I've never heard anyone complain about Steam prices except that EA marketing guy a few years back.
Are there really a contingent of gamers appalled by low prices for games on Steam?
Yes. They seriously believe it's going to be the downfall of the industry. These folks post here too. I don't want to name names but yes they exist and it's shocking.
If you want to know who shoot me a PM.
GoG also said this (which I found kind of funny), and they kind of have a point about massive sales devaluing games. I mean, I own over 900 games on Steam, I believe. I've only even launched about 300 of them. Then again, I've been a game collector long before Steam existed, so I can't rightly blame Steam for my behavior.
Does Killzone have a continuous story? I've never played them and I'm not sure I want to, except maybe the new one. Thoughts about jumping in at the end?
You'll be perfectly fine. It's set 30 years after all the other games, so it should be self-contained. Besides, the games weren't exactly story intensive. All the backstory was available on their website at one point and it was actually really awesome, far from the black and white story from the games and the ISA came across like complete dicks.
I've never heard anyone complain about Steam prices except that EA marketing guy a few years back.
Are there really a contingent of gamers appalled by low prices for games on Steam?
Yes. They seriously believe it's going to be the downfall of the industry. These folks post here too. I don't want to name names but yes they exist and it's shocking.
If you want to know who shoot me a PM.
GoG also said this (which I found kind of funny), and they kind of have a point about massive sales devaluing games. I mean, I own over 900 games on Steam, I believe. I've only even launched about 300 of them. Then again, I've been a game collector long before Steam existed, so I can't rightly blame Steam for my behavior.
Instead, I will blame Republicans.
It's just like most other media/tech purchases with the added caveat of convenience. Do you want that game right now? Then you're going to pay a premium. The people that wait for sales probably wouldn't have picked the game up anyway. I'd be willing to bet it's a relatively small percentage of that Venn diagram that contains people that consider a game "Must Buy" and also wait for a sale.
On the subject of Sony ads, dude on my Twitter feed's company made this, I think it came out today.
It's a little long but I like the general feel of it. Nostalgia and continuity. Definitely coming from a different angle than 'Greatness Awaits' (for an older audience I suppose) but continuing the theme Sony's marketing have been going for of the PS4 being as much about the player as the machine.
On the subject of Sony ads, dude on my Twitter feed's company made this, I think it came out today.
It's a little long but I like the general feel of it. Nostalgia and continuity. Definitely coming from a different angle than 'Greatness Awaits' (for an older audience I suppose) but continuing the theme Sony's marketing have been going for of the PS4 being as much about the player as the machine.
Why do they want you to pre-order Warframe at all? It's a free to play game. What does pre-ordering even mean in this context?
- 20,000 Credits to help upgrade your arsenal
- 50 Platinum to give you access to new Warframes, weapons and more
- Exclusive PS4 Braton Rifle skin
Just a note, I'm not seeing Warframe listed on the online store anymore, although it is in my purchase history.
Wait this is all you get? How much is the pre-order? I can tell you that the skin isn't worth it because you won't be using that Rifle for very long and 50 platinum isn't all that much. And credits come much easier than anything in the game.
That's good that it's free. I'm pretty sure I started with 50 Platinum, and 20,000 credits on the PC anyway. But I'm glad no one is spending money on it.
On the subject of Sony ads, dude on my Twitter feed's company made this, I think it came out today.
It's a little long but I like the general feel of it. Nostalgia and continuity. Definitely coming from a different angle than 'Greatness Awaits' (for an older audience I suppose) but continuing the theme Sony's marketing have been going for of the PS4 being as much about the player as the machine.
I just saw that Killzone doesn't support split screen. So given that there's a Killzone UK bundle with two DS4 (as well as a similar US bundle without KZ), what games support the use of two controllers?
"Oh, well, this would be one of those circumstances that people unfamiliar with the law of large numbers would call a coincidence."
I just saw that Killzone doesn't support split screen. So given that there's a Killzone UK bundle with two DS4 (as well as a similar US bundle without KZ), what games support the use of two controllers?
I’ll tell you what happens in Demon’s Souls when you die. You come back as a ghost with your health capped at half. And when you keep on dying, the alignment of the world turns black and the enemies get harder. That’s right, when you fail in this game, it gets harder. Why? Because fuck you is why.
So I'm at a corporate Sony thing, and finally seeing 4k close up, a 55inch screen. It's fucking incredible. I don't see how games can take advantage of this level of resolution though, even in the coming gen. It's freaking me out a bit how sharp it is
So I'm at a corporate Sony thing, and finally seeing 4k close up, a 55inch screen. It's fucking incredible. I don't see how games can take advantage of this level of resolution though, even in the coming gen. It's freaking me out a bit how sharp it is
The biggest problem is how close you need to be to a 55" screen to get the benefit.
from 8-10' away, it may as well be 720p-1080p at that size.
Unless we have a cultural reimagining of the living room (sparse to no furniture, wall projectors being the norm) I don't see 4K getting nearly the traction that 1080p did, if not in screens themselves, but definitely in delivered content.
We will either be still using 720p/1080p for the screens themselves, or we will be upscaling 720p/1080p content for the forseeable future.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I dunno, I was ten feet back and there was a clear difference.
That said, I used to work on a home cinema / hifi magazine so looked at stuff for a living so maybe it's more obvious to me.
Either way, I sit a distance from a screen to the point where it nearly fills my field of vision, like at the movies. And at that distance this is unreal.
It's all sport, will smith trailers and nature docs though. No gaming demos.
ALRIGHT FINE I GOT AN AVATAR
Steam: adamjnet
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I mean, you might be a mutant, which is cool - some of my best friends are mutants.
What showrooms and tech demos tend to do is really run some high contrast showcase material on the set with optimal calibration and lighting in an environment perfectly set up to make it pop. It would be just as impressive 10' away at 1080p...
that said, 4K is fucking beautiful, and when you are up close on the set you can totally tell the difference. It just may not be a difference people will be very happy with or even notice at all once they get the 55" TV back home, set it up where their old 55" 1080p set was, and sit on their couch 10' away to watch a football game.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I know people say that you can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p up to a certain distance but I think it's full of shit. Maybe it's a chart saying "in general, most people can't.." which is something I can agree with. Hell, my parents can't tell the difference between 480p and 1080p. Well.. They claim to anyway.
+1
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I know people say that you can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p up to a certain distance but I think it's full of shit. Maybe it's a chart saying "in general, most people can't.." which is something I can agree with. Hell, my parents can't tell the difference between 480p and 1080p. Well.. They claim to anyway.
but its not full of shit, it really comes down to what our eyes are capable of recognizing.
to say that the chart (which as far as I can tell is basing appropriate pixel density/pixel size against the blur from distance off of 20/20 vision) is off is to say that how we diagnose one's vision is off.
edit: none of this is to say 4K is pointless. 10' away from a DLP 4K wall projector cranking out a 100" or larger image would be goddamned mind shattering.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
So I'm at a corporate Sony thing, and finally seeing 4k close up, a 55inch screen. It's fucking incredible. I don't see how games can take advantage of this level of resolution though, even in the coming gen. It's freaking me out a bit how sharp it is
I was very lucky to see a prototype 8K screen. It was like a jump from HD to better than reality!!
Both consoles support 4k video output. No chance that any actual games are in 4k. Sony has ruled out games in 4k, and there's nothing to make anybody believe that the XB1 would be capable of it either.
The benchmarks in this article can be taken to help illustrate some of the problems facing 4k gaming.
Dehumanized on
+2
CarbonFireSee youin the countryRegistered Userregular
Both consoles support 4k video output. No chance that any actual games are in 4k. Sony has ruled out games in 4k, and there's nothing to make anybody believe that the XB1 would be capable of it either.
The benchmarks in this article can be taken to help illustrate some of the problems facing 4k gaming.
