• Shawdow194@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well it’s a scaling effect and diminishing returns

    To the human eye 480p vs 1080p is significant but 4k vs 8k is hard to tell

    I think focusing on new technologies such as AI upscaling/world generation or VR is a better use of developers time and pushes the industry back into the innovative space it’s supposed to be

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      VR will always stay a niche technology just because of the limited circumstances where people can use it (e.g. not on the move, not while watching kids,…).

      • Shawdow194@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I agree

        I should’ve clarified VR/ AR. I do think AR will be a large part of daily life and apply much further than video games in the not too distant future

    • tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Depends a bit on screen size and placement, too. I play on 27", 1440p, about 3 feet from my face, and my eyeballs are definitely the lowest resolution link in the chain. 32" screen on my desk, 60" screen in front of the couch, and 1080-1440 will start showing their pixels. I’m not anxious to upgrade my screen, because 1440p gives me great framerates with a cheaper video card. Also a 32" screen at a viewing distance of 3’ is hard to actually see everything.

      I’d much rather have a good game that runs fast at 1080p than have to get a $700 card for OK framerate and style-over-substance gameplay just to get 4k.

      Agree that using VR to get immersive, wide-field graphics from fewer pixels is a great alternative.