Results 426 to 450 of 507

  1. Post
    Well in Horizon Zero Dawn I've played around by switching from 1080p to 4k and SDR to HDR and HDR clearly makes a much bigger impact to the visual experience than 1080p to 4k does. It more or less just sounds like you don't have a proper HDR panel

  2. Post
    Yeah, my Samsung UA65K is so subpar its almost unbearable.
    I stand by my statement, and your retort is just as baseless as your original claim.

  3. Post
    HDR has definitely been a more striking improvement in visual fidelity than the resolution bump, for me anyway. It's different strokes for different strokes, don't think there's any real need to get snarky about it.

  4. Post
    Frederick James wrote:
    HDR has definitely been a more striking improvement in visual fidelity than the resolution bump, for me anyway. It's different strokes for different strokes, don't think there's any real need to get snarky about it.
    haters gonna hate, pc gamers will continue to bag on HDR to justify their purchases until they get with the times and buy proper HDR panels

    also people need to realise not all HDR is created equally, its down to how the developer has chosen to implement it, down to how the TV processes it HDR can even differ between console manufacturers - some games have lackluster HDR, although the improvement is still very noticeable on a HDR10 certified panel, but then you have some games like Horizon, Resident Evil 7, Andromeda where the color and contrast dramatically changes with HDR

  5. Post
    The problem with so-called HDR is that the publicized comparisons are made against strawman alternatives, just like every gimmicky TV tech we've seen every year. People are understandably sceptical.

    I'm trying to keep an open mind since I'm (passively) display shopping, but there just isn't much rational info out there, other than the fact it could go brighter than anything I've ever owned. Bear in mind all my displays are currently on minimum possible brightness setting.

    Also being underwhelmed by console rendered 4k is not hugely surprising. It's a bit like complaining about 1080p on PS3.

  6. Post
    SirGrim wrote:
    haters gonna hate, pc gamers will continue to bag on HDR to justify their purchases until they get with the times and buy proper HDR panels
    Doesn't ChrisB have the same TV as you?

  7. Post
    I thought we were talking about the Xbox One X not who has the better TV lol.

  8. Post
    As much as I hate to leap to SirGrims defense, I've heard many reviewers / tech sites / youtubers make the same comment, that HDR is a bigger deal for image quality over 4k.

  9. Post
    HDR on the right game is pretty dang amazing, I would say it's more 'eye popping' than the jump to 4K (in my experience anyways).

    KS8000's best feature for me has been HDR, the 4K is OK though but I mostly play in 1080p upscaled to 4K (unless it's native on a console game vs PC options).

  10. Post
    All I am saying is the HDR is not some transformative experience. It's good, even very good, but it is not something that really affects the quality of the experience.
    Its a nice to have, but like 4K is certainly not a need to have. There is a lot of hyperbole around the technology, and while I am not making the comparison to 3DTV, but similar claims were made about how amazing that technology was as well, and how it massively enhanced the gaming experience. HDR is better than 3D in this, much better in FACT but like it you're not missing out on all the much by not having it, and one thing it certainly does not do is make any game "look like a totally different game" when in use.

    The consoles and PC games are embracing the tech is great, and that panels are coming out supporting is awesome too! However unless you're already in the market for a new display its not worth the money imo.

  11. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    All I am saying is the HDR is not some transformative experience. It's good, even very good, but it is not something that really affects the quality of the experience.
    Its a nice to have, but like 4K is certainly not a need to have. There is a lot of hyperbole around the technology, and while I am not making the comparison to 3DTV, but similar claims were made about how amazing that technology was as well, and how it massively enhanced the gaming experience. HDR is better than 3D in this, much better in FACT but like it you're not missing out on all the much by not having it, and one thing it certainly does not do is make any game "look like a totally different game" when in use.

    The consoles and PC games are embracing the tech is great, and that panels are coming out supporting is awesome too! However unless you're already in the market for a new display its not worth the money imo.
    Have you experienced hdr on a proper hdr display?

    I have a ks8000 and hdr is mind blowing. I haven't been this impressed with something visual since Crysis.

    The red on the Ferrari in the first episode of the grand tour is redonk. 1 billion colours v 16 million

    8bit v 10bit. 1000 nits +

    Yeah hdr displayed correctly is f**king amazing

  12. Post
    SoAndSo wrote:
    Have you experienced hdr on a proper hdr display?
    I love when people bring this up.
    WE HAVE THE SAME TV! I think a lot of people do, as it was the first decent HDR 4K display that was not an insane price.
    Although I am likely getting a different TV soon as I am sick of not being able to rotate the screen, and can sell it to a mate for a solid price. Will probably a Panasonic 65EX780Z

  13. Post
    I agree with ChrisB, it is a visual enhancement, not a game changer by any means. I've played several 4K/HDR games and UHD content, it is good yes, noticeably better visually than without, but (particularly from a gaming perspective) if you took it away, within 5 minutes of playing I probably wouldn't notice.

