3 ms·

The dream of game graphics was murdered first by crypto and then by LLMs. Is there any hope for a time when the market for high-spec GPUs will actually be games

The dream of game graphics was murdered first by crypto and then by LLMs. Is there any hope for a time when the market for high-spec GPUs will actually be games? Or has that ship sailed forever? At least AI has some sort of real world utility I guess, but I still wish neither revolution had happened.

borissk 3y ago
The price of gaming GPUs have risen mainly because very few gamers buy AMD and Intel GPUs.
wruza 3y ago
Tbh, graphics is not what games lack today. Personally I was fine with what we had 7-10 years ago graphics-wise, and most modern cards hit FPS limits for these games, apart from few pathological cases. But if you're into graphics, I agree it sucks, and probably forever now. Otoh those who were into graphics brought us here, didn't they, so maybe it's karma ;). Imagine that the great filter is not supernovae nor nuclear, but the fact that species may happen to have good enough eyesight to glimpse into the box of pandora computing.
- alkonaut 3y ago
  I really do like fancy graphics in games. Once you have seen the good ones, I now find it pretty off-putting when something looks like it was made 10 years ago (Recent example: Starfield). I think some games like the modern iterations of CP2077 are just mind blowing - all gameplay aside. But it's a shame that it costs basically north of $1000 to play it the way its developers hope you will.
  - semi 3y ago
    That's always been the problem.. it's hard to justify the expense of making a game few people have the hardware to run. So instead most games just target whatever modern consoles are which aside from right after a new release is usually relatively old for a PC.. which then makes it hard for PC gamers to justify spending that $1000+ when few games utilize it.
    - natpalmer1776 3y ago
      Personally I spend a ton on gaming hardware so I can (ab)use mods that are horribly unoptimized, buggy, and require about as much effort to install and use as would be required to become competent in another programming language. Minecraft and Skyrim have been my two constant companions for years now.
      - imtringued 3y ago
        Ah yes, Minecraft. Nothing else comes close to waiting 20 minutes for it to load your modpack and the game using 10GB of your RAM.
  - wruza 3y ago
    Ugh. Cyberpunk I don’t like specifically for its neon darkness and these RTX-enabled monochrome colors and ambients. Same for modern young streamers who like “pink from one side, blue from the other side” lighting. Also speech is all f on f on f. Recently I watched SF/CP comparison video that ought to show superiority of the latter. But it left very mixed aftertaste. Yes, CP is much more “technological” and “produced”, but SF is at least not a bunch of teens who can’t change a lightbulb and learned about the word “fuck” yesterday.
- tacocataco 3y ago
  I personally prefer larger maps in game over graphics.
  - alkonaut 3y ago
    It depends. If it feels empty or walled off with loading screens then it doesn’t feel large just because it is big in extent. The experienced “size” of a world feels more related to density than how long it takes to traverse. Starfield vs CP2077 feels like an example here again.
I_Am_Nous 3y ago
I think for the most part graphics have been "good enough" for a while, and since raytracing is the new hotness that's what games are working on improving rather than pure polygon count or resolution. The market for gamers spending insane amounts of money on hardware is kind of disappearing as well, I know so many people who just buy "upgrades" to their existing hardware to play newer games, but they certainly aren't buying 4090s. It's a similar issue with EVs, the market they were trying to sell to didn't really exist. They wanted people with enough money to buy an expensive car, but also people who are not expecting oodles of luxury features which would normally come on a car that expensive. So now they are having to lower their EV prices in general because inflation kind of murdered any market they may have had. Add on the EV growing pains of battery tech still being susceptible to reduced range in the cold, increased tire wear, and defects...I don't know many people who will take such a risk for such a price.
scorxn 3y ago
Hmm, not sure what you mean. The consumer cards from AMD and Nvidia are still gaming-first, and games utilize new features like ray-tracing and DSS. Speaking as a lifelong PC gamer and current Twitch addict, the industry still seems very healthy.
- alkonaut 3y ago
  Games are targeting 3090 or 4090 for decent settings and frame rates. My 2070S is tired as hell. The mid range jumped from $150 to $500 in a couple of years. The enthusiast range jumped from $250 to $1500. That’s painful.

borissk 3y ago

The price of gaming GPUs have risen mainly because very few gamers buy AMD and Intel GPUs.

wruza 3y ago

Tbh, graphics is not what games lack today. Personally I was fine with what we had 7-10 years ago graphics-wise, and most modern cards hit FPS limits for these games, apart from few pathological cases. But if you're into graphics, I agree it sucks, and probably forever now. Otoh those who were into graphics brought us here, didn't they, so maybe it's karma ;). Imagine that the great filter is not supernovae nor nuclear, but the fact that species may happen to have good enough eyesight to glimpse into the box of pandora computing.

alkonaut 3y ago
I really do like fancy graphics in games. Once you have seen the good ones, I now find it pretty off-putting when something looks like it was made 10 years ago (Recent example: Starfield). I think some games like the modern iterations of CP2077 are just mind blowing - all gameplay aside. But it's a shame that it costs basically north of $1000 to play it the way its developers hope you will.
- semi 3y ago
  That's always been the problem.. it's hard to justify the expense of making a game few people have the hardware to run. So instead most games just target whatever modern consoles are which aside from right after a new release is usually relatively old for a PC.. which then makes it hard for PC gamers to justify spending that $1000+ when few games utilize it.
  - natpalmer1776 3y ago
    Personally I spend a ton on gaming hardware so I can (ab)use mods that are horribly unoptimized, buggy, and require about as much effort to install and use as would be required to become competent in another programming language. Minecraft and Skyrim have been my two constant companions for years now.
    - imtringued 3y ago
      Ah yes, Minecraft. Nothing else comes close to waiting 20 minutes for it to load your modpack and the game using 10GB of your RAM.
- wruza 3y ago
  Ugh. Cyberpunk I don’t like specifically for its neon darkness and these RTX-enabled monochrome colors and ambients. Same for modern young streamers who like “pink from one side, blue from the other side” lighting. Also speech is all f on f on f. Recently I watched SF/CP comparison video that ought to show superiority of the latter. But it left very mixed aftertaste. Yes, CP is much more “technological” and “produced”, but SF is at least not a bunch of teens who can’t change a lightbulb and learned about the word “fuck” yesterday.
tacocataco 3y ago
I personally prefer larger maps in game over graphics.
- alkonaut 3y ago
  It depends. If it feels empty or walled off with loading screens then it doesn’t feel large just because it is big in extent. The experienced “size” of a world feels more related to density than how long it takes to traverse. Starfield vs CP2077 feels like an example here again.

I_Am_Nous 3y ago

I think for the most part graphics have been "good enough" for a while, and since raytracing is the new hotness that's what games are working on improving rather than pure polygon count or resolution. The market for gamers spending insane amounts of money on hardware is kind of disappearing as well, I know so many people who just buy "upgrades" to their existing hardware to play newer games, but they certainly aren't buying 4090s. It's a similar issue with EVs, the market they were trying to sell to didn't really exist. They wanted people with enough money to buy an expensive car, but also people who are not expecting oodles of luxury features which would normally come on a car that expensive. So now they are having to lower their EV prices in general because inflation kind of murdered any market they may have had. Add on the EV growing pains of battery tech still being susceptible to reduced range in the cold, increased tire wear, and defects...I don't know many people who will take such a risk for such a price.

scorxn 3y ago

Hmm, not sure what you mean. The consumer cards from AMD and Nvidia are still gaming-first, and games utilize new features like ray-tracing and DSS. Speaking as a lifelong PC gamer and current Twitch addict, the industry still seems very healthy.

alkonaut 3y ago
Games are targeting 3090 or 4090 for decent settings and frame rates. My 2070S is tired as hell. The mid range jumped from $150 to $500 in a couple of years. The enthusiast range jumped from $250 to $1500. That’s painful.