Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[Jizz_Beard_thePirate]

vivster said:

Captain_Yuri said:

So here is the full email that Hardware Unboxed as gotten:

"Hi Steve,

We've reached a critical juncture in the adoption of raytracing, and it has gained industry-wide support from top titles, developers, game engines, APIs, consoles, and GPUs. As you know, NVIDIA is all-in for raytracing. RT is important and core to the future of gaming, but it's also one part of our focused R&D efforts on revolutionizing video games and creating a better experience for gamers. This philosophy is also reflected in developing technologies such as DLSS, Reflex, and Broadcast that offer immense value to customers that are purchasing a GPU. They don't get free GPUs; they work hard for their money and they keep their GPUs for multiple years.

Despite all this progress, your GPU reviews and recommendations have continued to focus singularly on rasterization performance, and you have largely discounted all of the other technologies we offer gamers. It is very clear from your community commentary that you do not see things the same way that we, gamers, and the rest of the industry do. Our Founder's Edition boards and other NVIDIA products are being allocated to media outlets that recognize the changing landscape of gaming and the features that are important to gamers and anyone buying a GPU today, be it for gaming, content creation, or studio and stream.

Hardware Unboxed should continue to work with our add-in card partners to secure GPUs to review. Of course, you will still have access to obtain pre-release drivers and press materials. That won't change. We are open to revisiting this in the future should your editorial direction change.

Bryan Del Rizzo
Director of Global PR, GeForce"

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/kbijzo/nvidia_might_actually_be_evil_wan_show_december/

Honestly I don't fully disagree with Nvidia's statement as Hardware Unboxed stance on Ray Tracing is pure nonsense. But I do think Nvidia's wording could be better as one could interpret it as they only want Ray Tracing and nothing else. Which to be fair, they obviously do but realistically, they are obviously fine with Mostly Raster and some Ray Tracing instead of All Raster and No Ray Tracing. A reviewer should present all options to the consumer, not just the ones they see fit as that is not what PC gaming is about.

Still, I am expecting Nvidia to back-peddle at some point from all the pressure they are facing right now.

As someone who truly believes that RT is the future of gaming and not just the next 10 years but the next 50 years, I cannot fault a reviewer for going a different angle. Reviews are opinion pieces and it is vital for a wide array of different angles to be represented. Reviews from Nvidia fanboys are just as important as reviews from AMD fanboys. Might as well have a review from a person who doesn't game or thinks gaming is a lame waste of time. Those are all important angles because there are different kinds of people out there and they rely on reviews that are tailored to their position. Only then will it be possible for someone to make an educated decision of how much a product is worth to them.

That's an issue I have with game reviews for example. My taste isn't necessarily mainstream so I'd love to have reviews of people who don't gush about that lame mainstream gritty realism. As is I probably can't take any Cyberpunk review seriously or as a recommendation. I would need to read a review of a person who absolutely hates the game and glosses over all of the things other reviewers love and instead names all the bullshit I might encounter. That is much more helpful to me than a glowing review from someone who tries to be objective about it and only goes at it from a neutral or mainstream position.

Yea that's a good point. But I do think that a reviewer having that sorta bias should come with a consequence such as this. When there is such a limited supply of cards for both reviewers and consumers, a reviewer that has a strong bias such as this should be given a lower priority than a reviewer who takes a more neutral stance in terms of allocation. Especially as there are tons of new reviewers growing in popularity every day who would rather give a fair review than have a strong bias and run with it.