AMD denies blocking Bethesda from adding DLSS to Starfield | Starfield DLSS mod locked behind a paywall::undefined

  • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    yeah, some people might tell, I don’t think it’s worth the trade-off of excluding a large part of the market.

    NVIDIA doesn’t even respect their own user base. I have a 3080 and can’t use DLSS 3. I’ll keep supporting open technologies.

    • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I got a 3080 and I would never want to use DLSS 3 anyways. Keep that stupid ass fake frame generation away. I can put up with upscaling since it’s at least a true rendered frame, but that’s pretty much where I draw the line. Fake frames might make it feel smooth, but I’m not into this hobby for the feels.

      • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        that’s fair, I’m absolutely in it for the feels haha

        I just play to have a good time

    • AngryMob@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nobody wants exclusion of any technology, thats the entire point. Especially when its been shown repeatedly that once you implement one of the 3 (fsr, dlss, xess) techs, the other 2 take almost no effort to add in as well. So little effort that modders have managed to shove them in to games that exclude them for whatever reason, sometimes achieving it in a matter of hours.

      All that said… Dlss is definitely better quality than fsr. “Some people might tell” is an understatement.

      Your 3080 cant run frame generation because it wouldn’t improve your framerate with that gpu architecture. Just like software dlss wont improve framerate on a 1080.

      Nvidia isnt some boogeyman holding back these techs because they just want to force people to buy new cards. They are definitely making tech that only works on the newest cards to try and get more sales, dont get me wrong, but its not arbitrary.

    • dalingrin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      No one is saying FSR should be excluded.

      Though if there’s only going to be one hardware agnostic upscaler then I’d rather it be XESS than FSR.

    • BallShapedMan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      No exclusives at all are as bad for the gamer economy as only exclusives.

      I’m interested in the next version of FSR, it’s rumored to include frame generation.

      • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        No exclusives at all are as bad for the gamer economy as only exclusives.

        Can you elaborate on that? I don’t see a clear benefit of exclusives to the user base or industry in general, only to those involved.

        • Kelly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If small devs are expected to support every platform day one that increases the barrier to entry.

          A world where small teams start their release on one or two platform they find advantageous and then port their successful titles to other platforms after is probably safest for them and offers the most product diversity for consumers.

          • whileloop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not a fan of using the same word to describe two very different kinds of exclusively.

            Exclusivity due to platform contracts (i.e., Sony paying a developer to keep a game exclusive to PlayStation), is not the same as exclusivity you described in your comment.

          • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            and then port their successful titles to other platforms

            Well, then they’re not exclusives, are they? I get the point to speed up time to market, but I’m questioning the benefit of having “lifetime exclusives”, or anything beyond 1 year, honestly.

            • Kelly@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The implication is of course that less successful titles will not be ported either because the company runs out of money or feels they are better off working on their next title than investing more resources on porting a middling title to a second choice platform.