Ok, I’m not a gamer, and I have a real honest question: we had fun with gamesetsin the 90’s. We had LAN games in the 2000’s, and over Internet quickly after. People were spending hours, days playing. Each new GPU was so much better, sharper pictures, “so realistic”, etc.
Are you genuinely having more fun now than with good games from 10years ago? Even 15years ago??
Because it looks like this whole requirements thing is pure marketing, and studios needing to keep selling: “Look, shinier graphics that will make the previous generation of games you loved and found incredibly sharp and detailed when theé came out look mild and of bad quality now!”










Maybe I wasn’t clear, but my point was these requirements are indeed driven by the studios and the GPU makers.
These are marketing decisions, because the day it stops (imagine studio claiming “we’re good enough, no more need to improve graphics!” then GPU last 10 years or more before needing replacement (I write a conservative 10, as they are heavily stressed while in use, but a computer can last longer than that).
Similarly, if graphics stop improving, studios will have a much harder time coming up with new games players want to buy. They will need to actually innovate in games mechanisms or find other added value features, or accept that the market will significantly decrease as new shiny graphics on the same game will no longer work.
So game advertisements are all about blasting you with spectacular graphics and animations.