin wrote:Osterkraut wrote:Okay, so they're cheaper than they used to be. They're still about twice the price ($20 versus $10), not available for most titles older than 10 years old, and still don't look any better on the *majority* of movies. Bitch and complain all you want, but all you've done is derail a simulator/game console question into some stupid argument over what is essentially the second coming of BetaMax. It's stupid, and the format really isn't going to be that "big" anyways thanks to media-on-demand/streaming/cloud/UltraViolet. I don't give a crap, neither does the OP, and neither should you. Sheesh!Javelin wrote:Come on man, what's next? I just showed you your average Blu-Ray is under $20.Osterkraut wrote:Maybe I just haven't purchased a DVD since... ah, hold on... Cars 1, I think. Most "normal" DVD's are $8.99 a few weeks after they come out (check Target). Blu-Ray's are what, $30 normally?Javelin wrote: Worth 4x the cost difference? No, none of them.I just went on Amazon and checked. Avatar, which no one can argue doesn't look better on Blu-Ray, is $19.99 for a DVD AND Blu-Ray set. DVD only? $8.99 At this point you just need to admit that dog won't hunt.
Man, you just don't quit, do you? You derailed the thread with your lies, I was bringing it back into fact land.
Fact: Blu-Ray discs aren't even twice the price of DVDs (Bullitt: $7.39 for the two DVD special edition, $9.99 for the Blu-Ray edition which contains all that the two DVD special edition contains).
Fact: As you can see by my recent example, you'd be shocked at what is on Blu-Ray. And why not? The studios get to "George Lucas" their content and make even more money by released a Blu-Ray.
Fact: As pointed out, most movies for several decades have been filmed at a resolution that exceeds even Blu-Ray. The jump from DVD to BR isn't as mind-blowing as the jump to HDTV was, but it's there.
Fact: With 350 million sales in 2010*,Blu-Ray is here to stay (as long as anything remotely electronic stays these days), it's hardly BetaMax. HD-DVD was BetaMax to Blu-Ray's VHS. The xBox had HD-DVD, to get the topic back on track and your panties unbunched.
It's almost 2012, man. Welcome to the future.
And now for the best part:
Javelin wrote: *Obviously* a joke statement, but back here in reality 99% of BluRay media looks NO different than the DVD versions. That and what kind of crap do we normally watch? LeMans and HB Halacki's original Gone in 60 Seconds? Yeah, those will be worth paying 4x as much for on BluRay if that ever even happens...
QED, and only $4 more than the DVD copy. Oh and you should read the first review, it's a well-written, knowledgeable tome from a guy who owns 3 different versions of LeMans...gushing over the detail shown in the Blu-Ray edition.
1080 HD B-R ect. hurts my eyes.
Yea if you cant see the difference w/Blu-Ray get a better TV or a better HDI cable.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Ugh.... digital copies can DIAF. I STILL buy CDs. I refuse to stop. Until i can buy uncompressed digital copies of everything, i'm not buying even ONE. I refuse to support that crap.
I'm with you. Dealing with DRM and backups etc. is annoying as crap. I have no use for download-only media, and I don't care if that makes me a dinosaur. When my computer explodes I will still have all the hundreds of CDs and DVDs to play the materials from.
Javelin wrote:Osterkraut wrote:Okay, so they're cheaper than they used to be. They're still about twice the price ($20 versus $10), not available for most titles older than 10 years old, and still don't look any better on the *majority* of movies. Bitch and complain all you want, but all you've done is derail a simulator/game console question into some stupid argument over what is essentially the second coming of BetaMax. It's stupid, and the format really isn't going to be that "big" anyways thanks to media-on-demand/streaming/cloud/UltraViolet. I don't give a crap, neither does the OP, and neither should you. Sheesh!Javelin wrote:Come on man, what's next? I just showed you your average Blu-Ray is under $20.Osterkraut wrote:Maybe I just haven't purchased a DVD since... ah, hold on... Cars 1, I think. Most "normal" DVD's are $8.99 a few weeks after they come out (check Target). Blu-Ray's are what, $30 normally?Javelin wrote: Worth 4x the cost difference? No, none of them.I just went on Amazon and checked. Avatar, which no one can argue doesn't look better on Blu-Ray, is $19.99 for a DVD AND Blu-Ray set. DVD only? $8.99 At this point you just need to admit that dog won't hunt.
HDDVD was Betamax. 
Duke wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Ugh.... digital copies can DIAF. I STILL buy CDs. I refuse to stop. Until i can buy uncompressed digital copies of everything, i'm not buying even ONE. I refuse to support that crap.I'm with you. Dealing with DRM and backups etc. is annoying as crap. I have no use for download-only media, and I don't care if that makes me a dinosaur. When my computer explodes I will still have all the hundreds of CDs and DVDs to play the materials from.
CDs just... work.
If i want a digital copy of what's on that CD, i'll do it myself. And i will avoid compressing them until i die. The last thing i want to hear on my car stereo that's already challenged because.. well... IT'S IN A CAR, is a compressed lossy file.
Garbage in, garbage out.
To back Javelin up a bit:
When Blu-Rays came out, they did a VERY bad job in releasing some VERY poor versions. Pretty much upsampled DVD letter box versions from what they looked like. I have a copy of Top Gun, which should be great on Blu-Ray, but looks like CRAP.
The Blu-Ray industry kind of pulled an "80's American Cars" thing early on. The crappy conversions created a mindset up poor quality that will last for a long time. It is a good example of how not controlling quality can really hurt you for a long time. People like to mess with Apple a lot for its prices, but they do a great job (generally) of controlling quality and it shows in their brand loyalty and sales.
a little nutty with some fruity top notes
sorry thats what I hear/see when I hear people talking about CD vs a lossy formats... ESPECIALLY in a car with a factory system... maybe my ears aren't that great... and my speakers suck... but I hear pompous jackassery when people start talking such nonsense... maybe one day i'll spend some $$$ on a quality audio system from my home... but the simplicity of mp3s isn't something I see myself moving away from.
*er and just to add... this is supposed to have a little bit of sarcasm in it... but not completely 
Considering the amount of trouble I've had with DRM locking me out of music I legitimately own, the number of times that meta-data is wrong or disappears, songs playing incorrectly, etc. I seriously cannot consider .mp3 as a "simple" format.
porksboy wrote: What are the advantages to the various game systems regarding driving games and particularly simulators? I have a Wii and my 6 year old is asking every day for a DS. What about the XBox? I want to get a system that will have some realistic driving simulators.
Xbox does have the kinect. I have not even tried it with Forza 4 yet. Aside from the head tracking feature, I hear you can actually race with it.
As far as kids are concerned...Kinect is actually pretty cool. In my opinion it works a lot better than the Wii. I have only played a few games with it (shortly after we got it my xbox broke and it took me almost 9 months to finally replace it.) I am sure there are many more games out now than when I last checked. My wife uses some of those aerobics/workout games with it.
xd wrote: Yea if you cant see the difference w/Blu-Ray get a better TV or a better HDI cable.
Considering HDMI is a DIGITAL standard, there is no such thing as a "better" cable. You can keep thinking your $200 6 foot monster cable provides you better picture though 
As for the OP, buy a computer. $400 will get you a computer that can play the best of the best simulators just fine, buy a bitchin wheel (g27) and go have fun.
If you have to buy a console, 360 all the way. RROD hasn't been an issue forever, AND they extended the warranty to a gajillion years. Sony fanboi's always bring it up because it is literally the only reason you can justify owning a PS3
HiTempguy wrote:xd wrote: Yea if you cant see the difference w/Blu-Ray get a better TV or a better HDI cable.Considering HDMI is a DIGITAL standard, there is no such thing as a "better" cable. You can keep thinking your $200 6 foot monster cable provides you better picture though
Monster cable is garbage anyways.
What you say is truth, though. However, on longer runs, the cheap stuff is more likely to not work correctly. Myself? I use cheap-ass monoprice HDMI cables. I think i have $10 wrapped up in the three that i use, total.
