Why isn't plasma widely recommended for gaming?

[firstrig]

I've seen people build triple-monitor setups using LCD screens to have a more immersive, wide-screen experience. It costs in the range of ~900~1200$ (assuming each monitor costs approx 350$). On top of that, your final experience will be detracted by the ugly bezels. Given that you can have a plasma TV of comparable size for a significantly lower cost and have a completely bezel-free experience, it also has fantastic response time and refresh rates. Why isn't plasma preferred by a lot of people?

 

[LordConrad]

Plasma screens get burn-in very easily from static images. Plasma should be fine as long as: 1) You don't pause your games 2) you have a very aggressive screen saver. Also, because plasmas have extremely high refresh rates, you shouldn't get any screen tearing when gaming.

 

[firstrig]

Plasma screens get burn-in very easily from static images. Plasma should be fine as long as: 1) You don't pause your games 2) you have a very aggressive screen saver. Also, because plasmas have extremely high refresh rates, you shouldn't get any screen tearing when gaming.

That's exactly what I was thinking. So why aren't they preferred by most gamers? (I don't think games and static images go hand in hand since there is a lot of constant movement). Why would anyone pay extra to get a multi-LCD setup and get a sub-par experience (bezels) instead of opting for a plasma? Is there really an objective and technical reason which I am missing, or is this just because people are sub-consciously being misled by marketers and Youtube-gurus to believe that LCD setups are the coolest?

 

[4Ryan6]

I've seen people build triple-monitor setups using LCD screens to have a more immersive, wide-screen experience. It costs in the range of ~900~1200$ (assuming each monitor costs approx 350$). On top of that, your final experience will be detracted by the ugly bezels. Given that you can have a plasma TV of comparable size for a significantly lower cost and have a completely bezel-free experience, it also has fantastic response time and refresh rates. Why isn't plasma preferred by a lot of people?

I was considering a 3 monitor setup myself, pricing out the monitors and a good stand to support them and I was after a high quality monitor setup so the setup was not going to be cheap.

Last Christmas rolled around and the wife and I decide to give each other a new TV for Christmas, a Samsung 60" Plasma, one freaking nice HDTV!

That left the old 46" 1080P LCD HDTV with a 1920 x 1080 screen resolution, which was originally destined to go to the bedroom, but just for the heck of it I took it into my office to see if I could game on it?

OH CRAP! It never left my office!

Gaming on this thing is awesome, it is like walking into the screen instead of looking at it, and since it is a 1080P LCD I know a Plasma would be even better!

I would say right off that the only reason these are not being recommended as their prices back when they were new were really high, but today you can snag a 1080P HDTV around the 46" range cheaper than a quality 3 monitor setup and descent stand, without the multi monitor resolution hassles.

I've gamed with it in 1080P even using Crysis 3 a great first person shooter with no blurring and I'm running a 1080P LCD, so I know a Plasma would be awesome!

Anyone even considering using around a 46" 1080P Plasma for gaming I say go for it!

You won't be disappointed!