  14. Post
    that's called visual perception if you changed the game graphics settings from high to medium after 5 minutes you wouldn't notice either, just because you don't notice doesn't mean it's not worth it, it's a high end feature that enhances the experience I understand not everyone wants it or can afford it same as any high end setup.

    you could make further comparison to other high end enhancers like gaming monitors that have 144hz refresh rates, it's nice to have but not required and if you went to 60hz after 5 minutes you wouldn't notice but that doesn't mean it isn't worth it it's visual perception

  15. Post
    SirGrim wrote:
    that's called visual perception if you changed the game graphics settings from high to medium after 5 minutes you wouldn't notice either, just because you don't notice doesn't mean it's not worth it, it's a high end feature that enhances the experience I understand not everyone wants it or can afford it same as any high end setup.

    you could make further comparison to other high end enhancers like gaming monitors that have 144hz refresh rates, it's nice to have but not required and if you went to 60hz after 5 minutes you wouldn't notice but that doesn't mean it isn't worth it it's visual perception
    Exactly, so its not like a "totally different game" at all. It's like the exact same game, that just looks a bit better.

    People seem to be able to over-hype HDR because not many people have it yet so its difficult to refute, and everyone who does has likely just dropped thousands of dollars on a TV, so they're more than happy to just go with it.

  16. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    All I am saying is the HDR is not some transformative experience. It's good, even very good, but it is not something that really affects the quality of the experience......
    ....... for you.

    For others, it's been exactly what they say it has.

    Yelling "FACT" in all capitals does not necessarily make it so - the whole thing is completely subjective, so YMMV. I think it's a little on the nose to try and beat people down with absolute statements when it's really just a matter of opinion.

    I also have to ask this - ChrisB, why does someone else having a different opinion than you on something get your back up so much?

  17. Post
    So that Scorpio eh. Well the one x I guess it is now.

    Sent from my K3 Note using Tapatalk

  18. Post
    ludez wrote:
    So that Scorpio eh. Well the one x I guess it is now.
    Moar like the Xbox One L, amirite?

  19. Post
    EvaUnit02 wrote:
    Moar like the Xbox One L, amirite?
    Pretty much, the thing I don't get with Microsoft is their pricing. They are already way behind in sales to the PS4. You need something truly enticing to be swayed over to Xbox, Xbox one x aint going to do that.

    Don't get me wrong it's a cool machine and all but they should focus on getting back on level playing Field, not playing catch up.

    The one s is a very nice little Machine, quiet has cool features and looks bloody good. But didn't sell enough to dent the gap.

    Sent from my K3 Note using Tapatalk

  20. Post
    ludez wrote:
    So that Scorpio eh. Well the one x I guess it is now.
    Yeah sorry, dragged it off-topic a bit there.

    I just get a bit pissed off when i say "I really enjoyed that!" and someone else says "No, no you didn't".

  21. Post
    DW wrote:
    Exactly, so its not like a "totally different game" at all. It's like the exact same game, that just looks a bit better.

    People seem to be able to over-hype HDR because not many people have it yet so its difficult to refute, and everyone who does has likely just dropped thousands of dollars on a TV, so they're more than happy to just go with it.
    My visual perception of is that it can create a trans formative visual experience for me, if HDR is so amazing for me and not for others, I feel sorry for others perhaps one of us needs to get our eyes checked. Perhaps there is some over selling but that is inevitable, if someone owns a product they will never be able to give a subjective opinion about that product because they have a valid incentive to want to speak positively about something that spent money on

  22. Post
    Can you build a PC to match the One X's performance for the same price?

    The answer is no, but if you want more info: http://www.pcworld.com/article/32007...-pc-build.html

    It costs roughly double the One X's price in the U.S to build an equivalent PC

    PC's specs required below, dunno how this would cost in NZ?

    CPU Intel Core i5-7400
    Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty Z270 GAMING-ITX/AC
    RAM Crucial 8GB DDR4
    Graphics card Gigabyte Radeon RX 580 8GB Gaming 8G
    Storage Western Digital 1TB Caviar Blue 3.5" 7200RPM HDD
    Optical Drive Pioneer BDR-211UBK 4K UHD Blu-Ray drive
    PSU Thermaltake SMART 550W 80+ Bronze
    Case Rosewill Dual Fan Micro ATX Mini Tower
    OS Windows 10 OEM license

    This build has some flaws, the costs didnt include building so requires the user to put it together, also it didnt include a mouse and keyboard which would be required consider the one x does come with a controller

  23. Post
    ^ So really, when you break it down like that, $750 is pretty decent value for money.

  24. Post
    Frederick James wrote:
    ....... for you.

    For others, it's been exactly what they say it has.

    Yelling "FACT" in all capitals does not necessarily make it so - the whole thing is completely subjective, so YMMV. I think it's a little on the nose to try and beat people down with absolute statements when it's really just a matter of opinion.

    I also have to ask this - ChrisB, why does someone else having a different opinion than you on something get your back up so much?
    Umm what? Maybe you had better go back and read the thread again. Irony, its a thing! So is hypocrisy, or at least confirmation bias in this case.

    SirGrim wrote:
    My visual perception of is that it can create a trans formative visual experience for me, if HDR is so amazing for me and not for others, I feel sorry for others perhaps one of us needs to get our eyes checked. Perhaps there is some over selling but that is inevitable, if someone owns a product they will never be able to give a objective opinion about that product because they have a valid incentive to want to speak positively about something that spent money on
    Which is what I called you out for.
    HDR is great, but in reality it's not so different from a lot of things.
    When it comes to games aliasing is far more of an issue for me, so higher resolution is more important than a lot of things. I am also susceptible to simulation sickness, so framerate is extremely important, for me. However both do not objectively improve the experience in general. They do subjectively for me, but much like HDR mileage will vary.

  25. Post
    HDR for the win, TV's today can't even produce the image colour range of TV's of tomorrow. 4K is always going to be 4K.

    /edit

    As it is atm, I would actually pick 4K unless HDR was always used to its best.