/vr/ - Retro Games

It definitely affects games with precise timing, such as beating Mike Tyson in Punch Out. It's part of the reason why modern (console) games are all slow slogfests with QTE for awesome and scripted gameplay. And when I say console I'm not saying it in the mustard sense, I do mean games made for consoles which also includes most PC games since all PC games are console ports.

Last affects everything 18ms is pretty minimal but I think you're giving most lcds credit for being as fast as the fastest lcds and I suspect you might be doing the same for your "response time" number if not just pulling it directly out of your ass

>>5633742
Once you're under ~30ms it really depends how you're defining and measuring input lag, one number isn't really sufficient.

>>5633742
All CRTs suffer from at least 8.8ms input lag. Then the original hardware adds a significant amount (more than 30ms for NES, more than 40ms for SNES, etc) so this is why you get the least amount of input lag with an optimized emulation setup today.

>>5633826
you have mental issues
Most LCD response time tests shows that it takes between 6~14ms for a picture to display before the next frame
Some tvs take 20ms but most monitors don't take that long
This is input lag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVw6T9rw0xU

>>5634049
That's actually not what input lag is and there are zero TVs I'm aware of with 6ms input lag. 20 is pretty typical and 20 is noticeable

>>5633742
>I was arguing with an obsessed CRT fag who was fucking right
I smiled, OP. Eat shit.

>>5633742
fag the problem is that if you connect 240p/480i console to modern tv it will upscale and deinterlace video signal digitally it takes fucking time to do that it produces even more input lag. I played my psx on lcd and when I switched to crt it was a relief

>>5634338
>he doesn't emulate and upscale for psx or at use ossc for original hardware on lcd

>>5633875
It is pretty noticeable.

>>5634020
No, CRTs without conversion are rated in microseconds not miliseconds. 8 is for SOME while 16 or more for others (always multiple of 8) that are turning 15k to 31k. Rarely do you find sets that are higher than 50 microseconds. They are usually EDTV sets or 720p sets.

>>5634256
LCD monitors are generally around 8-13 now, for any respectable brand. LCD/OLED or similar tvs have varying ranges from 8-13 for VERY FEW SETS to generally 14-20. 1440p@120hz sets are VERY low. OLED are included in what I just said.

>>5633742
Play a game on an emulator for 5 minutes. Make sure the emulator lets you add delay to controls. Then after the 5 minutes add 15-20ms of delay. Then try 30-40. You can 100% notice it, but you should be able to adapt. The thing is, most tv/monitors of the last few years are SO LOW even with processing of 240/480 content, they are not even worth reporting. In some cases a device like an OSSC is required to get optimally low times, as the built in scaler on most tvs is a converter not a transcoder. The benefit of CRT is still there, but only barely. Honestly hardly worth the effort but I still do it when I don't want to use my OSSC with my OLED (new OLED sets are crazy low response times)

>>5633742
Apart from lost frames from particular game, after lost frames from emulation (or almost none if optimised, 0 if original hardware) the biggest problem is TV lag.
Best perfomance Ive seen for now is your old square VGA monitors, I can't notice any problems

>>5634341
I didn't say not noticeable, the problem with comparing numbers is "input lag" is not well defined and will change significantly on what exactly you're measuring.

>>5633742
>infrared input over HDMI
Is this the latest kiddo meme "proof" of something?

>>5633742
faggot

THE EMPEROR TOTALLY HAS AMAZING CLOTHES BRO I CAN SEE THE INPUT LAG TOO I SWEAR I CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE I DON'T BLAME THE MONITOR ONLY WHEN I LOSE IT'S INPUT LAG
INPUT LAG IS NOT A MARKETING LIE I SWEAR

>>5633742
How are plasmas for lag?

>>5635338
Input lag is not real.

>>5635224
Marketing lie? by whom? The CRT ultrasecret consortium of NEETs?

>>5633742
>9.8ms
You fucking WISH they were that fast.
You're probably looking at manufacturer specs that quote "response time".
Reponse time is NOT input lag. It's something completely different and refers to how much motion blur there is on the screen.
Also those manufacturer stats are always bullshit because there's no standard method of testing so they always give you a bullshit number that means nothing.
The actual input lag on those tv's is much much much much higher than 9.8ms

>>5634341
>No, CRTs without conversion are rated in microseconds not miliseconds. 8 is for SOME while 16 or more for others (always multiple of 8) that are turning 15k to 31k. Rarely do you find sets that are higher than 50 microseconds. They are usually EDTV sets or 720p sets.

This isn't correct. Every CRT has at least exactly 8.3ms of input latency.

>>5635803
OP is is a retard, but so are you. 15 ms input lag at 60 hz is standard now for decent TVs.

>>5635403
>my reading comprehension is not real
>zoomer intelligence is not real

>>5634020
>All CRTs suffer from at least 8.8ms input lag.
>Then the original hardware adds a significant amount
>More than 30ms for NES, more than 40ms for SNES, etc
>so THIS is why you get the least amount of input lag with an optimized emulation setup today!!

>>5636201
Which part isn’t accurate? Can you back up your claim with hard evidence or are you just angry and uninformed? Your first day here I’m guessing?

>>5636201
>i don't understand burden of proof
Most children your age don't

>>5635338
same garbage. Plasma and CRTs are the greatest memes in the world
LCD screens are dirty cheap and you can find units with decent picture response time so you can literally buy one every 5 years assuming you let them on more than 8 hours per day
CRTs have buzz and many other issues (switch capacitors every 2 years) and plasma tvs are heavy cancer

>>5636664
Lol

>>5636664
>my mommy won't let me have an old tv in my room

The real reason to use a CRT for retro is because analog signals work best on CRTs. Every console until after the wii are analog systems that use analog signals(disregarding the ps3/36/wiius since they were built for 720p, not 480p). What makes this so shit on modern displays is they are digital. This is not bad in itself and is great for modern consoles but to display analog content you gotta convert the signal to digital. The converts/scalers built in are not the best so you get display lag. Also upscaling stuff at 240p to a 1080p screen looks like ass. I hear scalers that cost like 400 bucks work really well which is fine and dandy I suppose. Lastly, the 4:3 aspect ratio looks best on Non widescreen CRTs.

Retards here praise CRTs for the wrong reasons. I have seen some real nice CRT monitors with high refresh rates and think the tech could have improved but calling it the king of all displays is very ignorant and uneducated. Personally I think Plasma looks the better for digital content, I havent had to suffer burn in since the TV is like 5 years old.

>>5636970
dumbest post in the thread

>>5633742
>Caring about ms
Who are you? The fuckin' flash

>>5636985
How?

CRTs don’t have input lag you stupid zoomers

>>5637009
Wanna get BTFO?

>>5637025
I'd like to see you try.

The real stupid thing is even caring about input lag in single player games
Is nothing but autism and retardness. The game doesnt change at all because you easily get used to it.

>>5636970
>The real reason zoom zoom blah blah zoom
Holy fuck you're retarded

>>5637034
Cringe and yikes.

>>5637034
oof
>>>/v/

>>5636201
Fuck off kid

>>5637284
stay mad nigger

>>5637106
Someones mad their device useless for anything made in the past 15 years.

>>5638362
>someones mad people laughed at their retarded attempt to explain something they're clueless about

>>5633742
In most cases, input lag is impracticable in game mode. I usually use games like legend of dragoon to test when I get a new tv. Even the off brands surprise me.

>>5633742
It's because the newer TV is upscaling the signal, thus introducing the lag. Use a CRT for classic gaming.

>>5633798
>It's part of the reason why modern (console) games are all slow slogfests with QTE for awesome and scripted gameplay
That's a problem with shit designers, not a miniscule delay that's somehow less than one frame but still fucking you up.

>>5633742
lcds deinterlace signals meant for crt by combining 2+ frames?

So, can I use a 75 ohm coxial cable port as a video in to a console? is there an adapter for this that connects to RGB, S-Video, etc? My CRT only has composite

>>5636664
Cope

>>5639382
No, that isn't right. Most hold off a frame and duplicate.

So each 30/60th is held until the next and you see a full frame on the odd scan. So 8ms. VERY early lcd/crt tech for 480p and higher held longer but there isn't much reason as it is unrelated to processing power. Some of the widescreen CRTs are variable between 32ms and 50ms. Even mid level lcd was never variable.

>>5633798
Holy shit you are retarded.