Yeah it looks super-cheap and crappy, but that's a pretty well-produced assembly video. Props to them for that!

Put it next to your kiddie urinal.

Sanitary-Ware-Ceramic-Children-Urinal-for-Kindergarten (resized).png

EDIT: Nevermind. Seems like the whole video was spliced here for some dumb reason....

Check out the major glitch in Street Fighter II at the 44 second mark in the E3 video. Looks like crap emulation. No thanks:

I see it now. The guy playing jumps back on screen, too. I was too focused on the screen. Why would they edit a video of gameplay WHILE HE'S PLAYING?!

But are they 1299 discrete games, or are many of them 20 or more each of each SNK fighting game.

$99 clearance next spring, like last time.

Those still work today. I doubt these things will be working in 10 years, let alone 35.

These are CHEAP electronics. They're not built to last. Surface mount components + ultra cheap manufacture specs=won't last as long as a 2600.

I GET that. I'm just saying that the 2600 was built better than these new toys, which is why it often still works 35 years later. The spec on this new disposable stuff is much cheaper. "Just barely good enough" is good enough these days.

"Threatened" is a little hysterical. I made a point. A valid point. You found that threatening somehow?

False. I've made exactly 10. 4 of them have been responding to you - today. And there were some compliments in there like, "that's a pretty well-produced assembly video. Props to them for that!" that you chose to ignore for your weird narrative.

6 posts over a one month period is not exactly spamming a thread.

LCD monitor though? Kinda meh for a vector game. I mean Vectrex did home vector for $199...

$200 more than the Arcade 1UPs they released last year and they added a yoke and that's it? Seems like not such a great value proposition.

(And $199 would be like $450 in 2019 dollars, but the Vectrex screen was only 9", to be fair.)

OLED is getting much cheaper, but not THAT cheap. The 77" OLEDs were 20 grand just a few years ago and can now be had for about $4500. Probably $3000 by Christmas if you don't need the new model year.

We game on ours all the time, and no issues with burn in. When the TV is "off" the TV is refreshing the cells transparently which is something plasma never did. You may get some persistence on a white screen if you've been gaming with a HUD for 8 hours, but it's gone the next time you watch it. You'd have to REALLY abuse the set to get burn (24/7 same set of images on vivid would do it since there's no down time to refresh the cells). OLED is the ONLY way to watch movies. Amazing HDR, smooth motion, and unbelievable black levels. We went from Panasonic VT level plasmas (top of the line for 65" they didn't make the Z ones that large) to OLED and OLED is hands-down better. We'd never have an LCD. The loss of picture quality compared to OLED, even on the top end models, is too much to swallow. There's a reason manufacturers are licensing OLED now for top-end sets - it's the best picture. Never lost a head-to-head with any LCD.

The last year they didn't make 65" ZTs did they? I know I was looking for one and had to "settle" for a VT which I bought to last 5 years until OLED tech became affordable (it was only small screens in expensive electronics at that point). I think I only had to wait 3 years to buy a 65" OLED. I HIGHLY recommend making the jump from plasma to OLED, especially if you have Netflix and Amazon Prime video. OLED + HDR is AMAZING quality TV time.

I don't think any plasmas are HDR, it came years after their time. It's one of the biggest differences with OLED. Lost in Space looks FANTASTIC in HDR, especially some of the planetscapes. 4k makes less difference than HDR. But yeah, HD Netflix with HDR and Amazon Prime video with HDR are really something special. Best place to get high-bitrate HDR shows.

Watch enough HDR shows and that Panny will start looking awfully shabby. We still have a 37" (bedroom armoire, biggest that would fit) and two 50" Pannys, but everyone prefers the 65" OLED for most watching. These Pannys are not long for the world here...

It's more important how far they are from the TV station's broadcast ANTENNA.

Unless they're in a valley, a powered roof antenna should let them pick up the signal. We're IN a valley and can pick up the antennas around that are at least 60 miles away. FCC has a map of broadcast towers you can check.

I got a cheap antenna for the roof that I really had my doubts about, powered it to boost the signal and we get all the channels in HD. Fox is kind of iffy, but it comes in unless it's storming. The best thing about it is it's not compressed to oblivion. That's what pushed us off Charter. I couldn't deal with their constantly increasing compression. The pictures looked TERRIBLE for $100+ a month. We're doing antenna+streaming now and it's much better (though consolidation of all the dumb streaming apps HAS to happen at some point).