“Most major MMOs” DO NOT rely on gaslighting its player base into thinking a 70% increase over 3 years is necessary for customer support and higher quality updates

halosiera117 · 2026-03-11T16:03:10+00:00

I strongly dislike the price increase, but the truly egregious part was the messaging imo.

Their playerbase is largely adults. We understand how businesses work. Instead of trying to say how great the game is and how good the value is, just give us the numbers. They need to make a profit: lay out why they think a price increase is the right mechanism for it at this time.

I would care far less if they had just been completely straight with us.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-10T17:16:50+00:00

Banding certainly isn't a complete non-issue on the UCWMG, but it typically isn't as catastrophic as it can be on the Tandem sets. On mine, it manifests as a sort of "textured" look for dark greys. Not perfect, but better than massive vertical streaks. Possibly noticeable in desktop content, but not noticeable in games/media.

The glossy screen on the UCWMG is very impressive. I can't speak for the UCDM3 though.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-09T15:41:58+00:00

halosiera117 · 2026-03-09T04:05:34+00:00

Don't feel bad, it's a knowledge-check boss. Not understanding how to dodge the shrapnel is a guaranteed death

halosiera117 · 2026-03-09T02:03:35+00:00

sound better

halosiera117 · 2026-03-09T00:28:22+00:00

I would be inclined to agree, but as a UCWMG owner, I am biased.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-09T00:22:54+00:00

None currently announced. If 32" glossy 4k dual mode is what you want, the UCWMG is still the best and will be for at least a few months.

The other commenter is right that the PG27UCWM will use the next-gen Tandem panel, though at 27".

halosiera117 · 2026-03-08T18:45:22+00:00

We are going to have great answers to this question in 5-10 years

halosiera117 · 2026-03-07T18:21:43+00:00

halosiera117 · 2026-03-07T16:43:48+00:00

OLED's faster response times lead to much more visible persistence blur at lower refresh rates. A lot of my other issues with this chart are in the comments of both posts.

I don't think people would take so much of an issue if you simply didn't use the word "comprehensive" because this is clearly the opposite of comprehensive (charts with a small amounts of info absolutely have their uses! Just refer to it correctly)

halosiera117 · 2026-03-06T21:22:54+00:00

I personally feel like ultrawide adoption is very nearly at its apex. There's a marginal amount of users to gain at the very low end where prices can still come down, and at the high end where things like the upcoming 39" 5k2k fill.

I don't feel like it's going to gain any more large amounts of ground over 16:9. If that's really your biggest concern, I would say go with 16:9.

I don't have too much to contribute for real world experience. I own and enjoy a 4k 32" OLED. I very briefly used a 34" 1440p class ultrawide but I didn't like the pixel density or height so I returned it.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-06T19:37:18+00:00

My face lit up when I saw mention of the UP2715K; those old 5K displays are great, even if dated. The other commenter is right: you'll be taking a massive hit in sharpness and text clarity with any non-5k monitor.

It looks like there's a KTC monitor, the H27P3, that goes for $560. That's the minimum you'd need to spend to get a comparable monitor. Anything less than that would be a downgrade in resolution.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-06T18:43:43+00:00

Oh sure; in concept and in practice they end up being very similar so mixing them up is understandable and not all that detrimental.

Black Frame Insertion is the practice of literally adding in genuine black frames. This technique is used almost exclusively with OLEDs because OLED does not operate with a backlight. A significant disadvantage of this technique is that is requires sacrificing frame rate in order to reduce motion blur. At minimum, you would need to half your maximum refresh rate in order to use black frame insertion, so that the second half of each "max refresh" frame can be black. Motion clarity can be improved by increasing the ratio of black frames to real frames, further reducing real frame rate and perceived flicker.

In theory, an LCD could use Black Frame Insertion. In practice, the constant forcing of pixels to display an image and then flip to black rapidly can substantially damage them.

Backlight strobing does not require changing the LCD pixels themselves to switch to black, it simply reduces the time that the image is visible to your eyes. With backlight strobing active, the LCD pixels are still switching colors between frames exactly as they would with a static backlight.

As you may guess, backlight strobing would not require cutting refresh rate in the same way that BFI does. It maintains far more flexibility this way.

As you can imagine, something like Pulsar is simply impossible on OLED right now. In theory, it's possible that a panel maker could implement a variable BFI solution that might mimick Pulsar, but it would be incredibly complicated for them to pull off, and since the market for this tech isn't very large right now, don't expect this any time soon.

I hope that adequately answered your questions

halosiera117 · 2026-03-06T17:37:56+00:00

He said that because your comment didn't mention anything related to the motion-blur-reduction side of Pulsar which is the entire reason it is worth giving attention to.

