By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
caffeinade on 03 May 2018
Edit Thread
Chazore said:
caffeinade said:

HBAO+ is inferior (quality) to VXAO, and real-time ray tracing.

Personally:
I am fine with developers adding Gameworks features, if they are added features, and can be run on AMD GPUs.
As long as it is an added feature, and the addition of that feature doesn't take resources or performance away from Intel or AMD GPUs: it is okay.

I do have an issue with one company or body exclusively partnering with a development studio for a game project.
AMD, Intel and Nvidia (and anyone else) should all be working with the developer, all adding their own features to the title.

Well yes, before VXAO, HBAO+ was where it was at, but now it's VXAO and RT.

 

Hmmn, that ends up taking us back to that Tomb Raider thread, where it becomes a fixed situation, in that Nvidia would have to create open sourced tech that AMD can use, but AMD can do the same and if it gimps Nvidia then somehow Nvidia would be to blame, but Nvidia would somehow also be to blame if their tech does not play nice with AMD's.

They all should be working with the devs, but then of course you have to factor in, "where do they benefit?". If Nvidia works with a dev, they benefit, if AMD works with a dev, then they too benefit. But if they both work on the same game, then where exactly can you market your hardware when your competition has exactly the same trimmings?. Also you have to factor in that crowding a dev team with 3 over companies can simply stack up the workload and then you also have to factor in all 3 companies being very crystal clear with communication and what each of the 3 want to do with said devs.

Just imagine the headlines of AMD and Nvidia working with one dev, then finding out one of the two has a "feature" that ends up gimping the other. That could just as easily cause the gimped company to simply skip out on any future dealings with that dev team, based on that trio partnership.

If Nvidia develops a wonderful, open technology that runs poorly on AMD's cards.
AMD need to work harder on their GPUs.
If AMD's open tech performs poorly on Nvidia cards.
Nvidia need to improve their GPUs.

As long as players are given the option to disable the tech (as in, the tech is additive to the base experience), no one was really harmed.
Players should be able to use Hairworks and/or TressFX according to their personal tastes/requirements.
It doesn't seem reasonable to expect developers to try to force effects perform equally on two different architectures (the both have strengths and weaknesses, and aren't really directly equal).

"where do they benefit?"
AMD, Intel, and Nvidia all benefit from a stronger PC platform.

AAA studios have money and staff.
They should be able to handle working with three or more parties, they do it on consoles.