If some well regarded media publisher came up with strong evidence that you were licking apples in the grocery store then putting them back, and the majority of the relevant news media agreed that you were and 3/4 of the polled public believed you were, and you weren't, and had a PR department that was looking for such things, wouldn't you make it clear that you weren't licking apples at the grocery store and putting them back?
Some other corporation doing something bad for the consumer doesn't excuse all bad corporate behavior.
And I never said that one bad thing from a competitor excuses another from doing the same.
Point of the matter is, AMD hadn't done that.
Intel XeSS DP4a also works across all hardware and it also looks worse than XeSS with proper hardware acceleration. FSR2 is better than DP4a but worse than native XeSS and worse than DLSS.
The definition of 'worse' is highly subjective here because implementation of each feature will matter.
All three upscalers will come with their own advantages and drawbacks (bear in mind that ghosting, artifacting, shimmering, etc. DOES appear on XeSS and DLSS).
AMD did address most of these issues in FSR 2.2 (so its puzzling as to why Bethesda hadn't used it and instead went with 2.0.
At any rate, to really notice the differences, one would have to stop playing the game, zoom in and look for discrepancies in details.
Yes, technically speaking, FSR is 'worse', but the margin has been reduced to academic debate for the most part which most people won't even notice while they are actually playing.
Plus, one of the likely reasons why XeSS wasn't implemented (despite being open source) is likely because Intel's presence in the gaming sector is minuscule to virtually non-existent. Their entrance into this particular segment is fairly recent to start with, and adoption of XeSS will vary (plus, it definitely has its own drawbacks as we've seen in comparative videos).
But you know what else is open source? Temporal upscaling. Any game that uses FSR2 needs temporal upscaling to work and any game that has temporal upscaling supports DLSS and XeSS by definition. They just have to be implemented. How hard is that? I bet you could just make a phone call and either Nvidia or Intel would get you the help you needed if you were making a popular game.
I wouldn't bet on anything.
Usually, incorporation of features from certain companies is done when a company works with the game devs, or the company pays the game devs to include features into the game.
Ultimately, the decision to use any company features is up to the game devs... and whether they see it worth their time, money and effort.
AMD is not clean from the time they released their first CPU.
When a paid contract is signed it can have requirements. There was a sponsorship contract. If it was in the contract then AMD does have that power.
I said 'mostly' didn't I?
As for sponsorships... as I explained before, sponsorship only gives the company priority in terms of feature implementation and optimizations.
Whether or not competing companies features are used or not is entirely up to the devs.
Prohibitions of using competing company features is quite frankly a waste of resources and money.
The gaming market is pittance compared to the AI and data centers... quite honestly, it doesn't make sense for ANY hw company to bother itself with it.
If they sponsor a given game, they merely pay for priority in terms of feature implementation and optimizations over competing companies... that's it.
Anything else would would be considered anti-competitive behavior and opens the said company to potential lawsuits.
In this day and age, keeping something like that a secret would be next to impossible, and AMD being the 'underdog' with much less resources vs others, it doesn't make sense to do that (they're better off focusing their efforts in the AI and data center as far as adoption and optimizations are concerned).
The easiest way for AMD to prove that they didn't make Starfield a worse performing game for everyone using RTX and Arc for noncompetitive reasons is to publish the original sponsorship contract text.
If AMD does and the restriction against the use of DLSS and XeSS is not in there, then all of those claiming it is are wrong aren't they? That would be proof AMD defenders are right on this.
But they won't do that because they have been licking apples and putting them back.
Ideally perhaps, but this is likely not going to happen.
In that sense, you'd have to request the same of NV sponsored games too... and I don't see you advocating for that to happen.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram