News AMD Claims Starfield Devs Have the Power to Add DLSS Support

[Admin]

AMD's Frank Azor assures gamers that it is in no way blocking Starfield's development team from using Nvidia's competing DLSS tech in the game.

AMD Claims Starfield Devs Have the Power to Add DLSS Support : Read more

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

How much do you want to bet the backroom deal is "You add DLSS, you have to pay us $XXXXXXXX"?

 

[A Stoner]

How much do you want to bet the backroom deal is "You add DLSS, you have to pay us $XXXXXXXX"?

Situations like that set the company up for some pretty bad events and I doubt they are very likely. And the incentives just do not seem to be there to make that argument. As the AMD product is universal and works on Intel, NVidia and AMD products, which means the lack of the DLSS add on does not really force anyone to buy AMD products.

DLSS on the other hand, it does lock players into buying NVidia products if they want the best experience.

Anyways, can you point me to the incentives that would make the back room deal risk worth pursuing?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Situations like that set the company up for some pretty bad events and I doubt they are very likely. And the incentives just do not seem to be there to make that argument. As the AMD product is universal and works on Intel, NVidia and AMD products, which means the lack of the DLSS add on does not really force anyone to buy AMD products.

DLSS on the other hand, it does lock players into buying NVidia products if they want the best experience.

Anyways, can you point me to the incentives that would make the back room deal risk worth pursuing?

A reverse ransom, if nVIDIA wants DLSS in _____ games, they have to PAY $$$ to the Game Developers for their time and effort to implement & test DLSS.

We all know that Jensen Huang / nVIDIA has the $$$ now to afford it thanks to the AI Profits.

Otherwise the dev's can just default to FSR1/2 and it'll work on everybody's GPU's.

Less effort & Testing needed to validate one set of Upscalers.

So if Intel & nVIDIA want to play ball, pay ALOT of money for Dev time & Testing + Profit Margin, or else we won't put in the effort to implement. The fans can go and mod it to their hearts content.

Not one line of code will be written until we get paid.

Money! Money! Money! MONEY!!!!

 

[Makaveli]

How much do you want to bet the backroom deal is "You add DLSS, you have to pay us $XXXXXXXX"?

And what would be the logic behind that?

 

[RedBear87]

And what would be the logic behind that?

None, developers who are actively excluding competing technologies simply risk to alienate potential players who vote with their wallet. And considering the widespread diffusion of Nvidia GPUs between gamers there's a lot of people that they could alienate.

 

[hotaru251]

90% of PC gamers use Nvidia

yes, but a large # of those still use pascal or older. (dlss only works on RTX gpu) and doesnt work with Intels gpu.

FSR does work with them.

be an nvidia fanboy all you want (and b4 u say im an amd fanboy I run a nvidia gpu) but facts are theres benefits for having FSR in game as its much more beneficial to majority of users and not locking anyone with older gpu or other color (amd/intel).

 

[Deleted member 2950210]

For some reason, whenever I hear about DLSS and FSR, all I can think of, is games that will still need a lot of work, before offering satisfying frame rates to all users.

DLSS was supposedly for gamers to get that extra bit of performance... now you have poorly optimized games using it as as crutch... as if to say "oh it's OK that this sucks because DLSS will pick up the slack."

I’m afraid that this will be the case with Starfield.

I hope I’m wrong, though.

 

[-Fran-]

So it took AMD's Chief Architect of Gaming like 5 minutes of an interview to say "yeah, we're not blocking DLSS", but the entire Marketing Team NEVER gave an official answer or clarified AMD's position? REALLY AMD? REALLY? Also, not to point out it's been... What? 3 months or something?

Gosh... I don't know what to say about this. Baffling. Anyway, good at least they now have a clear answer to that whole debacle.

And in another topic: the DLSS copium/brainwash is stronk.

Regards.

 

[Tim_124]

“Unfortunately, The Verge failed to get an official statement from Bethesda to see if Starfield might receive DLSS integration in the future.”

If only there was another publication that had ‘journalists’ who could ask such questions…

 

[HyperMatrix]

I feel like there are details that haven’t been shared. It makes no sense for a game company to support FSR2, and not include DLSS2 which would take less than a day to implement. Nvidia even put out the open source streamline api that lets you do the work of implementation once, and plug in FSR, DLSS, and XeSS all at once.

There are other considerations here that AMD isn’t divulging. Such as “sure you can add DLSS, but then we won’t sponsor your next game.” I’m not saying that’s what’s happening but I’m saying there’s more to this story because from a business sense, it doesn’t make sense to go through the hassle of enabling FSR2 but then not supporting the objectively superior DLSS2/3.

Some will argue that not everyone has an RTX card. And that’s true. But Nvidia still has the largest share of the market and RTX numbers are growing and people who have newer cards likely have more money to spend buying games than people who are using a 7+ year old card. RTX cards have been available for 5 years now.

Either way….it takes no time to add the feature as modders are showing. So there has to be something else they’re not telling us. I’m personally not buying Starfield for 2 reasons. 1) lack of DLSS support. 2) premium $70 pricing.

Haven’t bought a single PS5 game at those prices either. The combination of the 2 leads me to believe they’re just greedy while simultaneously not caring about the consumer. “You will take what we give you and you will like it. And also you will pay an extra $10.” Paaaasssssss

 

[ilukey77]

lets be honest here though AMD own the console market Microsoft dont own PC

so in the grand scheme of things AMD with the power of Microsoft and Xbox are going to play the advantage any way they can over Nvidia .

Is it right to lock out a tech because the stand to make more money NO but they are a company !!

Does that also mean that people should only buy AMD gpus because there is no deal on starfield with Nvidia gpu purchases !!

We dont get that story because its acceptable for Microsoft / Bethesda to lock starfield out of Nvidia GPU purchases but not lock DLSS out of starfield !!

 

[ilukey77]

Either way….it takes no time to add the feature as modders are showing. So there has to be something else they’re not telling us. I’m personally not buying Starfield for 2 reasons. 1) lack of DLSS support. 2) premium $70 pricing.

AMD own the console market DLSS was always going to be a after thought ..
Starfield is a Xbox game as well !
Argument could be made that if Microsoft teamed up with Nvidia ( which was NEVER going to happen because of Xbox ) what would AMD have anyway RT performance is lower and DLSS is Nvidia only !
Because FSR is open source isnt totally a valid argument !!

 

[hotaru251]

now you have poorly optimized games using it as as crutch

worse than that...we have GPU that are relying on it as a crutch (4060/ti basically require dlss 3.0 for frame gen to get better performance than last gen)

 

[SyCoREAPER]

I'll hope for DLSS but I have a feeling there is something going on behind the scenes.

Where else better to debut AMD open frame generation tech that works on AMD and Nvidia cards.

 

[rluker5]

Why is this statement coming out AFTER I've already preloaded Starfield?

They've had like 3 months to say this. I bet even if AMD said "fine, you can have DLSS" a month ago Nvidia would have had it in by now and have been flaunting the paid PR and customer support.

Saying it so late seems like they are just trying to prove they have been allowing it the whole time.

 

[txfeinbergs]

I'll hope for DLSS but I have a feeling there is something going on behind the scenes.

Where else better to debut AMD open frame generation tech that works on AMD and Nvidia cards.

Unfortunately FSR 2 sucks compared with DLSS. The former is a SW solution, the other HW which is obviously going to be better.

 

[hotaru251]

I bet even if AMD said "fine, you can have DLSS" a month ago Nvidia would have had it in by now

nvidia isnt needed for it.
Bethesda makes the call.

 

[thestryker]

I feel like there are details that haven’t been shared. It makes no sense for a game company to support FSR2, and not include DLSS2 which would take less than a day to implement. Nvidia even put out the open source streamline api that lets you do the work of implementation once, and plug in FSR, DLSS, and XeSS all at once.

It's not that straightforward for custom game engines that haven't had prior implementation of the specific upscaling technology. That being said any company with deep pockets has no excuse for not just adding all of them.

So it took AMD's Chief Architect of Gaming like 5 minutes of an interview to say "yeah, we're not blocking DLSS", but the entire Marketing Team NEVER gave an official answer or clarified AMD's position? REALLY AMD? REALLY? Also, not to point out it's been... What? 3 months or something?

Gosh... I don't know what to say about this. Baffling. Anyway, good at least they now have a clear answer to that whole debacle.

And in another topic: the DLSS copium/brainwash is stronk.

Regards.

I am very much with you on this one it seems really odd.

Unfortunately FSR 2 sucks compared with DLSS. The former is a SW solution, the other HW which is obviously going to be better.

It depends on the implementation quite a bit as it can be equal to DLSS, but it'll never surpass it. It's not a HW vs SW situation, but rather what form of hardware acceleration it can use. Due to there being no industry standard here AMD would have to do like Intel and write FSR to have dual acceleration paths to have better results on AMD cards while maintaining compatibility.

 

[NeoMorpheus]

Instead of continuing with this nonsense, why dont we ask the untouchable company why they are incapable of supporting every gpu with their lock-in tech called DLSS like how AMD is doing with FSR?

Or since people love mental gymnastics, how come magically nobody remembers how in the first decade of the 2000, all games were polluted with proprietary tech and the infamous boot movie “the way it was meant to be played” or something along those lines, but AMD does something similar and everyone loses their…..

I wonder what happened to us as consumers/customers that suddenly, we either don’t demand more or worse, stopped demanding altogether.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

“Unfortunately, The Verge failed to get an official statement from Bethesda to see if Starfield might receive DLSS integration in the future.”

If only there was another publication that had ‘journalists’ who could ask such questions…

FWIW, we asked AMD about this months ago. There was going to be a statement... and then it never materialized, apparently until now. Which, you know, feels rather weird. If you're not doing anything then it should be really easy to say, "We're not doing anything to block the use of DLSS." To me, it sort of implies that maybe they were doing something and have since changed policy.

But there's the whole "what's the point?" aspect. Nvidia blocking Nvidia-promoted games from using FSR2 in favor of DLSS would be a lot easier to believe, simply because Nvidia has the might and the market share. AMD trying to do that in reverse would be very hard to justify for the game devs. "Hey, we'll pay you / help you use our open source FSR2, but only if you don't support DLSS, which runs 35% or so of higher spec gaming PCs."

If AMD were smart about this, what they would be saying behind closed doors to the game devs is, "Please implement FSR2, and really think about also including DLSS and XeSS support, because then it doesn't look like we're trying to hide anything." I sort of get the impression that Nvidia has been doing that more of late, as a lot of DLSS 3 games end up having FSR2 and XeSS as well, which is the way it should be.

 

[Blacksad999]

Situations like that set the company up for some pretty bad events and I doubt they are very likely. And the incentives just do not seem to be there to make that argument. As the AMD product is universal and works on Intel, NVidia and AMD products, which means the lack of the DLSS add on does not really force anyone to buy AMD products.

DLSS on the other hand, it does lock players into buying NVidia products if they want the best experience.

Anyways, can you point me to the incentives that would make the back room deal risk worth pursuing?

XESS also works on every GPU, and is objectively superior to FSR in every single way. If you're rolling with the "it works on everything" excuse, shouldn't we be using the vastly superior option here?

 

[Peter Ferrari]

if it was free, they would have included dlss/xess, as this would probably take almost no time.
I prefer to look at evidence instead of debating, and the evidence is strong against amd. most amd sponsorships do not include dlss or xess (free to use, open). "Have the power" is not "are free to use".

Instead of continuing with this nonsense, why dont we ask the untouchable company why they are incapable of supporting every gpu with their lock-in tech called DLSS like how AMD is doing with FSR?

wasn't this made clear on turning launch what dlss runs on ?

 

[Blacksad999]

if it was free, they would have included dlss/xess, as this would probably take almost no time.
I prefer to look at evidence instead of debating, and the evidence is strong against amd. most amd sponsorships do not include dlss or xess (free to use, open). "Have the power" is not "are free to use".


wasn't this made clear on turning launch what dlss runs on ?

Xess doesn't "cost" anything. It's just not open source.

 

[Peter Ferrari]

Xess doesn't "cost" anything. It's just not open source.

I meant open for anyone to use. It is not vendor locked, yet still gone from amd sponsored games, despite being a lot more stable in motion.
Imo this has nothing to do with sales, just hides the fact that fsr2 hit a wall in image quality without ML while dlss/xess are getting better. After dlss 3.5 release, I bet even less amd games will use dlss, or they'll be limited to 3.0 cause RR looks like a huge leap in RT denoising.