| curl-6 said: It got me thinking; is more pixels really the best way to spend limited rendering resources? |
Generally I am a PC gamer, so "limited resources" isn't a thing.
So... Yes. More resolution.
In consoles though, there is a balance where the hardware has enough bandwidth/fillrate to hit various resolutions. For the Playstation 4 that seems to be around 900P-1080P, Xbox One... Around 720-900P.
| KLXVER said: Resolution is just something PC gamers use to act superior... |
Don't forget console gamers beat the resolution drum as well... ResolutionGate at the start of the 8th gen being a prime example where the Xbox was trolled into oblivion due to it's plethora of 720P titles.
And why can't we use it as a selling point? If the PC is capable of handling 11,520x2160 and a console is struggling to maintain 1280x720... Isn't it worth of mention? In that aspect the PC is clearly superior, no contest.
| CGI-Quality said: Overrated? No. However, I think people should slow down a bit an absorb the individual details contained in lower solutions. For instance, although most of my personal 3D work is rendered in 8K, I find the sweet spot for gaming to be 1440p/144Hz. Very few games take advantage of the higher fidelity, so there's no need to go gaga over 4K. It looks fabulous, don't get me wrong, but it's just a bit more than needed at the moment. Higher hertz is much more of a priority for me. |
Same. I prefer downsampling from 4k to 1440P. It provides an amazing image that is a step up from 1080P, but still allows you to have all the bells and whistles turned on.
Refresh rates have a direct impact on gameplay as well.
| Mr Puggsly said: I think 1080p is always gonna look good. We're just at point where going above 1080p is easy with affordable specs. I mean its matter what looks sharp to the human eye and 1080p is just that. |
I am at that point where I think 1080P looks rather dated.
All my devices are 1440P or better for that exact reason, literally put my money where my mouth is.
| Mr Puggsly said: Although the nice thing about games running natively above 1080p is the improved visuals on that same 1080p screen. I'm referring to super sampling and it creates an overall better image even if you don't want to upgrade your display resolution. 16x anisotropic filtering is also great for improving the clarity of textures. |
The ironic thing is that during the 7th gen... My debates with console gamers generally resulted in a downplaying of resolution and anisotropic filtering... It's nice that it's gaining more prominence now that the masses have gotten a small taste of it.
| Mr Puggsly said: Even if you have an expensive PC video card, you can't always get 4K, 60 (or higher) fps and the highest graphics settings. Compromises are made and I think the average consumer is fine with 1080p for higher graphics settings and performance. |
You lower your settings... Even lowered PC settings at 4k will often still beat the consoles anyway in terms of fidelity and clarity.
| ironmanDX said: In the sense that they're the most important factor in image quality? Yes. Resolution is still quite important though. I'd take 1440p with better visual effects over 4k. |
I think most people would. Quad-High Definition (1440P) is a big step up over 1080P, yet still affordable where you can dial up all the visuals.
| manuelogando40 said: It depends. At the beginning of the generation the resolution was the most important thing. After the output of xbox one x, the resolution is no longer important. |
Resolution has always been important. ~ PC Gamers.
PC gamers had the option of 4k~ back in 2001.
PC gamer had the option of 1080P back in 1995.
And 1440P has been around for donkey's and is super affordable now.
| KBG29 said: Devs need to offer options in all games going forward on PS5/XB4. |
Wouldnt you be better off just buying a PC then?
| o_O.Q said:
...but seriously as a long time console gamer who transitioned to pc gaming over the last year or so with a fairly powerful pc, the difference having higher resolutions and framerates (especially) makes to the gaming experience is amazing i can't go back now, when i see stuff in 30 frames on console it hurts my eyes now and low resolutions make everything look so blocky |
Welcome to the #PCGamingMasterRace. May all your games be good ones.
| trent44 said: Resolution has been pretty irrelevant in my experience. Honestly, I would take a Nintendo Switch with a 480P (or even 240P) screen if it meant a bunch more mid-budget games getting made (shorter development time, lower budgets needed for modeling/textures/etc.) and taking more risks with more novel/niche ideas. |
Resolution has zero effect on a games budget directly
It literally takes a few seconds to edit a configuration file to swap between 240P and 4k... The cost is building assets to shine at a higher resolution, but a developer isn't obligated to do that. - In-fact allot of games during the 7th gen had high frequency texturing anyway, which actually shines at higher resolutions... Which is why allot of Xbox One X backwards compat titles in 4k can start to look like a massive step up. (Final Fantasy 13 for example)
A Nintendo DS game upscaled to 4k on PC can look leagues better than the DS.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
