Chrkeller said:
JRPGfan said:
Chrkeller said:
I don't agree with the diminishing returns argument. There is massive improvement still to be had, the problem is it requires complementary hardware and is expensive. The one aspect the ps5 crushes the ps4 with is lighting, but without OLED the difference is somewhat negated. 120 hz is superb, but requires a TV that supports 120 hz. The list goes on and on.
The days of noticing the benefits of a new system regardless of other hardware are gone. But with the right hardware the differences are stark.
I just upgraded to a rtx 4090, is slaughters the ps5. But again requires a good TV/Monitor and of course isn't cheap. So diminishing returns exists, depending on how it is define, but graphics can get way better than seen on consoles. |
I honestly think both of you have valid points.
The jump from 1080p -> 1440p -> 2160p isnt gigantic, while the requirements in GPU grunt are huge.
And while 120fps is nice..... its not really needed (for alot of games) and does little for the "visual jump" javi mentioned.
Stuff like raytraceing... again its better looking, but again you can easily do without, and have much lower requirements on the gpu.
Switch 2, at say a PS4 level in hardware, will be able to visually punch above its weight, by simply not makeing use of 120fps, raytraceing, or trying for 4k.
I would call that deminshing returns.
When you can easily click a few checkbox's, that drastically reduce how demanding running the game is, without it being super noticeable visually.
If you just have enough money (powerfull enough hardware) these drawbacks (requirements vs visual upgrades) become much smaller issues.
The thing is, not many people can afford to buy themselves 4090's for their gaming hobby.
I think by next gen, the raytracing and high resolution, will have much smaller impacts vs today, simply by virtue of how powerfull the consoles then will be. |
I honestly can't tell the difference between 1440p and 4k. 1440p is more than enough. 120 fps, I can't sing it's praise enough. I honestly think 60 to 120 is bigger than 30 to 60. The smoothness and response of playing at 120 fps is bliss. I view gaming similar to cars. Is there a difference between a Ford focus and Porsche 911? Absolutely. Does a Ford focus get the job done and perfectly acceptable? Absolutely. Same logic with high end gpus. The biggest issue I see with console next generation is cooling. I have two 140 mm intake fans, two 140 mm exhaust fans, 1 120 mm exhaust fan, cpu has two 140 mm fans and the gpu has 3 fans... and my PC is pumping out 40C air. Compact consoles are going to be hard just because of heat dissipation. |
Ford Focus v Porsche 911 is waaaay overstating it, every man and his dog can tell them apart, you don't need to be a car aficionado.
Whereas most people will think they're looking at the same game when comparing spiderman 1 & 2.
You're super into graphical fidelity and that's great, but the average gamer doesn't have a clue about pixel count, geometry, path-tracing, raytracing vs baked, frame-rate/pacing, environment density etc.
You're underestimating just how well trained your eye is compared to the average gamer, by virtue of having a comparatively much higher level of interest on that side of things.