HiTempguy wrote:xd wrote: Yea if you cant see the difference w/Blu-Ray get a better TV or a better HDI cable.Considering HDMI is a DIGITAL standard, there is no such thing as a "better" cable. You can keep thinking your $200 6 foot monster cable provides you better picture though
You can keep telling yourself that cheap is "as good" Monster cables suck. If you have a good TV you can see the difference. You also need to realize that I'm talking a 1080 not 720 and bigger then 50 inches. Read the reviews on amazon for the "as good" hdmi cables. There is a difference.
xd wrote: You can keep telling yourself that cheap is "as good" Monster cables suck. If you have a good TV you can see the difference....
You really need to go for it and invest in one of these though:
http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Digital-Audio-Ethernet-Connection/dp/B003CT2A6I/ref=pd_sim_sbs_e_5
Review: First off, I bought one of these for my $200 19" Visio. It displays 720P, but NOT ANY MORE!!! When I got this cable, it came wrapped in bacon, which I thought was pretty weird, but shrugged it off, slid off my recliner into my Rascal, scooted from the living room to the kitchenette, and started cooking my bacon-wrapping. As the smell of delicious pork back filled my double-wide, I turned around to look again at the box the cable came in. Could this be? Yes! It was a "3 wolves barking at the moon shirt" and even better, it fit me perfectly (I wear an XXXXL). So I yumplugged (get it, yum because of the bacon?) the crappy coax and component cables from my TV, and slapped in the HDMI golden cable between the visio and the blu-ray. I was completely unprepared for what would turn out to be the best day ever. I dusted off my....oh who am I kidding...I was already watching my "Mama's Family: season 1" Blu Ray (disc one). The magic began... Once Vicki Lawrence appeared on screen, she broke character AND the fourth wall. She, and the rest of the cast jumped OUT of my TV, and performed the episode on my living room floor!!!! Screw 1080P! This is way better. I thought to myself that having a 12" real-life "mama's family" cast was awesome. I wondered what would happen if I had a bigger TV... Or better yet, used this cable to plug it into that giant TV screen they have at Cowboys Stadium! Anyway, I was in for a further treat when I was watching a Betty White episode. Oh MAN!!! Could life get better? I spoke too soon... After enjoying some drinks with the mini-cast of "Mama's family" (my own mama left me all her Hooch in the will), we threw on the TV. I turned it on to family guy, and the same thing happened. I was able to punch that Jesus-hating Peter Griffin and that smart-assed dog in their sacrilegious faces. Mini-Betty White even did a pile driver to Stewie. MacGyver came on, and we all were in 7th heaven (and when 7th Heaven came on, it was EVEN Better). I could go on and on about my day, but i'm gonna stop here. BUY THIS CABLE. It could easily be the best $2594.75 you ever spend...
Getting one of these is entirely optional:
http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Three-Wolf-Short-Sleeve/dp/B002HJ377A/ref=pd_sim_sbs_e_3
Review: This item has wolves on it which makes it intrinsically sweet and worth 5 stars by itself, but once I tried it on, that's when the magic happened. After checking to ensure that the shirt would properly cover my girth, I walked from my trailer to Wal-mart with the shirt on and was immediately approached by women. The women knew from the wolves on my shirt that I, like a wolf, am a mysterious loner who knows how to 'howl at the moon' from time to time (if you catch my drift!). The women that approached me wanted to know if I would be their boyfriend and/or give them money for something they called mehth. I told them no, because they didn't have enough teeth, and frankly a man with a wolf-shirt shouldn't settle for the first thing that comes to him. I arrived at Wal-mart, mounted my courtesy-scooter (walking is such a drag!) sitting side saddle so that my wolves would show. While I was browsing tube socks, I could hear aroused asthmatic breathing behind me. I turned around to see a slightly sweaty dream in sweatpants and flip-flops standing there. She told me she liked the wolves on my shirt, I told her I wanted to howl at her moon. She offered me a swig from her mountain dew, and I drove my scooter, with her shuffling along side out the door and into the rest of our lives. Thank you wolf shirt. Pros: Fits my girthy frame, has wolves on it, attracts women Cons: Only 3 wolves (could probably use a few more on the 'guns'), cannot see wolves when sitting with arms crossed, wolves would have been better if they glowed in the dark.
xd wrote:HiTempguy wrote: Considering HDMI is a DIGITAL standard, there is no such thing as a "better" cable. You can keep thinking your $200 6 foot monster cable provides you better picture thoughYou can keep telling yourself that cheap is "as good" Monster cables suck. If you have a good TV you can see the difference. You also need to realize that I'm talking a 1080 not 720 and bigger then 50 inches. Read the reviews on amazon for the "as good" hdmi cables. There is a difference.
