It's the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD FSR 3.0 has exposed the ugly truth about most PC gamers
- Thread starter Nexus18
- Start date
I actually think we're seeing the first signs of a second video game crash - the console and PC market, whilst commanding huge revenues, has been surpassed by the mobile space. Game budgets are rivalling Hollywood blockbusters (Spider-Man 3 is projected to cost $350,000,000 to make) and 'AAA' games have to sell an insane amount of copies just to break-even (Spider-Man 2 needs to sell 7 million copies to break even).
XBox has blown the one chance they had to make their console a dominant player in the market and we're seeing record numbers of layoffs and studio closures with companies like Embracer buying up huge swathes of the development landscape then shuttering studios who did nothing wrong except get swallowed up by a corporation that didn't have a 'Plan B'.
There's also the huge question mark hovering over Game Pass' actual profitability - the revenues are huge, but so are the costs. If Microsoft decides that say, AI is its future, not gaming, the industry repercussions will be seismic.
Last edited:
It's the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me.
Hence why nvidias dlss and frame gen is so much better than amds
Soldato
I did work experience at a game dev studio that was attached to Sony about 20 years ago now when I was in secondary school as at the time I thought I wanted to be a game dev, Not so much anymore
I did play testing, Looking for bugs, Trying to break the game and at that point in time testing was taken very seriously, You had to document any irregularity, What, How and when the bug or error happened and it was common to play through the same area of a game dozens upon dozens of times with different builds of the game.This was mandatory as games on the PS2 had to be completely bug free or as close as possible, As they had zero ability to rely on bug fixes via the internet like we do now which has become a problem as studios or more so publishers know they can deliver a half or 3/4 finished game to customers and just launch 10GB, 20GB, 30GB, 40GB or even bigger patches years down the road to finish the game ala Cyberpunk, Which wasn't in a really good state until patch 1.6 which was nearly 2 years after the initial release date, The public IMO has become way too lenient with this crap.
Xbox should've brought Scalebound to market, That looked really good but they seem to have made near zero effort to turn it around and bring it out. It's actions like this that basically hand the market over to Sony's PlayStation.
Last edited:
Yep. 100%.
I do think there should be stronger consumer protection laws for software - if you can prove that a software product (game or otherwise) has unacceptable faults, you should be able to demand a full refund - you should also be able to demand a refund if the vendor substantially alters the product after you've purchased it (adding in cash shops/loot boxes, removing prior functionality).
Last edited:
Not sure what that has to do with what you said about "it's always about getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product" but OK.Hence why nvidias dlss and frame gen is so much better than amds
e: I guess for some people everything is always about Nvidia vs AMD.
Last edited:
Not sure what that has to do with what you said about "it's always about getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product" but OK.
e: I guess for some people everything is always about Nvidia vs AMD.
My post was clearly in response to @Aegis post about "game development" in general and the problems with poor releases....
And then see the part where I said this:
Yup agree on the whole except for image quality bit
Development in general across all industries now is pretty **** tbh especially with ai in the picture now, it's always about getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product, the stakeholders just want to get it over the line and out there with no care for what they are delivering (obviously there are a few exceptions but it's becoming rare in the day of "on demand"), it's very much a deal with the consequences after. There are practices, which seeks to improve the overall quality and speed up testing and delivery, generally what DevOps engineers aim to build out but problem is, this is often poorly implemented in most companies and if the software engineers complain that such "processes/systems" are slowing them down in delivering xyz features (because it's not passing tests, which means they have to go and spend more time resolving the issues before they can deliver xyz feature), stakeholders will want xyz processes put in place removed in order to meet the deadline without any care for why such processes were put there in the first place.
Optimisation/Quality is always the last thing to get looked at, I can't see this ever changing until there is a shift in how companies operate and change what they value.
You took part of my post:
To respond with this (which was my comment on another discussion topic with a different member about software methods nvidia/amd/intel are using):
It's the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me.
So yes in the context of getting a good end result with regards to gaming experience, Nvidia with their software solutions solve the issues with such issues in todays games by providing a good solution to address issues with rushed game releases i.e. bypass ****** optimised games and also get better IQ as evidenced than native + TAA where as the likes of amds solutions could be fit into the "rushed release" products as evidenced with FSR, freesync etc. Given you have taken snippets of my posts to try and frankenstein some narrative, I'm not really sure what you're trying to put across though.
So what you're saying is that you think the experience and end result being all I care about, that if if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me does not apply to getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product.
That building a well QC product only applies if it's not the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me...talk about proving my point without even realising it.
e: To be clear as i can you're struggling...This sentence "it's always about getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product" is incongruent with this sentence "It's the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me."
That building a well QC product only applies if it's not the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me...talk about proving my point without even realising it.
e: To be clear as i can you're struggling...This sentence "it's always about getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product" is incongruent with this sentence "It's the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me."
Last edited:
So what you're saying is that you think the experience and end result being all I care about, that if if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me does not apply to getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product.
