What devs currently are playing with a 4k 27 inch monitor?? +plus Testing.
I know you have some screen shots, and i do know someone posted them. What i wanted to know, is what brand a link would be great
also what video card you used to play with to gain those true 4k pics with.
1080p is still good either way, but for the future we are seeing many more people buying 4k monitors with only a sub par video card.
Q? what was your fps like when doing so in 4k.
(we know its all being tweaked) this is just a rough estimate on hardware and the future.
- Anyone else using different hardware in other engines that is using the 4k?? what is your hardware, and what fps do you get.
My spelling just sucks.... spell checker somewhere?
I've considered getting a 4k monitor but you really need to go SLI to get decent performance still. Perhaps when the new AMD / Nvidia graphics cards come out it will help somewhat but 4k gaming is amazingly stressful on your hardware. I have a pretty decent computer with a 980Ti GPU and I wouldn't dream of trying to game in 4k on that system. Currently I game at 1440p and even then some games dip when it comes to fps.
Maybe in a year or two I'll get a 32" 4k monitor but for now I'll stick to 1440p.
currently i have the evga 780ti sc 3gb card that pushes sometimes over 100fps in most games. I also use the gaming monitors 27inch on hdmi.
So to get much better then that, other then improving on graphics cards for more push, i wouldnt see much reason for me to get a 4k monitor or a true 4k video card until i see 100fps reviews.
We also have to rely on gaming engines able to push this fps.
So why advertise in 4k? and why have other developers pushed in 4k for. 8fps........ isnt fun
Promotional material is almost always shot in the absolute ideal circumstances. I notice there's conveniently no FPS indicator in their screenshots.
I wouldn't necessarily say they're advertising 4k, it's just how business is conducted. When you go to a restaurant and look at the menu, the food looks a thousand times more glamorous than it does in practice. It's not such a different concept with video games.
Also one thing to consider is that hardware will continue to mature for the several years that Pantheon is out. By supporting 4k early on, hardware will likely grow strong enough to be able to support it.
The best reason of all though, people enjoy their eye candy and it demonstrably works well to display your product in the most favorable light.
FierinaFuryfist said:Be careful when starting out pushing boundaries. Remember Vanguard's release? Sure 6 years later people could play it easily, but that helped curtail it's launch.
Oh I remember. It was a stark change from beta that is for sure. It was really bad. I had upgraded my machine for that one and it was a real hoot to get things to actually work those first few weeks.
I think WoW was worse though.
Ox
I'm hopeful but not optimistic for 4K.
I have been using a 4K monitor in my home office for about 6 months now. Well technically not a monitor but a 40" Samsung tv.
I have tried a number of games with it - some are great, some you can tell that were not optimized for gameplay for a 4K.
Fallout 4 with upgraded graphics - AWESOME on 4K.
I run 3 monitors on a GTX 980 ti. 40" 4K, 30" 2650x1600 and a 27" HD. Most other videos cards will not really support a 4K monitor well enough to allow smooth play.
Here is a link to a screenshot of FO4 in 4K http://agencygaming.com/_images/FO4/powerarmor_2.png
Oxillion said:Is Pantheon a CPU or GPU centric game?
Ox
All modern pc games are heavy on shaders. Without it you don't get smoke, water, fire etc. A pixel & vertex shader are small programs that operate the GPU.
When EQ1 launched it was the first subscription game to require a dedicated GPU. Most of us had the pass thru add on cards.
Any investment in GPU upgrades is a good one.
I think Pantheon is going to be geared toward CPU, where as most games nowaday's runs off a mixture of GPU and CPU.
When EQ2 was made they were planning on GPU but did not also plan for multi-core functions in the CPU system. (which honestly was a costly mistake for them)
I think that Pantheon will run more off of CPU than GPU because: I remember watching their Twitch broadcast on youtube, (could not watch it at work.) and the graphic's did not look like you would need any where near the top of the line graphic's cards to run on max. Everything look kind of blocky still.... maybe that will change? but at this point in the game development I do not think it will.
LeonSanborn said:I think Pantheon is going to be geared toward CPU, where as most games nowaday's runs off a mixture of GPU and CPU.
When EQ2 was made they were planning on GPU but did not also plan for multi-core functions in the CPU system. (which honestly was a costly mistake for them)
I think that Pantheon will run more off of CPU than GPU because: I remember watching their Twitch broadcast on youtube, (could not watch it at work.) and the graphic's did not look like you would need any where near the top of the line graphic's cards to run on max. Everything look kind of blocky still.... maybe that will change? but at this point in the game development I do not think it will.
sigh.
They said multiple times that basically all the effects and animations were placeholders. What we saw in the PRE ALPHA video is nothing, and you watched it on a stream or youtube at some lower resolution. There's nothing in the video that you can take to say that the game would be considered gpu vs cpu intense. In fact looking at graphics of modern releases will not tell you that. Optimization is optimization and may have little to do with what you as the user see.
Krixus said:LeonSanborn said:I think Pantheon is going to be geared toward CPU, where as most games nowaday's runs off a mixture of GPU and CPU.
When EQ2 was made they were planning on GPU but did not also plan for multi-core functions in the CPU system. (which honestly was a costly mistake for them)
I think that Pantheon will run more off of CPU than GPU because: I remember watching their Twitch broadcast on youtube, (could not watch it at work.) and the graphic's did not look like you would need any where near the top of the line graphic's cards to run on max. Everything look kind of blocky still.... maybe that will change? but at this point in the game development I do not think it will.
sigh.
They said multiple times that basically all the effects and animations were placeholders. What we saw in the PRE ALPHA video is nothing, and you watched it on a stream or youtube at some lower resolution. There's nothing in the video that you can take to say that the game would be considered gpu vs cpu intense. In fact looking at graphics of modern releases will not tell you that. Optimization is optimization and may have little to do with what you as the user see.
hmm Maybe I missed their comments on that some where.... but I did say that I saw it on the youtube saved from the twitch stream. Obviously I know that there is quality loss in that, but generally not much if it is being streamed from the game dev's computer and internet, and of course optimization always helps but it may or may not be there from the start.
Yeah, Krixus is correct in his assessment. A game looking prettier has no correlation with its dependence on CPU or GPU. For the most part, the CPU and GPU both play very specific roles, while there is also a lot of interplay between them.
It is a matter of optimization, generally. A poorly optimized, pretty game will run horribly on any hardware. A well optimized, pretty game will still only run so well on a certain level of hardware. However, you can't simply look at a game on a stream or in a screenshot and make determinations about how it utilizes hardware.
Personally I don't think that Pantheon needs to be designed around 4k. Still, for all the people who have it or plan to have it in future, a proper UI scaling for such resolutions would be awesome. I bought a laptop with a 4k resolution and enjoy in EQ2 hotbars the size of a small ball pen refill or a 6man groupwindow the size of my thumb (it's not big). So for EQ2 to make it even playable I have to downscale the laptop's resolution to 1920x1080 again, resulting in fuzzy textures which is a heavy strain on my eyes. Not nice ;(
GTX 1070, 1080 or 1080TI can do 4k to some degree. But it's still way to early to speculate. There will be 1 or 2 more generation of Nvidia GPU's and 2 generations of AMD GPU's released before Pantheon ships. That should be close to do double the current GPU performance. Plus, Pantheon is a Unity engine game so it's not going to push the upper end of GPU requirements anyways.
1440p is where it's at. The 1080ti can do 4k okay from what I'm hearing if you have two, but that's high-end enthusiast. The jump in 4k capabilities from 900 to 1000 series was notable though. In the coming years, we may actually be able to run 60fps in 4k for less than $2000 in graphics cards.
4K focus is basically essential. Higher, even. Having the texture assets designed in as much fidelity as possible that can be down-converted.
EQ today would look so much better if the textures weren't archaic and there were higher quality assets to pull from as time went on and downloaded by the game's launcher. They were designed for the times. Just a little bit of forward-thinking would have kept many years of age off the visual appearance of the game.
Vade said:4K focus is basically essential. Higher, even. Having the texture assets designed in as much fidelity as possible that can be down-converted.
EQ today would look so much better if the textures weren't archaic and there were higher quality assets to pull from as time went on and downloaded by the game's launcher. They were designed for the times. Just a little bit of forward-thinking would have kept many years of age off the visual appearance of the game.
That is a good point. Designing everything to support 4k from the jump would probably be much easier than trying to go back and upgrade later.
I think it's a must in actual game industry to design games for 4k, especially in MMO industry cause these games are meant to be played many years after release. With the last graphic cards generation, performances are no longer an issue for 4k, any config with a single 1080GTX can support at least 40+ fps on any recent game in 4k full options.
Currently the benefits of 4k on PC are not so obvious for players because of the size of monitors, on a 24' or 28' the difference between 4k and full HD is not striking enough. That's the reason why I decided to try it on a 55' TV as monitor, it's great on solo games and I'm looking forward to test Pantheon with it, I have great hopes of an upgraded immersion and comfortable UI.
Vade said:4K focus is basically essential. Higher, even. Having the texture assets designed in as much fidelity as possible that can be down-converted.
EQ today would look so much better if the textures weren't archaic and there were higher quality assets to pull from as time went on and downloaded by the game's launcher. They were designed for the times. Just a little bit of forward-thinking would have kept many years of age off the visual appearance of the game.
While I would not agree that higher than 4k is essential, I do think it's a good idea for currently in development games to be developing using 4k textures. If everyone cannot use them at launch, years down the road the game will still look good and will make patching in better graphics easier.
Many of the remastered console games from say PS3 to PS4 still look good because the old games were designed with much higher graphic fidelity than what was capable of the console being developed on. It makes going back and doing enhancements much easier.
Of course, this concern will only come into play with Pantheon when they start cranking out custom art assets. Not sure if they are doing that yet, nor do I know if the built in Unity tools are rendering at 4k or not.
I don't have a 4K setup right now, so the point is moot for me. Nevertheless, I agree that the game should be designed from the start with 4K in mind - it's a game that hopefully we're going to be playing for a good many years, after all! But 4K isn't the whole story, as more and more gfx cards and monitors/TVs start to support larger colour spaces and HDR, the engine and assets should either support those from the get go, or be flexible enough that enabling support at a future date isn't a development nightmare.
On a related issue, I very much hope there will be good options for UI scaling. I play on my living-room TV. Far too many games don't have UI scaling at all, or only allow for minimal scaling, which means too often I find myself squinting or getting up to be able to read tiny text or figure out tiny icons. This is an issue at 1080p, I can only imagine what it would be playing at 4K resolution, 6 feet away from the screen.
I agree that 4k will be the standard in probably 5 years or so, but right now probably less than 1% of gamers have the capability of running it at acceptable frame rates (60fps+).
Don't know what settings you're running or what games you're playing, but a single 1080 does not run most games on high/max @ consistent 60fps. And really, at this point with 144hz monitors, who wants to be locked at 60fps anyway? I'd take 100+fps at 2k over 60fps at 4k any day. My friend couldn't even get a consistent 60fps on high settings with Black Desert with THREE 900 series Titans. He just upgraded to 2 1080TIs and said it's better, but it's still not running those frames on max settings.
