@deviltaz35: Of course. Some methods, like FXAA, aren't very useful at any resolution imo. Multi-sample works very nicely at 4K (my reference being a 28" 4K monitor where my eyes are about 2ft from the screen whilst playing. And I've been using it for a while) to remove jaggies. The sweeping statement that AA is useless at 4K is wrong though. But if someone doesn't mind the jaggies that's cool, good for them.

I recall that not too long ago a bunch of people thought that 1080p was such a high resolution that we wouldn't need AA any more.

@OldSchoolPlaya: Depends how much disposable income (that you want to spend on computers and video games) you have, I guess? I very much enjoy being able to take advantage of great looking games, but equally I don't mind going back to my PS4 and playing at 1080p (though that generally means playing at half the frame rate I get on my PC, which I'm not okay with). My favourite game on PC this year is Oxenfree, which is a 2D adventure game, but I like having the option to push things to their limits when I can.

I'd add that a 4K monitor is great for my work. I spend a lot of time looking at charts and data tables, and I can fit far more legible data on the screen at 4K than I could on my previous 1080p monitor.

@Coseniath: I can't recall seeing a game tip much above 6GB yet. In Rise of the Tomb Raider I notched just over that mark in the Geothermal Valley area. The more intensive games I played would generally be using 4-5GB of VRAM, with only a few consistently pushing past 5GB.

That's on a Titan X, 4K max vanilla settings. I've used the ini files to push a few games well passed the options menu (like rendering 3D distant trees in Witcher 3 with shadows. Looks fantastic and has a lower framerate than a photo album, btw), and that way I've pushed VRAM over 10GB.

I have noticed that when comparing performance with people in forums with cards with less VRAM, my card will use more than theirs at given settings, so it seems like if you have room to spare it will use it less efficiently or something? I'm not technically inclined, so I'm not sure why it is though (assuming everyone is reporting truthfully).

@cboye18: Same. I just want to be able to enjoy playing at 60fps, and will pay for it if I have to. Though personally I'd rather just have a setting on the PS4 I have to lower the res in return for frames.

@eva02langley: It really isn't useless at 4K. Not at all.

@rlg5150: Using a small amount of a decent AA technique is very helpful at 4K on a 28" monitor. Foliage and character models, especially clothing detail, often retain very visible aliasing even at high resolution, even in the most impressive looking games. To maintain a decent frame rate at 4K there are numerous settings I would lower before I got rid of AA, such is the visible benefit of it.

The devs at From Soft also said they couldn't beat NG+ in Bloodborne. Permadeath in a game like this seems a bit gnarly though, might take a whole week for some ridiculously skilled fan to beat that one.

@livedreamplay: Who said anything about different mechanics? The current engine soils the games with copious stuttering, stiff animation, bad load times, and a plethora of other technical problems. It's about time they upgraded it to something that worked properly.

Are they replacing Clem with a better game engine, perchance?

@baral-o: Graces is my favourite. I haven't much liked any since then either. I actually did really enjoy much of Xillia, but it was going on a bit so I quit after they got to Elympios. X2 and Zestiria were ruined by poor design and I didn't finish them either.