• 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.

Poll: AMD Screws Gamers: Sponsorships Likely Block DLSS

Are AMD out of order if they are found to be blocking DLSS on Starfield

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
LtMatt said:
Yes, but you are doing the same thing to my post since I was not focusing on development cycles of games and release schedules for updates. I'm aware that happens, if that's what you want me to say.

To counter your misdirection attempt, we'll put Cyberpunk to one side since that was released in Dec 2020 and FSR 2.1 was added in November 2022. So we'll say it took two years of game development and cycles from the developer to be able to find time to add FSR 2.1 into Cyberpunk 2077.

What about Metro LL, Plague Tale Requiem, Control? All Nvidia sponsored titles, but no FSR (not even 1.0) in any of them.
Click to expand...

Glad you understand the difference so hopefully you won't support that poorly derived take going forward.

Just to confirm timelines so I don't have it wrong:

FSR2.1 was released in Sept 8th 2022 per AMD's own blog: https://community.amd.com/t5/gaming...ution-2-1-out-now-even-more-fsr-2/ba-p/544170

On Nov 8th, exactly 2 months after AMD's announcement above, CDPR added FSR2.1 in not just PC but also both next gen consoles. https://www.videogameschronicle.com...heoretically should mean improved performance.

A 60 day program cycle aligned to the next patch release seems quite reasonable no? I'm failing to see the outrage.

You should reach out to your favorite tech tubers/publication and ask them to question the devs on why those games above didn't get FSR support. It's a valid question and I'd be just as curious.
 
Last edited:
Stanners said:
Do you think AMD are out of order if they are blocking DLSS on starfield ?
Click to expand...
I think if DLSS was open source it wouldn't be an issue. If you read the licence agreement (please do, maybe you'll have a different opinion) you can see why DLSS integration might be problematic in some situations. For example, if a developer uses DLSS, you have to have Nvidia RTX/DLSS logos all over your game, Nvidia can market your game on their website, and a lot more too if you read the agreement. Just my personal opinion.
 
Last edited:
Robert896r1 said:
Glad you understand the difference so hopefully you won't support that poorly derived take going forward.

Just to confirm timelines so I don't have it wrong:

FSR2.1 was released in Sept 8th 2022 per AMD's own blog: https://community.amd.com/t5/gaming...ution-2-1-out-now-even-more-fsr-2/ba-p/544170

On Nov 8th, exactly 2 months after AMD's announcement above, CDPR added FSR2.1 in not just PC but also both next gen consoles.

A 60 day program cycle aligned to the next patch release seems quite reasonable no? I'm failing to see the outrage.

You should reach out to your favorite tech tubers/publication and ask them to question the devs on why those games above didn't get FSR support. It's a valid question and I'd be just as curious.
Click to expand...
I corrected the dates, take a look at my post again and you'll see the true timeframes.
 
Last edited:
LtMatt said:
I think if DLSS was open source it wouldn't be an issue. If you read the licence agreement (please do, maybe you'll have a different opinion) you can see why DLSS integration might be problematic in some situations. For example, if a developer uses DLSS, you have to have Nvidia RTX/DLSS logos all over your game, Nvidia can market your game on their website, and a lot more too if you read the agreement. Just my personal opinion.
Click to expand...
free advertisement for you game from nvidia then? as long as nvidia dont charge royalties to use dlss then its all good.
 
LtMatt said:
I think if DLSS was open source it wouldn't be an issue. If you read the licence agreement (please do, maybe you'll have a different opinion) you can see why DLSS integration might be problematic in some situations. For example, if a developer uses DLSS, you have to have Nvidia RTX/DLSS logos all over your game, Nvidia can market your game on their website, and a lot more too if you read the agreement. Just my personal opinion.
Click to expand...

Are those AMD sponsored games that do have DLSS advertised on the Nvidia website now? Is that the reason AMD are blocking DLSS?
 
Stanners said:
Are those AMD sponsored games that do have DLSS advertised on the Nvidia website now? Is that the reason AMD are blocking DLSS?
Click to expand...
Which games are you talking about? How do you know which games are sponsored?

I gave you my personal opinion, what's yours? Sounds like you've made up your mind already.
 
Its not even been confirmed that Starfield will released without DLSS, everyone has just assumed it won't. Would be pretty funny if after all this it does have DLSS support.

Also on another note what if this is how AMD plan to release their updated version of FSR with frame gen and maybe improved upscaling. Will people still be raging if that is the case and the visual improvement end up being on par with DLSS?
 
Last edited:
LtMatt said:
Which games are you talking about? How do you know which games are sponsored?

I gave you my personal opinion, what's yours? Sounds like you've made up your mind already.
Click to expand...

Who else opinion would it be, I know it came from you...
I have made my mind up in as much as if it is true then it is out of order. It is beyond me why AMD if it is not true do not just say so.
 
Raelgun said:
Of course not, is ocuk out of order for not advertising or including competitor's products?
Click to expand...

It's this kind of black and white thinking that leads to threads going off on weird tangents. You do realise those aren't comparable situations?

Stanners is referring to AMD potentially blocking the use of a competitor technology within a game. If true, it could raise significant antitrust issues and questions about market manipulation. It's essentially about how a company might be leveraging its position to potentially harm competitors and consumers by limiting the potential utility of their products. Yes, I'm aware nVidia may do or have done the same.

Your response, on the other hand, pertains to the retail business practices of OCUK and their decision on what products to stock and advertise. As a retailer, OCUK has the discretion to choose the products they believe best serve their customer base or align with their business model and that includes choosing not to sell or advertise certain brands or products. It doesn't directly disadvantage any competitor in terms of product functionality, unlike the first scenario. Retailers often have exclusive deals with suppliers or make strategic decisions about the brands they carry without it being an issue of fair competition.

So yeah, while both situations could potentially influence consumer choice, they do so in fundamentally different ways and engage different aspects of market competition and regulation.
 
Last edited:
LtMatt said:
I corrected the dates, take a look at my post again and you'll see the true timeframes.
Click to expand...

You didn't correct the dates, you completely reverted to a FSR1.0 argument. Your 2.1 point that you had originally crafted which as you see now, is poor.

FSR1.0 was by all means a generally horrific implementation of upscaling technology. That's just brand protection 101. Why would CDPR who are already taking heat for CP2077 issue now implement a universally panned upscaling tech and offer a poor experience?
 
Robert896r1 said:
You didn't correct the dates, you completely reverted to a FSR1.0 argument. Your 2.1 point that you had originally crafted which as you see now, is poor.

FSR1.0 was by all means a generally horrific implementation of upscaling technology. That's just brand protection 101. Why would CDPR who are already taking heat for CP2077 issue now implement a universally panned upscaling tech and offer a poor experience?
Click to expand...
I forgot that FSR 1 was even in Cyberpunk tbh and only discovered it when looking up the time lines, but the point is still completely relevant as it still took an incredibly long time to integrate something that takes a few days development time. Development cycles for a feature like that are not usually well over a year.

Anyway it was for that reason that I gave some other examples aside from Cyberpunk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom