![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
So...wuts the latest word on 30incher release dates???
- Thread starter StalkerZER0
- Start date
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Dan_D said:
Uh-oh, I smell a flame war a brewing.
Don't get me started Dan
In Starcraft, each side had 13-15 different units. A few land units, a few air, and a couple base-releated ones. Where's the strategy in that?
Compare that with ~130 different units to choose from, including a full assortment of naval (subs, aircraft carriers, cruisers), radar buildings/units, radar blocking units, stealth fighters, bombers, scout planes, lange range cannons, nukes, and all sorts of land units. When you have all that to choose from, with different units having different strengths, there's so much more potential for strategy. It's no longer just "flood your enemy with as much crap as you can", but actually thought-out strategy. Oh and did I mention fully 3D terrain that affects gameplay?
In Starcraft, each side had 13-15 different units. A few land units, a few air, and a couple base-releated ones. Where's the strategy in that?
Compare that with ~130 different units to choose from, including a full assortment of naval (subs, aircraft carriers, cruisers), radar buildings/units, radar blocking units, stealth fighters, bombers, scout planes, lange range cannons, nukes, and all sorts of land units. When you have all that to choose from, with different units having different strengths, there's so much more potential for strategy. It's no longer just "flood your enemy with as much crap as you can", but actually thought-out strategy. Oh and did I mention fully 3D terrain that affects gameplay?
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
zzz said:Don't get me started Dan
In Starcraft, each side had 13-15 different units. A few land units, a few air, and a couple base-releated ones. Where's the strategy in that?
Compare that with ~130 different units to choose from, including a full assortment of naval (subs, aircraft carriers, cruisers), radar buildings/units, radar blocking units, stealth fighters, bombers, scout planes, lange range cannons, nukes, and all sorts of land units. When you have all that to choose from, with different units having different strengths, there's so much more potential for strategy. It's no longer just "flood your enemy with as much crap as you can", but actually thought-out strategy. Oh and did I mention fully 3D terrain that affects gameplay?
The reason why I never really got into RTS games is because to me at least those games seem to be based on logistics alone.
Ya know? Build this base or that. Manufacture troops and what not. And you launch static units and if you bombard enough on your enemy u win.
I'm more interested in actual strategy as if your a general and you got to figure out what moves your enemy is doing and then send in fire power. And you win by using superior tactics and strategy.
Is TA like that?
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Scyles said:
Then when I finally am victorious with my diabolical plan of buying the best performing 30" lcd at the right time I might actually consider getting one of them RTS games.
jamesavery22
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 123
StalkerZER0 said:
Not only is it pure logistics but games are decided fairly early, even if its not known by all sides. If one side builds this that and whatever in a better fashion than anyone else right at the beginning that person is almost guaranteed to win... Battles are meaningless and just a numbers game. I can understand why people get addicted to it though. Its fun setting up domino's and watching them fall. It takes a lot of patients to do so which makes the results that much more rewarding for the player.
Anyways, soooooooo any new info on that HP?!?!!
Yes, TA is like that. I played the game online for years, and it was always a good idea to send scouts out to watch what your enemy is doing, so you know how to defend and what his weaknesses are. To my advantage, most other players didn't know to do this.StalkerZER0 said:
Here's some quotes on Supreme Commander:
"Chris Taylor calls it "warfare of information." The key to winning is knowing what your opponent has built, where it is, and what he's doing with it."
Chris Taylor: "Strategy is the thing, yeah? It's also the thing that I just haven't felt like there's been a lot of. Instead, RTSs are a click fest to grab resources and be really sharp and throw as much stuff as your opponent as possible so that it turns into a wrestling match where you want to pin them to the mat early on. To me that's not war game strategy."
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
zzz said:
Well I will definately look into these RTS games....the good ones I mean based on real strategy when I finally GET MY 30" MONITORRR!!!!!
Now like Jamesavery said.....wheres more freakin info on the HP!!!!!!
Mission accomplished--we got you riled up agian.StalkerZER0 said:Well I will definately look intot these RTS games....the good ones I mean based on real strategy when I finally GET MY 30" MONITORRR!!!!!
Now like Jamesavery said.....wheres more freakin info on the HP!!!!!!
jamesavery22 said:Its been pretty obvious Dell was clearing out their 30" stock. The price dropped from $1899 to almost $1200 in under a month. I've got high hopes for the HP, its what Im planning to buy at least. The previous LG panel was a success so unless they really screwed the pooch I dont see the successor being worse. Might not be leaps and bounds better but hopefully and probably at least a little better
I think that is called a sale. Dell has them regularly. It was $1499 ($1350US) in Canada almost a year ago. The 2407 is also down to $679 right now. Does that mean it is being replaced as well? It may be time for replacement, but it is not something you can really tell by Dells sale of the week.
There has been a steady decline in the regular price of all dell monitors. Combine the latest decline with a sale and it is a very sweet deal.
Though it as about time for a newer version. Given dells history, probably PVA, now that 30" PVA panels are becoming available.
I am not talking about strategy or technology. I hated Total Annihilation because I didn't like the look of the game, nor did I think it was any fun. I just didn't get into it. I am pickier about RTS's than most people.
I liked Dune the Battle for Arakis on the Sega Genesis, hated the PC version.
I liked Dune 2000.
I liked Command and Conquer 1 and 2.
I liked Red Alert 1 but didn't get into 2.
I liked Command and Conquer Generals.
I have hated all Warcraft games to date, but loved Starcraft.
I liked Dawn of War, but got bored with it after awhile. I still like it as a lan game, but won't play it by myself.
I am not a strategic kind of guy. What I do is defend my base to the best of my ability, then just build the largest amount of the most effective units I can, and then I simply swarm the enemy and crush them. If I have to be strategic, I'll fail everytime. Partly because the Ai in these games sucks so bad and the units don't follow orders for crap, but mainly because I lack the patience for real strategy.
I liked Dune the Battle for Arakis on the Sega Genesis, hated the PC version.
I liked Dune 2000.
I liked Command and Conquer 1 and 2.
I liked Red Alert 1 but didn't get into 2.
I liked Command and Conquer Generals.
I have hated all Warcraft games to date, but loved Starcraft.
I liked Dawn of War, but got bored with it after awhile. I still like it as a lan game, but won't play it by myself.
I am not a strategic kind of guy. What I do is defend my base to the best of my ability, then just build the largest amount of the most effective units I can, and then I simply swarm the enemy and crush them. If I have to be strategic, I'll fail everytime. Partly because the Ai in these games sucks so bad and the units don't follow orders for crap, but mainly because I lack the patience for real strategy.
Just giving some appropriate love for TA. Those of you who missed this one, it is your loss. One of those breakthrough games.
How could you not love the look? Real 3d units vs the 2d sprites every one else was using. Terrain that affected the physics of artillery. Real artillery.
In it's day, TA blew the other games away. It was a masterpiece. It was game of the year all over the place in 1997(it is on many greatest of ALL TIME lists). I still fire it up occasionally, and it still looks good today. It is still installed on my computer right now. It recognized and ran perfectly at 1920x1200 resolution and looked amazing on my Dell 24" LCD. How many 10 year old games do that? I wonder if it could pull off 2560x1600? Other RTS games from the era were stuck in 640x480 using flat landscapes and 2d sprites.
Mass battles in TA were INSANE! Hundreds of Units blowing up and leaving wreakage all over the place. Killer sound, killer sound track.
If you were lucky enough to play this game when it came out (I was), you experienced one of those ahead of the curve experiences, where I game just takes a quantum leap on everything else. The super cool experience of downloading an official new unit almost every week. There was an extremely intuitive interface that made factory management tolerable. Tons of Air/land/sea/undersea units for every situation, mobile radar, radar jammers, sonar, sonar jammers, etc...
Nothing like the first days of TA against your friends when you barely know the units, the real terror of being shelled by a Bertha for the first time. Good times. TA killed my interest in lesser RTS games for years. I doubt the magic can be recreated in Supreme Commander, but I am hoping for the best. I found another player at work and tried to get an online game going again, but he had network issues.
Well earned Best RTS of all time:
http://archive.gamespy.com/top10/february04/rts/index11.shtml
How could you not love the look? Real 3d units vs the 2d sprites every one else was using. Terrain that affected the physics of artillery. Real artillery.
In it's day, TA blew the other games away. It was a masterpiece. It was game of the year all over the place in 1997(it is on many greatest of ALL TIME lists). I still fire it up occasionally, and it still looks good today. It is still installed on my computer right now. It recognized and ran perfectly at 1920x1200 resolution and looked amazing on my Dell 24" LCD. How many 10 year old games do that? I wonder if it could pull off 2560x1600? Other RTS games from the era were stuck in 640x480 using flat landscapes and 2d sprites.
Mass battles in TA were INSANE! Hundreds of Units blowing up and leaving wreakage all over the place. Killer sound, killer sound track.
If you were lucky enough to play this game when it came out (I was), you experienced one of those ahead of the curve experiences, where I game just takes a quantum leap on everything else. The super cool experience of downloading an official new unit almost every week. There was an extremely intuitive interface that made factory management tolerable. Tons of Air/land/sea/undersea units for every situation, mobile radar, radar jammers, sonar, sonar jammers, etc...
Nothing like the first days of TA against your friends when you barely know the units, the real terror of being shelled by a Bertha for the first time. Good times. TA killed my interest in lesser RTS games for years. I doubt the magic can be recreated in Supreme Commander, but I am hoping for the best. I found another player at work and tried to get an online game going again, but he had network issues.
Well earned Best RTS of all time:
http://archive.gamespy.com/top10/february04/rts/index11.shtml
Mrbustanut
n00b
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2006
- Messages
- 57
Ya, just downloaded the beta for supreme commander...OMFG this game rules.
And you only scratch the surface. The new downloadable unit each week was so much fun. The interface was wonderful: select 1 tank, ctrl-z, they're all selected. 1, ctrl-z, ctrl-1, you've updated your growing fleet. F5-F8 to save the screen position.Snowdog said:
I played TA on a Pentium 133 with a modem for the longest time! It's interesting on the back of the box it says "big maps for 32MB users", and now it has no problem running at 1920x1200.
jamesavery22
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 123
Snowdog said:
Yes its a sale. And the 2407 was $700 four months ago.+30% drops within a months time have only happened in the past when a bigger LCD was released or the first two months of a product release. I.E., the 2007 dropped close to 40% when the 2407 came out. The 2407 dropped a little over 20% in the first month it was released. So yes a random >30% drop amidst a bunch of <15% drops should raise a brow. Just my 2c though. Not like it matters. Enough speculation to convince the 3007 will get a new panel and there is no such thing, for a consumer at least
, as too big of a price drop StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
jamesavery22 said:
+30% drops within a months time have only happened in the past when a bigger LCD was released or the first two months of a product release. I.E., the 2007 dropped close to 40% when the 2407 came out. The 2407 dropped a little over 20% in the first month it was released. So yes a random >30% drop amidst a bunch of <15% drops should raise a brow. Just my 2c though. Not like it matters. Enough speculation to convince the 3007 will get a new panel and there is no such thing, for a consumer at least
I see myself as being very shrewd regarding my timing. Its like I'm timing a perfectly crafted military operation.
I think I will be able to see a review of the HP L3065 and make up my mind if I want to get that or a dell 3007wfp before dell runs out of the one with the IPS panel.
I WILL BE SUCCESSFUL!!
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Dan_D said:
*sobs* Somebody please encourage me that I'm doing the right thing?
There will always be something better around the corner. My thought is buy the best product you can when you need it and can afford it. If you always wait for the next "great" thing you will wait perpetually.
Unless you have a confirmed date of something better in less than 3 months or so for release, I wouldn't wait. Plus the price of the Dell 3007WFP is unbeatable. $1279.99 on Dell's website.
Unless you have a confirmed date of something better in less than 3 months or so for release, I wouldn't wait. Plus the price of the Dell 3007WFP is unbeatable. $1279.99 on Dell's website.
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Dan_D said:
Oh, thanks for the encouragement!
