Soldato
Are game producers really going to cut out a large part of the game playing community by simply producing or porting games that most people will be unable to play due to lack of vram? Seems a bit silly to me if they do?
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
All this talk of the lack of enough Vram?
- Thread starter ethan
- Start date
Caporegime
Yes they are and if you want max details, get a card with enough VRAM or lower settings. Lazy devs or just the way it is? Pass but nowt we can do about it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,147
Well usually the settings go low enough as to not cut many gamers out. It's only when you go for pretty high settings that the Vram can become an issue.
Well it will probably take three years plus for the majority to move to 4K and if the move from dvd to blu ray is anything to go by, I can't see anybody but enthusiasts being at all bothered by huge amounts of vram.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Thing is pc gaming is still considered niche compared to consoles, but now the architecture on consoles and pc is closest it's been, more devs are seeing they can port their games over a lot easier.
The downside is they don't seem to want to optimise it for pc's, where consoles have unified memory and strict set of hardware to code for, pc's don't.
End result is often something so badly ported that you have to go overkill on hardware to get it playable at a reasonable fps with decent eye candy.
Most game devs want to produce decent games but often don't have the time to polish the ports for pc gaming especially if they are funded by EA or Ubi etc who don't give a monkeys about quality, they just care about profit
The downside is they don't seem to want to optimise it for pc's, where consoles have unified memory and strict set of hardware to code for, pc's don't.
End result is often something so badly ported that you have to go overkill on hardware to get it playable at a reasonable fps with decent eye candy.
Most game devs want to produce decent games but often don't have the time to polish the ports for pc gaming especially if they are funded by EA or Ubi etc who don't give a monkeys about quality, they just care about profit
Associate
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2014
- Posts
- 1,070
8GB of unified memory on the ps4 will likely mean that game devs will feel free to significantly increase ram requirements over the next couple of years. It wouldn't surprise me if by 2017, due to unoptimised porting, pc game ram requirements increased to typically ~16GB, with 6-8GB of vram required for gaming with the eye candy turned up.
Last edited:
Caporegime
4K is very nice and I kinda miss it but looking at the big picture (pun intended), the ideal scenario for 4K is a single GPU to max details and that I feel is a long way off. For me, I want a nice 40" 4K 100Hz plus monitor and preferably with G-Sync.
yea but in 4 years time the quality of top end games at 4K will blow your mind... you'll see a massive improvement in textures and detailing and thus depth of field and 3D....
what you have right now is hardware that can just about play 4K...... only because the games available right now are so basic in their textures and detailing.
Far Cry 4 will look total rubbish compared to what you'll see in 4 years time, it's a bit scary to be honest, but i expect by then we'll have virtual reality headsets, you'll never look at another monitor screen ever again....
but you'll never be able to game properly until they can inplant directly into your brain and change your reality, so that you're actually in the game, but that wont be for another hundred years.
Last edited:
The games still play, and that's all they developers really care about it. They have no interest in catering to the minority (and it really is) of gamers that want to play at high resolution with all details maxed out. I can only hope in years to come as technology improves, that will change, and games will be better optimised. GPU development will play a massive role in this though, as currently you need x2 cards minimum for 4K, so it's a LONG way from being mainstream. Most people still game at 1080p, and a 970 is good for that. And look at the 960! Do you think that card would have been made if there wasn't a market for it? We have some time to wait before games are made with the 4K gamer in mind... until then, we will be paying through the nose to play it comfortably at that resolution.
yea and all the console gamers at work dont even know what 4K is, my mate said to me yesterday, ``have you seen 1080p yet it's flipping amazing, you need to get PS4 Mal, it's way better than a PC ``....everyone in the room agreed with him, i said nothing just laughed inside.
and these guys are keen gamers too !!!!!! we have a rubbish 40'' LG LED at work, it isn't just bad, it's horrific, but these console gamers think it's brilliant
I've had the same experience and you just have to shake your head and walk away. There's no talking to some people. I had an interesting conversation with someone the other day though which maybe explains the psychology to some degree... he knew about PC gaming and that it could offer superior graphics, but he literally couldn't be bothered with it. He liked the fact that his PS4 just works, no messing around, no worrying about upgrading, or if someone has a better system than him. It was simple and easy. I think that way of thinking is true for a lot of people tbh.
yea nearly all of them cant be bothered with a pc/ too expensive, they only game online for a laugh, it's a social thing only... they only really play BF4 or COD.....they dont game seriously they fool around with each other, or join games in gangs and cheat like crazy
Last edited:
You'll be able to play the latest games in the next few months/years with a 1-2GB card, just with the textures on low or medium, or at a lower resolution, depending on the game.
It's as it always has been over the years - requirements to run games maxed out increases every couple of months. You have to spend the money keeping up to date on graphics cards if you want the best image quality possible.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
To be fair 1080p looks quite decent on my 46" Samsung TV, however I do run games with SuperSampling AA...consoles though they don't have this luxoryand these guys are keen gamers too !!!!!! we have a rubbish 40'' LG LED at work, it isn't just bad, it's horrific, but these console gamers think it's brilliant
im going the other way, sending the 970's back and with the money getting the philips 40" 4k monitor, now all i need is some gpus to run it
well i do have a couple of 290's to tied me over, if 2560x1400 looks ok on it i might just play games at that res untill newer cards come out
well i do have a couple of 290's to tied me over, if 2560x1400 looks ok on it i might just play games at that res untill newer cards come out
Permabanned
in 4 Years all gamers will play on VR helmets n not some ****** 4k monitors..
Legend its like people thinking that LED tv is beter than Plasma LOL
Legend its like people thinking that LED tv is beter than Plasma LOL
Most games would be developed with certain settings for each memory capacity. i.e. Ultra for 4GB+, High for 3GB, etc.
For the gtx 970 the game would see it as a 4GB card as reported by the bios but if the drivers are actually limiting it to 3.5GB then there will be a problem. The additional 0.5GB of sata being loaded may then be unintentionally swapped into system RAM as the ENBseries guy sort of proved a few days ago.
This would be why you get stutter.
Soldato
Only trouble with plasma screens is the re-gassing. I'm dreading when mine will need it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,409
Chances are the Oculus Rift consumer version will be minimum 1440p screen and the developers have said 4k upwards would be ideal because it's so close to your eyes, so I would expect the consumer versions (if succesful) to use 4k and 8k screens in a few years
Therefore you will still need the VRAM.
Only trouble with plasma screens is the re-gassing. I'm dreading when mine will need it.
Can't tell if you are being Ironic?
Plasma's do not need "re-gassing"