You're right, the reasonable answer is that there must be a global cabal of hired enforcers out there who were paid fortunes to make sure Starfield is seen in a positive light.
That's why the two largest gaming publications in the world gave it a 7.
Fact is, there is mod that enables both dlss2 and dlss3 aka frame generation in starfield, so it wasnt some rocket science and matter of budget to implement it, just lack of will, and guess what, that lack of will had to came from somewhere, and it defo didnt come from the dev team since they know very well nvidia has 80% of marketshare atm, so lets just use logic, like famous detective did
Then the answer is pretty clear who didnt want dlss2/3 in starfield, and for what reasons, nuff said.
Here quick comparision native vs dlss2 vs dlss3, gainz are immense
Do you have like, zero awareness of a thing called nuance?So in a direct talking about Starfield, he talked about DLSS not being implemented because of agreements with AMD, but it has nothing to do with Starfield ?
I reiterate, the dude is shitting his pants (like he was during covid, posting everyday about his fear to die of Covid and his anxiety about it).
'Does not and will not and never has....'
"He admits that — in general......
But Azor says that — in general ....
Well then when you post on a social network about it, on your own name, as a professional, you bring some context and explain what you're talking about. It's not like he isn't used to post online like a 70s sitcom star who's starting internet, he's using those tools all day long.Do you have like, zero awareness of a thing called nuance?
You can have a podcast about a topic, and in that podcast, talk about things that are indirectly related to said topic, while not being exactly about that topic.
Fact is, there is mod that enables both dlss2 and dlss3 aka frame generation in starfield, so it wasnt some rocket science and matter of budget to implement it, just lack of will, and guess what, that lack of will had to came from somewhere, and it defo didnt come from the dev team since they know very well nvidia has 80% of marketshare atm, so lets just use logic, like famous detective did
Then the answer is pretty clear who didnt want dlss2/3 in starfield, and for what reasons, nuff said.
Here quick comparision native vs dlss2 vs dlss3, gainz are immense
AMD sucks TBH, they aren't a real competitor to Nvidia, all they do is hold PC gaming back by denying the majority of PC gamers access to technology their Nvidia cards support
Well then when you post on a social network about it, on your own name, as a professional, you bring some context and explain what you're talking about. It's not like he isn't used to post online like a 70s sitcom star who's starting internet, he's using those tools all day long.
i like how he was hanging out with both Phil and Todd Howard and didnt bother to ask them a simple question like, 'hey you had $80 billion to spend on cod and bethesda, why did you need to beg AMD for a sponsorship?'I heard Phil knocked on his door before he deleted the tweet
i like how he was hanging out with both Phil and Todd Howard and didnt bother to ask them a simple question like, 'hey you had $80 billion to spend on cod and bethesda, why did you need to beg AMD for a sponsorship?'
Have they? There have been plenty of times when AMD/Nvidia paid devs to support some exclusive feature of theirs. I don’t know of any time where they paid to NOT include a competitor’s tech.I get that this is a shitty practice but we know GPU companies have been doing this since they started to bundle games with their cards. What's so shocking about this partnership? Is it because alot of people with Nvidia GPUs are butthurt because they can't take an L?
and yet millions of people are playing the premium edition quite happily already, zero fucks given about what a vocal minority are crying over.MS just keeps stepping on rakes. The PC version will likely sell the most because of gamepass. Let’s take a small pile of money from a GPU manufacturer with like 4% market share to actively make our game shittier. How much could this deal possibly be worth?
I get that this is a shitty practice but we know GPU companies have been doing this since they started to bundle games with their cards. What's so shocking about this partnership? Is it because alot of people with Nvidia GPUs are butthurt because they can't take an L?
and yet millions of people are playing the premium edition quite happily already, zero fucks given about what a vocal minority are crying over.
dlss 2 is free, 3 just adds fake framesI am also playing and enjoying Starfield. And it runs fine on my PC. The people getting the shaft are the people on 2080s, etc who could be playing this with much better framerates and arbitrarily can’t because of a dumb business deal. So either wait for a DLSS patch that we don’t even know will ever come, or pay for a mod (LOL).
