Quite frankly, I'm surprised that anyone with any knowledge of computer hardware would try to argue that 2GB cards won't be able to run games a year from now. I won't try to stop you from insisting that's the case though.
Didn't you just say that you were standing by your initial point? It's not a big deal though.
And yeah, I'm talking about mainstream AAA games. Cards that are 3+ years old now can still run today's AAA games. Today's (fast) cards will run AAA games 2 years from now. Not on the highest settings of course, but they'll run them.
New consoles Didn't come out 3 years ago I think you'll find things different now. Just to reiterate I'm not saying all games but I definitely believe there will be games that require 4 GB vram within 2 years.
We're still a long time away from needing more than 2GB of VRAM just to run most games.
We'll just have to disagree on that.
I suppose I should have taken "just to run" more literally. I guess if your talking about running min setting no AA at 25-30 FPS then you may be right.
As for the evil within I'm sure you could run it there's usually a good amount of headroom built in to system requirements but fact that 4GB is a min requirement today doesn't bode well for 2gb cards 2 years from now.
It might very well be that developers will not bother to include low-res textures and such for the PC version in a year or two, meaning it won't even run on 2 GB VRAM.
Nah.. before I got my GTX 770, I was playing games like Bioshock Infinite and the new Tomb Raider at near-max settings with a 3+ year old GTX 470. I don't think the next 3 years are going to see such a jump in graphics that the cycle will be that much different.
Except that you're completely wrong about that. Do some more research and you'll see that the min requirement for The Evil Within is only a 1GB graphics card. 4GB is the "recommended" requirement.