How much does the lag on an LCD TV really effect gameplay?

[BadMouth]

I've been considering creating a place in my house to play old console games through emulation.
I have a couple old CRT TVs with s-vid and component inputs, but I'd also like to play modern steam games on a high def widescreen.
I also have a 120hz 47" hdtv that isn't being used at the moment.  I think it is a Vizio.
Is the lag actually enough to make the gameplay frustrating on the old games?
or is it something only the most skilled shmuppers would notice?

EDIT: I have an LCD monitor in my cab and am fine with it, but I'm assuming the TV has much more lag.

[Homietheclown]

I'd like to bump this. I'm curious of the answer too.

[elvis]

Depends on the make/model, and the type of game your playing.

http://www.displaylag.com/what-is-input-lag-the-breakdown/
http://www.displaylag.com/testing-method/
http://www.displaylag.com/testing-method/

If you're playing games that require fast response times (which many arcade games do), I'd be looking for something in either the "Excellent" or "Great" categories.

[nitrogen_widget]

Either my synapses are damaged or lag on LCD monitors and TVs isn't all that big an issue.
From my experience if a TV has game mode or something labeled similar use it. It will turn off any filtering or post processing that causes a slight delay.
If it doesn't have a game mode it just works.

I honestly cannot remember experienceing lag while gaming on an lcd.
Heck my 22 inch PC monitor is really a TV.
No lag when I move the mouse or game at all.

Also the above article cracks me up.
Its like their telling people even though they don't notice lag, they got it and need to go out and buy an expensive display.
But, even then they will still have lag they don't notice but it will be less lag that you still don't see so you should just take their word for it.

[bulbousbeard]

It's highly overrated, but it does make a minor difference. If you've got something like an ROG Swift monitor, it's already at the point where even a professional competitive gamer wouldn't be able to tell the difference. G-Sync is like playing with v-sync off. There's basically no lag.

If you've got a huge TV that does a lot of processing, it can get ---smurfy---/noticeable.

Basically, 99% of humans don't even have the perceptive capability to tell the difference between 1-2 frames of input lag and no lag.

3+ frames of input lag start to get noticeable but still playable. 5+ frames is crap for all but the most casual of players.

[MonMotha]

LCDs themselves exhibit surprisingly little latency, especially TN designs (which do have other problems).  VA designs are generally the worst as they require non-causal overdrive waveforms to get decent response time (which is a separate matter), and of course the universe is causal, so things generally just get delayed to make it work.  Raw parallel interface TN panels generally have sub-frame latency (usually they latch at the end of a line, it seems), and raw IPS panels are pretty close.

What kills is the scaler and other processing pipeline latency.  Devices marketed as "televisions" tend to be much worse in this regard than devices marketed as "monitors" since they're generally trying to do various tricks to improve the perceived image quality of marginal (overcompressed, repeatedly scaled, etc.) photorealistic scenes while monitors are intended to simply display exactly what they're fed since it's usually uncompressed line art (PC graphics).

Some TVs do have a, usually poorly documented, way to turn off a lot of the processing.  It's often called "game mode", or, on Samsungs especially, telling it that an input is a "PC" will do it.  They're still usually higher latency than a real "monitor".

As to whether you'll notice, it depends heavily on what you're doing with it and how bad the latency is.  1 60Hz progressive frame is almost unnoticeable except in controlled test situations.  2 frames, or a single 30Hz frame, is sometimes noticeable in high-motion, timing-sensitive applications like technical fighters (e.g. Street Fighter), Japanese music/rhythm games (American titles are usually quite forgiving), "bullet hell" shmups, etc.  3+ starts to become noticeable with regular interaction making e.g. interactive aiming in slow-pace shmups hard.  4+ pretty much rules out anything but casual gameplay.

Most humans absolutely have the ability to perceive 1-2 frames of lag in controlled situations, but most won't notice it, even if trying to, in normal applications.

FWIW, I've done tests since I play a lot of Japanese rhythm/music games.  beatmaniaIIDX, in particular, is highly sensitive to this particular metric.  I can play without meaningful adjustment (i.e. same as a lag-free CRT) with 1 60Hz frame of lag, but 2+ requires conscious adjustment, and 4+ starts to become essentially unplayable without using the hidden mod.  Players of that game who use sudden+ mode (aka "towel mode") often have to adjust their setpoint even for fractional-frame lag.

[rCadeGaming]

Basically, 99% of humans don't even have the perceptive capability to tell the difference between 1-2 frames of input lag and no lag.

3+ frames of input lag start to get noticeable but still playable. 5+ frames is crap for all but the most casual of players.

In terms of what you can "feel," I completely agree with this assessment.

In terms of the effect on your performance in-game, I think that last 1-2 frames you can't really feel can still make a difference, depending on the type of game.  If you're playing a fighter or shmup, adding an extra frame on top your own reaction time can be the difference between blocking that hit or just missing that projectile.

[Malenko]

In terms of 1 to 2 frames, I think for the most part its horseshit. I feel the only time something like that would even be a factor is competitive play. For putting something in your house to enjoy arcade games and the like on, its fine. Frame latency is just a super popular excuse on why you lost, much like a ricer blames having the air conditioning on in his car when he loses a race.

The only scale you should concern yourself with is the "enjoyment scale". Is the LCDs display causing you to not enjoy the game? get a better one. If its not, you're golden. 

[Loafmeister]

I would add that if it's against a human opponent, I can appreciate the need for less lag as possible.  However if 99% of your gaming is against the CPU, the brain is an incredible and powerful machine, which in this case, provides you with an ability to compensate for lag incredibly well and very much automatically.  This is evident with anyone who plays virtual pinball, there's lag there, but it becomes second nature after a while (as long as you don't go back and forth between "real" pinball and "virtual" pinball anyway )

[adder]

i didnt really care for lag until i saw a thread ages ago on the mameworld forums by a guy called darayu talking about a test you can do with vs. super mario brothers in mame. the test is, try running along and jumping off the edge of one of the green pipes sticking out/up from the ground. if you play that game with triple buffer on, by the time you press the jump button to jump off the very edge of the pipe, you have fallen off the pipe before you jump. but if you get your lag down (hint: a good start is, dont use triple buffer), then suddenly you can play the game with more accuracy (ie. actually jump off the edge's of platforms instead of having to press the button early). one or two frames of lag does make a difference to me, so much so that i wouldnt bother playing the games if i had an unwanted frame or two of lag going on. that's just me though, its not something which bothers everyone. everyone has a different opinion, and some people are less fussy than others.    actually i suppose my post addresses input lag more than video lag (LCD vs. CRT atc), but anyway there you go.

[rCadeGaming]

Why would it only matter in competitive play?  It helps with ANYTHING that's challenging and requires reflexes.

Say I'm playing a shmup and level 6 is really hard.  Fast reflexes are needed to avoid fast moving or surprising hazards.  There will be tons of times when I barely miss death by a single pixel.  Adding any extra delay on top of my own reaction time could easily make or break it; being stuck on level 6 instead of getting to level 7.  Or say I'm playing a tough boss in a fighting game.  He moves really quickly and I need to react very quickly to block or evade certain things.  Same deal.  I keep using these genres because they're favorites of mine, but it will be the same with anything challenging that requires reflexes.

Playing with the minimum possible lag ELIMINATES any excuses.  It feels better to know success or failure is totally within your control.  Otherwise there is frustrating grey area, not knowing you would have made it if your setup was better.

You cannot compensate for lag.  Unless you know what's coming well ahead of time, it's physically impossible.  There are certain things in games that happen by surprise.  An event happens in-game, and a player response must be detected within a certain amount of time to avoid harm to your character/ship/whatever.  The difficulty in responding is proportional to the amount of time available to do so.  Some of this time is used up between the event happening in-game and the visual cue actually being physically visible on-screen.  Another portion is used up by between the button being pressed and the game actually registering the input.  The remainder is the time that's actually available for the player to respond.  The more is used up by the display and the input handling, the less is available to the player, and difficulty increases.  There is no compensating for this.

You're saying you couldn't use any improvement in your gameplay performance, however large or small?  The only way this can actually be true is if you're not playing anything that's challenging for you.  Not that that's inherently bad, just a difference in philosophy.

Minimal lag setups are very feasible these days, and I don't see why not to take advantage.  It seems that some people are trying convince themselves that it doesn't matter because if they are missing out on something, they think it better to falsely believe it doesn't exist.

[butanebob]

In terms of 1 to 2 frames, I think for the most part its horseshit.

You've never played Dodonpachi apparently.  1 or 2 frames is literally a matter of life and death.

[Malenko]

You've never played Dodonpachi apparently.  1 or 2 frames is literally a matter of life and death.

Nope never heard of it.