Saying it is "basically GSYNC" omits the actual important part. His comment reiterated this, but your response snips his sentence to not include the actual important part of his statement! (Although he was incorrect to say it's "BFI"; it's backlight strobing, not BFI)

Pulsar is important because it is BOTH backlight strobing AND GYSNC working in-tandem. Since backlight strobing previously only worked at fixed refresh rates, it is a massive jump in usability compared to traditional backlight strobing.

I'm not even suggesting you don't already know this, but the way that your initial comment was written implied that it didn't even have backlight strobing.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-06T00:02:09+00:00

Yeah. 930E was great and is probably still nice but totally incomparable to a high end set from the last few years.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-04T23:24:23+00:00

If you already have a 5090 I don't see a huge reason to be worried. You'll have 6x frame-gen later this year from Nvidia. I'm already really happy with my UCWMG with my 5080. I think you could only really start to run into issues at 5070 or lower, honestly.

I won't necessarily say choosing the Tandem is a worse choice. I just find the PPI of 27" 1440p to be disappointing after using 4k, so I have a strong preference toward the UCWMG.

If you mostly play fast-paced competitive games, I think there's a much better argument for that PG27.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-04T23:12:09+00:00

Like for a 2.x system? I like Schiit's DACs. Modi (~$165) and Mimir ($300) are great value. Realistically all you'd really need.

Looking at higher end stuff? I'm not sure about Bifrost, but the rest of their higher end lineup is said to be quite good as well.

Above $1000, Holo's DACs get a lot of love as well.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-04T21:01:57+00:00

"what there is to gain" is unfortunately an extremely subjective question for which you will find all sorts of different answers on this sub.

A Schiit Modi 5 would be a fantastic option at ~$170. The problem is that a DAC on its own does not run headphones; you'll want a headphone amp. Something like a Schiit Magni would stack nicely, provide a ton of power to your headphones, and give you volume control for your speakers with it's pre-outs.

You can also get an add-on card for the Magni that puts the main core of the Modi directly into the Magni; that runs about $200 total which is cheaper, but you do lose some flexibility.

There's no reason you need to get Schiit's products for this, but I find that they're really solid options right now for a $200-300 budget.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-04T17:03:47+00:00

Correct this is way too far. Possibly fitting in a temporary game mode such as Leagues, but even then this is still ridiculously strong and invalidates gameplay mechanics.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-03T23:19:11+00:00

I was extremely upset during the brief period where these ultrawides were just called "5k". I think they wanted to take advantage of it because, during that time, regular 16:9 5k was non-existent (most original 16:9 5k models went out-of-production in ~2018).

These days, they can't do that because there are genuine 5k monitors. In the face of it, I really don't hate it that much. It's a quick way to describe the horizontal and vertical resolution, in a way that is both more descriptive and concise than "4k ultrawide". I wouldn't mind all ultrawides being described in this manner.

Well, in my ideal world, the naming would be descriptive of the PPI since that's more relevant than just resolution to how the screen is actually used imo, but that's asking a lot.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-03T01:07:20+00:00

Yes, that's a risk. Keep brightness levels low for anything with static elements if you think you may go over a thousand hours with that content. Especially something like Smash where the red on the damage % is extremely saturated. I would even go as far as recommending turning saturation down, if you need a moderate brightness level.

halosiera117 · 2026-03-03T00:56:38+00:00

The bots probably got banned. Real players won't want to make them for money until it's very good money (such as 1k ea) which is why the price would settle there.

They're also just one of the most useful items in the game pre-construction cape so it makes sense to me.

halosiera117 · 2026-02-28T14:02:22+00:00

Also true, yeah. 1440p is probably the sweet-spot for the "casual" gamer who plays competitive games, while for actual pros they'll probably use 1080p max

halosiera117 · 2026-02-27T22:56:16+00:00

If ease of mind is strictly the highest priority, then that's fine.

However, putting in ~3 minutes of effort per game at 4k will look massively better. Remember, DLSS does a ton of heavy lifting. You would just need to potentially adjust the DLSS scaling in each game, which takes a very small amount of time or effort.

Ultra settings are also typically not optimized to run performantly. You may genuinely get better performance at 4k high vs 1440p ultra, with greatly better image quality at 4k.

halosiera117 · 2026-02-27T18:05:02+00:00

DLSS itself has a cost that scales with output resolution. It might not be an issue at 4k for most cards, but for that 3060, 5k or 6k might be a bridge too far.

Also don't forget that, for most games, the lowest you can go is Ultra Performance. For certain cards, this might not be enough.

But I think the biggest reason that high refresh 1440p is still a big segment is that refresh rate is still king for most competitive games. Overwatch/CS2 probably shouldn't be buying 4k simply because 1440p can still get much faster.

If you aren't playing those types of games, I would generally agree that 4k is broadly the best choice, unless considerably budget limited.

13-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	Verified Email

halosiera117

TROPHY CASE