Insane Metal
Member
I believe the higher the resolution, the better. When 1080p content started to appear, a lot of people said it was a waste, that HD was good enough. And we keep seeing this over and over again.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
4K gaming: “It’s useless,” says Playdead founder.
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
- Opinion Game Dev Indie
ROMhack
Member
Add better AI to this, too. Feels like such a long time since developers truly cared about that.
Last edited:
Slings and Arrows
Banned
I don't see 4k as a waste, it's more that devs are jumping too soon.
Let's see some high quality physics and ai at a high framerate before we up the pixels.
Myths
Member
Right now, sure. It’s *mostly* useless to those who have mid-range (or weaker) cards. You can still get a decent experience @ 30 FPS.
I mean I’m not complaining, it’s insane how fast we’re moving. It seems like just yesterday 720p was touted. Now we’re talking two to four times that.
I mean I’m not complaining, it’s insane how fast we’re moving. It seems like just yesterday 720p was touted. Now we’re talking two to four times that.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
The difference being that going from a 250GB HDD to a 1TB HDD doesn't require an exponential increase in computational power to drive such capacities. What's after 4K? 8K? Yeah, good luck drawing 1.9 billion pixels per second (for 8K at 60FPS). Transistors can't get much smaller, they're already smaller than some atoms. Moore's Law is failing us, the computational gains are drying up. You have to draw the line somewhere.
Kenpachii
Member
What is crippled here exactly?
Not a god damn thing.
How has resolution negatively impacted consoles? It hasn't, the performance profiles of the 4K machines are still better than the base systems and they're pushing resolutions multitudes higher.
Yeah well help me find that $1,000+ Sony FW900 and then we'll talk.
Dude quantum break barely runs at stable 30 fps, same for red dead redemption at ultra settings. It's janky as fuck gameplay vs perfect smooth 1080p gameplay and barely 60 fps at 1440p.
U sacrifce a shit ton of performance that can add towards the visual quality. 100+fps 1080p > any other solution. 1440p60fps is a nice trade off if you care about more pixel quality but that's it as it goes for todays gpu offerings especially in newer games.
People advertising there shitty 4k resolutions only work in games that barely push visuals forwards. Even final fantasy 14 runs here at ~200 fps super smooth on a 1080ti at 1080p, ~100 fps at 1440p, 4k = janky sub 60 fps experience with loads of input lag. And this game is far from pushing visuals forwards.
MS also gets increased a metric ton,, 80-90 fps at ultra settings, with 4 ms, vs 30 ms 35 fps in quantum break. Yea good luck with that.
Call me when u can run 144 fps on 4k at ultra settings. Oh wait nothing there that can remotely boot it. 4k is a waste of time and that's why practically nobody cares for it and with raytracing 4k makes even less sense in the future.
Hell even screen vendors know it on the PC side. And its also the reason people that buy 10k pc's for streaming ( yea real 10k pc's ) sit at all 1080p 144+hz screens or 1440p144hz screens ( which just started to open up as a market but even that is barely a thing as 1440p at 60 fps on ultra settings in games is barely bootable in new games let alone next gen games. Nobody remotely cares for 4k at all.
Consoles also get negatively impacted by it, for the simple fact that if they pushed a lesser gpu in that box and a better cpu, u would actually have gotten 60 fps at 1080p instead of this useless chase towards sub par pixels and settings that barely can run modern games at playable framerates. Hell even that sony dev mentioned this, they needed far more performance to actually make 4k work and are the resources spend well then? nope, its a complete waste.
This is why i mentioned with the xbox one x, they should have cut that gpu towards a 4 tflop one and ram a cheapo ryzen in that box. They would be played all games at higher resolution then xbox one and 60 fps to boot with it.
Sadly they don't because exactly what this guy is mentioning in the article they chasing this dumb as 4k pr slogan that basically resulted in these garbo boxes that do everything half way.
PC gamers know that 4k was a pipe dream already for a while when those boxes got announced, and frankly 4k still is brutal and will stay brutal unless game developers stop pushing visuals forwards. Which isn't the case as new games clearly showcases this.
With raytracing and next gen around the corner, 4k makes even less sense.
But ofcourse sony and microsoft is shouting 8k from the rooftops, because lol logic. And lets add 120 fps with it. I can't wait for that farm of 2080ti's that boots that box. Or as console gamers mention. It's just magic bra.
Last edited:
DynamiteCop!
Banned
All of those shots are from the Xbox One X and no they couldn't just shove a Zen CPU in there given the amount of time they had to work with, costs and testing for compatibility.
The X was never designed to be a gross departure from the base system, its intent was to take the results seen on the base system and essentially scale it 4x and if there was still a surplus of compute it would further steady framerates or be used for additional graphical flair. The X operates within the exact parameters it was designed to, it does what it was intended to do. Take the Xbox One experience to the 4K display and steady it out.
Nothing was lost going from the Xbox One to the Xbox One X, nothing was lost going from the PlayStation 4 to the PlayStation 4 Pro. It was a net gain on all fronts, resolution, performance, sometimes higher settings etc.
EverydayBeast
ChatGPT 0.001
4K gaming is useless in the fact that gaming's graphics only highlights a portion of the game, a game with great 4k graphics but bad story, and gameplay could bore you to tears.
Kenpachii
Member
So you don't read, aint going to explain it again.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
I read it just fine, the whole assertion here is that chasing 4K produces some kind of net loss, it doesn't whatsoever.
Gamernyc78
Banned
4k being "useless" is dumb to say imo. Games and the electronic medium in general live off of pushing new tech and advancements. What he could have said is 4k shouldn't take precedence when creating a game, there are other priorities, now tht I agree with.
Solomeena
Banned
No such line is ever going to be drawn when it comes to technology, they will find a way.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
Nope. 3-5nm is about the limit and quantum computing isn't useful for this kind of task. Unless there is some major technological advancement, or we go back to making computers bigger and bigger we just don't have far to go I'm afraid.
I mainly use 4k resolution in games and have to agree that it's not usually worth the performance cost. 2560x1440 is probably better compromise and there are so many other ways to improve the experience, tuning texture/object LODs so that pop-in is reduced or having better AO or AA solution.
Kagey K
Banned
For games like Limbo and Inside I can agree. Something about the fuzzy background gave it an 80s vibe that I really liked, but for other games HDR and 4K can really turn the game up a notch.
I suppose it’s only useful if you are aiming for that look. Kind of like the film grain effect on Wet and Mass Effect.
I suppose it’s only useful if you are aiming for that look. Kind of like the film grain effect on Wet and Mass Effect.
FeldMonster
Member
People still ride horses and bicycles, but they aren't the default mode of transportation today.
People still hunt, but most people go to a grocery store.
"People" still believe that vaccinations are bad, but modern medicine strongly advises their use (and the majority follow that recommendation).
Just because some people do things the "old way" we should never consider newer alternatives? Note: that I am not saying it is mandatory, just as I wouldn't outlaw horses, and hunting (though anti vaxxers need to be publicly shamed).
FeldMonster
Member
I can't believe we are still having this lousy conversation on the cusp of 2020!
There are a lot of claims being made in this thread that I think are incorrect.
There are a lot of claims being made in this thread that I think are incorrect.
- GPU and CPU are NOT interchangeable. You can't simply drop 4K and add 60 fps to a 4K, 1080 P game and expect it to work
- 1440 P is a non-starter, as it looks aweful and is unsupported on 4K TVs, as it is a non-integer divisor of 4K
- 4K is not simply "emerging" now, we have had 4K ready consoles for 2-3 years and 4K TVs for 5-6 years
- 8K is far off, 4K is a natural "landing zone" for the foreseeable future, next gen consoles will easily hit 4K if the upgraded consoles can do so now, some games now even natively.
- Of course this guy thinks 4K is wasted, his games are indie games with low quality graphics.
- Of course the console manufacturers are pushing technology, they have different goals than an indie game dev. Part of their goals are (wait for it, this is really groundbreaking news) to sell...hardware. [Gasp! The horror!]
- Clearly this argument is split on peecee vs. Console. PC users sit less than 20" from their monitor, so framerate is more critical, and the difference between 4K and 1080P is largely irrelevant because of the tiny screen size. Console users have large TVs, where resolution absolutely matters, and the depth of field is very different, the edges of peripheral vision are outside the TV borders.
- Can you even purchase a non-4K TV bigger than 30" today?
OmaeWaMouShindiggity
Member
"1080P gaming, its useless" says developer who doesn't want to put effort into developing 1080P games. 4K will be the industry standard as time passes and the next developer will be saying "8k gaming, its useless"
OmaeWaMouShindiggity
Member
But honestly, none of this matters cuz one day we are going to be full dive sword art online in the game type technology. Just keep the pain meter below 3 thx.
Shifty
Member
xPikYx
Member
Nothing to Lol about. As per example
GymWolf
Member
1440p doesn't looks awful cmon...
PooBone
Member
I happily play on an Xbox One X so the Nintendo Switch must be useless, according to this logic.
4k is useless, right now. But it wont be once the next gen of consoles comes out with the hardware to support it better.
I dont put much stock in what he says though because he sounds like a whiner trying to get some attention is all. He completely ignores the fact you dont have to make 4k games. Undertale isnt 4k, blasphemous isnt 4k, god of war isnt 4k, tons of games arent 4k but sold well and are good games. But some games are cool with it. Thats why we have so many games because there is something for everyone.
Did we really need HD games? No because the games would still be the exact same thing, just not look as good but yet we all want them.
And he can select his own path, which they have done, no one stopped them. No tech vendor said make 4k games or Ill kill you. Infact Id dare say he hasnt been approached by tech vendors at all but making it sound like he is.
This guy is pretty much someone Ill just ignore now because this means nothing to no one.
I dont put much stock in what he says though because he sounds like a whiner trying to get some attention is all. He completely ignores the fact you dont have to make 4k games. Undertale isnt 4k, blasphemous isnt 4k, god of war isnt 4k, tons of games arent 4k but sold well and are good games. But some games are cool with it. Thats why we have so many games because there is something for everyone.
Did we really need HD games? No because the games would still be the exact same thing, just not look as good but yet we all want them.
