Maybe it's just me, but going over 1080p doesn't seem worth it.

[night814]

A lot of devs who haven't had to even think about 4k before are likely going to focus on a lower res with better everything else. Thinking about a lot of Japanese devs and assuredly worldwide indies, they would be foolish in my opinion to focus solely on the higher res factor.

 

[MaulerX]

After experiencing 4K I just can't go back. The resolution boost makes graphical details more visible and apparent.

I was shocked at how those xbox/360 games looked on the X. You can see astounding graphical detail that were always there but you couldn't see at the lower resolutions.

So yea higher resolutions are not just higher resolutions. A higher resolution will make you see graphical details that you just couldn't see at a lower resolution.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

I want my 4K games. Give me a dynamic res with as many 60 FPS titles as possible.

Give us a super high frame rate mode for certain games, too.

 

[Jombie]

Noticeably higher resolution is cool for about five minutes and then I never think about it again. It's cool, but I still play PS1 games, so I can't say it's some determining factor.

 

[Bjones]

2013: "Maybe it's just me, but going over 720p doesn't seem worth it"
2006: "Maybe it's just me, but going over 480p doesn't seem worth it"

Click to shrink...

I mean there is some truth there but the perceived size difference is much less noticeable than going from 480 to 720.

 

[leng jai]

After buying a big 4K display, I want everything in 4K. One of the first things I did when I set up the TV was have a look at the Freeview channels on it... and they look terrible. Even the "HD" 1080i ones, let alone the SD resolution ones that make up the majority of channels still. In 2020. I don't think I've watched any of those channels since. It's no wonder people are cord cutting when regular TV looks so awful picture quality wise. On the plus side, RDR2 on a One X looked superb in 4K.

I wish my PC monitors were 4K+ as well. I want that retina-display level crispiness, especially when editing photos and video. I'm sure games would look pretty good on those monitors as well.

Click to shrink...

For TV the problem is the bitrate, not the resolution. The bite rate for free to air TV and 1080p streaming on stuff like Netflix is terrible. A 1080p Blu ray still looks damn nice on a 4k TV.

 

[Skyebaron]

1440p on a 4k display is just good now that CAS and Nvidia sharpening are available.

 

[Asator]

The amount of power it took to get from 480p to 720p and 720p to 1080p is nowhere near the cost of native 4K. We are getting less visual return at a much higher performance cost.

Click to shrink...

The problem with that is that it's reaching a point where it's harder and harder to notice any differences. And hell, if you go by those Steam surveys a significant % of players still plays at 720p so it's not like it became unusable.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, people were saying the exact same things when they were defending 720p as being enough compared to 1080p. If I remember correctly, there was even a video from IGN saying that 1080p was unnecessary because you couldn't see the difference unless you had a huge screen or something like that. And then the Xbox One/PS4 came and the fact that the Xbone was doing 900p native in certain games while the PS4 could do 1080p was a massive deal. No one was arguing that 720p was good enough anymore, and people were suddenly capable of seeing the difference between 1080p and 900p (even though the difference is less important than 1080p vs 720p).

As for the performance requirements, it was also a huge strike against 1080p at the time. And as we've seen, devs mostly dealt with it (although they do struggle to hit it natively on the base consoles) and no one is arguing in favor of 720p anymore. 4k might be a bit overkill for now, but I have no doubt that in a couple of years people will not really be willing to go back to 1080p. It's a bit of a shame that the TV/console industry skipped 1440p though, as that's a pretty sweet spot.

 

[Optional Objectives]

.

 

[turbobrick]

1080p is good enough for me. I have a 24 inch 144hz monitor, I'd rather have higher frame rate than higher resolution.

As for tv's, I was still using a CRT until 2011. I mostly upgraded because I couldn't read text anymore in games.

 

[MonadL]

I don't think 4k is super mindblowing but HDR is absolutely godly. So glad I bought a new tv for it.

 

[--R]

I mean there is some truth there but the perceived size difference is much less noticeable than going from 480 to 720.

Click to shrink...

I'd argue that a jump from 1080 to 4K is at least as noticeable than going from subHD to HD. Even if you are on a small screen you can notice the difference on aliasing.

 

[SunBroDave]

If all games looked as good as RDR2, I'd be fine with playing them in 1080p. Anything less visually impressive than that though and at this point 1080p is just pretty unacceptable to me

 

[pixelation]

1080p with better IQ any day of the week.

 

[TAJ]

I could live with 1080p if it was downsampled from 4K or higher.
Native 1080p is just not good enough.

 

[RestEerie]

careful now.....many kryptonians on ERA sweasr that they can see the pixel differences between 1080p, 1440p and 4k without zooming 400%

 

[Akela]

For TV the problem is the bitrate, not the resolution. The bite rate for free to air TV and 1080p streaming on stuff like Netflix is terrible. A 1080p Blu ray still looks damn nice on a 4k TV.

Click to shrink...

True. I will say that in my experience Netflix still looks considerably better then anything I've seen on normal TV, OTA or cable. Not UHD Blu Ray good obviously, but still noticeably more crisper then 1080p. Youtube 4K also has surprisingly good picture quality when you consider the sorts of videos people generally upload onto there compared to an actual streaming service.

And yeah 1080p Blu Ray does still look pretty great (I have a copy of Planet Earth from like 2006 and being able to see footage of snowfall without the picture being compressed to hell is revelatory.)

 

[Saifu]

Still playing games at 720p.
So yeah, that's a no from me.

 

[smurfx]

doubt most games next gen will hit 4k with all the bells and whistles. we will likely get what we currently get with the pro and one x and get the checkerboard stuff with all graphical features present.

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

I'm actually ok with 1440p and above. It's 1080p I have an issue with because it looks blurry AF on my 4K monitor and TV.

 

[TheHunter]

If you game on a big tv go 4k.

If you play on a small tv/moniter you're fine with 1080p IMO.

 

[Asriel]

Can't go back from 4K HDR now.

 

[TheGhost]

I have 4k on my consoles and 1080p on my computer and honestly 1080 looks like shit compared to 4k

 

[DaciaJC]

Honestly, I could personally do without even 1440p. But I couldn't find a decent 144 hz IPS monitor at 1080p, so that's where I'm at. Full-blown 4K sounds like an enormous waste if you're dramatically sacrificing performance to achieve it.

 

[Tagyhag]

1440p is a good improvement over it and 4K is an improvement over that (Though you definitely see the diminishing returns) but yeah I'll take 1080/1440p 144FPS over 4K/30FPS any day.

 

[Strings]

1440p + is noticeable and very nice, though I'm fine with 1080p.

It's anything below that from the current gen that looks awful to me (I can't use my Switch docked - it's yuck (though I'm fine with games all the way back to SNES and play PS1/PS2 games daily, something about low res modern games is irritating af)).

 

[Khrno]

I do 21:9 at 3440x1440

And before I had a 32" 4K monitor.

Very early 4K adopter, but it is not worth it, however I would not do 1080p even at ultrawide, that's why I did 1440p since it would be a downgrade going back from 4K to standard 1080p

 

[Dommo]

On a PC monitor 4K just isn't as big a deal as it is on a tv, it's just too small.

Click to shrink...

Someone sitting close to a PC monitor is going to perceive more detail than someone sitting on their couch watching on a 55inch TV. Why do you think games traditionally designed for PC use far smaller text size than console games that use much larger blockier clearer fonts and interfaces? Or why do you think PC monitors have always pushed resolution far earlier than TVs ever have (iMacs have been 5k for some years now). It's because you notice resolution a lot more up close.

 

[Paz]

I'll take framerate over resoluton every time, but I also think 4k looks incredible.

 

[Chopin the Third]

Disagree. I can see a noticeable difference going from 1080p to 1440p, and 4k is an even bigger difference. That said, I don't think I'll ever need anything higher than 4k, and I don't need it to be true 4k either. Good checkerboard rendering, temporal injection, and other reconstruction techniques are perfectly fine, are virtually indistinguishable from true 4k, and preferable as they use less resources.

 

[pargonta]

I would prefer devs continue to work to make the performance and bells and whistles work with 4k, so in the future I won't have to sacrifice resolution and slum it with 1080p (not really slumming, just being obnoxious)

 

[Man God]

I've honestly felt this since 480p.

 

[headspawn]

Why would you include 1440p with 1080p in the poll? I love a crisp 4k, 1440p is a damn fine middle ground.. 1080p? Nah. I'd much rather be well above that.

 

[leng jai]

Someone sitting close to a PC monitor is going to perceive more detail than someone sitting on their couch watching on a 55inch TV. Why do you think games traditionally designed for PC use far smaller text size than console games that use much larger blockier clearer fonts and interfaces? Or why do you think PC monitors have always pushed resolution far earlier than TVs ever have (iMacs have been 5k for some years now). It's because you notice resolution a lot more up close.

Click to shrink...

Just goes to show you people don't understand viewing distance half the time. If you're on a monitor sitting right up to it in a desk it's going to be much easier to see every little detail that high resolution provides compared to setting metres away from a TV no matter how big it is.

 

[Arta]

I would have agreed with you up to late last year, but now that I have one it does make a difference if you have at least a 55 inch tv.

 

[Kieli]

I will always take the most reasonable resolution that offers me the best performance and graphical fidelity.

In 2020, that would still be 1080P.

Maybe in 2030, it'll be 4K when everything else is 8K or 32K or whatever.

 

[SoftTaur]

My vision isn't good enough to tell the difference past 900p or so.

 

[GavinUK86]

1080/60 is where it's at for me.

 

[nbnt]

I wouldn't say it's not worth it, but if I had to choose between 4k or performance, I'll definitely go with the latter. Framerate > resolution any day of the week.

 

[Tortahegesztő]

After all the 4k stuff I tried during my brief adventure in tech related youtube content creation I really don't see upgrading to 4k necessary, especially now when even decent 1080p/1440p grade gpus are expensive already. I just barely perceived any difference for entertainment content and only when looking at the screen super closely.
For work tho the extra desktop space was neat on a single screen.

 

[Dankir]

I game on a 75" 4K Vizio and to be honest HDR is a much bigger deal for me than resolution.

 

[Dogui]

720p is more than enough for me, to be really honest.

 

[Pancracio17]

Id take better framerate over better resolution, but yeah I want 4k. It looks amazing.

 

[Lobster Roll]

I'll take the best possible resolution while not sacrificing framerate. 60 fps *should* be the floor for the minimum acceptable framerate, and if that means some games end up 1080p and others end up being 1440p and none end up being 4K then that's fine with me. 4K is cool for photo mode, but once you flip that off and start seeing the images in motion again, framerate is king again.

 

[DvdGzz]

My 55" 4k tv is 3 feet in front of me on my computer desk. 1080p is almost ugly at the size and distance. I was thinking of getting a 27-34" monitor though, so I can see 1440p being all I need.

 

[Vitamin_B_Complex]

I had this conundrum before I upgraded my PC with Dragon Quest XI - 4k at 30fps, or 1080p at 60fps? The jump in crispness was just too beautiful to ignore on a big TV.

Click to shrink...

1440p at 45FPS should be the best option then.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I'm still rocking a Plasma for this very reason

1080/60 will all the trimmings is awesome.

 

[Yogi]

1440p at 45FPS should be the best option then.

Click to shrink...

Yep. But not everyone has a VRR tv, so you'd get tearing at 45fps.

 

[SapientWolf]

I think ultrawide 1440p is probably the sweet spot. I don't need to trade frames for more skybox in a shooter.

 

[Mass Effect]

why did you undermine the entire thesis of your own thread with the poll options? You say going over 1080p isn't worth it, but then lump 1440p into the same poll choice as 1080p, which will skew the results.

anyway, 4K is definitely worth it at larger screen sizes. I do agree that you get diminishing returns on smaller sizes, especially computer monitors -- it's more worth it to use that power for higher framerates if possible.