To be fair the DLSS 2.0 mod is free.I am also playing and enjoying Starfield. And it runs fine on my PC. The people getting the shaft are the people on 2080s, etc who could be playing this with much better framerates and arbitrarily can’t because of a dumb business deal. So either wait for a DLSS patch that we don’t even know will ever come, or pay for a mod (LOL).
Well what about games that support dlss but not fsr? Why does that exist?The vast majority of gamers have nvidia GPUs, and the game runs much worse on them than it ought to. Attacking them for being unhappy sounds like victim blaming. It's completely self-defeating from Bethesda / Microsoft to alienate the majority of the PC market.
Fact is, there is mod that enables both dlss2 and dlss3 aka frame generation in starfield, so it wasnt some rocket science and matter of budget to implement it, just lack of will, and guess what, that lack of will had to came from somewhere, and it defo didnt come from the dev team since they know very well nvidia has 80% of marketshare atm, so lets just use logic, like famous detective did
Then the answer is pretty clear who didnt want dlss2/3 in starfield, and for what reasons, nuff said.
Here quick comparision native vs dlss2 vs dlss3, gainz are immense
and MSAMD!
I can't imagine what the GPU tech world would be today without Nvidia pushing hard. Can you? AMD is reactionary, far cry from early ATI, which to remind peoples, they invented freaking tessellation in 2001, only to complain Nvidia was better at it later on when AMD purchased them.AMD’s certainly in the wrong, but claiming they’re holding PC back, while defending Nvidia who makes everything proprietary to their cards only is a joke.
Nvidia sucks just as much.
Ray tracing existed before Nvidia put an asic on their GPUs to make hybrid ray tracing practical. DLSS could've been like FSR on previous Gen GPUs and could've been accelerate with tensor cores to improve quality like DLSS now. Also,it wasn't until Turing where there was a significant departure on GPUs being used differently in gaming, everything else was just iterative.I can't imagine what the GPU tech world would be today without Nvidia pushing hard. Can you? AMD is reactionary, far cry from early ATI, which to remind peoples, they invented freaking tessellation in 2001, only to complain Nvidia was better at it later on when AMD purchased them.
I was ATI / AMD for 20 years or so. Their attitude became that of a loser and it pissed me off. All this gameworks drama, i was on AMD side during all that and it still convinced me to go Pascal in 2016. Because AMD has only AMD to blame in all this. I already detailed a shitload of it in previous threads so i'm not going there, but they have a shit attitude. They used to have an engineer in the top 100 studios in mid 2000's, they had mantle to leverage console→PC ports with little to no man hours. They shit the bed. They fired most of the team. They saw microsoft react to DX12 and they just didn't leverage any advantage of all this development. They basically let Nvidia run away with DX11 gameworks, freely.
Nvidia's not sitting on their laurels like Intel did with market share domination, they continue to pour in HUGE R&D budgets and they're actually getting ahead at a speedier rate than everyone anticipated with the the likes of Cyberpunk 2077 path tracing.
So it's "proprietary", but all of it is implemented in games via the hardware agnostic API. So it's on the supplier side to figure out what to do with these API calls. Basically a compiler that is and was present for both vendors since the dawn of GPU graphics. It's just that never in GPU history has features started to make games look so differently between vendors, ever. Upscaler differences are cute comparisons and i can let it slip if somebody doesn't spot the difference. But we're getting into the denoisers now and totally different approaches with the ray reconstruction, NOW games don't even look like they came from the same pipeline. I can't recall a time in my >25 years owning GPUs where this happened for a same API.
But let's go for the idea, what would even happen that Nvidia makes DLSS all GPU? They're tailored to their hardware tensor cores and pipeline. All indications would be that they would have to downgrade the quality to satisfy everyone, just like AMD and Intel did. Why do we aim for the bottom of the barrel? That's not how to advance.
What I'm getting it is that, Nvidia has actually raised up their market share by proprietary tech that they've invested millions in. Why wouldn't they? I can't think of any business model where companies openly share secrets for shit and giggles. We're not talking about some lone dude making a .zip archiver open source here.
Wouldn't AMD benefit from actually making FSR the best they can on their cards, exclusively? Because what's the business case here for FSR anyway? Its biggest GPU market is not even AMD, it's Nvidia GTX cards, and while that makes a bunch of peoples happy that they don't have to upgrade their 1060 to play Starfield at FSR ultra performance at 1080p, a pixel soup basically, they're not upgrading, are they buying AMD if they upgrade? Seems not, market share keeps shrinking. So I'm dumbfounded at the business case of FSR for every cards.
It's "open source"! I tell ya what, open source in the software business is the "I'm vegan" level of annoying. Nobody gives a fuck, nobody. Where are the FSR branching paths from all the interest in FSR code? It's nowhere. We're asking devs that barely make it to the finish line with a working product on PC, that they have their games fixed within 24-48 hours by script kiddies, to actually open the source code and understand what's going on in these upscalers? Doesn't seem to happen. I don't believe it. Devs use the SDK, they use the UE plugin, voila. They have no interest of opening that shit box.
I really don't think the "good guy" AMD with open source bullcrap is working. It's just not, the numbers don't lie. Their marketshare is evaporating.
Should we be pissed that Microsoft didn't think of making a default ML upscaler in DX12? Probably actually. This is the result. The denoisers, upscalers, ML are basically on vendor's shoulders. We were supposed to move away from DX11 like GPU vendor attachments, leave everything to devs and here we are again, back to square one.
He didn't say it isn't about Starfield either, I guess he either doesn't know or doesn't want to say. He deleted the original tweet so fast he must have been worried about the consequences.
Also:
He seems a bit too easily pleased that it's all good because we can download a third party mod to make the game work well, surely a AAA game years in development from a two trillion dollar company ought to run well by default, not needing mods which the vast majority of people will never think or know how to use?
Well what about games that support dlss but not fsr? Why does that exist?
Just the usual PCMasterrace GPUcard warring.I have no idea what any of this means.
Just the usual PCMasterrace GPUcard warring.
Fact is, there is mod that enables both dlss2 and dlss3 aka frame generation in starfield, so it wasnt some rocket science and matter of budget to implement it, just lack of will, and guess what, that lack of will had to came from somewhere, and it defo didnt come from the dev team since they know very well nvidia has 80% of marketshare atm, so lets just use logic, like famous detective did
Then the answer is pretty clear who didnt want dlss2/3 in starfield, and for what reasons, nuff said.
Here quick comparision native vs dlss2 vs dlss3, gainz are immense
The 67% is what fsr/dlss scales from, to 4k, so actual native is 1440p there, with 4k native, at current gimped nvidia drivers for their gpu(visibly below 7900xtx, just few % above 750$ 7900xt lol), i think 4090 would be around 50fps in that area in true native 4k, 67% scaling on both axis is 1440p.Shouldnt render resolution scale be at 100% for it to be native? In the video it is lowered to 67%.
If he has received information from developers (that he has vetted and knows they're aren't imposters) who agreed to provide said information on the condition of anonymity then the whole "tell us your sources or it didn't happen" is silly anyway. Journalists rarely reveal their sources otherwise they wouldn't have sources for very long.-John makes a post on X about DLSS(I assume)
-Someone makes a response about him being a journalist and possible false information
-John clarifies that he's not really an investigative journalist and instead just heard it from a few devs
-John deletes original post(?)
-Somehow, people interpret this as he is talking about Starfield(possibly due to poor wording)
-John says this isn't even about Starfield
-People think MS got to him because of this mix up.
Nvidia locking a lot of features over the years from AMD users cause they want.
AMD locking Nvidia DLSS from some game.
Bonus:
Many game not run well.I have no idea what any of this means.
Unga bungaMany game not run well.
Many Game-makers no have access to big juju to make game run well.
Wizards who make big juju promise use only to other game-makers.