安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
此主題已被鎖定 
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
Not really.
The science behind our eyes, how they work, and viewing distance, settings and all the other little bits are factors that result in things not quite how you'd expect.
Hell, lots of people still swear by having a massive screen as their TV but sit so far away that the difference between 720 and 1080 must be negligible.
a 50" TV from 2m to 3m, looks identical to a 5" screen from 30cm ish away
Yup, you can't beat physics (even though Kickstarters claiming they've discovered perpetual motion always try).
(con, for "confidence trick", did you know?)
Oh aye.
Some of them even believe themselves too, which I always find hilarious.
I'll give you a clue: The native resolution isn't 4K.
Elitists always get hung up on numbers that they can laud over others, and they often don't understand the first thing about what those numbers mean.
I trained to be an audio engineer back in the early 90s in Manchester (England). One guy on the course would still bang on about amplifier's power in watts being the be-all and end-all. Even after lecturers explained why not only was it not, but the quoted figures differed from PMP to RMS, rendering them useless anyway.
Some people like having their crutches I guess. Says something about their insecurities I guess.
maybe it's a disease, don't want to catch it whatever it is.
It's just like the fast food hamburgers. they keep getting smaller and smaller . but the price gets bigger and bigger
The highest resolution of any VR headset I have seen with a half decent price tag is 2880 or 1440 per eye which is not even 2K per eye, but touted as 4K.
Not sure about thePimax 8K, it's said to be 4K per eye (3840 x 2160), but it also has a 200 degree FOV. The problem is, it's not about who can make the highest resolution HMD, it's about who can make one that games will support and is still afffordable.
Yup, it's much like the old dumb marketing tricks audio manufacturers would use in the 80s - banging on about how many Watts output their system had.
Toshiba were a big one for this - they used to have a line of boomboxes that were good for the time, but would boast their power on the marketing blurb - one being a 100W box (which I owned for a while). But it was PMP not RMS. Peak Music POwer being a completely useless descriptor as it means "it will reach this amount on output briefly with everything distorted and pushed to the max", whereas RMS (root mean square) was actually nearer the truth as it's more of a usable average.
Adding 2K+2K to make 4K is all kinds of dumb.
It's actually irrelevant, as Watts isn't the be-all and end-all people think.
I've got a high-end stereo that blows my PA stuff out of the water and it's FAR less in wattage. Distortion and so on is what makes it such a beast - clarity and sound pressure can make all the difference.
But anyway, we're not talking stereos but portable boomboxes. 100W back then was a beast (assuming it was 100W, which it wasn't as I said). It was a CD player with two tape decks about 5 speakers and it was indeed loud. Ate it's way through 8 D cell batteries in an hour and a half.
So yeah, you can't compare those two things, and wattage ain't everything anyway.