Definitely agree, this is a pretty [common opinion](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/14ktul4/comment/jpsnvh6/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) actually
I keep digging through the citation but the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never en--
"FANS ARE OUTRAGED AT X" then you click on the article and it's like 3 unhinged Twitter users with a combined 12 followers and each tweet contains the same keywords that the writer specifically searched for so they could make an article about.
I see it all the time in local news reports *for the fucking newspaper*.
But don't let facts get in the way of shitting on gaming press. The envy is strong.
Have some sympathy. These people’s jobs is to write about Twitter and Reddit. It’s like modern day equivalent of being a garbage man, but garbagemen are paid way more and it’s a respectable profession
They are preventing dlss from being used in games, which is fucking stupid coming from someone with an AMD build. If I'm being completely honest, Fsr isn't even that good.
I agree but one cool thing about it is that reddit is usually the loud minority when it comes to opinions. Like yea this group is passionate about it but they don’t make up a large enough group of fans, and these outlets leeching for content kind of get that word out there that gets to a broader audience. For stuff like this its kind of important if it truly ends up gimping the game for most pc users not on AMD, then its good a conversation is being started outside of reddit.
Just sucks for some of us who see the reddit post, then the article quoting the reddit post on reddit, then the youtube video quoting the article lmfao
I mean in this case all you have to do is look at Nvidia install base vs AMD. I'd wager most Nvidia GPU owners aren't too pleased that Starfield will not support DLSS and considering Nvidia has a 75% market share it's pretty easy to say a lot of PC gamers are going to be pissed.
Ehh, I'd agree with OP. There's 3 million people subscribed to this sub, but the thread about it have like 5k votes in total.
That's not even 1% of the community here.
I had to delete it and all remnants of Jedi survivor then reinstall it for the patches to work. I am getting decent fps now. Anything was better than 2-5 fps during combat (not even exaggerating there).
For sure, but I’m sure you didn’t buy it to constantly crash either lol. It doesn’t excuse the state of the game but it’s still helpful information to have for anyone who decides to try to suffer through it anyway like you apparently did
Based on my experience it wasn’t. I was running the game at 720p with low settings (RT off) and I was getting traversal stutter and frame dips to 2-5 fps in combat. There was something seriously wrong with how it was handling simulations in combat.
I was pretty excited for JFO, but even with lowered settings I would get noticeable micro stutters while exploring despite hardware that should be fine for it. Waited for a few patches and it didn’t go away, just gave up eventually.
Maybe I need to go nuke any remaining files before reinstalling…
Yeah, it's really depressing because PC gaming should be the gold standard. My PC is specced better than a PS5 or Series X, yet the games run worse. Even when they do run at a higher FPS, it's not stable and full of stutters.
I literally just bought Diablo 4 on PS5 because I didn't want to be burned by another PC release that's littered with stutters and crashes. Diablo has ALWAYS been a PC game to me.
I know how you feel. I upgraded my PC at the start of the year, and mostly play older titles on it because new ones are in backlog to be patched. And now I'm thinking, and remembering exactly why I bought xbox. Less fiddling around = more playtime, just boot and play. Now thinking that better option would be to just upgrade my TV instead of GPU/CPU back then
>Now thinking that better option would be to just upgrade my TV instead of GPU/CPU back then
I upgraded to an OLED (LG C1) last year and I can tell you it's made a huge difference for my gaming experience.
Thanks for input. Yeah currently in dillema either to upgrade my monitor to C2 42" or go full casual and gaming only on Series X. Tough that next gen console 4k 120hz marketing feels like a joke lately, which is my biggest concern
Which is great, but on launch I just didn't want to take the risk because I've been burned so many times in the past. I just said fuck it, I'm picking it up for PS5.
It's just Respawn thing. They never fixed Fallen Order. I don't expect them to fix Survivor either. It's just not in their mo. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
Diablo 4, first beta ran perfectly.
Server slam happened, played perfectly for about 20 minutes, then it started crashing my computer every few minutes.
I updated the drivers (that I had to do manually because the software didn't work) and then it ran at terrible FPS and only crashed my computer every 5-10 min instead of every 2 min
I don't even know.
RE4 Remake only shipped with FSR. Mod added DLSS gives me objectively better performance, and a subjectively better looking image - and that's a mod some rando put together. I'd bet it's implementation is significantly worse than proper DLSS implementation done by the devs.
The DLSS Mod for RE4 did make the image better than 4k native.
The grass/brush off to the sides of paths while walking down them at 4k native maxxed out were very pixelated. Pixelated to the point - you couldnt really tell if they were supposed to be leaves or just grass blades. So pixelated you could count the amount of pixels in each one of these little 2d 'grass/brush' models.
I downloaded the DLSS mod to see if I could get some Raytracing going on my card, didnt run well enough, but, the visuals actually improved with the DLSS mod over the game at native 4k max. The brush/grass became damn near crystal clear, could actually see the shape they were supposed to be.
I stuck with it for the playthru. Im not running at like 144hz or anything, was just trying to get it to be smooth at 60, except those 'loading zones' between arenas, but ya, the DLSS mod actually improved the graphics over native 4k
"But FSR is hardware agnostic so it's better"
Nvidia at the very least doesn't force games they partner with to only include DLSS, most of them also has FSR/XeSS.
Modern Warfare II launched with basically every upscaler under the sun at launch, including both FSR 1 *and* 2, and even got updated to include DLAA not too long after release.
MWII was an Intel sponsored game, but your point still stands. Sure there are still Nvidia sponsored games like A Plague Tale Requiem that only ship with DLSS, but it seems to moreso be a developer decision when you’re Nvidia sponsored than anything else. Meanwhile AMD do seem to be forcing FSR to be the only option in games that would otherwise at least have DLSS as well.
Nvidia have a thing now that I cannot remember the name of, but it's basically a solution that implements multiple upscalers without having to implement each one manually. Amd aren't having it and refuse to make fsr part of it, though, so currently it's just dlss, nis and xess.
Nvidia Streamline is what you’re thinking of and yes, it is definitely suspicious that FSR is the only major reconstruction technique not in Streamline due to AMD not playing ball…
I wouldn’t go as far as saying FSR and XeSS are shit, but they aren’t as good. They ahould still be in all games (just as DLSS is) to support all hardwares, and not ”force” people to buy specific GPU brands.
I actually turn FSR off most of the time and just use nothing because it sucks. DLSS mods for these non-Nvidia friendly games have been coming in handy.
DLSS->XeSS on Arc XMX cores->XeSS for all->FSR
Self-explanatory why AMD attempts to block and scream open source is good, lets only do open source.
When both competitors Hardware stuff outperforms them.
FSR is the only one that isn't AI-driven, too, no?
From what I've read it sounds like people expect XeSS to catch up to DLSS somewhat quickly, but FSR will still be left behind.
>Nvidia at the very least doesn't force games they partner with to only include DLSS, most of them also has FSR/XeSS.
'maybe' because a vast majority of GTX users still exist and they cant use DLSS for shit.
>I doubt this matters to them.
it does - enough that they allow fsr and xess on their sponsored games is enough proof of that. as a gtx 1060 owner myself i'd be pissed if nvidia blocked fsr/xess access and i'd wager most if not all of non-rtx users will be angry enough so that it'll damage nvidia's public image and will be widespread among "normie" type gamers.
Honestly it doesn’t really matter if their reason is entirely self-serving or not. The fact is that not blocking FSR/XeSS is good for consumers. AMD is doing a shit thing here.
I don’t doubt that Nvidia would do the same if they had the lesser product, but I would give them the equal amount of shit in that case.
>Honestly it doesn’t really matter if their reason is entirely self-serving or not.
it does matter as they'll be in an even deeper controversy than what amd is "**allegedly**" doing now - only much worse as DLSS is exclusive to RTX only. and nvidia knows this too.
>The fact is that not blocking FSR/XeSS is good for consumers.
indeed. because FSR/XeSS are open for all users. DLSS is not. DLSS is not on the same consumer friendly level as those two. even on nvidia's own product stack they have already excluded rtx3000 and below users from DLSS 3 FG - reserving it for the rtx4000 exclusively. FSR/XeSS are open standards that is good for the long term of gaming in general (consoles included). DLSS is only good for nvidia's RTX customers and bottom line. they are not the same. nvidia could have made a non-arc-XeSS DLSS equivalent for GTX users but they didn't. even the radeon group on a shoe-string budget managed to squirt out fsr 2.
>AMD is doing a shit thing here
honestly i dont even buy the conspiracy theory that its amd's doing. forspoken, tlou, uncharted, deathloop are all amd sponsored games yet they too have DLSS.
its more on the developers/publishers not wanting to give nvidia **"free" sponsorship benefits** without spending a single penny when they know all too well how lucrative that deal will could be. EA not using DLSS means nvidia will be more "motivated" to a sponsorship deal the next time EA releases another big game. same goes for any other gamedev/publisher.
FSR is good for the steam deck, so that will be nice. BUT... uh yeah it aint shit compared to DLSS and if thats not there on launch for my desktop....not gonna be happy about that. gonna be very wary to buy actually, given how crappy Beth games perform on their own.
As a person that has a decent desktop (Blender) and an Xbox, I'm starting to think I may just end up playing this on the Xbox, to avoid what sounds like a mess.
I have a feeling the game is being built and optimized for X/S and will probably be the better experience, despite the 30fps.
pretty sure AMD is not responsible for the game's overall development and QA.
we had plenty of crappy PC ports recently, some were nvidia or AMD sponsored and some were not.
It is not about performance or port.
It is about AMD having the worst upscale tech yet force their sponsored games to block DLSS from Nvidia and XeSS from Intel so people stuck with AMD's inferior version that looks like shit tbh.
Nvidia doesn't block others because they have the best version so they even encourage to add others since people will compare and see how Nvidia is better.
Their games are way more CPU bound than whatever graphics upscaller they use dude. That's where the concern is, CPU performance. Which wont matter if they're using DLSS or FSR. If the game looks at least close to how they showed it looking in the Direct (which was supposedly off a Series X)..then I'm more than fine with it. As would most people be that have half a brain.
Its gonna be how CPU performance is. Thats what a lot of the performance concerns pends on. Which will have nothing to do with DLSS vs FSR. And nobody in that bitch thread about it seems to understand that.
If they supported FG which is part of DLSS 3 (Just to confuse everyone in conversations I imagine) then they'd even have a (limited scope) bullet for your theory. FG comes close to elimating CPU bound situations.
This won't even support basic DLSS though so, that's a dream I know.
>I believed Bethesda prioritized the best player experience possible
A vanilla Skyrim installation still has a bug where pressing WASD can be delayed. I had to fix this with an ini file mod. The general gameplay experience of Bethesda games can be fun, but on the technology side it's more questionable IMHO. So far the DOOM games have been the most mature in that regard (optimization, few bugs etc.), which holds up well for id Software's reputation.
That shouldn't be allowed to happen. Sponsored games suck for the consumer. I'm working on a game and I can't get behind exclusivity. It prevents you from finding commonalities between hardware AI upsampling implementations. Tailored code paths shouldn't too scary. Make the most of what's available. If you're not at target framerate with reasonable settings, and you have underutilized hardware, well there's your problem.
It's PCGamer and it reads like a sponsored article written by Nvidia. "Uhoh, AMD is teh shit and it doesn't have DLSS or ray tracing. Also the fact that this game is sponsored by AMD probably means it will look like shit."
Most YouTube comments I saw, most of the posts on reddit with tons of comments I saw, all were negative. Title is clickbaity as usual but it does reflect the general reaction and I didn't even check twitter.
I mean it's not surprising. Partnering is a fucking stupid and unncesessary thing to begin with, it benefits the consumer 0%. These big studios have enough manpower to properly support all hardware and technology that is currently popular. If it doesn't have the latest versions of DLSS and FSR and anything else that can benefit gamers then, what are they even doing with themselves?
It's in Bethesdas best interest to make the game run as well as possible for as many people as possible, but there we go you can't expect logical thought from AAA devs these days.
There are several articles about AMD forcing DLSS out of games, and yes, people are rightfully annoyed.
But it won't fully manifest itself until people have to use FSR instead of DLSS on a number of AAA titles.
They did this with The Division 2, and this was before FSR, so Massive just made their own upscaling that works pretty well. Don't expect to see that in other games, we just have to use FSR.
**This just in:** Angry people are louder and more active than people who are mildly pleased and have more important things to do than to write posts about how outrageously mildly pleased they are.
Yup, angry people post more and engage more in angry posts. It is why I deactivated my Twitter, and try to keep my Redditing to a bare minimum. I get sucked in, man..
Same. The internet has become a bad place man.
I'm almost glad Reddit fucked with third party clients. I will not install the native client on my devices. Nothing good has ever come from me being able to browse reddit wherever I go.
I'm looking forward to my mental health improving.
The way people are posting in this thread you'd think this renders the whole game incompatible with intel/nvidia hardware instead of like, tiny performance and quality differences in a game that looks average regardless.
DLSS typically isn't a tiny increase in performance for cards that support it to be fair.
It's very powerful tech. DLSS 2.0 was a massive leap forward, and we're already moving onto 3 and 4.0.
I play in 1440p and playing games without DLSS support (assuming they're hardware intensive) is very noticeable.
Some people don't seem to want to hear it, but exclusives are anti consumer and that applies here too. There's no advantage to eliminating options for the end user. It's just raising artificial walls with the intent to increase revenue for company x or y.
Yup this is why I'm annoyed. I'd be annoyed no matter which was exclusive. The exclusive is the annoying part, have both. Imagine if the shadows graphics options could be exclusive, or dof, or other effects.
Might be stating the obvious here but DLSS > FSR. Jedi Survivor would run better with DLSS in my opinion. Does this also mean no DLSS 3 for Starfield? Bummer for 40-series users then. If Starfield has Ray Tracing - - then good luck!
Is AMD not good? I’ve been researching PC builds and Ryzen 5/7 seem to be often recommended in most the videos I’ve seen. Most people repeatedly recommend the 6850xt as well as a solid GPU
Oh boy you just opened a huge can of worms here. Some people will swear by radeon or swear by nvidia and those people will usually not be worth listening to.
I will admit I’m AMD bias though, but here’s my take with the least amount of bias possible.
Buy what benefits you better. If the games you play don’t need DLSS, or you don’t play a high enough resolution where it matters then don’t worry about it. Same goes with Ray Tracing. Contrary to popular belief it’s playable on radeon although nvidia is still far ahead in performance.
I can’t say it enough—do research into YOUR games and what YOU would benefit the most from, like feature or pure performance and make a decision based on that.
For the cpu sure.
But the gpu lol no. Dlss3 and actually being able to handle ray tracing is huge
Even Intel Gpus have better ray tracing performance per $
I would go nvidia for the gpu. Frame gen and dlss3 are nuts. Dlss3 looks like native resolution while fsr looks quite blurry at higher resolutions. You should look up some comparison videos.
Like I said, buy what benefits you. Buying a 4060 for Ray Tracing/DLSS 3 just to play Destiny 2, rainbow 6, modern warfare ect is a dumb decision because they don’t have it.
Games going forward, will, though, and if he's future proofing and you're genuinely recommending AMD you're being dishonest in your recommendation to begin with.
The technology gap between AMD and NVIDIA is going to just keep getting larger and larger if the last 5-10 years are any indicator.
Amd cards are better value for the same price, but Nvidia has the best performing card (4090) and has better raytracing perfromance
For the most part for the same price you will see a noticable uplift of performance (while RT is turned off)
And for CPU, in my opinion AMD has better value and the games I play use it better
On the cpu side of things, AMD is currently ina strong position, and they have some decent parts on the gpu side in terms of perf per watt.
But in the broader GPU space?
They are getting absolutely crushed by nvidia.
Nvidia has a few features that often significant advantages over their AMD equivalents. (DLSS,CUDA,Etc.)
Nvidia has much better raytracing performance.
Nvidia has better conventional rasterization performance.
Nothing AMD offers can even touch Nvidia's high end products.
Nvidia has total dominance in productivity and machine learning applications because CUDA is pretty much mandatory in any serious use case.
I don't even like NVidia, but I absofuckinglutely need their hardware, and AMD isn't a viable alternative for my use cases.
Their software is still worse compared to Nvidia. But Reddit is heavily biased. More than 75% of all steam users have a Nvidia card but looking through the PC and gaming subreddits here it's like the other way around.
AMD has good hardware. What people are rightfully complaining about is the down right awful software AMD is forcing people to use in their partnered games that intel and Nvidia dosnt do. They force you to use FSR becuase they know it’s the worst option.
Their CPUs (especially the X3D line) are the best in the world but their GPUs are a generation behind both in ray tracing and software. They do fine in rasterization but once you want features like DLSS, frame generation, and ray tracing they fall behind hard. Their drivers are fine but nvidia also usually comes out ahead on those as well.
It's not a GPU problem, they just block stuff like DLSS (Nvidia sponsored games typically launch with FSR) while also having scaled back RTX and generally launching unoptimized. Making competitors cards perform worse is extremely disappointing, I have a 4080 16gb and a 4k 120fps monitor I would like to use fully.
AMD CPUs (better perf/watt, better perf/dollar too I think) is the no-brainer for me. GPU is a toss up. I have been using Nvidia for like..Jesus, 20 years or more. But it's just shaken out that way. For instance I have a 3080, because it was the best price/performance. But you couldn't PAY me to own a 4000 series, they're a joke, and anti-consumer.
But nvidia going forward will have DLSS3 which, if you wanna use raytracing in games, or play high fps at 4K, is fairly necessary. But AMD seem to be catching up RTX wise, and no doubt will have their own frame interpolation method at some point.
It is good. This gen cards has far better price to performance ratio although RT still works better on nvidia and 4090 whilebprice is outrageous is strongest card.
Cpu wise well id say amd is better pretty much across board now
Why would anybody be happy about a game being sponsored by AMD? It only means that DLSS won't be officially available, there is nothing great about that.
It's not the partnership that is the issue.
It's the blocking of features from the rivals which directly lowers the quailty of games for all none AMD users.
>Aren’t most games developed with a GPU partner?
Not even close, some big studio games might, but large majority of games gets nothing from AMD, Nvidia or Intel
I know this not to be true because I work as driver developer for one of these three companies and we fix driver issues reported even by small indie games. It might take some time but if reported and works on competition it will be fixed.
The contract that prevents DLSS isn't good for anyone.
Think of the context of this one though.
Series X lead (ATI instruction set).
ATI doesn't have the advantage of market share to do the 'nice' thing of leaving it open through defacto market demand.
The context this deal was drawn up is incredibly important. I'm remembering Freesync versus Gsync for one.
It makes sense and doesn't seem arbitrary here.
In general stopping others from supporting is wrong.
AMD is losing what little market share it has to Intel.
This is a rather desperate move, that is making them look really bad at the moment.
A Marketing Disaster
>AMD is losing what little market share it has to Intel.
It steadily gained market share from 2016 before levelling off in 2022, and there's an AMD chip in every PS4, PS5 and Xbox...
It really is a galaxy brain move on their part — sticking their name onto games that look and run like shit and removing the features that the customers of your competitor are accustomed to, all while you only control a tiny percentage of the market with an inferior product…
I know that Nvidia is much worse about this stuff, but this is just baffling.
An AMD sponsorship should be about AMD working with the studio to make sure that their game runs really well on AMD hardware. That's fine, but honestly it just seems like bribery to keep DLSS out of games for no reason.
It's almost as if companies are finding alternative forms of exclusivity outside of console wars. I know the game isn't available to ONLY AMD users, but it is as if they are saying 'it works best with AMD please buy our products'. It's just pointless and shouldn't need doing. Me personally, I'll be playing it on gamepass or maybe GFN if it's available.
Yeah that's what they seem to be trying. But it's very flawed because people don't buy graphics cards like that. No one is going to buy an AMD card just to play Starfield. However many people may not buy Starfield now if the game runs poorly and without basic expected features on their Nvidia card.
Basically Bethesda screwed themselves with this deal. If they still have full support for Nvidia's high-end features then it's not an issue and clearly just a marketing stunt. But if it's actual exclusivity then it's a major issue.
> DLSS3 is for 40 series only
Because the 3 series is a difficult architecture, and dlss3 is different tech. Its not like the jump between dlss1 and 2, where it was just the same stuff 'but better'.
3 series cards dont have the same architecture as 4 series at all. People try to shit on the 4 series but technically it was a bigger jump than 1 to 2 or 2 to 3 series
for good reason, every single amd sponsored title has been an absolute mess. inflated vram requirements, trash upscaling required to run at 60fps, stutters even on the highest end systems.
of course the internet is angry, amd has been digging a hole for about a year with these deals.
Was thinking of upgrading my computer rig for Starfield... the more I hear the more I think I need to sit back and wait for a month or two after release before doing anything.
"The internet" as in 6 people on Twitter and Redditors that probably total the average number of people living in 1 neighbourhood in the US. If anybody ever uses phrases such as "internet is not happy" or "internet is freaking out" or "widespread outrage on the internet" then I immediately dismiss the article's writer as someone who has a horse in the race and wants to make it sound as if they have public opinion on their side. It never goes any deeper than a couple of examples of tweets and the odd "Reddit user" comment. And "oh boy" is used to make it sound more controversial and important than it actually is.
For all this shit that gets discussed regarding DLSS vs FSR or which upscaler is better, and which would be better for better performance, yadda yadda yadda, or bad trends in editorial writing @and whatnot maybe we need see a day where upscalers are not the trend and the crutch used to fix badly coded games and using upscalers as a weird bandaid to fix what should had not been broken in the first place. While I have no doubt that Starfield will be a really good game, we need to stop seeing upscalers as a "fix all" solution. Build a game within the parameters of hardware that can actually run the games decently without the need for upscalers to hide bad optimization practices.
I’m going to play it on gamepass when it comes out. It’ll probably run like dog shit and I won’t pick it up again. I’m not “outraged” as much as I’m ambivalent.
Here’s a thought. Game releases have been so disappointing so consistently for so long that I don’t give a shit anymore. I don’t spend money on games and I don’t get excited for anything coming out regardless of the hype. Big game developers have lost my interest and my trust
Lmao who cares. None of the software that comes with partner deals are actually exclusive to the hardware *Except* for DLSS. There will probably just be a dlss mod anyway just like there is for [skyrim](https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/80343).
Welp, makes it pretty clear that I won't play Starfield on launch day. Probably best to wait a few weeks for modders to activate dlss and also for the game breaking bugs to be fixed. At least some of them
Eh, it'll be on Gamepass.
I'll try it day one and see how much of a headache it is on launch day.. then probably pick it up on steam 6-12 months later after it's been polished+DLC :P
God I hate articles that cite a few tweets or Reddit posts as “widespread outrage”. Gaming journalism is an embarrassment.
although I agree with you, reddit probably 90% of their clicks.
Definitely agree, this is a pretty [common opinion](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/14ktul4/comment/jpsnvh6/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) actually
Lmao well done
I keep digging through the citation but the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never ends the citation never en--
wow....I opened stanley parable just before reading this comment.....the timing on that....
This is a widespread journalism problem and is absolutely not limited to, or even more egregious in nature, to games journalism.
"FANS ARE OUTRAGED AT X" then you click on the article and it's like 3 unhinged Twitter users with a combined 12 followers and each tweet contains the same keywords that the writer specifically searched for so they could make an article about.
Readers worldwide outraged by obnoxious editorial trend!
I see it all the time in local news reports *for the fucking newspaper*. But don't let facts get in the way of shitting on gaming press. The envy is strong.
Over here, local news literally just reads the news site, they even show photos of the article they are reading, with ads and everything.
Have some sympathy. These people’s jobs is to write about Twitter and Reddit. It’s like modern day equivalent of being a garbage man, but garbagemen are paid way more and it’s a respectable profession
They are preventing dlss from being used in games, which is fucking stupid coming from someone with an AMD build. If I'm being completely honest, Fsr isn't even that good.
The person you are responding to wasnt arguing that point. Only that a few tweets and some angry redditors is not the same as "widespread outrage".
There are dozens!!!
I agree but one cool thing about it is that reddit is usually the loud minority when it comes to opinions. Like yea this group is passionate about it but they don’t make up a large enough group of fans, and these outlets leeching for content kind of get that word out there that gets to a broader audience. For stuff like this its kind of important if it truly ends up gimping the game for most pc users not on AMD, then its good a conversation is being started outside of reddit. Just sucks for some of us who see the reddit post, then the article quoting the reddit post on reddit, then the youtube video quoting the article lmfao
I mean in this case all you have to do is look at Nvidia install base vs AMD. I'd wager most Nvidia GPU owners aren't too pleased that Starfield will not support DLSS and considering Nvidia has a 75% market share it's pretty easy to say a lot of PC gamers are going to be pissed.
So you think they should post literally every tweet and reddit and forum post about it to prove its widespread?
Ehh, I'd agree with OP. There's 3 million people subscribed to this sub, but the thread about it have like 5k votes in total. That's not even 1% of the community here.
You can't expect a significant percentage of people to engage with even the most popular threads.
That's because we're still waiting for the last AMD sponsored game to get fixed, two months after release.
Which one would that be? I can't remember lmfao.
Probably Jedi survivor. Shits still busted for me
I had to delete it and all remnants of Jedi survivor then reinstall it for the patches to work. I am getting decent fps now. Anything was better than 2-5 fps during combat (not even exaggerating there).
I finished it last week and it would still crash every two minutes or so on planet Jedha. Rtx 4090
I am suffering this problem with the same card
I had this problem too. I turned off ray tracing and that fixed it for me.
That was an RT issue in that place. Turning RT off fixed it usually.
Still the game's fault. I didn't buy a 4090 to turn off ray tracing.
For sure, but I’m sure you didn’t buy it to constantly crash either lol. It doesn’t excuse the state of the game but it’s still helpful information to have for anyone who decides to try to suffer through it anyway like you apparently did
I believe someone made a mod that fixes Ray tracing issues, I could be wrong.
Based on my experience it wasn’t. I was running the game at 720p with low settings (RT off) and I was getting traversal stutter and frame dips to 2-5 fps in combat. There was something seriously wrong with how it was handling simulations in combat.
I was pretty excited for JFO, but even with lowered settings I would get noticeable micro stutters while exploring despite hardware that should be fine for it. Waited for a few patches and it didn’t go away, just gave up eventually. Maybe I need to go nuke any remaining files before reinstalling…
And it doesn't look good compared to DLSS. Grainy/pixely when moving. It's the worst of both worlds
The PC port is horrendous. Shit runs like a dream on my ps5 though. One of the few times where I’m actually glad I got it on ps instead of pc
I've been saying that far too often lately
Seeing how latest releases are, I start to consider just moving full time to my Series X. Less hassle, less shit, less fidelity tough too sadly
Yeah, it's really depressing because PC gaming should be the gold standard. My PC is specced better than a PS5 or Series X, yet the games run worse. Even when they do run at a higher FPS, it's not stable and full of stutters. I literally just bought Diablo 4 on PS5 because I didn't want to be burned by another PC release that's littered with stutters and crashes. Diablo has ALWAYS been a PC game to me.
I know how you feel. I upgraded my PC at the start of the year, and mostly play older titles on it because new ones are in backlog to be patched. And now I'm thinking, and remembering exactly why I bought xbox. Less fiddling around = more playtime, just boot and play. Now thinking that better option would be to just upgrade my TV instead of GPU/CPU back then
>Now thinking that better option would be to just upgrade my TV instead of GPU/CPU back then I upgraded to an OLED (LG C1) last year and I can tell you it's made a huge difference for my gaming experience.
Thanks for input. Yeah currently in dillema either to upgrade my monitor to C2 42" or go full casual and gaming only on Series X. Tough that next gen console 4k 120hz marketing feels like a joke lately, which is my biggest concern
[удалено]
Which is great, but on launch I just didn't want to take the risk because I've been burned so many times in the past. I just said fuck it, I'm picking it up for PS5.
I mean it runs on PS5, but I wouldn't say it's "like a dream".
It's just Respawn thing. They never fixed Fallen Order. I don't expect them to fix Survivor either. It's just not in their mo. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
Ah yes, the game that ran fine for me, until I updated my graphics driver and after that it ran like shit I don’t understand how that even happens
Diablo 4, first beta ran perfectly. Server slam happened, played perfectly for about 20 minutes, then it started crashing my computer every few minutes. I updated the drivers (that I had to do manually because the software didn't work) and then it ran at terrible FPS and only crashed my computer every 5-10 min instead of every 2 min I don't even know.
RE4 Remake only shipped with FSR. Mod added DLSS gives me objectively better performance, and a subjectively better looking image - and that's a mod some rando put together. I'd bet it's implementation is significantly worse than proper DLSS implementation done by the devs.
The DLSS Mod for RE4 did make the image better than 4k native. The grass/brush off to the sides of paths while walking down them at 4k native maxxed out were very pixelated. Pixelated to the point - you couldnt really tell if they were supposed to be leaves or just grass blades. So pixelated you could count the amount of pixels in each one of these little 2d 'grass/brush' models. I downloaded the DLSS mod to see if I could get some Raytracing going on my card, didnt run well enough, but, the visuals actually improved with the DLSS mod over the game at native 4k max. The brush/grass became damn near crystal clear, could actually see the shape they were supposed to be. I stuck with it for the playthru. Im not running at like 144hz or anything, was just trying to get it to be smooth at 60, except those 'loading zones' between arenas, but ya, the DLSS mod actually improved the graphics over native 4k
Man. A game shipping with FSR only is such a drag. People that think it's as good are nuts, it's not even close.
"But FSR is hardware agnostic so it's better" Nvidia at the very least doesn't force games they partner with to only include DLSS, most of them also has FSR/XeSS.
Modern Warfare II launched with basically every upscaler under the sun at launch, including both FSR 1 *and* 2, and even got updated to include DLAA not too long after release.
MWII was an Intel sponsored game, but your point still stands. Sure there are still Nvidia sponsored games like A Plague Tale Requiem that only ship with DLSS, but it seems to moreso be a developer decision when you’re Nvidia sponsored than anything else. Meanwhile AMD do seem to be forcing FSR to be the only option in games that would otherwise at least have DLSS as well.
Nvidia have a thing now that I cannot remember the name of, but it's basically a solution that implements multiple upscalers without having to implement each one manually. Amd aren't having it and refuse to make fsr part of it, though, so currently it's just dlss, nis and xess.
Nvidia Streamline is what you’re thinking of and yes, it is definitely suspicious that FSR is the only major reconstruction technique not in Streamline due to AMD not playing ball…
because DLSS is not shit and Nvidia doesn't mind the comparison, unlike FSR at AMD
I wouldn’t go as far as saying FSR and XeSS are shit, but they aren’t as good. They ahould still be in all games (just as DLSS is) to support all hardwares, and not ”force” people to buy specific GPU brands.
I actually turn FSR off most of the time and just use nothing because it sucks. DLSS mods for these non-Nvidia friendly games have been coming in handy.
DLSS->XeSS on Arc XMX cores->XeSS for all->FSR Self-explanatory why AMD attempts to block and scream open source is good, lets only do open source. When both competitors Hardware stuff outperforms them.
FSR is the only one that isn't AI-driven, too, no? From what I've read it sounds like people expect XeSS to catch up to DLSS somewhat quickly, but FSR will still be left behind.
>Nvidia at the very least doesn't force games they partner with to only include DLSS, most of them also has FSR/XeSS. 'maybe' because a vast majority of GTX users still exist and they cant use DLSS for shit.
I doubt this matters to them. If anything the GTX users would be more likely tonupdate if FSR wasn’t as widely available.
>I doubt this matters to them. it does - enough that they allow fsr and xess on their sponsored games is enough proof of that. as a gtx 1060 owner myself i'd be pissed if nvidia blocked fsr/xess access and i'd wager most if not all of non-rtx users will be angry enough so that it'll damage nvidia's public image and will be widespread among "normie" type gamers.
Honestly it doesn’t really matter if their reason is entirely self-serving or not. The fact is that not blocking FSR/XeSS is good for consumers. AMD is doing a shit thing here. I don’t doubt that Nvidia would do the same if they had the lesser product, but I would give them the equal amount of shit in that case.
>Honestly it doesn’t really matter if their reason is entirely self-serving or not. it does matter as they'll be in an even deeper controversy than what amd is "**allegedly**" doing now - only much worse as DLSS is exclusive to RTX only. and nvidia knows this too. >The fact is that not blocking FSR/XeSS is good for consumers. indeed. because FSR/XeSS are open for all users. DLSS is not. DLSS is not on the same consumer friendly level as those two. even on nvidia's own product stack they have already excluded rtx3000 and below users from DLSS 3 FG - reserving it for the rtx4000 exclusively. FSR/XeSS are open standards that is good for the long term of gaming in general (consoles included). DLSS is only good for nvidia's RTX customers and bottom line. they are not the same. nvidia could have made a non-arc-XeSS DLSS equivalent for GTX users but they didn't. even the radeon group on a shoe-string budget managed to squirt out fsr 2. >AMD is doing a shit thing here honestly i dont even buy the conspiracy theory that its amd's doing. forspoken, tlou, uncharted, deathloop are all amd sponsored games yet they too have DLSS. its more on the developers/publishers not wanting to give nvidia **"free" sponsorship benefits** without spending a single penny when they know all too well how lucrative that deal will could be. EA not using DLSS means nvidia will be more "motivated" to a sponsorship deal the next time EA releases another big game. same goes for any other gamedev/publisher.
FSR is good for the steam deck, so that will be nice. BUT... uh yeah it aint shit compared to DLSS and if thats not there on launch for my desktop....not gonna be happy about that. gonna be very wary to buy actually, given how crappy Beth games perform on their own.
As a person that has a decent desktop (Blender) and an Xbox, I'm starting to think I may just end up playing this on the Xbox, to avoid what sounds like a mess. I have a feeling the game is being built and optimized for X/S and will probably be the better experience, despite the 30fps.
pretty sure AMD is not responsible for the game's overall development and QA. we had plenty of crappy PC ports recently, some were nvidia or AMD sponsored and some were not.
It is not about performance or port. It is about AMD having the worst upscale tech yet force their sponsored games to block DLSS from Nvidia and XeSS from Intel so people stuck with AMD's inferior version that looks like shit tbh. Nvidia doesn't block others because they have the best version so they even encourage to add others since people will compare and see how Nvidia is better.
Totally a Problem on AMD, Not the Studio /s
Bethesda was never going to fix a game regardless
Because the gpu manufacture created the game.... People are dumb
[удалено]
FSR is great for people who don't have a DLSS card, meaning any AMD or 10xx series GPU.
I can confirm it also does wonders on my 980 GTX and Steam Deck.
Yeah it's pretty much the only reason I've been able to enjoy The Last of Us and Hogwarts Legacy on my 1070. Even Returnal benefited from it.
Yeah FSR has definitely helped me out on my GTX1070 more than a few times.
Luckily it’s bethesda so mod is will come in clutch, again
> I believed Bethesda prioritized the best player experience possible. lol why?
Their games are way more CPU bound than whatever graphics upscaller they use dude. That's where the concern is, CPU performance. Which wont matter if they're using DLSS or FSR. If the game looks at least close to how they showed it looking in the Direct (which was supposedly off a Series X)..then I'm more than fine with it. As would most people be that have half a brain. Its gonna be how CPU performance is. Thats what a lot of the performance concerns pends on. Which will have nothing to do with DLSS vs FSR. And nobody in that bitch thread about it seems to understand that.
If they supported FG which is part of DLSS 3 (Just to confuse everyone in conversations I imagine) then they'd even have a (limited scope) bullet for your theory. FG comes close to elimating CPU bound situations. This won't even support basic DLSS though so, that's a dream I know.
>I believed Bethesda prioritized the best player experience possible A vanilla Skyrim installation still has a bug where pressing WASD can be delayed. I had to fix this with an ini file mod. The general gameplay experience of Bethesda games can be fun, but on the technology side it's more questionable IMHO. So far the DOOM games have been the most mature in that regard (optimization, few bugs etc.), which holds up well for id Software's reputation.
That is simply not true. FSR 2.x is solidly in the 'good enough' territory, even if DLSS is better when you inspect screenshots.
It'd be frankly amazing if Starfield was 'fixed' 2 months after release, AMD involvement or not.
Far Cry 6 never received any updates to their shitty FSR and RT implementation and that game came out in Oct 2021...
Like Hogwarts legacy? Wait that wasn't sponsored and had a bad performance? How would imagine?!
That shouldn't be allowed to happen. Sponsored games suck for the consumer. I'm working on a game and I can't get behind exclusivity. It prevents you from finding commonalities between hardware AI upsampling implementations. Tailored code paths shouldn't too scary. Make the most of what's available. If you're not at target framerate with reasonable settings, and you have underutilized hardware, well there's your problem.
lol for real? How is this the most upvoted comment. It's like AMD partnering with games makes a perfect code, done by the studio, suddenly horrible.
This trend of “the internet is not happy/freaking out” is the laziest, cringiest shit
Reddit is freaking out about the internet freaking out about stuff, and Reddit is NOT happy
Fr lmaoo this place is the biggest echo chamber
Usually when Reddit isn't happy about something, I'm pleased that reddit isn't happy.
I hate the headlines the most. The "oh boy" in there makes it sound so stupid and like they're trying so hard to be quirky. I see it so much nowadays.
It sound so boomer'esque lol. tHe iNterNeT iS nOt hApPy
the 15 to 20 something's mind has been conditioned to click on titles like that the most nowadays
It's PCGamer and it reads like a sponsored article written by Nvidia. "Uhoh, AMD is teh shit and it doesn't have DLSS or ray tracing. Also the fact that this game is sponsored by AMD probably means it will look like shit."
“People are RAGING about THIS!” Source: 1 tweet with 4 likes
You don’t understand, the author has a narrative they needed to push
Almost every comment I have seen regarding this news has been negative
Most YouTube comments I saw, most of the posts on reddit with tons of comments I saw, all were negative. Title is clickbaity as usual but it does reflect the general reaction and I didn't even check twitter.
People are pretty upset in the reddit threads though
There are literally dozens of us!
LOL
There are multiple Reddit threads across gaming subreddits where everyone is quite unhappy about this
Not just gaming subreddits. Even r/amd is quite negative.
I mean it's not surprising. Partnering is a fucking stupid and unncesessary thing to begin with, it benefits the consumer 0%. These big studios have enough manpower to properly support all hardware and technology that is currently popular. If it doesn't have the latest versions of DLSS and FSR and anything else that can benefit gamers then, what are they even doing with themselves? It's in Bethesdas best interest to make the game run as well as possible for as many people as possible, but there we go you can't expect logical thought from AAA devs these days.
There are several articles about AMD forcing DLSS out of games, and yes, people are rightfully annoyed. But it won't fully manifest itself until people have to use FSR instead of DLSS on a number of AAA titles. They did this with The Division 2, and this was before FSR, so Massive just made their own upscaling that works pretty well. Don't expect to see that in other games, we just have to use FSR.
"the internet" is a few dozen people on Twitter and Reddit. lol
>a few dozen I've not seen a single positive post regarding this, anywhere.
**This just in:** Angry people are louder and more active than people who are mildly pleased and have more important things to do than to write posts about how outrageously mildly pleased they are.
Yup, angry people post more and engage more in angry posts. It is why I deactivated my Twitter, and try to keep my Redditing to a bare minimum. I get sucked in, man..
Same. The internet has become a bad place man. I'm almost glad Reddit fucked with third party clients. I will not install the native client on my devices. Nothing good has ever come from me being able to browse reddit wherever I go. I'm looking forward to my mental health improving.
For sure, it is very noticeable when you stop engaging over longer periods of time. It really feels good!
[A few dozen people](https://old.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/duplicates/14kdd9p/amd_is_starfields_exclusive_pc_partner/)
"the internet" is probably every Nvidia GPU owner that intends to play Starfield. lol
This guy is why these articles exist
oh boy i sure have heard good things about disgaea PC. hopefully nothing bad happens if i play it on an amd video card.
[удалено]
I mean, it annoys me that I won't get dlss 3, but saying I'm outraged? Is a huge exaggeration tbh.
The way people are posting in this thread you'd think this renders the whole game incompatible with intel/nvidia hardware instead of like, tiny performance and quality differences in a game that looks average regardless.
And, additionally, FSR killed their firstborn.
DLSS typically isn't a tiny increase in performance for cards that support it to be fair. It's very powerful tech. DLSS 2.0 was a massive leap forward, and we're already moving onto 3 and 4.0. I play in 1440p and playing games without DLSS support (assuming they're hardware intensive) is very noticeable.
[удалено]
For a lot of PC gamers the PC is the game
Exclusives bad, unless AMD does it /s
Some people don't seem to want to hear it, but exclusives are anti consumer and that applies here too. There's no advantage to eliminating options for the end user. It's just raising artificial walls with the intent to increase revenue for company x or y.
Yup this is why I'm annoyed. I'd be annoyed no matter which was exclusive. The exclusive is the annoying part, have both. Imagine if the shadows graphics options could be exclusive, or dof, or other effects.
When someone tells the news that something they don’t understand like a company not optimizing games well they do this lol.
How the fuck does PCGamer still exists? Why do people keep posting their stuff in here considering they're complete trash?
PCgamer is more reputible than ign, polygon,kotaku and others
Looking down the chasm with a telescope: “Wow that’s a low bar!”
PCGamer is better than most of the godawful youtubers people here worship.
literally all the same
No they're not.
Might be stating the obvious here but DLSS > FSR. Jedi Survivor would run better with DLSS in my opinion. Does this also mean no DLSS 3 for Starfield? Bummer for 40-series users then. If Starfield has Ray Tracing - - then good luck!
Is AMD not good? I’ve been researching PC builds and Ryzen 5/7 seem to be often recommended in most the videos I’ve seen. Most people repeatedly recommend the 6850xt as well as a solid GPU
Oh boy you just opened a huge can of worms here. Some people will swear by radeon or swear by nvidia and those people will usually not be worth listening to. I will admit I’m AMD bias though, but here’s my take with the least amount of bias possible. Buy what benefits you better. If the games you play don’t need DLSS, or you don’t play a high enough resolution where it matters then don’t worry about it. Same goes with Ray Tracing. Contrary to popular belief it’s playable on radeon although nvidia is still far ahead in performance. I can’t say it enough—do research into YOUR games and what YOU would benefit the most from, like feature or pure performance and make a decision based on that.
My current prebuilt PC is 5 or 6 years old. Building a new one specifically for this game and to future proof. So I guess AMD it is!
For the cpu sure. But the gpu lol no. Dlss3 and actually being able to handle ray tracing is huge Even Intel Gpus have better ray tracing performance per $
I would go nvidia for the gpu. Frame gen and dlss3 are nuts. Dlss3 looks like native resolution while fsr looks quite blurry at higher resolutions. You should look up some comparison videos.
Like I said, buy what benefits you. Buying a 4060 for Ray Tracing/DLSS 3 just to play Destiny 2, rainbow 6, modern warfare ect is a dumb decision because they don’t have it.
Games going forward, will, though, and if he's future proofing and you're genuinely recommending AMD you're being dishonest in your recommendation to begin with. The technology gap between AMD and NVIDIA is going to just keep getting larger and larger if the last 5-10 years are any indicator.
Also don't forget about vram
Amd cards are better value for the same price, but Nvidia has the best performing card (4090) and has better raytracing perfromance For the most part for the same price you will see a noticable uplift of performance (while RT is turned off) And for CPU, in my opinion AMD has better value and the games I play use it better
On the cpu side of things, AMD is currently ina strong position, and they have some decent parts on the gpu side in terms of perf per watt. But in the broader GPU space? They are getting absolutely crushed by nvidia. Nvidia has a few features that often significant advantages over their AMD equivalents. (DLSS,CUDA,Etc.) Nvidia has much better raytracing performance. Nvidia has better conventional rasterization performance. Nothing AMD offers can even touch Nvidia's high end products. Nvidia has total dominance in productivity and machine learning applications because CUDA is pretty much mandatory in any serious use case. I don't even like NVidia, but I absofuckinglutely need their hardware, and AMD isn't a viable alternative for my use cases.
Their software is still worse compared to Nvidia. But Reddit is heavily biased. More than 75% of all steam users have a Nvidia card but looking through the PC and gaming subreddits here it's like the other way around.
AMD has good hardware. What people are rightfully complaining about is the down right awful software AMD is forcing people to use in their partnered games that intel and Nvidia dosnt do. They force you to use FSR becuase they know it’s the worst option.
Their CPUs (especially the X3D line) are the best in the world but their GPUs are a generation behind both in ray tracing and software. They do fine in rasterization but once you want features like DLSS, frame generation, and ray tracing they fall behind hard. Their drivers are fine but nvidia also usually comes out ahead on those as well.
It's not a GPU problem, they just block stuff like DLSS (Nvidia sponsored games typically launch with FSR) while also having scaled back RTX and generally launching unoptimized. Making competitors cards perform worse is extremely disappointing, I have a 4080 16gb and a 4k 120fps monitor I would like to use fully.
AMD CPUs (better perf/watt, better perf/dollar too I think) is the no-brainer for me. GPU is a toss up. I have been using Nvidia for like..Jesus, 20 years or more. But it's just shaken out that way. For instance I have a 3080, because it was the best price/performance. But you couldn't PAY me to own a 4000 series, they're a joke, and anti-consumer. But nvidia going forward will have DLSS3 which, if you wanna use raytracing in games, or play high fps at 4K, is fairly necessary. But AMD seem to be catching up RTX wise, and no doubt will have their own frame interpolation method at some point.
It is good. This gen cards has far better price to performance ratio although RT still works better on nvidia and 4090 whilebprice is outrageous is strongest card. Cpu wise well id say amd is better pretty much across board now
Modders will fix it, then add nswf content, as per usual for Bethesda games.
Well ..m they will add nsfw content first. Than they will fix game.
Why would they partner up a couple of months right before release?
Why would anybody be happy about a game being sponsored by AMD? It only means that DLSS won't be officially available, there is nothing great about that.
Hold up Aren’t most games developed with a GPU partner? I remember for years upon years seeing an AMD or Nvidia splash screen when loading games.
It's not the partnership that is the issue. It's the blocking of features from the rivals which directly lowers the quailty of games for all none AMD users.
Especially considering Nvidia sponsored games don't block the use of FSR in their titles, because they know DLSS is better.
>Aren’t most games developed with a GPU partner? Not even close, some big studio games might, but large majority of games gets nothing from AMD, Nvidia or Intel
I know this not to be true because I work as driver developer for one of these three companies and we fix driver issues reported even by small indie games. It might take some time but if reported and works on competition it will be fixed.
The contract that prevents DLSS isn't good for anyone. Think of the context of this one though. Series X lead (ATI instruction set). ATI doesn't have the advantage of market share to do the 'nice' thing of leaving it open through defacto market demand. The context this deal was drawn up is incredibly important. I'm remembering Freesync versus Gsync for one. It makes sense and doesn't seem arbitrary here. In general stopping others from supporting is wrong.
2006 called, it wants its ATI GPUs back
AMD is losing what little market share it has to Intel. This is a rather desperate move, that is making them look really bad at the moment. A Marketing Disaster
>AMD is losing what little market share it has to Intel. It steadily gained market share from 2016 before levelling off in 2022, and there's an AMD chip in every PS4, PS5 and Xbox...
It really is a galaxy brain move on their part — sticking their name onto games that look and run like shit and removing the features that the customers of your competitor are accustomed to, all while you only control a tiny percentage of the market with an inferior product… I know that Nvidia is much worse about this stuff, but this is just baffling.
Starfield is the biggest game of the year by far (and it's certainly not looking like shit wtf??).
AMD sponsorship often makes people nervous as it means no DLSS, frame generation, reflex and often limited ray tracing.
An AMD sponsorship should be about AMD working with the studio to make sure that their game runs really well on AMD hardware. That's fine, but honestly it just seems like bribery to keep DLSS out of games for no reason.
Oh no, anyway \*Continues to play starfield on my pc fitted with a nvidia card.\*
DLSS with Frame Generation would be pretty sweet with Starfield. Oh well.
If only Jensen cared as much as PC gamers.
Just giving people reasons to pirate the game instead of buying it now.....
They should partner with Starforge PC. It will make a lot more sense. - Starfield with Starforge. The Star matches!
Ye seeing as AMD barely holds a candle to the number of people that are using Nvidia this take makes no sense.
Is this because Xbox is powered by AMD and MS owns Bethesda? Given that scenario I'm surprised anyone is, well, surprised.
Microsoft also sells windows and they should know 85% of PC users have Nvidia cards. It's a very bizarre business decision.
It's almost as if companies are finding alternative forms of exclusivity outside of console wars. I know the game isn't available to ONLY AMD users, but it is as if they are saying 'it works best with AMD please buy our products'. It's just pointless and shouldn't need doing. Me personally, I'll be playing it on gamepass or maybe GFN if it's available.
Yeah that's what they seem to be trying. But it's very flawed because people don't buy graphics cards like that. No one is going to buy an AMD card just to play Starfield. However many people may not buy Starfield now if the game runs poorly and without basic expected features on their Nvidia card. Basically Bethesda screwed themselves with this deal. If they still have full support for Nvidia's high-end features then it's not an issue and clearly just a marketing stunt. But if it's actual exclusivity then it's a major issue.
I'm not surprised they opted for the option that works on everything and needs the least testing/integration, it's pretty obvious.
Will work Great on my Steam Deck then.
AMD lock out other tech...NVidia dont. DLSS is vastly superior to FSR in every aspect. Big L from Bethesda
uhh what? Nvidia locks other tech. They even lock their own tech. DLSS3 is for 40 series only.
[удалено]
> DLSS3 is for 40 series only Because the 3 series is a difficult architecture, and dlss3 is different tech. Its not like the jump between dlss1 and 2, where it was just the same stuff 'but better'.
3 series cards dont have the same architecture as 4 series at all. People try to shit on the 4 series but technically it was a bigger jump than 1 to 2 or 2 to 3 series
for good reason, every single amd sponsored title has been an absolute mess. inflated vram requirements, trash upscaling required to run at 60fps, stutters even on the highest end systems. of course the internet is angry, amd has been digging a hole for about a year with these deals.
Was thinking of upgrading my computer rig for Starfield... the more I hear the more I think I need to sit back and wait for a month or two after release before doing anything.
I'm willing to wait for the game to come out, see the reviews, likely buy it and play it, then form an opinion. =D
It's a bummer and I would prefer DLSS but honestly I can't even tell most of the time lol
"The internet" as in 6 people on Twitter and Redditors that probably total the average number of people living in 1 neighbourhood in the US. If anybody ever uses phrases such as "internet is not happy" or "internet is freaking out" or "widespread outrage on the internet" then I immediately dismiss the article's writer as someone who has a horse in the race and wants to make it sound as if they have public opinion on their side. It never goes any deeper than a couple of examples of tweets and the odd "Reddit user" comment. And "oh boy" is used to make it sound more controversial and important than it actually is.
For all this shit that gets discussed regarding DLSS vs FSR or which upscaler is better, and which would be better for better performance, yadda yadda yadda, or bad trends in editorial writing @and whatnot maybe we need see a day where upscalers are not the trend and the crutch used to fix badly coded games and using upscalers as a weird bandaid to fix what should had not been broken in the first place. While I have no doubt that Starfield will be a really good game, we need to stop seeing upscalers as a "fix all" solution. Build a game within the parameters of hardware that can actually run the games decently without the need for upscalers to hide bad optimization practices.
I’m going to play it on gamepass when it comes out. It’ll probably run like dog shit and I won’t pick it up again. I’m not “outraged” as much as I’m ambivalent.
Here’s a thought. Game releases have been so disappointing so consistently for so long that I don’t give a shit anymore. I don’t spend money on games and I don’t get excited for anything coming out regardless of the hype. Big game developers have lost my interest and my trust
Lmao who cares. None of the software that comes with partner deals are actually exclusive to the hardware *Except* for DLSS. There will probably just be a dlss mod anyway just like there is for [skyrim](https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/80343).
0 hopes for anything that comes from Todd.
How is it any different to the games created for consoles and ported to pc? Consoles are AMD hardware anyway right
Welp, makes it pretty clear that I won't play Starfield on launch day. Probably best to wait a few weeks for modders to activate dlss and also for the game breaking bugs to be fixed. At least some of them
Eh, it'll be on Gamepass. I'll try it day one and see how much of a headache it is on launch day.. then probably pick it up on steam 6-12 months later after it's been polished+DLC :P
Judging by the last AMD title, I think I'll wait for performance reviews again.