[Updated 11/4/15] Fallout 4 to NOT feature Nvidia Gameworks, but Nvidia is still working with Bethesda on the game.

[Deletive]

Here's another point (@Deletive): if you took off work days to play this game, go fucking play the game when it comes out. Don't get butthurt because your lesser favorite GPU vendor has exclusive effects in the game that are made to run on their cards.

 

I didn't pitch a fit whenever Tomb Raider or the new Deus Ex confirmed TressFX. If you want to play the game, play the fookin game

I like neither Nvidia or AMD more, both of which are completely fine by me. What annoys me the most is that the model Gameworks has left behind, leaving a sour taste in my mouth. 

We are two different people,  If you want to state your opinion about what I said how about you don't say i'm pitching a fit or I'm butthurt.  If I don't want to spend $80 CAD (almost 90$ with tax) on a game that I don't even have full access to all the graphical features of without going to green side then I won't spend that much money on the game.

[Hunched]

Arkham Knight, from what I understand, ran like shit for everyone. So much that WB pulled it from sales on PC.

 

Nvidia does need to do some quality control in that regard, and I've always thought this. I first noticed it with Black Flag where PhysX was bringing every system to it's knees at one point in time.

 

But like I said, Nvidia isn't making deals to get their games to run better. You literally disproved your whole point with what you just replied to me, mate.

 

Also, gonna let you in on a secret: you're able to toggle those features off if it's hindering your performance.

Yea, Arkham Knight did run like shit for everyone, yet somehow got Nvidia's stamp of approval?

GameWorks functioned well enough to them that they were satisfied and promoting it, that's scary.

 

Not going to reply to the fact Nvidia is involved in the development of Arkham Knight on PC? Gonna just ignore that obviously crossing the line fact?

Of fucking course you are....

[Hunched]

When is Nvidia crossing the line if developing PC ports for or with developers isn't it?

How delusional are you all willing to go?

[Guest Kloaked]

Yeah if every company stayed the fuck out of basically taking bribe money to tank performance for others (and inadvertedly, Nvidia's own product though they of course never face to that massive incompetence) then everything would work.

 

Only, it will never make sense for a company to basically turn down free money, this is why this stuff should be (and it very well could be already) regulated with an anti-trust suit.

 

Until I see some proof (likely won't ever happen anyways), I will not believe studios take "bribe money" to get gameworks into their game. We've had this discussion before somewhere (not with you specifically), so I don't feel like going down that road because no one can prove it either way.

 

They're not tanking performance for AMD, no matter how many times someone says it - it's not going to become the truth. Those effects are made to run on Nvidia GPU's, and those games do not have some hidden code to tank Radeon performance.

 

 

For me it's all about fragmentation. PC Gaming is getting more and more fragmented, from guys who sell - pardon my french - fucking hardware.

They don't make content, they never created studios and fully funded game, like the console guys. They cut corners to put their poor implementations of bloatware in exchange to put a sticker in a game.

I'm all for supporting developers, for the sake of the platform. There's not PC NVIDIA, PC AMD, PC INTEL... it's PC platform.

 

And you know my position about NVIDIA, I don't hide it - these guys make no contributions to the industry, they are fueled by false advertisement, and even have the audacity to use open standards while they enforce IP licensing.

Mark my words - NVIDIA is just warming up with the gaming experience shit. Drivers was the first step, next time you know you'll have your pc games locked to NVIDIA hardware, just like they are doing with other hardware like monitors.

 

I completely agree, except for the last part. I know they're making a bleeping retarded decision with their drivers, but I don't know about games being locked to Nvidia hardware unless Nvidia just makes their own games, something I don't really expect until their Grid service (or whatever it's called now) takes off.

 

 

I like neither Nvidia or AMD more, both of which are completely fine by me. What annoys me the most is that the model Gameworks has left behind, leaving a sour taste in my mouth. 

We are two different people,  If you want to state your opinion about what I said how about you don't say i'm pitching a fit or I'm butthurt.  If I don't want to spend $80 CAD (almost 90$ with tax) on a game that I don't even have full access to all the graphical features of without going to green side then I won't spend that much money on the game.

 

You're going to be getting the features of the game that were going to originally be in the game anyways, even if GameWorks effects didn't exist.

 

@Notional, you're wrong and we talked about that. I even have that thread in my signature yet you still disagree with my evidence. I don't know what else to tell you, mate.

[Guest Kloaked]

Yea, Arkham Knight did run like shit for everyone, yet somehow got Nvidia's stamp of approval?

GameWorks functioned well enough to them that they were satisfied and promoting it, that's scary.

 

Not going to reply to the fact Nvidia is involved in the development of Arkham Knight on PC? Gonna just ignore that obviously crossing the line fact?

Of fucking course you are....

 

Don't make out like I'm some Nvidia shill, mate.

 

Nvidia makes retarded decisions and I call it when I see it. Whenever a GameWorks game comes out and runs like absolute garbage, I call it garbage. I don't, however, put on some conspiracy hat like a handful of you forum users do.

[Hunched]

Don't make out like I'm some Nvidia shill, mate.

 

Nvidia makes retarded decisions and I call it when I see it. Whenever a GameWorks game comes out and runs like absolute garbage, I call it garbage. I don't, however, put on some conspiracy hat like a handful of you forum users do.

Nvidia announced it.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Godlygamer23

[Guest Kloaked]

Nvidia announced it.

Announced what exactly? A broken game? Like I literally just said in a previous post, I call garbage when I see it. I don't know how much more clear that is; I mentioned that I first noticed it with Black Flag, and now all the way up to Arkham Knight. They should have said something, but they didn't. That's dumb. I agree. You are, however, putting on a conspiracy hat when you make out like Nvidia had something to do with the game being bad.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Godlygamer23

[Guest Kloaked]

There's clearly no conflict of interest with Nvidia developing the Arkham Knight PC port right?

Right?

I'm out, too much delusion in here for me.

You guys enjoy your little circlejerk cult.

 

Peace. I don't enjoy talking to someone who doesn't know how to have a proper conversation anyways.

[Hunched]

Announced what exactly?

ANNOUNCED THEY ARE DEVELOPING/HELPING DEVELOP THE PC PORT OF ARKHAM KNIGHT

 

I've only said it about 3 times now I think?

Keep ignoring it though.

For real, I'm out.

 

I'm wasting my time talking to someone I have to tell the same thing 3 times and they still don't know what I'm saying.

[Godlygamer23]

@ChrisxIxCross. Please add a quote to your OP. Even though your original input is great, we still need a quote in order for me to be in line with our requirements for the Tech News sub-forum.

[Guest Kloaked]

ANNOUNCED THEY ARE DEVELOPING/HELPING DEVELOP THE PC PORT OF ARKHAM KNIGHT

 

I've only said it about 3 times now I think?

Keep ignoring it though.

For real, I'm out.

 

I'm wasting my time talking to someone I have to tell the same thing 3 times and they still don't know what I'm saying.

 

Like they do with literally every other game when the developers ask for help with optimizations.

 

Also, you said you were out like three posts ago?

[Texhnlyze]

Ah, here we go again. Seems like even LTT got affected by Patricia. 

 

Nothing new. Nothing new.

[Decon]

OMG NVIDIA IS SO EVIL THEYRE JUST TRYING TO BREAK THE GAME FOR ALL AMD USERS EVERYONE BOYCOTT THIS GAME ITS SO TERRIBLE IM SO BUTTHURT AHHHHHHHHHHHH

[PerfectTemplar]

Don't care about this game anymore, I took a fucking week off to play this. 

You've clearly bought into their ridiculous marketing when Fallout was never even that great in the first place. Production value of Fallout 4 looks like balls. Basically charging $60 for a subpar AAA title.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Godlygamer23

[ChrisxIxCross]

@ChrisxIxCross. Please add a quote to your OP. Even though your original input is great, we still need a quote in order for me to be in line with our requirements for the Tech News sub-forum.

Alright added in

[Godlygamer23]

Also, cut out the insulting now. There is never a need for insults if you're trying to have a discussion.

[Guest Kloaked]

You've clearly bought into their ridiculous marketing when Fallout was never even that great in the first place. Production value of Fallout 4 looks like balls. Basically charging $60 for a subpar AAA title.

 

It's not even out yet and you're making a judgement about the game.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Godlygamer23

[Misanthrope]

Until I see some proof (likely won't ever happen anyways), I will not believe studios take "bribe money" to get gameworks into their game. We've had this discussion before somewhere (not with you specifically), so I don't feel like going down that road because no one can prove it either way.

This is actually not a bad point but you probably won't like my twist on it: I also do want proof to basically prove me wrong. Only because I do not expect to be proven wrong but again it might happen.

 

What I expect to happen is to Nvidia constantly deny any wrong doing hiding behind copyright law, NDAs and closed source code. I actually do think that someone should sue to legally compel Nvidia to show the source code to properly scrutinize and find out exactly what it is going on in Gameworks.

 

Now for as long as it is a closed source well guarded secret, there is no point in even approaching an open vs closed source discussion. It is by Nvidia's own choice that they open the door for speculation.

 

What we can observe purely by the performance of Gameworks is as follows

 

1) It works worst on AMD cards

2) It works second to worst on previous generation Nvidia cards (Kepler and back)

3) It works best yet overal pretty damn badly only on the newest Nvidia cards

 

Now we know that most focus on 1) and my speculations (because they were just that, speculations) are based on 1) mostly. However 2) Also supports what it would seem like product cannibalization however Nvidia seems happy to push as much as they can to update and to the highest tier available. It is no coincidence that they did 0 rebrands on this generation, something that's rather unusual.

 

The only redeeming factor that might negate 1 and 2 (Because again, in fairness to your point on view this might very well be) it's just massive incompetence and a broken product. Now I'd argue that being perceived as morally shady by offering an elaborate bribe is actually not as bad as being seeing as technically retarded not being able to deliver on their promises and constantly failing at their premium Gameworks brand.

[Guest]

Wow, I mean come on, they aren't even adding teh crippled hair works which is awesome. Who also knows how long they've had the gameworks implemented for. It could have been a year. Unlike arkem knight. 

[Guest]

HERE, did anyone actually read the thing? I didn't, but read this quote: We’ve learned that Nvidia has been working with the studio to implement effects from the GameWorks library into the game for some time.

[Xsilent(X)]

So the developers are saying a BIG FUCK you to AMD side!

[Guest Kloaked]

 

 

So I'm not going to be pretending that I know what Nvidia's code looks like, or how the stuff gets implemented, or anything like that, so don't take it that way. I'm only going off of the benchmarks I see since it's something more tangible than theories from some random people on the internet (me included in that), and it's easier to read above all.

I compiled that list of benchmarks in my signature for a reason, yet it (the argument I brought in that post) still gets criticism even though it's clearly black and white in respect to the accusation that GameWorks somehow cripples Radeon GPU's no matter what you do (enabled or disabled any Nvidia effect).

 

On top of that, there's specific cases (Like Witcher 3) where the effect gets implemented poorly and happens to run "better" (in quotes for a reason since it doesn't actually run that much better) on the newest gen cards rather than the previous gen. I still haven't seen evidence to support that theory: Nvidia somehow gimping performance on Kepler when Maxwell is the better performer on tessellation. One of those mountain out of a molehill situations, because Hairworks ran like ass (sub 60fps, getting as low as 30) on my own system with a 980. Of course it's not like that now. I don't have a Kepler card anymore to do a test of my own, but I do not and cannot believe that Nvidia would somehow cripple Kepler on Witcher 3 - to what, make people buy Maxwell cards? Lol.

 

AMD's performance is going to tank on Gameworks effects no matter what you do unless their cards somehow support however Nvidia is running those effects. Hairworks is apparently a huge tessellation user, and the R9 285, having superior tessellation performance over even the 290x was able to run Hairworks better than other Radeon cards - still wasn't playable though.

 

Gameworks isn't inherently running badly from what I understand. What the issue is, is game development and how optimizations are made. 

 

I get that Nvidia makes dumbass decisions. I see them do it. They advertise obviously broken games because they have Gameworks implemented, and they are now forcing new drivers to be downloaded through GFE rather than GeForce.com.

[Guest Kloaked]

So the developers are saying a BIG FUCK you to AMD side!

 

This is not a big "fuck you" to AMD.

[Notional]

@Notional, you're wrong and we talked about that. I even have that thread in my signature yet you still disagree with my evidence. I don't know what else to tell you, mate.

 

That's just it, there isn't any proof in your links what so ever. Sure the Frostbyte team has worked close with AMD, but their engine is vendor agnostic. So is CryEngine in Crysis 3. All you prove there is that an AMD Gaming Evolved title won't screw over NVidia users. Just the way PC gaming is supposed to be.

 

As for Metro Last Light, it uses some advanced PhysX effects, like the sparks (and maybe smoke). But they are APEX effects, that are CUDA dependable, so the entire programming around that has no effect on AMD. Officially Metro LL is NOT a GameWorks game (it came out before I think?). It's a twiwmtbp title with some PhysX branding.

 

GameWorks games tends to use effects from the VisualFX library (like HairWorks, WaveWorks, etc.). Only 1 effect in VisualFX are APEX dependable, which is "Turbulence" which I don't think I've ever seen in a game.

 

No, actual GameWorks games include:

 

Watch Dogs

Assassins Creed Unity

The Crew

Far Cry 4

COD Ghost

Dying Light

Batman Arkham Knight

Batman Origins

 

None of these GameWorks branded games run well on AMD, even if you turn off the GameWorks effects. Sure in the Crew you are limited to 60fps and most NVidia and AMD cards will run that, but once you get below, you see AMD underperforming there too.

So your claim of GameWorks having no influence on AMD performance, simply is not true. Whether you turn them on or off, a GameWorks game simply just underperforms on an AMD GPU.

 

When you then look at AMD Gaming Evolved titles, they all run perfectly fine on NVidia.

 

ADDENDUM: No the irony here is that the ONLY GameWorks title in the link in your signature (Assassins Creed Unity), shows a 290x getting beat by ~7-8% by a 780, thus proving my point.

[Misanthrope]

Gameworks isn't inherently running badly from what I understand. What the issue is, is game development and how optimizations are made.

Not necessarily disagreeing because of this point so let me focus on this: Yes we could very well be talking about just poor game dev optimization. Yet if you as Nvidia are offering money to this developers to brand their products with the Nvida Gameworks (because regardless of whenever or not it's a bribe, we can agree that there is money changing hands here) wouldn't it be on your best interest to have also a say in how the final product ends up?

 

Look at what Nvidia is trying here: to basically introduce new technology. You're leaving that task in the hands of incompetent publisher executives that have 0 understanding on this and probably push inexperienced, overworked, supremely pressured gaming devs to implement this new tech, without looking at the source code and yet Nvidia is apparently incapable or uninterested in directly supervising and helping on this?

 

Need I remind you that Nvidia only offered to help fix that stupid Batman game after it bombed so hard it was taken off the shelves? You really want that to be the face of Gameworks?

 

Do you really trust a company with a 20+ year record of highly buggy releases that are often too ambitions, to just slap Nvidia Gameworks likely very close to the end of the developing cycle? 

 

You know even if I am not directly responsible, I wouldn't spend my money and time creating a super car only to handle the keys to a known drunk driver: I'd be more concerned about supervising my work even if I am not a driver of cars myself.