Have we hit the point where graphics for most games just aren't going to improve much further? Someone red pill me

yeah sure, whatever. calm your autism.
they are mid class....you happy now?

Yes they are, retard.

meh..... wrong quote

the name of the game now is frame rates and resolution
texture res and model detail has been at a plateau for over 10 years

Not at all. You'd know this if you knew anything about 3D modeling.

For gaming though, I think RTRT was stupid. Especially for nvidia. It's so dumb and doesn't add anything that isn't already there in some acceptable capacity.

What games NEED is dedicated physics processing. That's something that has infinite uses. Ray tracing is not something that can add to both graphics and gameplay the same way that advanced physics can.

Attached: 1474821593408.webm (290x360, 614K)

1070ti, 2060 and 2060 super are still in the top tier consumer cards, not so much the rest. The only cards more powerful are the ones very few people own.

Nvidia is updating physX like once a year, heh.

there are literally no games to upgrade for

im playing fucking EDF5 ffs

The redpill is the two major players are Microsoft and Nvidia. They have game development by the balls, and have strongarmed devs into using their proprietary garbage (DX 12, PhysX, Gaytracing), even locking people in at the hardware level.
Until something comes in to bust this up (either the government or a competitor) they're the ones setting the pace for what's possible.

Maintaining 144+fps with 4k is the next goal for cards to hit.

They haven't improved a lot the last couple of years because there was virtualy no competition except for the low tier segment.

AMD was still riding their old piece of shit architecture, and Pascal was so much better that Nvidia could ask whatever the fuck they like.

Now that RDNA is here, we should see some more improvements, the super cards were one of the first of those.

Attached: 1317729290597.jpg (270x203, 16K)

I do think we're reaching the upper-limit of graphics to where GPUs are going to be about maximizing efficiency.

People say this every few years and the answer is ALWAYS no

Yes, and that's why we came up with more inefficient and shitter ways of achieving the same graphics we had 8 years ago, so that we can blur them over with TAA and start pushing for stupidly high resolutions so you can end up with a 100x more inefficient 1080p image you'd have gotten in 2012

>Doesn't have a 144hz monitor

Attached: 1551881919651.jpg (1050x700, 117K)

Feels like it. I bought an rx480 for $180 bucks on 2016 and thus far I've been able to play every new game I've bought since at 60fps 1920*1080. What incentive do I have to upgrade?

The point of diminishing returns are here for now. Very few developers are going to spend hundreds of millions advancing graphics and game technology only to have their game flop in an overly saturated market. Also considering the majority of gamers are on consoles or mobile devices there is no need to improve graphics until that hardware catches up and there's an entire generation of zoom zooms that grew up playing mobile games on their mom's ipad and minecraft. They don't care about graphics.

No, we haven't. Fluid and gas dynamics still need major works. Textures are still only focused on a few shiny things, and small things are still pixelblobs. And characters still look plastic.

We're getting close, and in some genres we've hit the limit of what makes a difference (especially racing games), but overall still work to be done.

It's just that games look good on low settings nowadays. It's been like that for a pretty long time

A new generation of consoles is coming and it should force you to update if you still want to play with high/ultra settings.

Edf is has an 60fps cap
>not running EDF @5k

Nothing really.
I own a 2080ti but thats because 144hz has ruined how I "feel" games.
If you dont know how it feels, never try.

are you insane? most games still look aliased as fuck even in 4k, there's plenty of room for improvement

...

I don't think graphics are so important anymore, almost anything looks 'good' nowadays in 3D. But good grapics only help immersion to a certain level. We can just as easily immerse in a bunch of blobby 2D pixels as we can in hyper realistic 3D physics worlds, often times even easier in the 2D pixels blobs because it's less complex, and the hyper realistic stuff has more stuff to 'break immersion' if it's 'off'.
Amazing graphics is interesting for movies, but after the initial "Wow!"it doesn't do that much in games I think, only the biggest idiots get fooled by amazing graphics equals good game meme, but most people don't fall for it. Which I actually think is a good thing: fun games are more important than good looking games.

For me, it's not graphics, it's silky smooth framerate at every waking moment. If a game chugs even for a moment I get autistically upset.

Pc is such a sad platform for gaming since it relies on consoles to actually have room to breathe.
Graphics wise yeah 1080ti is wheres its at but i do feel that the ability to have fast load times on pc benefits games much better so im not complaining about building my pc but graphic optimisations wise there hasnt been a single console port that i been happy with.