Fallout 4 to feature Nvidia Gameworks

kaku · 25 Oct 2015 at 13:52

It's a Bethesda game, it won't be playable at launch anyway xD

ALXAndy · 25 Oct 2015 at 14:03

kaku said:
It's a Bethesda game, it won't be playable at launch anyway xD

I read an article that claims that it's pretty much perfect. I think Bethesda have learned from Valve on this game tbh. I think it's been ready for quite some time, but Todd Howard has an OCD about Fall and the 10th of November.

Howling · 25 Oct 2015 at 14:50

ALXAndy said:
Well PHSYX was a failure so I guess they feel they need something else to entice customers.

PhysX's problem was nVidia though. Though I'm not sure there was a better alternative, it needed integrating into systems and a purchase by AMD/nVidia was an efficient way of doing that.. the trouble then is it's vendor specific, and at the time AMD had a significant market share. The few times PhysX was used did look decent, but too big a hit to AMD performance so it didn't see widespread use.
GameWorks can be thought of in a similar way except nVidia do have the market dominance this time around to push it and see it used more, still a negative impact on AMD but I guess business is business.

opethdisciple · 25 Oct 2015 at 14:54

Ideally, GameWorks would be a vendor agnostic open source library.

However Nvidia should not be condemned for taking the initiative to develop a library of effects that devs can draw on to improve the IQ of their games.

I'm happy, that the major AAA games are mostly Game Works titles. It means Nvidia are doing the right things.

Any issues with performance are down to the Dev not Nvidia.

I'm now even more excited for Fall Out 4.

ALXAndy · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:02

Howling said:
PhysX's problem was nVidia though.

All of Nvidia's problems are because of them. It's their arrogance.

tommybhoy · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:04

Love how oblivious some people are to an enforced performance hit over higher optimisation, Nvidia must love those guys coin.

Howling · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:05

opethdisciple said:
Any issues with performance are down to the Dev not Nvidia.

Except that in every(?) instance of Gameworks use, there are issues. The question mark is because there may be a few where GW hasn't killed the game entirely

Occam's razor there, all the different devs using it are unlikely to ALL be at fault so the problem must lie elsewhere.

Aretak · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:08

opethdisciple said:
Any issues with performance are down to the Dev not Nvidia.

Indeed. Pure coincidence that poor performance follows GameWorks around like a bad smell. It's just that the developers of every game that's used it were incompetent. One day we'll find the magical, mythical studio that can implement it without crippling their game and finally be able to say that GameWorks did nothing wrong.

opethdisciple · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:08

Howling said:
Except that in every(?) instance of Gameworks use, there are issues. The question mark is because there may be a few where GW hasn't killed the game entirely
Occam's razor there, all the different devs using it are unlikely to ALL be at fault so the problem must lie elsewhere.

It's a work in progress tho like any piece of software. The way I understand it a dev uses a particular piece of code in their game. Any improvements or optimisations by the dev/Nvidia then go back in to the library. Meaning when the next dev wants to use the same piece of code, they are using code which has been improved by previous developers and any further improvements they make get put back in to the library. Rinse and repeat.

It's a very interesting and clever way of doing it if you ask me.

It would be better if it was vendor agnostic, but Nvidia cant be bashed for taking the initiative and developing a set of libraries that improve the IQ in games.

Dicehunter · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:41

opethdisciple said:
Ideally, GameWorks would be a vendor agnostic open source library.

However Nvidia should not be condemned for taking the initiative to develop a library of effects that devs can draw on to improve the IQ of their games.

I'm happy, that the major AAA games are mostly Game Works titles. It means Nvidia are doing the right things.

Any issues with performance are down to the Dev not Nvidia.

I'm now even more excited for Fall Out 4.

True, Just look at the Physx smoke implementation in AC: Black Flag that was tacked on 6 months after release, Nearly halved FPS while only giving a minor graphical effect and in most cases did nothing whilst cutting FPS nearly in half, Example below -

opethdisciple · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:44

If there truly was a big issue with it, developer after developer of the biggest AAA titles would not be using it time after time.

It's clearly a fantastic resource for improving the IQ and immersion in game development.

If the game comes out broken like Batman AK, it's not exactly Nvidia's fault. It's the studios for not releasing a bug tested optimised game.

ALXAndy · 25 Oct 2015 at 15:57

opethdisciple said:
If there truly was a big issue with it, developer after developer of the biggest AAA titles would not be using it time after time.

It's clearly a fantastic resource for improving the IQ and immersion in game development.

If the game comes out broken like Batman AK, it's not exactly Nvidia's fault. It's the studios for not releasing a bug tested optimised game.

The problem is Nvidia's name and reputation is connected to these awful games. People have bought them.

I got Batman when it came out. Tried to play it on my rig and it was an absolute bloody mess.

Nvidia need to do more work with the devs to get this sorted. Otherwise it just ends up making them look bad, rather than good.

thebennyboy · 25 Oct 2015 at 16:05

There hasn't been one game which featured Gameworks that ran well at launch. Don't think this game will change that sadly.

opethdisciple · 25 Oct 2015 at 16:10

ALXAndy said:
The problem is Nvidia's name and reputation is connected to these awful games. People have bought them.

I got Batman when it came out. Tried to play it on my rig and it was an absolute bloody mess.

Nvidia need to do more work with the devs to get this sorted. Otherwise it just ends up making them look bad, rather than good.

Agreed. And it's things like AK and AC Unity that change the development process of game development. Studios notice the mistakes of other studios.

humbug · 25 Oct 2015 at 16:18

Dicehunter said:
True, Just look at the Physx smoke implementation in AC: Black Flag that was tacked on 6 months after release, Nearly halved FPS while only giving a minor graphical effect and in most cases did nothing whilst cutting FPS nearly in half, Example below -

I can't even see the "minor graphical effect" in that ^^^^ where is it?

JediFragger · 25 Oct 2015 at 16:47

humbug said:
I can't even see the "minor graphical effect" in that ^^^^ where is it?

Me neither lol. Must be *extremely* minor

r7slayer · 25 Oct 2015 at 16:51

JediFragger said:
Me neither lol. Must be *extremely* minor

But it's halved the FPS right? So its gotta be doing something graphically? Surely?

JediFragger · 25 Oct 2015 at 16:53

r7slayer said:
But it's halved the FPS right? So its gotta be doing something graphically? Surely?

Sea tessalation too

StriderX · 25 Oct 2015 at 17:00

ALXAndy said:
I read an article that claims...

Well, considering the credibility of any write-up connected to gaming lately... I'm gonna ignore this possibility.

I will be amazed if its not a sprawling mess at launch.

Dicehunter · 25 Oct 2015 at 17:05

humbug said:
I can't even see the "minor graphical effect" in that ^^^^ where is it?

When you fire your pistol or go near a camp fire the smoke looks really good but even when there's no smoke around like in the scene I posted above the frames plummet.