Future 4k gaming

[Soccerman06]

Well Sharp has a 32" 4k panel that will be on sale in feb. Who has $5k to burn?

 

[BrightCandle]

A normal 32" 1080P screen (1920x1200) viewed at 6 feet actually meets the definition of a retina screen by delivering 75 Pixels Per Degree. That compares favourably to an Iphone that achieves 57 PPD.

You don't need higher resolution screens on your TV, you need games and hardware that actually renders at the resolution of the screens.

 

[moonbogg]

So let me ge this straight. People here think that super high res gaming would be no big deal or it would suck or something like that? WTF? You guys are strange. Games could have insane sharp little details and it would be awesome.

 

[Railgun]

It's because it's unnecessary if all you're looking for is more realistic gaming. Today's resolutions are fine. As others have said, developers limit themselves.

All 4k resolution will give you is more on screen, not necessarily any detail advantages.

 

[BrightCandle]

If your eyes can't resolve the difference what is the point of putting out more pixels? What is the point of putting out that many pixels AND having to give up other graphics fidelity options to allow it to run at a playable frame rate? That isn't a sensible trade off.

If console games didn't normally render at 540p or 720p maximum then it wouldn't be a problem, but it turns out most console games run at considerably below 1080p. But this is done because most people sitting at normal distances are happy with the games graphical quality without it being full resolution, because the TV is easily meeting the PPD necessary to fool the eyes. Infact half that pixel density (35 PPD) is more than sufficient and allows the games makers to have considerably more graphical detail in the game, which does actually impact the quality of the image in a substantial way.

 

[Stringjam]

So let me ge this straight. People here think that super high res gaming would be no big deal or it would suck or something like that? WTF? You guys are strange. Games could have insane sharp little details and it would be awesome.

I think the reason you're not seeing excitement is because today's GPU's aren't even capable of rendering realism at normal high resolutions, so a 4K display will essentially provide no added realism, but it will just make it even harder for GPU's.

We're going to need some serious advancement with rendering technology before we can even get close to what you're looking for with even 1080.

Check this out. It isn't a picture...it's a 3D model. I'll bet it looks great at your current resolution. Can you imagine an entire 3D environment rendered with this kind of detail? The ability to do that at 1080 is a far loftier goal than displaying what we're currently able to render on a 4K screen.

 

[tommo123]

but how does it deal with eyes, hair etc? something we're more intimately able to recognise? you can tell instantly with faces whether it's real or not since we're programmed to recognise sooo much information from other peoples faces

 

[reallyscrued]

So let me ge this straight. People here think that super high res gaming would be no big deal or it would suck or something like that? WTF? You guys are strange. Games could have insane sharp little details and it would be awesome.

You are strange for not understanding simple concepts.

Super hi-res gaming isn't going to magically make things appear more realistic. Go play Quake 3 at 1920x1080 then play Crysis at 1280x720. Which looks more realistic? It's not so cut and dry.

Yes, higher resolutions would allow for extra extremely fine details but we have yet to approach realistic graphics in many other aspects of realism; see my previous post.

I think the general consensus is that higher resolutions are very much welcome, but if most of us had to choose, I think we'd trade a higher resolution with higher poly counts, more texture fidelity, advanced lighting models and more particle effects. See stringjam's post.

 

[Cerb]

So let me ge this straight. People here think that super high res gaming would be no big deal or it would suck or something like that? WTF? You guys are strange. Games could have insane sharp little details and it would be awesome.

...and every gaming PC will only be able to play a couple games that can make use of it, and they'll need 1kW PSUs, and sound like an airplane in flying over. Er...yeah, no thanks.

 

[TechBoyJK]

I read that several major TV manufactures are wanting to skip 4K as a standard and push directly into 8K so that they dig into the standard more and not have to worry about going beyond it for a while.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

I don't expect anything from 4k for at least 10 years. Except the fact that I will be able to play on ultra settings on a moderate hardware and 1080 or slightly higher resolution.
Couple of games per year that can really pull it off, surprise ugly textures that lurk even in current AAA releases... And the whole trend of interesting games moving away from AAA scene. And smaller studios and indies can not afford to polish their graphics to 4k standards.

I think it's going to happen much sooner than that. There is going to be a push to start making higher PPI screens in the tablet and mobile space and that increase in manufacturing will translate into bigger screens as well.

3-5 years tops, higher PPI screens will be getting affordable.

 

[kache]

Personally I hope for a cheap 56" 4k monitor. I am not really into high PPI.

Maybe @144hz+, but not even Displayport would have the bandwidth for that.

 

[Paul98]

I will welcome the 4k and higher resolutions, but for gaming it seems like a waste till developers are able to do more with what they currently have. As others have currently stated, most of the problems with the graphics we have isn't the monitor resolution, but what the developers do with the textures, poly count for many models,...

But for home theater, work on a single monitor, multitasking, lots of other things 4k would be great. I would love to have a 4k projector on a 120" screen that would be great.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Looking forward to building 4k capable gaming rigs

And hooking it up to a quality 4K projector. ^_^

 

[obidamnkenobi]

I think it's going to happen much sooner than that. There is going to be a push to start making higher PPI screens in the tablet and mobile space and that increase in manufacturing will translate into bigger screens as well.

3-5 years tops, higher PPI screens will be getting affordable.

I just hope they can stop dumping crappy 1366x768 TN panels into majority of laptops, while at the same time as pushing 1080p into phone s

Although that seems to be getting better with the latest Ultrabooks going 1080p. Looked for some non-ultrabooks (and <$1500) though at "720P" displays was all too common.

 

[boxleitnerb]

So let me ge this straight. People here think that super high res gaming would be no big deal or it would suck or something like that? WTF? You guys are strange. Games could have insane sharp little details and it would be awesome.

We have to have the detail level for that, though. What's the point of displaying blurry textures at higher dpi? Or low poly assets without fine structures.
4k is not necessary right now in gaming. Too expensive performance wise and the gain is too small. Higher resolutions are only necessary for driving larger displays right now.

 

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

I think better graphics are better for more casuals but if you look at the complaints of hardcore guys it's they want less clutter on screen. Examples are competitive cs players. BF2 guys. DOTA guys.

Personally I'm OK with better graphics as long as the gameplay isn't negatively affected.

 

[JimKiler]

I read that several major TV manufactures are wanting to skip 4K as a standard and push directly into 8K so that they dig into the standard more and not have to worry about going beyond it for a while.

I wonder how many people will get motion sickness and nausea from 8K TV's.

 

[Subyman]

I'd hate to see a stagnation in realism due to an ever increasing resolution standard. With each bump up in resolution that is realism you must take out. I'd like to see a balance between bumping up resolution and seeing more realism. However, I'd like the focus to eventually shift to better physics instead of graphical fidelity.

 

[kache]

I'd hate to see a stagnation in realism due to an ever increasing resolution standard. With each bump up in resolution that is realism you must take out. I'd like to see a balance between bumping up resolution and seeing more realism. However, I'd like the focus to eventually shift to better physics instead of graphical fidelity.

I think they are just waiting for computing power to be high enough to switch to raytracing. That would solve pretty much any problem, without need of using ridiculous effects that only ruin the experience.
Then, hopefully voxels soon after and we'll have the easiest to program photorealism ever.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Tend to agree. Let's work on creating realistic worlds and better gameplay and leave the 4K stuff for a few generations down the road.

Good luck getting a console to run 4K anytime soon by the way. At least not without it looking like a game from 1998.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I think the reason you're not seeing excitement is because today's GPU's aren't even capable of rendering realism at normal high resolutions, so a 4K display will essentially provide no added realism, but it will just make it even harder for GPU's.

We're going to need some serious advancement with rendering technology before we can even get close to what you're looking for with even 1080.

Check this out. It isn't a picture...it's a 3D model. I'll bet it looks great at your current resolution. Can you imagine an entire 3D environment rendered with this kind of detail? The ability to do that at 1080 is a far loftier goal than displaying what we're currently able to render on a 4K screen.

Sorry but the magazine release button is not raised up enough. Too flat.

Still...yeah if things looked like that in our games...wow.

 

[reallyscrued]

I wonder how many people will get motion sickness and nausea from 8K TV's.

Yeah, I know tons of people who kept a hurl bucket next to them when first getting used to their new HDTVs.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Yep, gonna be great. It's gonna be a pretty decent amount of time before it's feasible though. Given current jumps, I'd say at least 6-8 generations before midrange hardware can do it @ 60fps/4K. I think right now triple 7970GE could do it with AA disabled and some details turned down. I also think that AA might become a little pointless with 4K @ desktop display.

You can power 4k res now for many games, it's about 8MP which is similar in size to 2x 25600x1600 monitors, we're already have systems powering 3x1 landscape configs with these monitors, it's ultra high end stuff but in about 2 more generations that will be do-able in a single high end card.

The bigger issue is connectivity, we need new cable standards to transmit 4k @ 60hz, I suspect we may see jerryrigged solutions with 2x HDMI or 2xDL-DVI to support this before we see revisions in HDMI/DVI/DP that can carry it on a single cable.

I'm extremely interested in 4k monitors although realistically I'll more likely to keep an eye on the projector space and get one there, they're available now for absurd amounts of money (£17,000), but in a few years they'll drop in price to something affordable for me and I'll likely pick one up for a nice 120"+ screen.

 

[Baasha]

uhh.. I play games at better-than-4K resolution --> 5160x2560 (13.2MP) and it is an absolutely incredible experience.

Max Payne 3 @ 13.2MP = WIN! : http://youtu.be/JMZyXveX1Vc

I am so eagerly waiting for Crysis 3!