Defiant as ever, I'm going to stick with my plan.I've once thought that if computers doubled in speed every day, you'd never buy oneDan_D said:
Stalker, on paper it's a difference of 92% vs 72% colors, 6ms vs 11ms gtg, and blacks that are twice as dark. Even if the 3007 somehow turns out to be better, there'll be plenty of them on the market (including ebay) for a while.
I would be happy with the 3007 image quality. Nice big S-IPS screen. The thing I would want is more inputs. Computer + PS3(or BR or HD player).
I would almost rather not have the upgraded Tubes for better color Gamut. When I checked the specs it was drawing double the power of the 3007. 180 watts vs 90 watts.
It looks like the extra color range comes from cranking the tubes up and filtering heavily. The recipe for heat and short tube life.
I would almost rather not have the upgraded Tubes for better color Gamut. When I checked the specs it was drawing double the power of the 3007. 180 watts vs 90 watts.
It looks like the extra color range comes from cranking the tubes up and filtering heavily. The recipe for heat and short tube life.
And in 2000 I would have been happy with a nice, speedy 1GHz machine.Snowdog said:
Actually no. Dell's spec is "147W to 177W (max)". HP's spec is "Typical: 118W, Max: <176W". The Dell typically consumes 25% more power! I don't know where you got your numbers, but I got mine from Dell's site just now, and the LP3065 spec sheet.Snowdog said:
Snowdog said:
That can't be right. According to Dell's specs, the monitor can pull up to 147-177watts depending on USB and sound bar usage.
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/...onitor_3007wfp?c=us&l=en&s=gen&~section=specs
EDIT: Damn zzz beat me to it.
I agree on the inputs. I don't mind a lot, but it would have been nice to have a few more options for inputs.
Like I stated in some earlier posts, the LP3065 is just a week away, so I have to say it is work waiting that long to see if it lives up to its expectations. As for inputs, I too am disappointed with the lack of options, but if the BenQ (which I originally planned to get) has an inferior panel, no amount of inputs will make up for poor viewing experience. Nevertheless, the HP has three DVI-D inputs, so one for monitor, one for HD-Tuner, and someone has to make a cheap {vga, component, s-video, composite} to {DVI} converter [Matrox are you listening ?!?] which neutralize the whole input issue.
zzz said:
Blame Dell Canada:
3007
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=en&s=dhs&cs=CADHS1&sku=222-0863
Power Consumption Operational 90 W (Maximum)
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Snowdog said:
Ya, I was at first really excited about the BenQ FP301W with its multiple inputs. But I think in the end screen quality is most important. Isn't it true that the BenQ will have a PVA panel?
If so then I really think it might be the HP L3065 that I might be getting.
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
pawstar said:
Ya a converter on one of the DVI inputs should do the trick nicely.
I just found this, but it looks like it only outputs 4:3 res's, and I think 30"ers stretch 4:3 signals they receive....so that would suck.pawstar said:
As for the way RCA/composite works, does it only support the 4:3 standard, or can you connect your DVD player to your 16:9 TV with RCA and the widescreen works fine? Since RCA just sends the analog signal, I don't see how it could distinguish between widescreen or 4:3 (unless your TV is smart enough to crop off the black on top and bottom).
Regardless, we'll have to find a converter that outputs 16:9.
zzz said:
On my system, my 30" monitor does NOT stretch 4:3 images. They appear with black bars on the left and the right instead. You can also change this behavior within the video card control panel. Both ATi and nVidia support this feature.
Dan_D said:
The problem here is that the input would be from a stand-alone device not connected to a computer. The issue is whether the monitor will not stretch the image on its own. My current 20" LCD allows me to change between no scale, scale with aspect ratio and scale to monitor extents.
zzz said:
Thats what I was thinking of! Unfortunately its a bit pricy and like you said, it has the 4:3 aspect ratio issue.
As for the RCA issue you can cheat the widescreen if you have the right DVD player. On your DVD player you need to choose to stretch image to the full 4:3 aspect ratio. On your widescreen TV you need to choose strech image again. And voila, widescreen output. But I don't know why you would want to do that, as component image is really poor quality and any descent widescreen tv will have better ways to connect the image !component!.
I see the composite/svideo connection more of as an option to connect consoles to the screen rather than dvd players.