There are people that still play games at 1080p at the end of 2017

>There are people that still play games at 1080p at the end of 2017
What's your excuse?

I use three 21.5" 1080p monitors that appear pixel perfect, or "retina" if you prefer, at my viewing distance and would only inconvenience myself with larger ones at a higher resolution.

I have a switch ;_,;

>tfw my cellphone is a higher resolution than my monitor and tv

>21.5"

jesus christ how horrifying

I can't fit more in my peripheral vision without falling for the vertical monitor meme.

>What's your excuse?
I'm still happy with how games look in my current setup and I don't want to justify making an overpriced/unsustainable upgrade. That's about it really.

my excuse is that 1080p is perfectly fine

>hurr why do you game at 720p when its current year
>hurr why do you game at 1080p when its current year
>hurr why do you game at 1440p when its current year
>hurr why do you game at 4k when its current year
>hurr why do you game at 8k when its current year

SHUT THE FUCK UP I DONT GIVE A SHIT ANYMORE WHAT HAPPENED TO BEING FUCKING HAPPY WITH WHAT YOU HAVE AND NOT ITCHING FOR AN UNESSENTIAL IMPROVEMENT EVERY FUCKING MINUTE

I'm using three 27" 1440p screens just fine.

I do not require ever-denser pixel count.

Yeah, cell phone displays are ridiculous now. Even 1080p is a bit much on a 5" or bigger screen. The ones with 1440p are utterly stupid, and there are even a few 4k phones now. Completely retarded waste of money.

>1080p has been the pc standard for over a decade now.
>Consoles still play at 900p or below in the current year

Clearly you sit much further from your screens than I do, or turn your head. The former accomplishes nothing and the latter is beneath me.

What's worse is the effect on battery life.

Most games don't run well in 4k yet. Some, like nuDoom do, but most cap out around 30-40 due to heavy post-processing.

Up to 20 inch 1080p is fine
21 to 30 inch needs 1440p
30+ requires 4k
I don't think you will ever need more than 4k. The PPI is insane. Any bigger and you get into a television zone where u sit 2 meters away and cant see the difference between it anyway.

8k is probably still needed for vr though.

I was used to having a 1080p phone for ~3 years now so I was disappointed to hear the Switch would have a 720p screen.

After seeing it for myself I realized there really isn't any noticeable difference.

Since Half Life 2 and Doom 3 I've never really given a shit about graphics. Aliasing also doesn't bother me so I have no real reason to go beyond 1080 besides productivity (a second monitor does that better)

I have a 28" 4k monitor and I can see the pixels just fine. 8k would probably be the max useful resolution for a desktop display.

Maybe you need glasses?

>sitting 1 cm from the screen

Blanket recommendations like this are retarded. It's all about your distance from the screen. You cannot determine visual quality with just screen size and resolution (PPI).

>cm
Whats that?

Thats why i said you don't need more than 4k. Up to 32-34 inch is probably the max you would go for a monitor. Any further and you need to sit back further away from the screen anyway.

Clearly not your retarded measure system. What's it called? Burgerinches?

More like 80 cm to one meter I'd guess

I do sit a little closer when gaming but even when leaning back I can make out all the detail. You can probably find the minimum angular resolution of the eye somewhere and find the max. useful dpi for your sitting distance based on that.

My main motivation for the 4k res was more screen space for text editing, since having several big windows is pretty useful when programming.

Quarter pounders or QP's for short.

This, why care about all this and not just have fun with your games?

1. Games aren't designed for above 1080, heck most aren't designed for that still
2. The diminishing returns kick in and the tradeoff for quality/performance isn't worth it in my opinion
I'd rather have a rock solid 1080p experience than dips to 50 FPS in 1440p

I play games at 1366x768.
Fight me.

I prefer a higher refresh rate

>1. Games aren't designed for above 1080
>There are people that still believe this
Unless you mean something like 2560x1080 which is not commonly supported

What year is it? 2002?

I don't care about graphics and I don't want to bother doing all the research and paying all the money for PC parts to get THE BEST GRAFIX.

>switch
>playing in 1080p

>some of the most passionate positive reviews on steam are from people who have the game running on older hardware
>some of the most cancerous unhelpful negative reviews are from brats who noticed a slight stutter on their precious new $3000 rig
Really makes me think

me too but it is a shameful admission

I've upgraded to 4k and the visual increase is so fucking negligible I wish I'd just gone for a 144hz.
It's only worth it for animated shit like Darkest Dungeon or Hollow Knight as it then makes the already pretty visuals so fucking crisp.

human eye cant see past 720p anyway

There has been little to no advancement in current games to really take advantage of higher resolutions without significant drawbacks.

All it adds is just a little more crispness. But its not really worth the price and performance hit.
>need atleast 500 dollars for a decent 4k monitor
>700 dollar gpu to run it decently.

Yeah pretty much. I got a 1080 TI and this monitor as I had spare cash to blow and bought into the meme.
For the longest time it just made Steam overlay unusable until they fixed it, and I had to "upgrade" to Win10 to from 7 as it didn't support multiple monitors with different resolutions well.
If I just ran with two 1080p monitors, with a 144hz for gaming, none of these issues would have arisen.

I can see the 4k benefit if you need the screen real estate for whatever reason, like I guess if you do artsy shit.

Much rather downsample with a TN monitor

>TN panel monitor