Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
But really, it's mostly just personal preference. I'd go with the 21:9 because I like the extra work space, and some upcoming 21:9 monitors will have 144Hz refresh rates.
Or even worst. They participate in the thread but do not answer the question. There is good side to this though. They do bump up the thread, hence increasing the chance that someone might come along might know what they are talking about.
Those monitors are not for gaming. Those for programs like 3ds Max, Photoshop, After Effects where you need more space for panels.
All the game you've mentioned are competitive. I don't play PvP games. I'm enjoy game like Skyrim and GTA series, non PvP competitive games. 21:9 does look much more attractive than 16:9.
This article and many others has convinced me that 21:9 is much better tha 16:9: http://www.pcgamer.com/lgs-34-inch-219-monitor-has-convinced-me-that-ultrawide-is-better-than-4k/