That building a well QC product only applies if it's not the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me...talk about proving my point without even realising it.
What he mneans is "I like to be spend all day trolling AMD".
So what you're saying is that you think the experience and end result being all I care about, that if if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me does not apply to getting to the market faster each time with no thought/care for building a well QC product.
That building a well QC product only applies if it's not the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me...talk about proving my point without even realising it.
Your logic is extremely flawed here like the ridiculous mona lisa comparison, it's like saying people are trying to take borderlands and force it to be photo realistic
I really don't get what you're trying to put across and it is just coming across like you're trying to start some petty argument tbh.
Companies can release fast to the market AND also have a well QC product as shown by nvidia.... As shown by good games like avatar (although it did get delayed multiple times). AMD just so happen to be an example of not just poor QC but also delivering slow.
Maybe next time, don't read too much into things and stop with the petty selective quoting to suit narratives as you're clearly getting lost in your own narrative now, selective quoting has been warned about before by the mods as it is classed as baiting/trolling.
What's clear is that you deliberately selectively quoted part of my posts to fit some narrative of yours for whatever reason. Read the stickied post at the top of this sub-forum.
Last edited:
What and your constant attempts at starting Nvidia vs AMD flame wars are not.
So are you saying that quoting a section of what someone said to highlight the incongruency of what they've said is against the rules? Would it make you feel better if i quoted the entire posts? Here you go...
Happy now or do you want to do a bit more backseat moderation of peoples posts?
e: Also maybe you'd like to point me in the direction of this rule about contextomy as i can see it here.
Graphics Cards Strikes
Due to repeated issues with inappropriate posts, trolling and discussion falling below the standard we would expect of the Graphics Cards forum the mod team have decided to implement a three strikes rule in this sub-forum. Users deemed to to have posted in an unacceptable manner will receive a...
forums.overclockers.co.uk
Last edited:
Lets look at where you took this quote:
From and what said quote was in reference to:
Hence why I replied to that comment of yours/mine with:
So yeah, about those subforum rules......
Stanners has posted before in threads warning people about it.
It's the experience and end result I care about, if xyz can achieve what I deem as being good then it's good with me.
From and what said quote was in reference to:
Hence why I replied to that comment of yours/mine with:
Hence why nvidias dlss and frame gen is so much better than amds
So yeah, about those subforum rules......
Stanners has posted before in threads warning people about it.
Last edited:
Soldato
Why folks just can't accept and respect personal experience, crazy.
Last edited:
Yet way way back when... when print magazines existed ... I remember this sound card group test (remember those) in, I think, Computer Shopper. The evidence clearly showed the Creative Soundblaster were distorting the sound to be more "pleasing" but the subjective tests had it near the top.
Image reconstruction / creating-what-wasn't-even-there has always reminded me of this. Not that I'm a big fan of ultra realistic as for that I'd need an OLED monitor and a cellar (since most things are way to dark for me then).
Indeed, i have no problem with people saying they personally like how X looks or that they prefer Y however that's subjective. However if we fall down the rabbit hole of making blanket statements like Z is better than native you open a whole can of worms, you go down the road of endless arguments over what is actually better, you lose any objectivity.
i am not a fan of fake frames. My experience is it is useless below the kind of FPS that most people find playable anyway.
If you are getting 30 - 50ish FPS enabling fake frames gives noticeable lag and in my opinion it is unplayable.
If you are getting 50-60+ FPS enabling fake frames is essentially pointless if you have a VRR monitor.
For example I get 70 FPS average in MSFS and adding fake frames brings it to 120+ FPS, but it doesn't feel faster. It just feels pointless on my VRR monitor.
People with low FPS are the very people who can benefit from fake frames, but they aren't really getting any benefit IMHO.
If you are getting 30 - 50ish FPS enabling fake frames gives noticeable lag and in my opinion it is unplayable.
If you are getting 50-60+ FPS enabling fake frames is essentially pointless if you have a VRR monitor.
For example I get 70 FPS average in MSFS and adding fake frames brings it to 120+ FPS, but it doesn't feel faster. It just feels pointless on my VRR monitor.
People with low FPS are the very people who can benefit from fake frames, but they aren't really getting any benefit IMHO.
As someone with a gsync ultimate 175hz monitor, this isn't correct. Higher FPS provides more motion fluidity thus a smoother image in play, which is one of the main reasons to have high fps in the first place, even in hogwarts where the base fps is already like 80 fps, jumping to 130+ is noticeably better in this regard.
MSFS is not the kind of game you'll see a huge benefit in due to the sim like slow nature of it.
I know what temporal upscaling is but that isn't the primary benefit of DLSS. Whilst recent versions of DLSS now have a temporal component, the original was purely super sampling (it was however temporally unstable, which is why nvidia started using motion vectors). SSAA which I reference as an example in the post you reply to is not a temporal method.
The conversation was also entirely about how supersampling can sometimes give a better image, since it has a higher quality reference than resolution selected.
Last edited: