SmokedMeat
Gamer™
No one should be blocking any of these technologies. Freedom of choice is what PC is all about.
Keep exclusivity bullshit on consoles
Keep exclusivity bullshit on consoles
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD sponsorships likely block DLSS - Hardware Unboxed
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Yep Sackboy really stands out as it even had DLSS3 and SER implemented, and Sony have a PC porting team in record as saying that they have a trivial solution for implementing all 3 upscalers, and Sony have also released AMD sponsored titles that support DLSS.
SolidQ
Member
Sony is defferent story. But Metro, Plague Tale etc doesn't have FSR.
Alot people forgot "The Way it's meant to be played" times
, Where Nvidia loses to ATI until 8800 Series
Del_X
Member
FSR looks downright offensive in the 4k comparison
Resident Evil 4 Remake: DLSS and XeSS Community Patch Review
Resident Evil 4 Remake recently got support for NVIDIA's Deep Learning Anti-Aliasing (DLAA), NVIDIA's DLSS Super Resolution (DLSS 3.1) and Intel's Xe Super Sampling (XeSS) through a community mod, and results are excellent. In this mini-review we take a look, comparing the image quality and...www.techpowerup.com
If its anything like RE4, its a huge difference. RE4 FSR implementation was fucked up. The vaseline made so many details lost. Has to be seen on monitor, not phone.
Topher
Gold Member
Nah, Bethesda has the resources of Microsoft behind them and I just don't see any excuse for not having DLSS as an option for Microsoft's biggest game in years.
I think it’s a mistake.
onnextflix5
Member
Dlss is a closed source, made exclusively for for nvidia graphics cards, I don’t see any problems with AMD blocking it on sponsored games, having Dlss only benefits their competitors, any company would do the Same.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It hurts gamers on an open platform, same way when the graphics market leader by far, has no open source mind you, FSR in some games that they sponsor as well.
winjer
Gold Member
The ideal situation is for games to support all upscalers. DLSS, FSR and XeSS.
Then the consumer chooses what he wants to use.
Zathalus
Member
It doesn't have to be DLSS only. It can be DLSS+XeSS+FSR. Every user is then free to use the one they prefer and works with the GPU they have.
Preventing something like XeSS hurts AMD users as well, because XeSS is better then FSR.
So basically the deal benefits no one.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
GPU makers shouldn't be blocking anything on games they are not making. Game makers shouldn't be accepting deals from GPU makers that require them to remove competing technology from their games.
Gamers shouldn't be making excuses for either GPU or game makers for any of this nonsense.
That's how I see it in a nutshell anyway.
Last edited:
Reallink
Member
This has to be some kind of meme you guys are acting out, you can't seriously be this delusional. The assbackwards logic and galactic olympic mental gymnastics required to rationalize AMD refusing to say "No, we don't do that" is unfathomable. How exactly does making yourself a despised public enemy sell your GPUs? Who the fuck would let something like this circulate if it was categorically false? You guys have to realize how preposterous your argument is on its face. Even if by some 1 in a billion miracle it is actually false, the only logical conclusion to be derived from AMD's criminally incompetent handling of the situation is that it's true.
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
it hurts them way more if they block it. every time a game only has FSR2 and no DLSS, people will talk about how shit FSR2 is, and talk about mods to finally get rid of it in favor of DLSS. "look how this quick and dirty dlss mod wipes the floor with FSR2"
if a game has all 3 methods people will more likely just talk about FSR2 in a positive way, like "it's a nice alternative for GTX and AMD users" etc.
in a world where even Apple has a better temporal reconstruction method, they just can't do shit like this and think they'll come out ahead of it, because they won't... noone buys a fucking AMD card because there's no DLSS I random games.
Last edited:
Agent_4Seven
Tears of Nintendo
AMD can just FUCK OFF with their shit ass FSR.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
XeSS is quite good actually and I agree it is better than FSR. This is Intels secret weapon
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
I’m not aware of Nvidia making deals with developers that forbid them from supporting AMD features
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Seriously, if FSR wasn’t so incredibly bad this wouldn’t be a huge issue. They can’t keep up with Nvidia so they have to pay devs to actively make games worse. Get fucked AMD.
Isn't the quality also dependent on the dev to some degree? I ask because the implementation in Diablo 4 is good.
You being serious?
Because you are clueless, it happens.
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
Enlighten me
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I haven't had a problem with it, but I play at 4K and with quality setting. It is overall not bad - someone did a test recently and FSR never came out on top, but it wasn't - DLSS looks great, FSR looks like dogshit - except for 1440p performance or the odd title like Forspoken.
Buggy Loop
Member
It's Nvidia's fault, they had to guess ahead of time which AMD features to add to contract because AMD alternatives were always reactionary to Nvidia's and late to the party.
Fucking Nvidia.
DaGwaphics
Member
It's about the clicks man, it's always about the clicks. Not that I'm begrudging these content creators, I watch many of the channels reporting on this all the time. Regardless of what AMD is or isn't doing with these contracts I've always just assumed that this is how it was and the results generally speak to that (with Nvidia sponsored titles running best on Nvidia cards and utilizing their features and the AMD sponsored titles favoring AMD).
There's also a good chance that the only reason Nvidia isn't blocking FSR in their contracts is because with their market position it would look like they were paying developers to crush what was left of the competition. They'd probably be up the river in anti-trust in a heartbeat. Thus, I don't necessarily think them not doing it makes them altruistic.
Last edited:
ShadowkillXNA
Member
Your turn, post some selfies now.
They can't compete, the real world is just too cruel for them.
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
It’s one thing for them to pay devs to support their own proprietary features/stuff that runs best on their own GPUs. It’s another thing to make deals that prohibit devs from supporting their competitor’s features.
Topher
Gold Member
I think that's what
poppabk
was alluding to earlier. Harder for Nvidia to get away with these sort of tactics and regulators already shot down previous efforts. So nothing about this is really suggesting Nvidia is above these sort of tactics. Clearly not the case. But doesn't make what AMD is doing any less shitty if they really are paying to exclude DLSS.
Kataploom
Gold Member
Sure, but they most probably haven't decided yet even if the decision is made in lead programmer's mind. You know in web app development industry a ticket for changing the color of a single label can take weeks or months since someone put the requirement to it finally being attended?
Putting FSR or DLSS seems more like a development time contraint than AMD paying to not support DLSS, since their audience are not mainly RTX users.
I won't believe AMD pays devs to avoid DLSS because the proof is in their favour, and if they do it, then Nvidia also do it, be it with FSR or any other way. In any case sure both manufacturers pay devs to optimize games for their cards better, like Ubisoft or COD games running way better on AMD and Cyberpunk 2077 running way better on Nvidia.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Don't blame him. Blame yourself or God.
DaGwaphics
Member
It is a console game as well, built with a proprietary engine that likely doesn't have plugins for all the available options. If DLSS is late it might just be a case of them prioritizing FSR because it's a first-party game now and the tech might be used in the console versions.
Topher
Gold Member
Hopefully AMD isn't paying for exclusion at all and this is just a matter of incompetence on the PR front. If that's the case then all good. If they are paying to exclude DLSS then sorry but "Nvidia also do it" doesn't make it any better.
I've been an app developer (non-gaming) for over 20 years so I understand what you are saying about change requests, but some changes are higher priority than others. In PC gaming where performance is highly scrutinized there is a reason the possibility of DLSS not being present is getting this much attention. And we are talking about technology that can be used to alleviate pressure on devs from dedicating additional resources to optimization in many cases. So I'm afraid I can't buy into this "time constraint" theory. If you do then that's fine. We can disagree.
In any case, this question has been raised by many in the industry and someone from AMD or Bethesda need to address it.
Last edited:
GHG
Member
Their backwards logic equates to the following:
AMD are allowed to partake in anti-consumer and anti-competitive practices because they are behind, which will lead to the superior alternative products/solutions on the market being gimped, which means AMD GPU's become a more attractive proposition, which means "BeTtEr CoMpEtItIoN".
When the reality is that everybody ends up losing. Existing consumers of competing products get shafted, AMD look like idiots and even if it does result in a few more sales for AMD it won't result in better competition due to the fact that Nvidia will see that consumers are accepting bullshit so will stoop to their level.
The best thing for everybody would be for AMD to get their arses in gear and develop better GPU's and improve their upscaling tech, but that would make too much sense. Some of these guys are obsessed with cheering on the underdog even if it's to their own detriment.
AMD should be embarrassed, at least Intel are trying, even given their limited resources and recent experience in the discrete GPU space.
Last edited:
marquimvfs
Member
GHG
Member
If it were nothing then AMD would simply debunk everything that's been spoken about, along with Bethesda (since their biggest game since Skyrim happens to be caught up in all of this).
So until that happens, we will continue to talk. Get over it.
marquimvfs
Member
GHG
Member
That's not how this works buddy. Sorry to break it to you, but we're already 3 pages in.
So either come up with something if substance that debunks the topic of discussion entirely or jog on.
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
If you ask someone point blank “did you do this thing that makes you look like a huge asshole” and they give you some vague non-answer, then you ask them again and they say “no comment”, the answer is yes. Stop playing dumb.
marquimvfs
Member
I can see that, like I said, slow day, no news. My point was already made, let's carry on.
That can very well be true, or just a very very bad PR move by AMD (let's face it, they're terrible managing this type of thing). But until we have some real confirmation, it's no big deal. Like the other topic showed, the original table presented were already debunked, therefore the video, or even the questions unanswered, has no reason to exist in the first place.
Last edited:
Kataploom
Gold Member
Topher
Gold Member
I thinkDaGwaphics summarizes better what I wanted to say regarding the time constraint:
Well Microsoft had no problem saying Redfall wouldn't have 60fps at launch then they can certainly make that announcement and face the music if that's the case for DLSS. But honestly, anything outside of Bethesda saying "nah....the rumors are bulshit. Starfield will have DLSS" ain't going to be pretty though. Let's hope the rumors really are bullshit.
NeverYouMind
Member
It would be hilarious if DLSS is available at launch and looks/runs like shit.
Putonahappyface
Member
Doctor Hades
Member
AMD have no confidence in their software which is more than likely why they would rather limit sponsored games to supporting FSR only. They really do not want people comparing FSR to XeSS or DLSS. NVIDIA generally don't do this because they know that they have the superior technology and that only owners of their GPUs have access to it anyway.
AMD and NVIDIA can both be manipulative and anti-consumer when it suits them but I really feel that AMD are the worse of the two. Why? Well because AMD are a generation behind NVIDIA in ray-tracing and upscaling technology and would rather everyone have an inferior experience even when better options are available. And that sucks because the PC is a platform built on choice and that choice should extend to being allowed to choose what upscaler to use, whether it is XeSS, FSR or DLSS regardless of sponsorship or whatever. AMD are not only punishing NVIDIA GPU owners by limiting games to FSR but also their own GPU owners who would otherwise have a choice of XeSS if they didn't like FSR.
FSR in my experience is the weakest of three main upscalers. Looks fine in a screenshot, yes, but absolutely terrible in motion. My only hope if Starfield is going to be limited to FSR only is that AMD improve it significantly before release! My guess is that they will use Starfield to launch FSR3, their answer to NVIDIA's DLSS3 frame generation. Guess we will find out in a few short months...
AMD and NVIDIA can both be manipulative and anti-consumer when it suits them but I really feel that AMD are the worse of the two. Why? Well because AMD are a generation behind NVIDIA in ray-tracing and upscaling technology and would rather everyone have an inferior experience even when better options are available. And that sucks because the PC is a platform built on choice and that choice should extend to being allowed to choose what upscaler to use, whether it is XeSS, FSR or DLSS regardless of sponsorship or whatever. AMD are not only punishing NVIDIA GPU owners by limiting games to FSR but also their own GPU owners who would otherwise have a choice of XeSS if they didn't like FSR.
FSR in my experience is the weakest of three main upscalers. Looks fine in a screenshot, yes, but absolutely terrible in motion. My only hope if Starfield is going to be limited to FSR only is that AMD improve it significantly before release! My guess is that they will use Starfield to launch FSR3, their answer to NVIDIA's DLSS3 frame generation. Guess we will find out in a few short months...
demented waffle
Member
I'd find it funnier if the cucks who bought the game(that had dlss capabilities) and got PureDark's mod, had their shit broken 2-3 times a day. Imagine paying an additional 5 bucks a month for that.