Eight Diagram Bat Fighter
Banned
Meh, that's just what was on the market at the time, not what average size was actually bought. Hoping they would have shown that data.
4K Support : could it have a influence on which Next Gen Console you buy?
- Thread starter onQ123
- Start date
- Status
Meh, that's just what was on the market at the time, not what average size was actually bought. Hoping they would have shown that data.
I can't believe people are trying so hard to downplay 4k on gaf, like its some sort of myth that can be debunked. Do you guys really expect 1080p to be some kind of hardcap for displays when its already been passed?
Before dropping the acronyms, you might want to consider that 4k support means a wee bit more than just console games native res.
Before dropping the acronyms, you might want to consider that 4k support means a wee bit more than just console games native res.
They'd probably be able to put DECENT graphics, but we'd be talking about stuff that's more about artistic quality and does a solid job technically but doesn't really even try to put in many neat effects. You definitely won't be getting amazing looking games unless they go for a style that works well for that type of game (see: Wipeout HD).
ElectricBlue187
Member
no but its already super expensive to develop for 1080p...so unless you really love cell shading
By the time 360 launched, I had a 42" Panasonic 720p plasma that I paid $800 for.
How much will a 42" 4k tv be next fall?
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Shit, I just got an HDTV last year. I doubt I'll be jumping on the 4K bandwagon for a long time.
Surly, for example support for 4K movies may be important
But as far as games go, i doubt we will see many use that resolution, it is a bit too extreme
Mark Rein. Human eye.
I can see the difference between my 1080p monitor and 1440p monitor from 2 feet away.
There's too much money to be lost by not re-releasing the films at 4k. They're already stored at that resolution. It would easier than most of the original blu-ray releases.
I own a 55" tv in my 1000sq ft apartment and the THX standard calls for a 107" display.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
it's closer to real life, like looking out a window or looking in the mirror, so you can see more detail on objects without that object being the only thing in the frame.
Karak
Member
Wait. You are saying you have personally seen a chip or chips that can do 4k native rendering of a 30fps environment with typical texture and polygon counts needed at that res and with those resources at an effective cost, wattage, and heat threshold?
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
People seem to mesmerized when looking at the new ipads 2k screen. We will probably have 4k tablets at a affordable price next year or early 2014. There is no fucking way in hell people are going to just sit there and let their tablets look better than the TV. We have 720p phones right now. We'll have 1080p phones next year. 4k will definitely be relevant in the next 5 years.
It's all I could find at the moment.
I mean, I don't know what else to say. People weren't buying 50+" HDTVs back when this current gen was starting. They were too expensive for most.
A decent-brand 42" 1080p set, the second-best, downgrade option like 720p was then, should be settling in right around there.
Meaning, if pricing tends to continue, it's going to be hard to find a 1080p tv that isn't likely to catch fire on you by the time next-gen consoles reach their market peak.
jeff_rigby
Banned
ATSC 3.0 should start being in high end TVs by 2015 if 2020 is the start of UHD.
Why The Next Generation Of Video Games Needs A Next Generation Of Television
National Association of Broadcasters Powerpoint on Next Generation TV
National Association of Broadcasters on ATSC 3 (we are currently ATSC 1.0 but some of the ATSC 3.0 features are coming soon to ATSC 2.0)
ATSC 2.0 is starting and it provides support for what we think of as XTV.
Eight Diagram Bat Fighter
Banned
Actually, Yes. It was actually 2 2K chips outputting 4k native rendering, but yes.
No I'm not disagreeing with you, just interested in it.
Oh okay.
That's a monitor with decent dot pitch. That becomes a different issue when you're talking tvs and are few feet from and the dot pitch is worse than a typical pc monitor.
I will not buy a 4K TV soon, however I do think that if the PS4 or Next-Xbox do support 4K TVs then the sales of these TVs will increase.
But it will be until the last years of their life-cycle. Why? Because at first people will be against of buying a TV like that, normal behaviour of something new (what is the benefit? I already have an HD TV why do I need it? Blah, blah, blah), and then there will be people that do buy them because, "hey I want to take all the advantage possible from the features of my next-gen console". As, people start buying it, the 4K TVs will get more popular and the sales will increase, and so the companies that develop this TVs, therefore the prices will decrease, and more people will buy.
Just like this console generation. Same reactions with HD TV. Yes. Not everyone has an HD TV, but the quantity of HD TVs sold from 2005 to 2012 did increase a lot.
I will not get one just because of the support for those kind of TVs, but I do think that this feature will be a trigger.
But it will be until the last years of their life-cycle. Why? Because at first people will be against of buying a TV like that, normal behaviour of something new (what is the benefit? I already have an HD TV why do I need it? Blah, blah, blah), and then there will be people that do buy them because, "hey I want to take all the advantage possible from the features of my next-gen console". As, people start buying it, the 4K TVs will get more popular and the sales will increase, and so the companies that develop this TVs, therefore the prices will decrease, and more people will buy.
Just like this console generation. Same reactions with HD TV. Yes. Not everyone has an HD TV, but the quantity of HD TVs sold from 2005 to 2012 did increase a lot.
I will not get one just because of the support for those kind of TVs, but I do think that this feature will be a trigger.
But as you know, human eye arguments depend crucially on viewing distance; it's impossible therefore to divorce the tech discussion from the discussion of homes and the consumer's arrangement of the living room.
Okay... 2 feet, and a desktop monitor. But for 4k Blu-rays to start picking up the pace significantly on the market, you'll need to target the primary movie-watching location for consumers, which is the couch, and which is never only 2 feet away from the viewing device.
Oh, they'll want to one day, surely. But I'm simply arguing that you seem far too optimistic with your timeline; hell, I'm not sure the DVD to Blu-ray conversion ever reached the sales heights the film industry was expecting, where--unless I'm mistaken--adoption of the format was severely slowed by consumers who deemed DVD "good enough" when upscaled by a decent set. Making the 4k case will be even harder, and must target an even small niche of gigantic screens in order to get started.
So how many consumers do you expect to have any interest / capability for adopting something close to 107"? I'd say very, very few.
Stephen Colbert
Banned
Yes, but only in the sense that I would imagine a device powerful enough to output games/movies at 4k resolutions at a decent framerate would be more than powerful enough to power out 1080p resolution at 60 frames per second.
Also, I do plan to buy a 120 inch 4k tv 3-4 years from now. And I have no doubt that the 4k console will be the best and cheapest way play 4k content on it for quite sometime.
Also, I do plan to buy a 120 inch 4k tv 3-4 years from now. And I have no doubt that the 4k console will be the best and cheapest way play 4k content on it for quite sometime.
DonMigs85
Member
Then 3-4 years later, prepare for your 240-inch 8K TV.
No. 4k makes absolutely zero sense whatsoever, no matter how big your room is. There's no content (and no, most movies actually aren't stored at 4k), having a TV so big that you have to move your head to see what's happening in the corners sucks, and the resolution of the human eye is limited.
No. I only have a small 19" TV as it is and I can't tell the difference between 1080 and 720. I can't see myself having a place or TV big enough in the next decade to have 4k being worth my time, certainly not for a games console. I will buy a PS4 because I like Sony's games, 4k support doesn't bother me, unless they use it to justify a big price.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
I believe so
Eight Diagram Bat Fighter
Banned
Depends on the person, I have 4K content I could watch right now actually. And whats with this idea that 4K requires that big of a screen? It doesn't.
I've seen a 4K tv displaying 4K content. You can tell the difference. 4K makes perfect sense.
That's another issue: Before going 4k, we should go 60fps lossless, 10bit or float. That would actually be a noticeable improvement. But 1080p@60 HDR lossless already requires storage way beyond Blu-ray.
partime
Member
People are still migrating to HD, 4-5k upgrades will only happen to movie theaters and large commercial displays, and it will continue to be that way for another minimum 10 years.
Broadcasters aren't even moving to 3D as fast as people thought, there is no way 4-5k will hit the road anytime soon. Plus, I just bought a new TV so don't get me upset.
I've "seen" it as well. I worked in post production. And no it doesn't. It's a placebo. Your eyes can't see it under normal conditions. It's absolutely impossible for anatomic reasons. If you actually see the difference, the TV is either way too big or you're way too close - neither option is desirable or comfortable.
Eight Diagram Bat Fighter
Banned
Not placebo at all, where you come up with that? I think you need to study about anatomy a little more and stop confusing resolution with pixel density.
So we should hold back new technology until we fully utilize old technology? That's just dumb.
To those saying there's no way games will be renderable at 4K...why not?
If it's 8x the work as games at 720p, or 4x the work as 1080p, then that would suggest something like PS4's rumoured set up* might be able to render stuff as technically ambitious as PS3 can somewhere between 720p and 1080p, depending on where a game's bottlenecks lie.
I think there'll definitely be a non-zero number of games next-gen that fall within that range of technical demand.
* Between 6 and 8x RSX on paper depending on the metric (bw/shader/fillrate/texelrate), probably more in real world due to architectural improvements. Sony seems to be saying 10x overall, but depending on where a game's bottleneck is I'm sure the mileage will vary, and you have to factor in Cell as a helper in some games' rendering systems...so I won't hazard to say PS4 should be able to render any level of 720p PS3 graphics at 4K. But broadening it to somewhere between 720p level and 1080p levels of sophistication seems fairly safe.
If it's 8x the work as games at 720p, or 4x the work as 1080p, then that would suggest something like PS4's rumoured set up* might be able to render stuff as technically ambitious as PS3 can somewhere between 720p and 1080p, depending on where a game's bottlenecks lie.
I think there'll definitely be a non-zero number of games next-gen that fall within that range of technical demand.
* Between 6 and 8x RSX on paper depending on the metric (bw/shader/fillrate/texelrate), probably more in real world due to architectural improvements. Sony seems to be saying 10x overall, but depending on where a game's bottleneck is I'm sure the mileage will vary, and you have to factor in Cell as a helper in some games' rendering systems...so I won't hazard to say PS4 should be able to render any level of 720p PS3 graphics at 4K. But broadening it to somewhere between 720p level and 1080p levels of sophistication seems fairly safe.
God damn Sony, extreme kudos.
http://www.slashfilm.com/lawrence-of-arabia-trailer-david-leans-masterpiece-gets-4k-restoration/
They have restored Lawrence of Arabia to 4K resolution for its 50th anniversary! Lowly 1080p Bluray will be out until end of the year.
I MUST SEE THIS
http://www.slashfilm.com/lawrence-of-arabia-trailer-david-leans-masterpiece-gets-4k-restoration/
They have restored Lawrence of Arabia to 4K resolution for its 50th anniversary! Lowly 1080p Bluray will be out until end of the year.
I MUST SEE THIS
Where are they? I'd like to see what you are talking about. What it boils down to is the fact that 4K isn't even a niche product at this time. It probably won't be for at least 2-4 years. Until the manufacturers are able to deliver a fully baked product that comes in below $3000.00, there will be no mass acceptance, and without mass acceptance where is the incentive of already strapped software houses to support 4K. Hell, they can hardly make 1080P cost effective.
XOMTOR
Member
Nope, the ability to output 4k won't influence my buying decision one bit.
It's gonna be interesting over the next few years watching TV manufacturers try and sell the general populace on 4k displays. (gonna need a better buzz word than "4k" to get consumers to take notice).
And unless the economy suddenly explodes and everyone is swimming in money, the average Joe will still be content watching his DVDs upscaled on his 42" HD set. While I can see the difference between blu-ray and DVD, most people I show a comparison to don't see it (or don't care).
It's gonna be interesting over the next few years watching TV manufacturers try and sell the general populace on 4k displays. (gonna need a better buzz word than "4k" to get consumers to take notice).
And unless the economy suddenly explodes and everyone is swimming in money, the average Joe will still be content watching his DVDs upscaled on his 42" HD set. While I can see the difference between blu-ray and DVD, most people I show a comparison to don't see it (or don't care).
With Sony you never know.
I recently saw a movie in a 4K equipped theater and the picture is amazing. If the source is created for 4K it is astonishingly good.
Outside of the many potential bottleneck issues, I believe devs would also have to scale assets and effects to look good at that resolution, creating further issues with those bottlenecks.
We would have to look at a specific game and how the system handles a scene at 720p versus 4K to get a better idea. A system can be theoretically 10x faster/stronger, but that could apply to specific areas while other aspects are far less of a leap. Look at the Wii-U, it could have twice the theoretical performance of the ps360 in some aspects but if they go with 8ROPs, that would be a pretty big bottleneck.
No way. 4K support already? With that amount of power in the consoles? No thanks, I'm good with 1080p and sub-HD games on my monitor for now. 4K will be another largely unused bullet point of the PS4 that will get patched into the 720 later anyways when necessary, so it will become largely irrelevant in the end when it comes to choosing a next gen console.
All the TVs in my house are still non-HD too.
All the TVs in my house are still non-HD too.
Eight Diagram Bat Fighter
Banned
Film doesn't work that way as far as source resolution. The film conversion to digital can go beyond 4K depending on what film type was used.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll