• 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.

GameWorks and TreeFX we testing these Wrong!

The thing that gets me with most of these technologies and the way they are added into the games be it AMD or NVidia, is the way that if it doesn't quite work well enough or takes too much of a hit performance wise for too little visual benefit, is that it become NVidia's or AMD fault.
This is of course rubbish, but most people don't see it that way.
You think that in those screen shots above, the coders are modelling Lara and they just say and TressFX do the hair and out pops the hair just like that. No of course not, there are loads of parameters for the coders to tweak and different options for them to use and yet every time it doesn't work as we the public might like it too it is the GPU vendor and not the developer that is at fault.
 
Shanks.....

Some God Rays with 0 performance hit.
Its really quite perplexing that there should be a performance hit for it, it seems to me everytime Nvidia do something (Thats invariably been done before) there seems to be a crippling performance hit, why?

On


Off


On


Off


On


Off
 
Yeah.. You hit the nail on the head. This what I been saying for ages Gameworks effects add nothing new and hurt performance. I just don't understand why they do this.
 
Personal Opinion:
They way I see these vendor specific features is if you're cooking a lovely korma with the misses, it's all going well as planned. Chicken is bubbling away in the yellow sauce and it's almost ready to serve. *knock knock* Well who the hell is that? Oh it's a neighbour and he's brought...gummy bears?

Neighbour: "He guys, smelled that you were making a tasty curry and thought it would look better with some gummy bears in it to add some colour!"

Well sure, it might look a bit better with a splash of colour mate but is it really going to improve the quality of my dinner? Nah bruv.

BRB getting a curry.
 
Last edited:
I dont think anyone is doubting the performance hit from either tech vendor.

The trade off however seems to be better on some features than others. I like Phys x on most games and ressfx too but this godray stuff is not something i would trade the performance for and it does make you wonder why there is such a large hit when there is very little visual difference between the settings (well from what i have seen).

Can someone confirm if there is an in game option which lets you turn godrays off, not low?
 
humbug said:
Shanks.....

Some God Rays with 0 performance hit.
Click to expand...
Yea, and they look subpar compared to what we have now.

It's like saying that some primitive SSAO didn't cost much, therefore the cost for HBAO+ isn't worth it nowadays. Not all effects are created equal.

OP seemingly picked one of the best examples from one side and the worst example from the other. Really no bias here, surely?

Gameworks stuff can be taxing at times and worth it at times, too. Just like the TressFX example used. It is up to the user to decide what they think is worth it, which will largely depend on what their rig is, what their performance expectations/standards are, and how much they care the improvement it makes. None of these are set in stone for anybody, so it's really silly to get all worked up about it.

I dont use every Gameworks effect on offer, but I do sometimes. And I'm glad to have the option.

shankly1985 said:
We could do this for all of the GameWorks effects and you will find they do nothing to what we already have in games and are just adding ontop more performance impact for no real gain in IQ..
Click to expand...
No, we really couldn't.

Absolute nonsense.
 
Last edited:
@ Seanspeed i spent little more than an hour on it, it actually looks really good if worked on and used properly.

Gregster said:
Righto, IQ it is and this really irks me.

Lara's hair is so sharp it actually cuts through her shoulders and neck. Constantly happening and a real gripe for me.
Click to expand...

Thats because the only solid object in the model is the bone structure, a simple structure that is used to animate the character, its not to dissimilar to a skeleton.

The textures, skin / clothing ecte... are simply wrapped around it, those textures have no collision properties because to do so would mean they don't have the flexibility to flow with the bone animation, as a result anything that comes into contact with it will pass straight through it.

This is not a problem with TressFX, this is simply a result of lazy development work, IE they didn't use strategically placed collision proxies for the hair to rest on.

Back on God Rays, its not normally something that one would use globally, the reason being it adds a haze to the image which in most cases just doesn't look very nice.
It should be used sparingly and only to create an atmosphere, like a darkened dusk scene to add atmosphere to the scene.

To use it as global lighting and shading is idiotic and horrible, like FC4 and FA4... it just seems like its there to say "this is a feature, its everywhere, you cannot miss it, unless you turn it off completely"
but then what i do know....
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
... just doesn't look very nice.
It should be used sparingly and only to create an atmosphere, like a darkened dusk scene to add atmosphere to the scene.
Click to expand...

Makes a lot of the screenshots with it on look 'washed out' to me. Then again, some people might like the excessive use of it. Is there any reason why you couldn't have a sliding scale of ray density the same way that many games have a sliding scale for objects like grass/trees?

Obviously choosing a lower density wont mean only darkened dusk scene would contain it, it would just mean the effects would be less in your face.
 
humbug said:
@ Seanspeed i spent little more than an hour on it, it actually looks really good if worked on and used properly.
Click to expand...
On what? The god rays? There's all sorts of banding issues and some weird artifacting going on with it. If it doesn't cost much, then cool, but it's no reason to get upset about a superior looking version that has a higher cost.

If we just rested our laurels on the first, most primitive variations of graphical effects and shunned anybody who did it better and <gasp> had a higher performance cost, games would not look nearly as good as they do nowadays. Sure, they'd all run at like 200fps, but half the benefit of these increases in graphics power/tech we get is the ability to spend more on higher fidelity effects.
 
Last edited:
Avenged7Fold said:
Makes a lot of the screenshots with it on look 'washed out' to me. Then again, some people might like the excessive use of it. Is there any reason why you couldn't have a sliding scale of ray density the same way that many games have a sliding scale for objects like grass/trees?
Click to expand...

No reason, i don't know the engine but it should have adjustable levels for that, in which case a sliding scale option could be programmed and flowgraphed.
 
I personally don't like that either AMD or Nvidia are doing these effects. Instead there should be coalition of developers who should make these libraries for everyone. But that wouldn't make sense since there is no financial benefits in it.
 
We know the effects are bolted on. They are there as an option to make the most of whatever hardware you could afford. Quality of the game is down to the studio/developers.

Being cynical for a second and say I never turn on Nvidia's GameWorks, would I be happy with a unreactive environments helping set up the perfect atmosphere for what's ahead, probably not. Think back to Stalker without godrays and those dynamic day and night cycles back in 2007 making is perfectly playable without mods to bring it up to date. Or watching blood drip down steps in Borderlands TPS thanks to PhysX. Sure as hell adds nothing to the gameplay but damn is that creepy :D

Ultimately it's there to gloss over the lower quality assets we constantly in big titles that is glaringly obvious to witness on PC. If you check over recent releases and the comparison screenshots/videos of platforms recently, there is part of my reason for postponing game purchases until a big sale. I don't order a game for extra effects or pay attention to trailers that aren't using actual in game footage. Yes I've got Fallout 4 in mind more recently with that comment and my word have the modders got their hands full to reclaim it once more as a proper quality PC title.
 
Dygaza said:
I personally don't like that either AMD or Nvidia are doing these effects. Instead there should be coalition of developers who should make these libraries for everyone. But that wouldn't make sense since there is no financial benefits in it.
Click to expand...

TressFX is free to use, source code is free to download, it is free to be implemented in any game, devs are free to change the code as they like when they implement it.

Gameworks is not free to use, the source code is basically hidden, you aren't free to modify or distribute modified/improved versions of it.

AMD gave devs a piece of software, an idea and a starting point to do with as they choose, Nvidia is trying to gain control, the latter is bad, the former is useful if devs want to use it.

The main issue with god rays is, and I've already found this in some inside locations, is that god rays are awfully done. One window had light leaking through and the entire scene basically blurs out. It's like walking into a bright room but your eyes not adjusting to the brightness. The Far Cry 4 picture looks frankly washed out and useless.

You can also see from the fallout 4 picture how this massive performance sapping god rays for ultra realism in the lighting... isn't even realistic. Look where the sun is compared to where a lot of those rays are falling. It's providing an irritating indoor overly bright washed out effect and outside it's very unrealistic in multiple areas. "We need huge power to give you realistic physics effects.... please ignore when they aren't realistic as we can't really explain that one, thanks, Nvidia".
 
It's not just Nvidia's God Rays that had a performance hit. STALKER Clear Skies has them too but the performance hit was apparently close to 50% (at the time). Nothing to do with Nvidia that one.

Also in Fallout 4 "God Rays" aren't just God Rays, according to Nvidia:
Generally, when folks refer to Volumetric Lighting they mean God Rays, Light Shafts, or Light Rays, but in the case of Fallout 4 NVIDIA Volumetric Lighting is so much more, reflecting light and adding illumination, shadow volume and considerable style to every outdoor scene
Click to expand...

and

In addition, NVIDIA Volumetric Lighting effects are affected by weather conditions, the dynamic day-night cycle, visual effects, and other factors, giving the world a truly dynamic appearance.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest, not sure I can tell the difference between all that or if humbug's examples have all those aspects, but the performance hit (which is apparently 6.5fps) if for all those things I believe.

Also, when someone uses GameWorks or TressFX, are the effects rendered within the engine or separate from it?
Cuz if they're rendered within the engine then sure that has to be considered as well as the library's implementation. So comparing a performance hit in Fallout 4's engine with the hit in CryEngine would become less meaningful. If the engine in use doesn't matter, then it's a fair comparison.

If it does matter then the same issue applies comparing Tomb Raider to Witcher 3, you'd not just be comparing the libraries, but also the engine they're rendering in.
 
Last edited:
Drunkenmaster, ethics might be more on AMD's side (if any corporation has ethics). But still I would prefer that developers should be the ones developing new technologies for general use, not hardware vendors. But it is what it is. I still do use both effects if possible.
 
Ian Evey said:
So did tressfx, they both hurt performance but you would think only gameworks does.
Click to expand...

See again you not getting what am saying so until you understand I would not bother replaying.

Does TressFX add something over no TressFX? Yes is they a difference? Yes

Does god rays add something over what we already have had? No
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom