March 30, 2012
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ftnddrqdfbrtxiiwehaa@forum.dlang.org...
> On Friday, 30 March 2012 at 21:03:21 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> Problem is, it also corrodes the connectors.
>
> Yea. But oh well, it can't be too bad... my old games
> all still work!
>
> Though, nowadays I tend to prefer the emulators.

Oh *definitely*. BTW, Wii homebrew is *fantastic* for that. It literally turns the Wii into a (very good) set-top multi-emulator device. And many of the Wii-hosted homebrew emulators are *very* good now. *FAR* better than the half-assed Virtual Console stuff.

> I have
> a playstation controller on usb, which works for all
> the old games naturally (there's a clear progression
> from nes -> super nintendo -> playstation, each is a
> superset of the next. It works well for Sega too.)
>

Yea. This gets into one thing I *love* about China's unwillingless to play by the US rules: Thanks to Hong Kong, I have an inexpensive device that lets me use a PS2 controller on PC *AND* GameCube *AND* XBox1 (And on Wii, for the few games that are actually intelligent nough to allow GC controllers as an alternative to the piece of crap "Classic Controller"). I love this thing. But that would *never* happen under US-style IP law. Playing by US rules, you're not allowed to have the *basic consumer choice* of using whatever the fuck controller you want with whatever the fuck system you want. China *allows* such consumer choice. Yup: China being *more* free than the corporate-owned US. Go figure.


> No hardware hassles, doesn't take space under the tv.
> I used to have a real mess of crap in my bedroom, the
> cords were hideous. Now most of that is on the computer.
>

Eeewww, I hate playing games on a PC:

- Too many other processes to screw up the experience.

- I spent sooo many hours every day *working* at the computer desk, I *don't* want to be be glued to it for my entertainment, too.

- Even if I didn't use a PC for work, for my entertainment, I'd still much rather use a nice comfortable living room couch/TV/environment than a computer desk anyway.

- Plus the non-indie commercial games come with rootkits and the requirement of buying new hardware twice a year. No thanks.


> The computer can also crank up the speed, which makes
> some of those old games so much more playable! I can't
> believe I used to sit there 10 hours a day and just
> grind or use the slow moving characters.

Some of the Wii-hosted homebrew emulators will do that too :)  I doubt I would have ever gotten all the way through Chrono Trigger if it weren't for that feature.

>> I *liked* that the N64 used carts
>
> I have only one game for the N64: Perfect Dark. Bought
> the game when I saw it at one of the stores and picked
> up the system like a month later.
>
> Great game, still my favorite of the FPS genre.

Yea, this is a pretty good one. Another one of my favs in Conker's Bad Fur Day. You play a cute little furry squirrel, and then you do things like get drunk so you can kill flame-based enemies by staggering around and pissing on them :) Fantastically "wrong" and great gameplay. It's a Rare game from back when Rare was actually still good. Actually paid $80 for that fucking game, but never regretted it.


March 30, 2012
> Eeewww, I hate playing games on a PC:
>
> - Too many other processes to screw up the experience.

Maybe if you were basing your experiences off of Windows 95.

>
> - I spent sooo many hours every day *working* at the computer desk, I
> *don't* want to be be glued to it for my entertainment, too.
>
> - Even if I didn't use a PC for work, for my entertainment, I'd still much
> rather use a nice comfortable living room couch/TV/environment than a
> computer desk anyway

Fair enough. You can hook PCs up to a TV though, of course.

.
>
> - Plus the non-indie commercial games come with rootkits and the requirement

Lose the hyperbole. :P

> of buying new hardware twice a year. No thanks.

Oh please. The hardware requirements have basically been static because of the age of the current consoles.

>
>
March 31, 2012
On 3/30/2012 12:36 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/30/2012 12:11 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:27:43 -0400, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I would argue that:
>>>
>>> 3. An extension method for an argument of type template parameter T will be
>>> looked up only in the instantiation scope.
>>
>> I don't think you looked at my counter case in detail. Your idea leads to two
>> different instantiations of tmpl!Foo having two different implementations,
>> depending on which extension methods you include. In fact, in one place, the
>> instantiation might succeed, but in another, the instantiation might fail.
>
> Yes, you're right. I missed that nuance. I don't really know how to fix it.

Ah, I know how to fix it. Mark such instantiations as "local" ones, so they are mangled with the module name of where they were instantiated from.
March 31, 2012
On Friday, 30 March 2012 at 22:43:00 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> Oh *definitely*. BTW, Wii homebrew is *fantastic* for that.

I don't have one of those thingys though.

> But that would *never* happen under US-style IP law.

You know what's funny: I used to use an Atari ac adapter
for my Sega. (still do, when I actually use the thing)

The Internet tells me that Sega controllers work in
Ataris too!

Accidental compatibility there!

> - I spent sooo many hours every day *working* at the computer desk

This is one reason why I actually like staying at the
computer: I can keep an eye on my email in the corner.

I often tell people I have to get back to the computer
so I can pretend to work for a while.

They laugh - I work via the internet, so I don't
have to *pretend*, since there's no one there to
see it.

Of course, often I actually do work and just don't
want to admit it. But, sometimes I actually do pretend.


The way I do that is by keeping the email window open
and answering requests, bugs, etc. as a kind of low
priority process. When they interrupt me, I'll handle
it, then get back to what I was otherwise doing.


Thus, pretending to work. It looks like I'm on top of
things, in reality, I'm goofing off on the video game,
a side project, the television, or the newsgroup or whatever.


Parking my butt in the computer chair means I can do
all that, and I keep the game in a corner window on the
screen, so I can see everything else going on too.

> - Even if I didn't use a PC for work, for my entertainment, I'd still much rather use a nice comfortable living room couch/TV/environment

My computer chair is probably the nicest furniture I own...
In my house's big room, I have a floor bed: a couple
blankets and pillows on the floor, next to my big tv.
(my "big tv" being a 20 year old 19" set! I'll use it till
it dies. Then duct tape it back together and get a few more
years out of it.)

Anyway, the floor bed is brilliant, but I like my chair too.

Besides it's just that I always feel like I *should* be working,
or at least available in case something comes up,
and if I'm sitting at the computer, at least I can pretend
to be...

> - Plus the non-indie commercial games come with rootkits and the requirement
> of buying new hardware twice a year. No thanks.

Eh, I just stick to the old stuff. The newest computer
game I've played is either Starcraft or Worms.

BTW, Worms 2, now there's a great game. I hear they are
doing a new 2d Worms game, written in D. I look forward
to it. (totally on topic now :P)

> I doubt I
> would have ever gotten all the way through Chrono Trigger if it weren't for that feature.

huh, Chrono Trigger moves pretty quickly. I don't mind it
at regular speed at all.

Unless you were playing the AWFUL playstation version. The
super nintendo one was pretty well paced. The events moved
along quickly, the characters moved at a good speed,
and most importantly, NO LOAD TIME.


A friend of mine years ago liked my super nintendo
version and saw a playstation port come out. He
bought it.

And I couldn't even look at it. It took literally
*minutes* to load the initial game, and several
full seconds to do stuff in the game!

In the original one, you bump into a monster, and instantly,
swords come out, the music changes, and you can hold in the
button to get it over with.

In the playstation one, you move... it pauses to load.
You finally bump into the monster.

It STOPS THE WORLD, seeks the disc, finally the music
changes, wait a bit longer, and FINALLY the swords come
out. Don't use the magic though, it will have to load some
more.

Fucking unbearable.


You'd think they would cache this or something. Nope. Go
to the next screen, bump a monster... and WAIT AGAIN.



What the /hell/. I know the playstation wasn't exactly
the beefiest hardware ever made, but come on.




Ironically, they also bundled final fantasy 4 in that same
sale, and this one was bearable. (I actually bought this disc
from him.) It took great aeons to initially load, but once
you got started, it played normally. You could even take
the CD out for the most part and still play it, proving
they loaded the whole game into memory up front.

Actually, it was pretty good. How could they do a good
job on one game, but so horribly drop the ball on a similar
game that came in the /same box/?

Ridiculous.


Since I'm talking about final fantasy, I played their playstation
games to, #7, 8, and 9. I've played 7 and 8 more than once, but
haven't gotten myself to try 9 again (despite it sitting next
to me for years now. Seriously, I can reach it right now!)

I didn't love 9 the first time I played it, but I went into
it with a bad attitude too - my dad paid the full $40 for it
instead of waiting a year for it to drop to $20. That annoyed
the crap out of me. Now I'm more angry that I was so rude
about it than anything else; he tried to get a fancy expensive
christmas present, and my response was not nice at all.


Aaaanyway, two objective complaints I have about it are
a) load times and b) cutscenes. 7 and 8 had these problems
too, but it was different...

FF7 fight time from start of graphic to menu input: 7 seconds.
FF8, same thing: about 7 seconds too, but you could turn them off, omg.
FF9.... 15 seconds.

(btw, FF1, same measure: < 2 seconds.)


That's right, the load time just about doubled between 8 and 9!
How ANNOYING.

And cutscenes: 7 had a few. 8 had a few more. 9 piled it right
up.

Gah!



But the worst when it comes to exposition is Metal Gear Solid.
Now, I only played #1 myself, but I watched my brother play #2 and 3.

MGS1 had a lot of exposition, no doubt about it.

But MGS2 was just non fucking stop. Round a corner, mandatory
call. Listen to them blabber on meaninglessly for like 45 minutes.
Seriously, some of the exposition scenes were that long, just
dribbling dialog.

My god.



Anyway I'm really rambling. Preaching to the choir I'm sure.


> It's a Rare game from back when Rare was actually still good.

heh, they also did Perfect Dark and the great Battletoads
on the nintendo. I never did finish that battletoads, but
I beat the living crap out of my brother over and over again!
March 31, 2012
"Bernard Helyer" <b.helyer@gmail.com> wrote in message news:jiioyfihtaqhpjafgmxr@forum.dlang.org...
>> Eeewww, I hate playing games on a PC:
>>
>> - Too many other processes to screw up the experience.
>
> Maybe if you were basing your experiences off of Windows 95.
>

Actually, it was pretty good back then, I'm thinking more the past 10 years. There's too much background crap that's always running now, not to mention programs completely hoarding as many resoruces and CPU power as the possibly can. Back with 95/98, there were what, three basic processes that were always running? I used to even have them memorized. Now it's probably around 10x times that, plus god-knows how many services, and half of it's all written in a "the hell with efficiency" style.

>>
>> - I spent sooo many hours every day *working* at the computer desk, I *don't* want to be be glued to it for my entertainment, too.
>>
>> - Even if I didn't use a PC for work, for my entertainment, I'd still
>> much
>> rather use a nice comfortable living room couch/TV/environment than a
>> computer desk anyway
>
> Fair enough. You can hook PCs up to a TV though, of course.
>

Yea, and I can replace my car's steering wheel with a one of those big wooden things things they used to use on boats ;)

My point being, yes, it's technically doable, but to make it work *well* is too much of a DIY project. (Plus it's not really doable for me since the shithole I've got here has knob-and-tube wiring pretty much everywhere but my computer desk, so nothing three-prong will work in the living room, so it'd have to be a laptop).

Something like a softmodded Wii, OTOH, is cheap, quick, easy, and has great results. (*Really* looking forward to the Raspberry Pi, though.)

> .
>>
>> - Plus the non-indie commercial games come with rootkits and the requirement
>
> Lose the hyperbole. :P
>

There's no hyperbole there. PC gaming DRMs have been *known* to be implemented as rootkits. That's plain fact. That's one of the reasons people pirate PC games they've already legitimately bought - because it doesn't have DRM, and therefore doesn't go screwing around with their kernel.

>> of buying new hardware twice a year. No thanks.
>
> Oh please. The hardware requirements have basically been static because of the age of the current consoles.
>

Even if that's true, it's too little, too late. Once bitten, twice shy.


March 31, 2012
On 3/30/2012 5:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> Ah, I know how to fix it. Mark such instantiations as "local" ones, so they are
> mangled with the module name of where they were instantiated from.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7802
March 31, 2012
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote in message news:vcadggwxsbxhdkjhrqfl@forum.dlang.org...
> On Friday, 30 March 2012 at 22:43:00 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> But that would *never* happen under US-style IP law.
>
> You know what's funny: I used to use an Atari ac adapter for my Sega. (still do, when I actually use the thing)
>
> The Internet tells me that Sega controllers work in
> Ataris too!
>
> Accidental compatibility there!
>

Yea, that was before the suits smelled money in the games direction, invaded, and decided "What's with all this oppenness bullcrap? LOCK THAT SHIT DOWN! Rope 'em in and lock 'em in!"

Like the AV cords: For fuck's sake, what's with the proprietary AV connectors? DVD players (even small ones) get by fine without that bullshit: They could easily have gone with proprietary conectors on the device end like the game companies do. But they're not actually asinine enough to do it.

>
> My computer chair is probably the nicest furniture I own...
> In my house's big room, I have a floor bed: a couple
> blankets and pillows on the floor, next to my big tv.
> (my "big tv" being a 20 year old 19" set! I'll use it till
> it dies. Then duct tape it back together and get a few more
> years out of it.)
>

Finally! Another person that's not jumping on board the "If flatpanel HD sets are so popular then I guess I have to go spring for one, too" bandwagon!

>
> Besides it's just that I always feel like I *should* be working,
> or at least available in case something comes up,
> and if I'm sitting at the computer, at least I can pretend
> to be...
>

That's kind of another thing: If I need to be doing work, it's going to be damn hard if I have a bunch of games two clicks away.

I'm both tongue-in-cheek and totally serious on that :)

>
> BTW, Worms 2, now there's a great game.

Yea, I've always like Worms. That's a good one. I grew up with the original Worms though, so the changes in Worms 2 took some getting used to: The cartoon worms, the new voices, the lack of scaling (the kids call it "zooming" these days ;) ). Got used to it though, and it's very good.

Another fantastic turn-based strategy is Moonbase Commander. Super under-appreciated.

> I hear they are
> doing a new 2d Worms game, written in D. I look forward
> to it. (totally on topic now :P)
>

Really? Cool!

>> I doubt I
>> would have ever gotten all the way through Chrono Trigger if it weren't
>> for that feature.
>
> huh, Chrono Trigger moves pretty quickly. I don't mind it at regular speed at all.
>

I'm trying to remember what it was that felt really slow to me...It's been awhile since I played it, but I think it *might* have been fanfare at the end of each battle...? Something like that anyway. It was a short, minor thing like that, but it was frequent enough that it just felt like I was being really slowed down.

> Unless you were playing the AWFUL playstation version. The
> super nintendo one was pretty well paced. The events moved
> along quickly, the characters moved at a good speed,
> and most importantly, NO LOAD TIME.
>

No, it was definitely the SNES one.

Aside from active time battle (which I've never liked in any of Square's games that used it), it's certainly not a bad game overall. Quite good, really. Although, I was always more of a Lunar fan, even if the battle system wasn't quite as polished as Chrono Trigger's.

>
> What the /hell/. I know the playstation wasn't exactly
> the beefiest hardware ever made, but come on.
>

Yea, constant loading sucks. Actually, that reminds me, have you seen that YouTube video of Sonic 2006's hub-world "gameplay"? Pretty much exactly like you describe: contant (slow) re-loading for at every trivial step...Except it's on the 360/PS3. No doubt that must have been a real rush-job.

>
> Since I'm talking about final fantasy, I played their playstation
> games to, #7, 8, and 9. I've played 7 and 8 more than once, but
> haven't gotten myself to try 9 again (despite it sitting next
> to me for years now. Seriously, I can reach it right now!)
>

You know, I've always had mixed feelings about square. I've always liked JRPGs, especially 16-bit ones, and square's have always had top-notch storytelling and presentation, but there's always been one reason or another that I never got far with any of them, despite beating other JRPGs like Lunar (multiple times, on both SegaCD and PSX).

The SNES Final Fantasy's seem right up my alley, being 16-bit JRPG and all (and I have a couple of them on PSX), but the active time battle just makes it really difficult for me to want to stick with it enough to get anywhere. So I don't think I've ever managed to get more than a couple hours into those.

In the PSX era, I was more into PC gaming and didn't have a PSX, so I got the PC FF7. Not long after I got to the overworld map (roughly disc 2? After Aeris is kidnapped, but before...uhh...you discover her ultimate fate - does that even *count* as a spoiler anymore? *Did* it ever? ;) ), I ended up getting bored with it and never got any further.

Later on, I got FF8 (for PSX), and even though I didn't mind the draw system, early on in disc 2 I realized I was only playing it to see what happens and was genuinely dreading/rushing-through the battles (which just seemed boring), so I gave up on that too. Didn't like how it was so ultra stat-heavy, either. I can enjoy stat-fiddling up to a point (such as in Castlevania: SOTN - the #1 best game ever created), but in FF8 it just seemed excessive.

Never tried 9. Played a demo or two of FF10, and thought "meh", and I guess I've kinda given up on FF since. I spent years trying to like the series and just couldn't :/ Ironically though, I think I'm the only person in the world who actually *likes* "FF: The Spirits Within". (I think part of what I liked was that it was a CG movie that *wasn't* a cartoon.)

>
> Aaaanyway, two objective complaints I have about it are
> a) load times and b) cutscenes. 7 and 8 had these problems
> too, but it was different...
>

Heh, on games like that, I feel a little bit differently about cutscenes. While my hatred for cutscenes and story-driven games has been growing for over a decade, storytelling has always been one of the core points of JRPGs.


> FF7 fight time from start of graphic to menu input: 7 seconds.
> FF8, same thing: about 7 seconds too, but you could turn them off, omg.
> FF9.... 15 seconds.
>
> (btw, FF1, same measure: < 2 seconds.)
>

Heh. Yea. Faster the hardware, the more waiting. Go figure.

>
> That's right, the load time just about doubled between 8 and 9! How ANNOYING.
>
> And cutscenes: 7 had a few. 8 had a few more. 9 piled it right up.
>
> Gah!
>

Hmm, I'll be sure not to try 9 ;) I guess even in JRPGs, story and cutscenes can be overdone.

>
>
> But the worst when it comes to exposition is Metal Gear Solid.

Oh my GOD yes, you're right. I was even going to mention that in reply to the FF stuff.

MSG1 was a great game at the time, despite the constant chatter. In fact, it was one of the main reasons I got a PSX (the other reasons being Castlevania Chronicles and SOTN). I don't think MGS1's gameplay holds up very well now, though.

MGS2 was CRAP. I couldn't understand how so many people actually liked that so-called "game". World's worst offender in terms of pointless incessant yammering with no gameplay (at least until Zelda Skyward Sword came out, which seems roughly even with MGS2 - but at least most of MGS2's cutscenes could be skipped - although there were so many that even *skipping* them still took forever).

I do have to admit though, the gameplay in MGS2, what incredibly little there actually was, was actually pretty good. But I've been spoiled by the Splinter Cell series which is stealth gameplay that even puts MGS2's gameplay completely to shame. Plus, the first three Splinter Cell games actually have very *good* (ie, not moronic) storylines that...here's the best part...are *seamlessly* integated with the gameplay and *don't* interfere with it (Splinter Cell 4's storyline is properly integrated, too, but it's a really f*ing stupid "THIS time, it's PERSONAL!" travesty). Seriously one of the best game series of all time (aside from the story in #4).

I played a demo of MGS3 and...never even finished the demo. The chatter was just as bad as in MGS2, plus loading times were worse, plus the gameplay itself was boring: It seemed to involve too much "Go into the menu to change clothes". What is this, Metal Gear, or Barbie's Dress-Up Menus?

I've never touched MGS4 and I never will. No matter what the gameplay is like.

Then the same guy behind MGS *cough*reinvented*cough* Castevania to predictably horrid results. And yet somehow it was well-received. After playing the demo, I cannot understand why: *everything* looks like plastic-toys-wrapped-in-cellophane, and the gameplay is a pure God of War clone (which itself was just mediocre: As my brother astutely pointed out, God of War is just the nighttime levels of Sonic Unleased with an Ancient Greek theme). Man, what I wouldn't give for a *second* Metroidvania game that *doesn't* require being played on a tiny little handheld screen...Preferably with the badass Alucard (and not that pussy Soma).


> But MGS2 was just non fucking stop. Round a corner, mandatory call. Listen to them blabber on meaninglessly for like 45 minutes. Seriously, some of the exposition scenes were that long, just dribbling dialog.
>
> My god.
>

Yes, and if you were massochistic enough to actually listen, the *content* of the conversations was maddeningly inane (that's "inane", not "insane". Although "insane" works, too.) It's like listening to a detailed analysis of Sex and the City plotlines: Who the fuck cares?!?!

>
> Anyway I'm really rambling.

Oh, like I'm not? ;)

>Preaching to the choir I'm sure.
>

Yea, but it's fun to actually *agree* with someone on gaming (or anything) for a change.

>
>> It's a Rare game from back when Rare was actually still good.
>
> heh, they also did Perfect Dark and the great Battletoads
> on the nintendo. I never did finish that battletoads, but
> I beat the living crap out of my brother over and over again!

