Using large screen LCD TV to play PC flight sim games

[ozTRipwiRE]

Thanks for the input!

 

Hi everyone,

 

Thanks very much for the input on using a TV screen to play PC flight sim games. I appreciate it! :)

 

ozTRipwiRE

[npole]

For your example they are not the same. The tv would have a actual FOV of 26 degrees while the monitor would have a fov of around 20 degrees.

 

In my example the apparent screen size is exactly the same (ie: TV placed ad 2m and monitor placed at 1.8m), perhaps the FOV is exactly the same (the borders are placed at the same angles; in other words you have to turn your head the same way to reach the screen border).

 

That is besides the point as a tv can be placed as close to you as a monitor an many people have them at a similar distance they have a monitor. In this case the TV will always give you a better real FOV which can map in to a better in game FOV.

 

No one sits 2 metres from their screen. You may as well have your example at 20M and then the comparative fov of view for them will be even closer but it wont make it any more of a useful comparison.

 

If you cannot move your setup and you cannot obtain the best of your screen, you can't blame the screen itself. In example you can play with a cinema screen sized projector, and sit far away from it to have the same apparent size of my 30" monitor. Even considering the "coolness" of playing with a that big sized screen, i'll be tons more profitable with my 30" monitor sitting at 150cm from it. Why? Because my resolution is much higher. :)

 

I dont know where you have got the idea that there is any eyestrain involved with any of this. Yep, that could be what happened in your experience but it's not scientific and contradicts everyone else in the thread.

 

It's called eye fatigue, it's when you concentrate on visual intense tasks, more intense is the task, more strain will receive your eyes, this is because the ciliary muscle tightens.

 

So if its just down to personal preference why don't you just say, no its not for me but the majority of people seem happy using them. Why argue with numbers, resolutions and theories to back it up?

 

None have said that ppl will not be happy by using a TV screen instead of using a proper PC monitor. TV screens are cheaper and are more common of big monitors, to not consider the fact that these ppl are running their game at max 1080p (so they won't take advantage of a 1600p monitor in example).

 

It's like asking: may I fly with the A10C with a cyborg evo joystick? I will answer: of course you do! ...but pointing the fact that there's other (and better, but expensive) solutions. Would it make the cyborg evo players unhappy? Of course not! But you cannot compare a evo with TM Warthog in example. And in this case you cannot compare a TV screen, with a PC monitor quality, they are two complete different devices that have been made for two different tasks. The original question was: "my TV but would that provide the same picture quality as running on a good PC monitor?" and the reply can be only one: "nope, your TV would never provide the same picture quality of a good PC monitor". :)

[Loz]

One thing not been mentioned in all of this, 40 inch TVs are, IMHO, rubbish when you use them for general windows use.

That's my "personal opinion" having tried one for DCS and didn't like it at all compared to my triple Dell 24 inch IPS setup. :)

[metalnwood]

In my example the apparent screen size is exactly the same (ie: TV placed ad 2m and monitor placed at 1.8m), perhaps the FOV is exactly the same (the borders are placed at the same angles; in other words you have to turn your head the same way to reach the screen border).

 

See attached picture based on a 30" 16:10 monitor and a 40" 16:9 TV. Not including bezels the TV obviously has a wider apparent/actual FOV to a viewer at those distances.

 

If you cannot move your setup and you cannot obtain the best of your screen, you can't blame the screen itself. In example you can play with a cinema screen sized projector, and sit far away from it to have the same apparent size of my 30" monitor. Even considering the "coolness" of playing with a that big sized screen, i'll be tons more profitable with my 30" monitor sitting at 150cm from it. Why? Because my resolution is much higher. :)

 

 

I am saying why on earth would you do that? You are giving an example of taking a large screen and putting it at a distance that gives that size no advantage. Whats the point? There is no point. You dont get a tv to do that. Everyone who has a tv posted saying they like the larger size. They are not moving it meters away to negate that fact.

 

 

It's called eye fatigue, it's when you concentrate on visual intense tasks, more intense is the task, more strain will receive your eyes, this is because the ciliary muscle tightens.

 

You are likely to get that on a monitor or a tv if you are going to get it. Cite any source that says you are going to suffer more using a TV in this context. Its not being used as an everyday desktop.

 

None have said that ppl will not be happy by using a TV screen instead of using a proper PC monitor. TV screens are cheaper and are more common of big monitors, to not consider the fact that these ppl are running their game at max 1080p (so they won't take advantage of a 1600p monitor in example).

 

It's like asking: may I fly with the A10C with a cyborg evo joystick? I will answer: of course you do! ...but pointing the fact that there's other (and better, but expensive) solutions. Would it make the cyborg evo players unhappy? Of course not! But you cannot compare a evo with TM Warthog in example. And in this case you cannot compare a TV screen, with a PC monitor quality, they are two complete different devices that have been made for two different tasks. The original question was: "my TV but would that provide the same picture quality as running on a good PC monitor?" and the reply can be only one: "nope, your TV would never provide the same picture quality of a good PC monitor". :)

 

This is where we disagree, you keep citing examples as if there is only one deciding factor. Its preference. You cant compare something rubbish to something good and say thats what its like if you use a tv compared to a monitor. Not everyone sees it like that where everyone would agree at warthog is a better stick than an cyborg.

 

What you are failing to understand is that people who are happy with the TV are happy to compromise in some aspects to get the larger picture that you cannot get with a monitor. If they could get TV's with triple the resolution and the GPU would run it then of course we would. No question.

 

The discussion is not one of pixel density, its one of preference. A larger picture with some compromises or a smaller less immersive one that is crisper.

 

It's not a scientific expedition - although you would do OK to recheck your maths re fovs ;)

Edited June 6, 2013 by metalnwood

[WildBillKelsoe]

It will immensely immerse the whole house if not the neighborhood. I have a 32 inch Sony LCD that really pisses people off, not because its loud, but because I use mini HiFi for speakers :)

go for it!

[MackTheKnight]

I would like to caution folks to consider seriously the issue of eyestrain and ergnomic issues, when utilizing large screen tv's for gaming/flight sim use. Please be aware of these issues.

 

Speaking from experiance here, as I purchased a 40" Sony LED screen, to use as my main display for DCS. I admit the experiance was quite immersive, however I started to get really bad migrains and neck pain, etc. I eventually traced this back to the bad ergonomic situation I created with the large display.

 

I now have a 3 X 24" eyefinity configuration and my migrains are gone.

 

Perhaps, I'm just more sensitive to the eye-strain & neck issues than other folks, but ergonomics should not be sacrificed for immersion. You could pay dearly for it, in the long run.

 

Regards,

Mack

[npole]

See attached picture based on a 30" 16:10 monitor and a 40" 16:9 TV.

 

What you didn't got from the phrase: "I did not the calculation, it's just an example". 200cm and 180cm were just an example, make it 200cm and 170cm in example, until you obtain the same FOV. ;)

 

I am saying why on earth would you do that? You are giving an example of taking a large screen and putting it at a distance that gives that size no advantage. Whats the point? There is no point. You dont get a tv to do that. Everyone who has a tv posted saying they like the larger size. They are not moving it meters away to negate that fact.

 

With a lower DPI you cannot move a 1080p TV much closer (not as close as 1600p screen) or you will start to notice the pixel separation (screendoor effect). In other words no matter how big is your screen, you have a minimum distance (it depends by the panel quality and more by the resolution) where you can place it, before you will start to notice the pixels, and because of this you can always obtain the same FOV of a TV using a monitor (no matter of the size) with the bigger advantage of having a much more detailed image.

 

What you are failing to understand is that people who are happy with the TV are happy to compromise in some aspects to get the larger picture that you cannot get with a monitor. If they could get TV's with triple the resolution and the GPU would run it then of course we would. No question.

 

...and what are you failing to understand is that I was replying to an exact question: "is a TV capable of providing the same quality of a good PC monitor?" .. and the reply cannot be different than: "no, it doesn't". Using a TV screen is (like you said), accepting a compromise: you do it because you can't (or won't) spend money on a bigger monitor configuration. Using one (or multiple) 1600p monitors requires much more money than running a single 1080p TV with a average graphic board.

 

The discussion (read the OP please), is not about the personal preference (that as the term suggest is personal!), but about the different screens quality (or the image quality offered by different devices), and this not a matter of "personal opinions", but facts. ;)

[metalnwood]

 

...and what are you failing to understand is that I was replying to an exact question: "is a TV capable of providing the same quality of a good PC monitor?" .. and the reply cannot be different than: "no, it doesn't". Using a TV screen is (like you said), accepting a compromise: you do it because you can't (or won't) spend money on a bigger monitor configuration. Using one (or multiple) 1600p monitors requires much more money than running a single 1080p TV with a average graphic board.

 

The discussion (read the OP please), is not about the personal preference (that as the term suggest is personal!), but about the different screens quality (or the image quality offered by different devices), and this not a matter of "personal opinions", but facts. ;)

 

You are correct, he did ask a specific question and in that respect your answer is correct.

 

At the same time it is also subjective because a lot of people will say the image is better because of the larger size. He did not ask will the resolution be less, will the dot pitch be more, will the blacks be worse, will the colours be off, will the screen be blurry.

 

You took his question one way and us with tv's took it in a more holistic approach which I believe is what people want to know.

[metalnwood]

I would like to caution folks to consider seriously the issue of eyestrain and ergnomic issues, when utilizing large screen tv's for gaming/flight sim use. Please be aware of these issues.

 

Speaking from experiance here, as I purchased a 40" Sony LED screen, to use as my main display for DCS. I admit the experiance was quite immersive, however I started to get really bad migrains and neck pain, etc. I eventually traced this back to the bad ergonomic situation I created with the large display.

 

I now have a 3 X 24" eyefinity configuration and my migrains are gone.

 

Perhaps, I'm just more sensitive to the eye-strain & neck issues than other folks, but ergonomics should not be sacrificed for immersion. You could pay dearly for it, in the long run.

 

Regards,

Mack

 

Yes, its different than a smaller screen and you do need to change things around a bit. I had to change my track ir a lot as i was getting some strain at first. Once I dialled things in specifically for the larger area I was using I never had a problem again.

 

I dont think a large screen is a good idea for keyboard mouse games, that will be a recipe for neck problems.

[Ali Fish]

imo its not worth it untill 4K resolution becomes standard. then avg PPI figures for TV,s will be around the 100 mark. which will be twice as good as todays standard.

[Mazzic]

I think distance from screen is not only interesting in regards of FOV. You

always will have a feeling for the distance your display is away from you.

 

IMO the best results in immersion i obtained if the display is roughly at the

same distance as your ingame front panel or HUD would be. I upgraded my

Sim-Setup from 24" to 27" to 30", but i am thinking now i should have

better spent my money on a 40" - 46" POS panel like Samsung 460MX-3.

 

A larger panel will give you just the right FOV at the right distance.

 

I have to admit that this is only valid for in cockpit simulations. For strategy

games and FPS i prefer a classic desktop arrangement with a high resolution

PC-Monitor. Versus Fighters and Action Adventures i play in the living room

on the TV, sitting comfortably on the couch as long as my wife doesn't get

pissed of ;-)

 

my 2ct

 

Mazzic

[Suchacz]

I saw DCS running on 3x27" in portrait mode (3240x1920). It was unbelievable. Far better than one HD big screen TV due to its bigger resolution.

[Thick8]

I have 3 39" Coby TVs that I purchased from Amazon for $300 each. The view is lifesize. No really, the MIP is 37" across. The side screens come off the main screen at a 45 degree angle. I use Facetrack with very low movement curves mainly to see the cockpit controls. I'd like to buy a forth one to put above the center screen but that might be overkill :D

Edited June 7, 2013 by Thick8
Spelling and grammar

[cichlidfan]

After all this time with 27" @ 2560x1440, I don't know that I would like dropping the resolution back and going bigger. A 40"+ screen would be great but...

 

One of these days I'll hook the PC to the 47" LG and see how it looks.

[npole]

I'd like to buy a forth one to put above the center screen but that might be overkill :D

 

It may works great, but if you do you'll leave on the ground a good bunch of FPS (and the HDR), because you'll be forced to disable the native full-screen (and opting for SoftTH is not the same, unfortunately).