The thing that cracks me up the most about CRT vs LCD is how these companies have you buying better graphics cards and processors and higher and higher refresh rate monitors, chasing framerates that are not only unattainable most of the time, but also cause game breaking bugs if you do manage to reach them, and all the while if you just bought a 60hz CRT from the start instead you could have avoided needing to spend thousands of dollars on hardware and just enjoy buttery smooth 60 fps with the best motion clarity on the market without game breaking bugs and without the struggle of trying to reach 144+ fps. It's the biggest swindle I think in consumer market history. Entire market tricked into buying shit they don't need. Amazing.
wow, what a bunch of nonsense right there...
The thing that cracks me up the most about CRT vs LCD is how these companies have you buying better graphics cards and processors and higher and higher refresh rate monitors, chasing framerates that are not only unattainable most of the time, but also cause game breaking bugs if you do manage to reach them,
there are no game braking bugs in modern, well made games, when running 144+fps. and it also isn't all too hard to reach more than 100fps on a modern PC if you aren't stupid enough to just max everything out instead of choosing sensible settings
and all the while if you just bought a 60hz CRT from the start instead you could have avoided needing to spend thousands of dollars on hardware and just enjoy buttery smooth 60 fps with the best motion clarity on the market
a good modern screen with BFI have similar motion clarity as a CRT. see my Dell monitor (which isn't high end or even that new anymore) doing the UFO test:
this isn't even an OLED, which have even better pixel response. in person the motion of this looks basically flawless. you can't really see any blur during motion. it's hard to capture this, for the image above I had to film my screen at 240fps on my phone and then look for a screenshot that wasn't out of sync with the monitor's BFI
hence the pretty bad image quality of the screenshot.
but even with the issues I had capturing it, in the shot you clearly see the important details on it
here's how it's supposed to look on a static image:
in my slow-mo image above you can see all the individual white dots on the UFO itself,
and you can see the black dots of the eyes being where they belong and in the shape they are supposed to be in.
you can see slight color bleed on the right black line of the alien's torso, and that's about the worst motion artifact I get here.
without game breaking bugs and without the struggle of trying to reach 144+ fps. It's the biggest swindle I think in consumer market history. Entire market tricked into buying shit they don't need. Amazing.
you never played anything at 120+ fps I presume. because 120+ fps looks way smoother than any 60hz CRT.
there are 160hz CRTs, not sure how smooth one of those would look but 60hz on anything is not as good as high framerates on a modern Monitor
and then if you play anything at half the refresh of your CRT you will get a really ugly double image, which looks somewhat like this:
meaning, if you play a 30 fps game on a 60hz CRT it will look like that 1/2 Hz example above.
so 30fps will look even more blurred on a CRT than on a modern OLED.
Finally, modern screens use less energy in both production and use,
they can be made way bigger and lighter,
they are WAY brighter,
and they of course can have way higher image quality.
imagine thinking it would be better to still have TVs that barely reach more than 30" screen size, and if they were bigger you could basically not move them without multiple people, and even then it would be a gigantic hassle.