Heh, yea, Battletoads was fantastic. I never beat it either, at least not without Game Genie. Insanely hard. A real "gamer's" game. That hoverbike section was just EVIL!

Rare used to be truly fantastic, right up there with Treasure. But when Free Radical split off, it killed both companies: Rare lost the ability to understand the art of gameplay, and Free Radical just re-released Goldeneye over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and called it "TimeSplitters".


March 31, 2012
On 3/30/2012 11:16 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Adam D. Ruppe"<destructionator@gmail.com>  wrote in message
>> In my house's big room, I have a floor bed: a couple
>> blankets and pillows on the floor, next to my big tv.
>> (my "big tv" being a 20 year old 19" set! I'll use it till
>> it dies. Then duct tape it back together and get a few more
>> years out of it.)
>>
>
> Finally! Another person that's not jumping on board the "If flatpanel HD
> sets are so popular then I guess I have to go spring for one, too"
> bandwagon!

Dudes, get an HD TV. It really is transformative. And yes, it kills me that my expensive old large screen standard def TV is just a POS in comparison, even though it is in perfect working order.

I can't even stand to watch standard def anymore.
March 31, 2012
"Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:jl6a6a$1gh$1@digitalmars.com...
> On 3/30/2012 11:16 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Adam D. Ruppe"<destructionator@gmail.com>  wrote in message
>>> In my house's big room, I have a floor bed: a couple
>>> blankets and pillows on the floor, next to my big tv.
>>> (my "big tv" being a 20 year old 19" set! I'll use it till
>>> it dies. Then duct tape it back together and get a few more
>>> years out of it.)
>>>
>>
>> Finally! Another person that's not jumping on board the "If flatpanel HD sets are so popular then I guess I have to go spring for one, too" bandwagon!
>
> Dudes, get an HD TV. It really is transformative. And yes, it kills me that my expensive old large screen standard def TV is just a POS in comparison, even though it is in perfect working order.
>
> I can't even stand to watch standard def anymore.

I've seen and used HD sets. Heck, my sister has one (a fancy new one - 1080p of course) and I've watched stuff on it with her. BluRay, HDMI, all the bells & whitles, etc. Yea, the HD looks nice, but ultimately I've never gotten past the overall feeling of "Meh". YMMV, but it *honestly* just doesn't do much for me. Certainly not enough to blow hundreds of dollars on it.

And that's with HD content. A lot of my stuff is SD (and will never change to HD - it's not as if my Wii or XBox1 games/hardware are suddenly going to start outputting HD), and I've always found that SD content looks noticably *worse* on an HD set than an SD set, no matter how fancy the upscale filtering is. The upscaling/filtering artifacts are always painfully noticable and it just looks like shit. But it looks perfectly fine on an SD set. 'Course, the old HD CRTs would have been able to handle SD content perfectly fine, but you can't get those anymore.

So blowing hundreds of dollars just so half my stuff looks *worse* and other stuff looks (to me) only marginally better? Pass.

It's not like B&W -> Color. Just a higher rez. Meh, big deal. When it's commonplace to have inexpensive HD *with* extended gamut (sp?) and quality no-glasses/no-headaches 3D, and content to take advantage of all that (and without getting dizzy from all the shaky-cam bullshit), then it'll probably be enough for me to care. At one point I went from a 160x160 greyscale Handspring Vizor (PalmOS) to a 320x320 full-color Palm Zire 71. *That* was a significant difference. SDTV -> HDTV? Small potatoes, I just can't care.


March 31, 2012
On Saturday, 31 March 2012 at 09:35:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> So blowing hundreds of dollars just so half my stuff looks *worse* and other stuff looks (to me) only marginally better? Pass.

I've seen a few high def tvs. I like half of them, though
not enough to displace my old set.

The ones I didn't like though are apparently the more
expensive ones. What happens is motion looks really
bizarre on these. I don't know how to describe it, but
watching a show on it just feels... weird as the camera
moves.

At first, I thought it was because these things are so
big that it was messing with my brain.

But, I brought this up on another forum and I was told
that's a feature in the hardware: apparently the expensive
sets interpolate frames into regular shows and display
more movement. So, instead of 23 fps, we get, I think,
30 fps, though I'm not sure, out of the same original material.

Anyway, everyone insists this is "better" and I think
it is weird just because I'm "so used to seeing shit".



But blargh, I still don't like it.