The truth is somewhere between these two. Digital forms of transmission are still vulnerable to interference issues. If you have lots of electromagnetic (EM) interference, then there actually is a possibility that a better shielded cable can improve picture quality. However, digital connections are much less prone to picture quality deterioration based on EM interference. With analog connections, on the other hand, ANY EM interference, no matter how small, will tend to alter the waveforms that convey the picture. As a result, well-shielded cables are much more important in an analog transmission than a digital transmission.
Conclusion: buy the cheap cable unless you can verify that EM interference is actually screwing things up.
xd wrote: You can keep telling yourself that cheap is "as good" Monster cables suck. If you have a good TV you can see the difference. You also need to realize that I'm talking a 1080 not 720 and bigger then 50 inches. Read the reviews on amazon for the "as good" hdmi cables. There is a difference.
Do you understand what a digital signal is? It is bits, 1's and 0's. You can't have better or worse bits, data is data in a digital world.
HiTempguy wrote:xd wrote: You can keep telling yourself that cheap is "as good" Monster cables suck. If you have a good TV you can see the difference. You also need to realize that I'm talking a 1080 not 720 and bigger then 50 inches. Read the reviews on amazon for the "as good" hdmi cables. There is a difference.Do you understand what a digital signal is? It is bits, 1's and 0's. You can't have better or worse bits, data is data in a digital world.
I thought I saw a 2!!!
HiTempguy wrote: Do you understand what a digital signal is? It is bits, 1's and 0's. You can't have better or worse bits, data is data in a digital world.
A digital signal is not always binary. Plus, interference can flip bits, so, it's not like digital signals are magical happy signals that can never be interfered with.
Blah blah blah, RLOD, hacking, some garbage about cables and dvds. Fairly standard for a thread like this.
I bought a PS3 after my 360 was about to take a E36 M3(and the price dropped). I'd like Forza 4, but since I don't know anyone who hasn't had at least one 360 crap out on them I refuse to buy another one. The hacking bit, I could still play my PS3 with the network down, not so much when the 360 bricks on you.
And online, the biggest shiny happy people I've ever run into were on Xbox live. Nowhere near as many on the PSN.
My PS3 is almost full(like less than a gig free full) so I'm going to grab a 1tb laptop hd and swap it in.
My 360 was a pile of crap and pretty much all of my games froze on it. It refused to play music without screwing up, and it took them this long to actually put a wireless adapter in the console instead of charging an extra hundred bucks for it. Granted, all this is for the old ones and might not apply to the new ones.
Dvds, I have netflix and don't have much in the way of disposable income. Cables, I have a 27 inch old ass tv, and a 10ft 9 dollar hdmi cable for when I can hook it up to a good tv. I've seen no discernable difference between it and my friends monster cable, so I'm allowed to mock you for willingly spending 200 bucks on something you could have gotten for less.
Javelin wrote:
Except we're dealing in the factual, not the subjective. You can't factually say Blu-Ray discs are four times, then backpedal to two times, more expensive than DVDs. You can't factually say the "stuff we watch" like Le Mans isn't on Blu-Ray. You can't factually say that Blu-Ray discs don't produce a higher resolution image than DVDs.
At this point you can keep using kettle logic and redefining your statements,or you can sack up and say you were wrong, and that while you personally don't like Blu-Ray, you've got no empirical evidence to back up your beliefs.
Osterkraut wrote:Javelin wrote:Except we're dealing in the factual, not the subjective. You can't factually say Blu-Ray discs are four times, then backpedal to two times, more expensive than DVDs. You can't factually say the "stuff we watch" like Le Mans isn't on Blu-Ray. You can't factually say that Blu-Ray discs don't produce a higher resolution image than DVDs. At this point you can keep using kettle logic and redefining your statements,or you can sack up and say you were wrong, and that while you personally don't like Blu-Ray, you've got no empirical evidence to back up your beliefs.
Holy freaking crap man, that reply was to the guys fighting over cable quality, NOT YOU. Go away!
You'll need to log in to post.