We're probably at least 8-10 years out for consumer level (ie non-enthusiast) 4k support for games. Possibly longer if we have another console revision after the incoming crop of machines. And by then, we might be consuming media in a different enough way (tablets, Oculus) that 4k won't even be that necessary.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves...these next-gen consoles aren't even hitting 1080p for some titles.
I still don't see why we couldn't get some swish indie games, or 2D platformers in 4k. Well, other than the insane storage requirements.
We certainly could, but in order to run those games at 4k, they would need to be sufficiently "simplified" that you'd lose most of the benefit running them at a higher resolution. And that'd be for like .05% of your audience that actually has a display capable of rendering at that quality.
fearsomepirateI ate a pickle once.Registered Userregular
On the split-screen thing, every COD since 4 supports split-screen. No indication they're going to quit. If anything, split-screen features have gotten more and more robust with every release.
Nobody makes me bleed my own blood...nobody.
PSN ID: fearsomepirate
I mean, you might be a mutant, which is cool - some of my best friends are mutants.
What showrooms and tech demos tend to do is really run some high contrast showcase material on the set with optimal calibration and lighting in an environment perfectly set up to make it pop. It would be just as impressive 10' away at 1080p...
that said, 4K is fucking beautiful, and when you are up close on the set you can totally tell the difference. It just may not be a difference people will be very happy with or even notice at all once they get the 55" TV back home, set it up where their old 55" 1080p set was, and sit on their couch 10' away to watch a football game.
I can appreciate what you're saying, (and your graph is according to whom, exactly?) but frankly, it's better, clearly and definitely. Not 3x better, like the numbers suggest - but there's no comparison for me, having seen it in person. The difference, in real terms, is far more 'real' than the difference between 30fps and 60fps which according to all known experiments should be indiscernible. And yet we can all tell the difference.
I mean, you might be a mutant, which is cool - some of my best friends are mutants.
What showrooms and tech demos tend to do is really run some high contrast showcase material on the set with optimal calibration and lighting in an environment perfectly set up to make it pop. It would be just as impressive 10' away at 1080p...
that said, 4K is fucking beautiful, and when you are up close on the set you can totally tell the difference. It just may not be a difference people will be very happy with or even notice at all once they get the 55" TV back home, set it up where their old 55" 1080p set was, and sit on their couch 10' away to watch a football game.
I can appreciate what you're saying, (and your graph is according to whom, exactly?) but frankly, it's better, clearly and definitely. Not 3x better, like the numbers suggest - but there's no comparison for me, having seen it in person. The difference, in real terms, is far more 'real' than the difference between 30fps and 60fps which according to all known experiments should be indiscernible. And yet we can all tell the difference.
Doesn't that chart support what you're saying, that 55" at 10' should be obvious? At that point "full benefit" of all of 720p, 1080p, and 2160p are all true.
actually, 55" at 10' shows benefit to 1080p (but not optimal / maximum) over 720p.
2160p/4K is just kind of masturbatory at a set of that size from that distance unless you have bomber vision.
4K is at its best at 55" when you sit 3-6' from the set.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
For whatever reason, Amazon PS4 preorders are available... if you're willing to buy the Knack bundle. I guess maybe people aren't interested in Knack?
Seems to be gone again anyway. I sent it to someone who somehow decided not to preorder forever ago and they get an unavailable error when they add to cart.
Edit: actually I guess they were a couple steps into ordering and then told the items became unavailable, whereas I just get the error right away, so apparently they ran out again literally as my friend was ordering. So maybe the moral is to just watch all the Amazon bundles 24/7.
bss on
3DS: 2466-2307-8384 PSN: bssteph Steam:bsstephanTwitch:bsstephan Tabletop:13th Age (mm-mmm), D&D 4e Occasional words about games:my site
The difference, in real terms, is far more 'real' than the difference between 30fps and 60fps which according to all known experiments should be indiscernible. And yet we can all tell the difference.
We can see a flash of light 1/200th of a second in length.
We can "sense" a pulse of light in darkness 1/300th of a second long.
