Nissash

Also would like to point out that while the ability to use DLSS or FSR in something like Unreal Engine is as simple as installing the plugin then enabling it you actually have to implement it which while does not appear to be difficult at all you still have to put it in to the game settings menus and validate each setting outcome as you can actually customize each setting level, they are not actually fixed and the same across games.
 
So if you put in either you have to actually do fine tuning and QA testing and also make sure that one isn't significantly worse or problematic than the other. It's not going to look all that good for your game if only you have problems with FSR or DLSS because you spent all your time on the other then slapped in the other and you cannot use any sponsored funding for any of this particular  QA.
 
It's really easy to oversimplify this, I do it. But I do also know there is more to things than just ticking a box and enable something and "hey presto, it's working" even if on the basic level it is actually "that simple".
 
Edit:
Also AMD does need to provide a better follow up response. It's getting a little too long at this point.

It`s literally like selling "free DLC", but to play it you must buy the full game. Yes, it is not directly giving money to NVIDIA but indirectly is.
"...DLSS doesn't cost anything to implement..." but it cost time and human resources, and according to NVIDIA SDKs LICENSE you must:
 
1. "...include the NVIDIA Marks on splash screens, in the about box of the application (if present), and in credits for game applications."
2. "...You hereby grant to NVIDIA the right to create and display self-promotional demo materials using the Assets, and after release of the application to the public to distribute, sub-license, and use the Assets to promote and market the NVIDIA RTX SDKs. To the extent you provide NVIDIA with input or usage requests with regard to the use of your logo or materials, NVIDIA will use commercially reasonable efforts to comply with such requests. For the avoidance of doubt, NVIDIA’s rights pursuant to this section shall survive any termination of the Agreement with respect to applications which incorporate the NVIDIA RTX SDK."
 
So no it`s not "... it kinda fails as marketing" it is marketing. (And it is only a small part of 7 pages of text.)
I agree with this except for the part about GPU manufacturers having more leverage. Developers, publishers, and GPU manufacturers have the same responsibility if they accept an anti-consumer sponsorship. 
 
I am not ignoring XeSS. It`s just I am less knowledgeable about the XeSS situation so don't want to speculate too bluntly about it. It is the newest technology and It doesn't have a large amount of games implementation to talk about.
 
But I found Intel XeSS Compatible GPU List:
Nvidia GPU
GTX 10 series
GTX 16 series
RTX 20 series
RTX 30 series
RTX 40 series

AMD GPU
RX 5000 series 
RX 6000 series
RX 7000 series

Intel GPU
Intel Arc GPUs
Intel Xe-LP integrated GPUs (11th generation mobile CPUs and newer)
 
There is a fairly larger amount of games with require older Nvidia GPUs than newer AMD so it is logical that XeSS will prioritize these games.
 
EDIT. And I just found this article, which claims"... that XeSS in its first outing is comparable to NVIDIA's DLSS 2.3 technology rather than AMD's FSR 2.0."
They have a choice. If you accept someone's sponsorship you must act according to the terms. If you don't like terms just don't accept sponsorship.
It depends on a lot of factors. It can take from 3 days with UE4/UE5 to a month or more with other more game-specific engines. So it can be expensive. 
Just because they own the majority of the market share doesn't mean we must give them free ads or make others pay (look in the first section of the post) so they can own even more.
I never said that HUB is totally on Nvidia's side. I saw the videos about Nvidia, DLSS, and 4060.
I don't like this particular video. It really badly made. Looks like hate speech (and it is). 
The video contains many assumptions, FSR and DLSS compatibility lists are inaccurate. It does not take into account the fault of publishers and developers. It requires the mandatory introduction of DLSS (since it is a proprietary technology, it technically plays on the Nvidia side, see the first section of the post), which generally depends not on AMD but on game developers.
At the same time, I too want to hear a normal answer from AMD about this situation.

It`s literally like selling "free DLC", but to play it you must buy the full game. Yes, it is not directly giving money to NVIDIA but indirectly is.
"...DLSS doesn't cost anything to implement..." but it cost time and human resources, and according to NVIDIA SDKs LICENSE you must:
 
1. "...include the NVIDIA Marks on splash screens, in the about box of the application (if present), and in credits for game applications."
2. "...You hereby grant to NVIDIA the right to create and display self-promotional demo materials using the Assets, and after release of the application to the public to distribute, sub-license, and use the Assets to promote and market the NVIDIA RTX SDKs. To the extent you provide NVIDIA with input or usage requests with regard to the use of your logo or materials, NVIDIA will use commercially reasonable efforts to comply with such requests. For the avoidance of doubt, NVIDIA’s rights pursuant to this section shall survive any termination of the Agreement with respect to applications which incorporate the NVIDIA RTX SDK."
 
So no it`s not "... it kinda fails as marketing" it is marketing. (And it is only a small part of 7 pages of text.)
I agree with this except for the part about GPU manufacturers having more leverage. Developers, publishers, and GPU manufacturers have the same responsibility if they accept an anti-consumer sponsorship. 
 
I am not ignoring XeSS. It`s just I am less knowledgeable about the XeSS situation so don't want to speculate too bluntly about it. It is the newest technology and It doesn't have a large amount of games implementation to talk about.
 
But I found Intel XeSS Compatible GPU List:
Nvidia GPU
GTX 10 series
GTX 16 series
RTX 20 series
RTX 30 series
RTX 40 series

AMD GPU
RX 5000 series 
RX 6000 series
RX 7000 series

Intel GPU
Intel Arc GPUs
Intel Xe-LP integrated GPUs (11th generation mobile CPUs and newer)
 
There is a fairly larger amount of games with require older Nvidia GPUs than newer AMD so it is logical that XeSS will prioritize these games.
 
EDIT. And I just found this article, which claims"... that XeSS in its first outing is comparable to NVIDIA's DLSS 2.3 technology rather than AMD's FSR 2.0."
They have a choice. If you accept someone's sponsorship you must act according to the terms. If you don't like terms just don't accept sponsorship.
It depends on a lot of factors. It can take from 3 days with UE4/UE5 to a month or more with other more game-specific engines. So it can be expensive. 
Just because they own the majority of the market share doesn't mean we must give them free ads or make others pay (look in the first section of the post) so they can own even more.
I never said that HUB is totally on Nvidia's side. I saw the videos about Nvidia, DLSS, and 4060.
I don't like this particular video. It really badly made. Looks like hate speech (and it is). 
The video contains many assumptions, FSR and DLSS compatibility lists are inaccurate. It does not take into account the fault of publishers and developers. It requires the mandatory introduction of DLSS (since it is a proprietary technology, it technically plays on the Nvidia side, see the first section of the post), which generally depends not on AMD but on game developers.
At the same time, I too want to hear a normal answer from AMD about this situation.