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

[CyanideInsanity]

He's right though, how would you feel if suddenly you could play games or get the full experience only based on your GPU? Say, you could only get the intended Tomb Raider experience with AMD and the intended Fallout 4 experience with Nvidia? You'd essentially be choosing your gaming future based on the GPU's color....

 

There is no comparison to locking out a couple of additional visual features and locking out even playing the game on the competitors hardware. The intended experience isn't much of an argument seeing as how we all have our own preferences which can even be the opposite of those making the game. Dark souls 1 and the evil within, anyone? What about that dank chromatic abberation, with myopic levels of DoF?

[Monarch]

He's right though, how would you feel if suddenly you could play games or get the full experience only based on your GPU? Say, you could only get the intended Tomb Raider experience with AMD and the intended Fallout 4 experience with Nvidia? You'd essentially be choosing your gaming future based on the GPU's color....

 

If that ever happens, then we will (hopefully) stand up together against it. Few effects Nvidia provides to enhance their users' experience a bit is something I'm okay with. I believe it doesn't take away experience devs meant you to have, because games do have their own effects. GW just provides something special for Nvidia users to enjoy.

[don_svetlio]

There is no comparison to locking out a couple of additional visual features and locking out even playing the game on the competitors hardware. The intended experience isn't much of an argument seeing as how we all have our own preferences which can even be the opposite of those making the game. Dark souls 1 and the evil within, anyone? What about that dank chromatic abberation, with myopic levels of DoF?

 

Now you know how pretty much everyone who cant play at ultra feels like

All I'm saying is that it always starts with something small and before you know it the game doesn't start on certain hardware.

[don_svetlio]

If that ever happens, then we will (hopefully) stand up together against it. Few effects Nvidia provides to enhance their users' experience a bit is something I'm okay with. I believe it doesn't take away experience devs meant you to have, because games do have their own effects. GW just provides something special for Nvidia users to enjoy.

Yet I still don't understand why Tress FX had such a huge negative backlash...

[Enderman]

All I'm saying is that it always starts with something small and before you know it the game doesn't start on certain hardware.

oh? and what is the difference between that and the features that they already have?

nvidia has shadowplay and amd has raptr

nvidia has gsync and amd has freesync

nvidia is better at opengl while amd is better at opencl

nvidia has physx, amd doesnt

 

has your game stopped working because of any of these features?

do you think that gameworks is suddenly going to take all the market away just for some smoke effects?

You're overthinking it way too much

Everyone always overreacts on the internet

Just look at all the people complaining about youtube red because it apparently "forces creators to join" lol, everyone is so gullible by the media

[Monarch]

Yet I still don't understand why Tress FX had such a huge negative backlash...

 

For the same reason GW has such a negative backlash. 

[don_svetlio]

For the same reason GW has such a negative backlash. 

Currently, the people against GW here are 1 in 4. Back then, the people against Tress FX were 3 in 4. Like I said, it's not the same reaction.

[CyanideInsanity]

All I'm saying is that it always starts with something small and before you know it the game doesn't start on certain hardware.

I doubt it. For nvidia or amd it probably wouldn't have many repercussions. Game developers would be the ones to take the hit. Not only would they be losing a large market of potential buyers, but I get the feeling people would be more likely to actively respond against them but would still be willing to buy from whichever hardware vendor is being an ass.

[Jamdude]

There's really no argument to this. If you don't have a Nvidia card, turn off the Gameworks settings - sorted.

[Maslofski]

awesome, now lets see ive AMD take, again, a few weeks to bitch and moan before patching 

[Notional]

It's over-tessellated by default. Try limiting the tesselation to 8x or 16x via catalyst control panel.

 

Problem is that it reduces tessellation on everything. It's difficult to know how it affects the entire game.

 

One thing I really like is how when AMD released Tress FX and it ran like shit on Nvidia cards, it was getting compared to cancer with people raving on about how it was anti-competitive and how AMD should burn for it but as soon as Nvidia does the exact same thing suddenly 3/4 of the people are fine with it. Go figure

 

Standards are good, double standards are twice as good. Today TressFX works just as well on both vendors cards. If GameWorks was like that (and optimized, and not stupidly overtessellated for no reason), I would have no problem with it.

 

This comes down again to "do you want everyone to have the same and equal experience?" Do you want PC gaming to become console gaming? Where everyone has exactly the same?

 

The interesting question is, do you want PC gaming to be segregated? Would you accept this if it was AMD exclusive?

 

It wouldn't be ok because people would still complain about it performing worse on AMD hardware. Yes, I think they overtessellated the hair in W3, and it caused pretty big impact on Nvidia GPUs as well. But Witcher 3 got a patch which included the option to reduce tessellation to 16x I believe, and the game is now playable even on my 970. I don't know if it's Nvidia's fault that it was previously locked to x32, or it was up to devs, but you can set it now to "low".

 

Afaik that new setting was Anti Aliasing setting on HairWorks, not tessellation multiplier. Why it says HairWorksAA.

 

oh? and what is the difference between that and the features that they already have?

nvidia has shadowplay and amd has raptr

nvidia has gsync and amd has freesync

nvidia is better at opengl while amd is better at opencl

nvidia has physx, amd doesn't

 

None of those things have any relevance to the actual games (with the exception of PhysX).

 

Shadowplay/raptr is a service not necessary to play the game or have any influence on the game.

Synced framerates has nothing to do with the game either, and makes no requirements to it.

OpenGL is fubar and is being phased out completely the second Vulkan releases.

 

PhysX is a great point, but it is also part of GameWorks (APEX). So PhysX is also part of the problem.

 

Segregating the pc market is anti competitive and therefore anti consumer. Why anyone would accept it, is beyond me. That goes for the overpriced Gsync too.

[Enderman]

The interesting question is, do you want PC gaming to be segregated? Would you accept this if it was AMD exclusive?

It already is

look at freesync and gsync

each company has its own

if AMD did a similar thing to gameworks thats proprietary to them, then great, more competition

then you can choose your GPU also based on what visual effects each comes with

just like how people now buy a GPU based on what variable framerate technology it comes with

 

its not going to make amd go out of business, just like how gsync didnt

[Notional]

It already is

look at freesync and gsync

each company has its own

if AMD did a similar thing to gameworks thats proprietary to them, then great, more competition

then you can choose your GPU also based on what visual effects each comes with

just like how people now buy a GPU based on what variable framerate technology it comes with

 

its not going to make amd go out of business, just like how gsync didnt

 

What are you talking about? They are two different hardware standards doing the same thing, which has nothing to do with the game. It's like comparing two different mice?!?

 

But if you want to go down that road, then ok. Gsync is a closed overpriced proprietary tech, exclusive to NVidia. It's like the hardware version of GameWorks so to speak. Adaptive Sync is an open industry standard, that NVidia can fully support and implement if they want to. They don't.

Variable framerate is still a poor comparison though, as the game will look identical on both.

 

Locking consumers into proprietary vendor lock in, is the exact opposite of competition.

[Enderman]

What are you talking about? They are two different hardware standards doing the same thing, which has nothing to do with the game. It's like comparing two different mice?!?

 

But if you want to go down that road, then ok. Gsync is a closed overpriced proprietary tech, exclusive to NVidia. It's like the hardware version of GameWorks so to speak. Adaptive Sync is an open industry standard, that NVidia can fully support and implement if they want to. They don't.

Variable framerate is still a poor comparison though, as the game will look identical on both.

 

Locking consumers into proprietary vendor lock in, is the exact opposite of competition.

ok so you just want nvidia to let AMD just take all of their code that they have spent millions developing so that everyone is equal because sharing is caring, no?

 

lol

and btw

adaptive sync is a standard, but freesync is not

freesync is proprietary to AMD

[Monarch]

Afaik that new setting was Anti Aliasing setting on HairWorks, not tessellation multiplier. Why it says HairWorksAA..

 

[Humbug]

Segregating the pc market is anti competitive and therefore anti consumer. Why anyone would accept it, is beyond me.

Some Nvidia users think that gameworks and the way it's meant to be played programs benefit them as Nvidia users. If they really think these features and effects are being applied in an efficient manner then ok, to each his own... But IMO the cold reality is that AMD gaming evolved titles consistently work better on Nvidia GPUs than Nvidia's own TWIMTBP games.

[don_svetlio]

Some Nvidia users think that gameworks and the way it's meant to be played programs benefit them as Nvidia users. If they really think these features and effects are being applied in an efficient manner then ok, to each his own... But IMO the cold reality is that AMD gaming evolved titles consistently work better on Nvidia GPUs than Nvidia's own TWIMTBP games.

A prime example is Witcher 3 - even with the amount of optimization done by CDPR the game's fps and frame times still vary greatly on mid-range hardware like the 380/960. I myself have seen fps go anywhere from 40 to 70 depending on the area on Medium preset.

[AHaskin14]

I don't give a flying crap about the potential "controversies". I want the game, I have an Nvidia gpu, I'm happy.

[Notional]

ok so you just want nvidia to let AMD just take all of their code that they have spent millions developing so that everyone is equal because sharing is caring, no?

 

lol

and btw

adaptive sync is a standard, but freesync is not

freesync is proprietary to AMD

 

I want NVidia to make their code optimized, not overtessellate, not be APEX based, and be completely open to the developer, that can optimize the code for both NVidia and AMD (with collaboration with AMD). You know just like TressFX.

 

Freesync is the driver implementation that uses Adaptive Sync. Freesync has no consequence for anyone, including NVidia and it's customers. So what is your point?

NVidia could make a driver implementation, and even call it Gsync, that uses Adaptive Sync.

[79wjd]

I want NVidia to make their code optimized, not overtessellate, not be APEX based, and be completely open to the developer, that can optimize the code for both NVidia and AMD (with collaboration with AMD). You know just like TressFX.

 

Freesync is the driver implementation that uses Adaptive Sync. Freesync has no consequence for anyone, including NVidia and it's customers. So what is your point?

NVidia could make a driver implementation, and even call it Gsync, that uses Adaptive Sync.

So basically you want Nvidia to do the same things that AMD is doing. 

 

Now, what exactly would incentivize Nvidia to do that considering they're not the ones facing bankruptcy due to lousy business practices/mismanagement. 

 

Nvidia shouldn't be spending its money to try and optimize code for its competition. 

[don_svetlio]

So basically you want Nvidia to do the same things that AMD is doing. 

 

Now, what exactly would incentivize Nvidia to do that considering they're not the ones facing bankruptcy due to lousy business practices/mismanagement. 

You're right, Nvidia has so many blind followers they can literally ask you absurd amounts of money of a GPU... oh wait.... they already do that....

[79wjd]

You're right, Nvidia has so many blind followers they can literally ask you absurd amounts of money of a GPU... oh wait.... they already do that....

The butthurt is real. 

 

And no, even blind followers will switch to AMD if Nvidia's offerings were truly bad. 

[PlayStation 2]

they're based around strenghts Nvidia GPUs have, like tessellation, as we know their tessellation performance is superior, and some effects simply don't work because they require driver support.

HaHa, KeK.

Guess this bitch hasn't heard of the R9 285/380. You know, a card that DOES match the 960 in every area, including tessellation.

[PlayStation 2]

The butthurt is real. 

 

And no, even blind followers will switch to AMD if Nvidia's offerings were truly bad. 

I was gonna make a joke about Apple...

but not really, not appropriate since it doesn't make too much sense

[79wjd]

I was gonna make a joke about Apple...

but not really, not appropriate since it doesn't make too much sense

Do even half the replies in this thread make any sense?