There is a world of difference between 30 and 60 frames per second, if only because we aren't relying as heavily on blur and other visual tricks to fool the eye into seeing animation.
It's a completely different, and much much longer conversation.
My last points on why 4K is a bit of a fool's errand right now:
1) The theater side of the machinery will fight against home users getting the same content source they get.
2) The data size is waaaay beyond the scope of blu ray in storage unless we start busting out those insane 8 layer designs out of the labs from 2007.
3) The shaders on our GPUs would shit themselves trying to run modern-style games at that resolution.
All this goes to say that it doesn't really matter anyways, since 4K will not be used for consumer content streams outside of demo reels you download off the internet, for at least a decade. I wouldn't be surprised if video quality stagnates around 1080p for a very long time, just like people have largely ccepted 192-256kbit MP4 audio despite the advancement of technology.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I've never heard anyone complain about Steam prices except that EA marketing guy a few years back.
Are there really a contingent of gamers appalled by low prices for games on Steam?
Yes. They seriously believe it's going to be the downfall of the industry. These folks post here too. I don't want to name names but yes they exist and it's shocking.
If you want to know who shoot me a PM.
GoG also said this (which I found kind of funny), and they kind of have a point about massive sales devaluing games. I mean, I own over 900 games on Steam, I believe. I've only even launched about 300 of them. Then again, I've been a game collector long before Steam existed, so I can't rightly blame Steam for my behavior.
Instead, I will blame Republicans.
It's just like most other media/tech purchases with the added caveat of convenience. Do you want that game right now? Then you're going to pay a premium. The people that wait for sales probably wouldn't have picked the game up anyway. I'd be willing to bet it's a relatively small percentage of that Venn diagram that contains people that consider a game "Must Buy" and also wait for a sale.
That's not what I mean. I mean that my Steam library is basically the same as if I bought a mansion with a library and filled it with thousands of books on sale, most of which I will never read. What value do those books have to me? It's a philosophical question and I am not sure what the answer is.
I will never play a majority of the games I own on Steam, but sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, I will still keep buying them as they go on sale. Steam sales trigger my "eh, fuck it, it's cheap enough" reflex. So I end up with a glut of games I have no intention of ever playing.
Worst still, the games I do intend or at least desire (to some degree) to play get lost in the endless sea of content I can never hope to crack. So I end up with games like Little Inferno and 30 Flights of Lovin' that I bought because I wanted to play, but promptly forgot I even bought because I bought like 40 other $2 games that week.
That's my own fault, but Steam at least paves the way for me to practice my bad behaviors. I do think the massive sales actively devalue game content, but I don't care that much.
The difference, in real terms, is far more 'real' than the difference between 30fps and 60fps which according to all known experiments should be indiscernible. And yet we can all tell the difference.
We can see a flash of light 1/200th of a second in length.
We can "sense" a pulse of light in darkness 1/300th of a second long.
There is a world of difference between 30 and 60 frames per second, if only because we aren't relying as heavily on blur and other visual tricks to fool the eye into seeing animation.
It's a completely different, and much much longer conversation.
My last points on why 4K is a bit of a fool's errand right now:
1) The theater side of the machinery will fight against home users getting the same content source they get.
2) The data size is waaaay beyond the scope of blu ray in storage unless we start busting out those insane 8 layer designs out of the labs from 2007.
3) The shaders on our GPUs would shit themselves trying to run modern-style games at that resolution.
All this goes to say that it doesn't really matter anyways, since 4K will not be used for consumer content streams outside of demo reels you download off the internet, for at least a decade. I wouldn't be surprised if video quality stagnates around 1080p for a very long time, just like people have largely ccepted 192-256kbit MP4 audio despite the advancement of technology.
On the production side of things, 4k is a resource hog. I had a project I was considering shooting in 4k back at the end of the summer, but the guy at the rental house I was renting cameras from convinced me to stick to 1080p because of how much more resource intensive it is. Drive space, processing power, render times... Basically he said my aging MacPro would crap the bed if I tried to work in 4k.
Add in top of that the chart above, which, having spent many years with a 32" 1080p TV far enough away that there was no difference between DVDs and BluRays, I basically agree with, and I really don't think 4k is practical for home delivery right now, and won't be for quite some time.
Oh, snap, that video. Pay attention, MS, this is how you market a console to gamers. Not with some outdoor collage of actors (and one filmmaker) giving a pep-talk about our potential and all the things we can do with "the cloud" or "juffo-wup" or something.
Zoku Gojira on
"Because things are the way they are, things will not stay the way they are." - Bertolt Brecht
The difference, in real terms, is far more 'real' than the difference between 30fps and 60fps which according to all known experiments should be indiscernible. And yet we can all tell the difference.
We can see a flash of light 1/200th of a second in length.
We can "sense" a pulse of light in darkness 1/300th of a second long.
There is a world of difference between 30 and 60 frames per second, if only because we aren't relying as heavily on blur and other visual tricks to fool the eye into seeing animation.
It's a completely different, and much much longer conversation.
My last points on why 4K is a bit of a fool's errand right now:
1) The theater side of the machinery will fight against home users getting the same content source they get.
2) The data size is waaaay beyond the scope of blu ray in storage unless we start busting out those insane 8 layer designs out of the labs from 2007.
3) The shaders on our GPUs would shit themselves trying to run modern-style games at that resolution.
All this goes to say that it doesn't really matter anyways, since 4K will not be used for consumer content streams outside of demo reels you download off the internet, for at least a decade. I wouldn't be surprised if video quality stagnates around 1080p for a very long time, just like people have largely ccepted 192-256kbit MP4 audio despite the advancement of technology.
Right, I'm not prepared to go get into a long discussion about this, but I'm not speaking anecdotally here. I wrote my first post in this discussion from my phone, in a very busy room, sitting at living room distance from the screen I was describing. I was literally looking at it while I was writing. This was not a controlled setting, it was in a hospitality box at a Peter Gabriel gig. (Gig was awful, BTW). The clarity and definition was astonishing. With regards to price, no it is not ready for mass consumption, this thing's $ level is in the stratosphere as with any new display technology, as with DVD and Blu-Ray before it, and will not be for quite a while, but it is seen as, and will be, a more significant boost to the TV industry than 3D ever was, and what the Kinect will be, and what the Oculus Rift will introduce. This is the Display industry's focus above those technologies - fidelity.
This is what broadcast will strive for from here on out; I say that because I was in the room with the people that make those decisions. But I don't think gaming will be able to keep up. 4k may not be on 'consumer streams' (whatever that means) but it will be what replaces Blu-Ray and it will be the largest driver in upping internet download speeds over the next few years. It's a big deal and it's part of the reason they are tearing up my street right now to put in the mega bandwidth super-bit fibre cables or whatever - because of media delivered like this.
Posts
GoG also said this (which I found kind of funny), and they kind of have a point about massive sales devaluing games. I mean, I own over 900 games on Steam, I believe. I've only even launched about 300 of them. Then again, I've been a game collector long before Steam existed, so I can't rightly blame Steam for my behavior.
Instead, I will blame Republicans.
You'll be perfectly fine. It's set 30 years after all the other games, so it should be self-contained. Besides, the games weren't exactly story intensive. All the backstory was available on their website at one point and it was actually really awesome, far from the black and white story from the games and the ISA came across like complete dicks.
It's just like most other media/tech purchases with the added caveat of convenience. Do you want that game right now? Then you're going to pay a premium. The people that wait for sales probably wouldn't have picked the game up anyway. I'd be willing to bet it's a relatively small percentage of that Venn diagram that contains people that consider a game "Must Buy" and also wait for a sale.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
It's a little long but I like the general feel of it. Nostalgia and continuity. Definitely coming from a different angle than 'Greatness Awaits' (for an older audience I suppose) but continuing the theme Sony's marketing have been going for of the PS4 being as much about the player as the machine.
*edited to embed that shit
Steam: adamjnet
Oh man... right in the feels...
I got my PS1 right before I got married, my first game was Wild Arms.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
Wait this is all you get? How much is the pre-order? I can tell you that the skin isn't worth it because you won't be using that Rifle for very long and 50 platinum isn't all that much. And credits come much easier than anything in the game.
Yeah, I liked this! Especially that window view that remained unobstructed through the years.
Diablo. FIFA.
Twitter - discolouie PSN - Loupa Steam - Loupa
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Knack-for-PS4-Gets-New-Screenshots-Shows-Local-Co-Op-Mode-385493.shtml
Let me tell you about Demon's Souls....
Steam: adamjnet
I don't think it's gonna be a thing in gaming for a while though
The biggest problem is how close you need to be to a 55" screen to get the benefit.
from 8-10' away, it may as well be 720p-1080p at that size.
Unless we have a cultural reimagining of the living room (sparse to no furniture, wall projectors being the norm) I don't see 4K getting nearly the traction that 1080p did, if not in screens themselves, but definitely in delivered content.
We will either be still using 720p/1080p for the screens themselves, or we will be upscaling 720p/1080p content for the forseeable future.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
That said, I used to work on a home cinema / hifi magazine so looked at stuff for a living so maybe it's more obvious to me.
Either way, I sit a distance from a screen to the point where it nearly fills my field of vision, like at the movies. And at that distance this is unreal.
It's all sport, will smith trailers and nature docs though. No gaming demos.
Steam: adamjnet
I mean, you might be a mutant, which is cool - some of my best friends are mutants.
What showrooms and tech demos tend to do is really run some high contrast showcase material on the set with optimal calibration and lighting in an environment perfectly set up to make it pop. It would be just as impressive 10' away at 1080p...
that said, 4K is fucking beautiful, and when you are up close on the set you can totally tell the difference. It just may not be a difference people will be very happy with or even notice at all once they get the 55" TV back home, set it up where their old 55" 1080p set was, and sit on their couch 10' away to watch a football game.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
but its not full of shit, it really comes down to what our eyes are capable of recognizing.
to say that the chart (which as far as I can tell is basing appropriate pixel density/pixel size against the blur from distance off of 20/20 vision) is off is to say that how we diagnose one's vision is off.
edit: none of this is to say 4K is pointless. 10' away from a DLP 4K wall projector cranking out a 100" or larger image would be goddamned mind shattering.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I was very lucky to see a prototype 8K screen. It was like a jump from HD to better than reality!!
The benchmarks in this article can be taken to help illustrate some of the problems facing 4k gaming.
We're probably at least 8-10 years out for consumer level (ie non-enthusiast) 4k support for games. Possibly longer if we have another console revision after the incoming crop of machines. And by then, we might be consuming media in a different enough way (tablets, Oculus) that 4k won't even be that necessary.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves...these next-gen consoles aren't even hitting 1080p for some titles.
PSN: SirGrinchX
Oculus Rift: Sir_Grinch
We certainly could, but in order to run those games at 4k, they would need to be sufficiently "simplified" that you'd lose most of the benefit running them at a higher resolution. And that'd be for like .05% of your audience that actually has a display capable of rendering at that quality.
It's not just space requirements, it's economics.
PSN ID: fearsomepirate
I can appreciate what you're saying, (and your graph is according to whom, exactly?) but frankly, it's better, clearly and definitely. Not 3x better, like the numbers suggest - but there's no comparison for me, having seen it in person. The difference, in real terms, is far more 'real' than the difference between 30fps and 60fps which according to all known experiments should be indiscernible. And yet we can all tell the difference.
Steam: adamjnet
Tabletop:13th Age (mm-mmm), D&D 4e
Occasional words about games: my site
actually, 55" at 10' shows benefit to 1080p (but not optimal / maximum) over 720p.
2160p/4K is just kind of masturbatory at a set of that size from that distance unless you have bomber vision.
4K is at its best at 55" when you sit 3-6' from the set.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Seems to be gone again anyway. I sent it to someone who somehow decided not to preorder forever ago and they get an unavailable error when they add to cart.
Edit: actually I guess they were a couple steps into ordering and then told the items became unavailable, whereas I just get the error right away, so apparently they ran out again literally as my friend was ordering. So maybe the moral is to just watch all the Amazon bundles 24/7.
Tabletop:13th Age (mm-mmm), D&D 4e
Occasional words about games: my site
We can see a flash of light 1/200th of a second in length.
We can "sense" a pulse of light in darkness 1/300th of a second long.
There is a world of difference between 30 and 60 frames per second, if only because we aren't relying as heavily on blur and other visual tricks to fool the eye into seeing animation.
It's a completely different, and much much longer conversation.
My last points on why 4K is a bit of a fool's errand right now:
1) The theater side of the machinery will fight against home users getting the same content source they get.
2) The data size is waaaay beyond the scope of blu ray in storage unless we start busting out those insane 8 layer designs out of the labs from 2007.
3) The shaders on our GPUs would shit themselves trying to run modern-style games at that resolution.
All this goes to say that it doesn't really matter anyways, since 4K will not be used for consumer content streams outside of demo reels you download off the internet, for at least a decade. I wouldn't be surprised if video quality stagnates around 1080p for a very long time, just like people have largely ccepted 192-256kbit MP4 audio despite the advancement of technology.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
That's not what I mean. I mean that my Steam library is basically the same as if I bought a mansion with a library and filled it with thousands of books on sale, most of which I will never read. What value do those books have to me? It's a philosophical question and I am not sure what the answer is.
I will never play a majority of the games I own on Steam, but sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, I will still keep buying them as they go on sale. Steam sales trigger my "eh, fuck it, it's cheap enough" reflex. So I end up with a glut of games I have no intention of ever playing.
Worst still, the games I do intend or at least desire (to some degree) to play get lost in the endless sea of content I can never hope to crack. So I end up with games like Little Inferno and 30 Flights of Lovin' that I bought because I wanted to play, but promptly forgot I even bought because I bought like 40 other $2 games that week.
That's my own fault, but Steam at least paves the way for me to practice my bad behaviors. I do think the massive sales actively devalue game content, but I don't care that much.
On the production side of things, 4k is a resource hog. I had a project I was considering shooting in 4k back at the end of the summer, but the guy at the rental house I was renting cameras from convinced me to stick to 1080p because of how much more resource intensive it is. Drive space, processing power, render times... Basically he said my aging MacPro would crap the bed if I tried to work in 4k.
Add in top of that the chart above, which, having spent many years with a 32" 1080p TV far enough away that there was no difference between DVDs and BluRays, I basically agree with, and I really don't think 4k is practical for home delivery right now, and won't be for quite some time.
Right, I'm not prepared to go get into a long discussion about this, but I'm not speaking anecdotally here. I wrote my first post in this discussion from my phone, in a very busy room, sitting at living room distance from the screen I was describing. I was literally looking at it while I was writing. This was not a controlled setting, it was in a hospitality box at a Peter Gabriel gig. (Gig was awful, BTW). The clarity and definition was astonishing. With regards to price, no it is not ready for mass consumption, this thing's $ level is in the stratosphere as with any new display technology, as with DVD and Blu-Ray before it, and will not be for quite a while, but it is seen as, and will be, a more significant boost to the TV industry than 3D ever was, and what the Kinect will be, and what the Oculus Rift will introduce. This is the Display industry's focus above those technologies - fidelity.
This is what broadcast will strive for from here on out; I say that because I was in the room with the people that make those decisions. But I don't think gaming will be able to keep up. 4k may not be on 'consumer streams' (whatever that means) but it will be what replaces Blu-Ray and it will be the largest driver in upping internet download speeds over the next few years. It's a big deal and it's part of the reason they are tearing up my street right now to put in the mega bandwidth super-bit fibre cables or whatever - because of media delivered like this.
Steam: adamjnet