And he can select his own path, which they have done, no one stopped them. No tech vendor said make 4k games or Ill kill you. Infact Id dare say he hasnt been approached by tech vendors at all but making it sound like he is.
This guy is pretty much someone Ill just ignore now because this means nothing to no one.
petran79
Banned
the elderly, making a large percentage of western countries population, cant even use ATMs or credit cards and they are waiting for their pensions to be paid via cash, even storing it at home. a harsh and risky reality for them. As if they'd care for 4k tvs. They'd feel more comfortable with 90s TV sets.
I was more referring to broadcasters not adopting 4k aparently due to the more expensive cost, especially for smaller stations and higher bandwidth used. Many havent even adopted HD yet
DynamiteCop!
Banned
It's not worthless whatsoever.
Forza Horizon 2 1080p
Forza Horizon 3 4K
Both cars cropped (Not zoomed)
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
When you have a dev that makes games look like this, a PS2/Xbox OG era system running at DVD 480p res is good enough.
The only feature set Playdead probably asks Nintendo, Sony, MS and PC card makers is how many shades of black and grey there are.
The only feature set Playdead probably asks Nintendo, Sony, MS and PC card makers is how many shades of black and grey there are.
Last edited:
xPikYx
Member
According to my logic I'm saying the opposite
DarthBuzzer
Member
The hilarious thing is, you hit the mark. There are people who still think 1080p is useless. Not only that, but given the chance they'd play on 720p or less resolution because somehow it's more immersive.
The Bloody-Nine
Member
Yep. What a weird thing to say.
bhunachicken
Member
(repeats same fact about how fine details are lost at distance, and how 1080p and 4K will appear the same when viewed beyond a certain threshold)
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Ugly girls can look pretty too if you're far enough away.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
Does 4K look better? Yes. Does it look good enough for me to accept about 1/3 the framerate? No. (A game that is hitting 120FPS at 1080p will typically drop to about 40FPS at 4K.) If people want this retarded race to the top of the frametime graph then they're welcome to it, but don't expect the rest of us to cheer and clap as developers consistently cripple the playability of their games on console for the sake of "muh 4k".It's not worthless whatsoever.
Forza Horizon 2 1080p
Forza Horizon 3 4K
Both cars cropped (Not zoomed)
alabtrosMyster
Member
4k is great for still photography, for movies a bit (it's crisper) but little to no movies are mastered at 4k.
For games, 1080p or 1440 are pretty neat, because they let you reach much better frame rates with higher settings... Which is always what I pick when given the opportunity to.
On my PC I have a 1440p 21:9 monitor, color calibrated - so 60hz - it's amazing for gaming, but I do miss my 4k monitor a bit when I am in Lightroom.
For games, 1080p or 1440 are pretty neat, because they let you reach much better frame rates with higher settings... Which is always what I pick when given the opportunity to.
On my PC I have a 1440p 21:9 monitor, color calibrated - so 60hz - it's amazing for gaming, but I do miss my 4k monitor a bit when I am in Lightroom.
Last edited:
DynamiteCop!
Banned
The framerate is untouched here, what's the argument now?
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
You're ignoring that the X could quite possibly push past 60FPS if it wasn't running at 4K. It definitely would've been able to if they hadn't intentionally hobbled it with a shit CPU to save a buck. They wouldn't have done that if plebians had made it clear that 30FPS was unacceptable. The higher the framerate the smoother the motion looks, the more responsive it feels and the better it feels to play. These benefits extend well beyond 60FPS.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
It can push 60 FPS but at 1080p and many sacrifices need to be made graphically, Horizon 4 shows this.
What's the point here though? Is a 4K take on our existing console generation in any way diminishing that current generation experience? No, it's enhancing it.
MeatSafeMurderer
Member
I have something I'd like to introduce you to. You may pick any point within this triangle...but...you can only prioritize one thing and only one of these things is actually important to gameplay. You may not care about it this generation...but if you think you're getting 4K60 with drastically improved graphical fidelity next-gen you're dead wrong...so you might want to make your choice now, before developers (and publishers...publishers just LOVE shiny screenshots) choose for you.
Noboru Wataya
Banned
1080p crippled consoles last gen, we should have stayed at 720p. Then again, 720p crippled some last gen games too. 480i maybe best. i remember some games dropping frames at 240p when in 60hz, I think 50hz is fine. Computers couldn’t push more than 256 colours. Why bother moving forward?
xPikYx
Member
The question is why not moving forward to something more worthy? Better physics, IA, drawing distance, RAY TRACING, poly count bla bla bla
grfunkulus
Banned
This is exactly the resolution I play Destiny 2 at for both pvp and pve on my Asus 43 xg438q at 120fps. The resolution is just high enough that everything looks amazing (nearly as much as 4k) and the framerate is just good enough that the sacrifice n responsiveness/refresh rate vs playing on a smaller, faster monitor is worth the trade off.
Of course, you need a rtx 2080 or higher to do this consistently but the technology is there. Of course, not many people are willing to shell out that much dough for the handful of games where pvp and pve scenarios can marry well enough and warrant such a display.