AMD is proud to announce that we are Bethesda's exclusive PC partner for the next-generation role-playing game, Starfield. Watch this special announcement vi...

Hoo boy. Not a good look AMD. It was scummy when nVidia did this, it’s scummy when you do it.

  • valpackett@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    4·
    1 year ago

    Keeping out a vendor-specific one in favor of a vendor-agnostic one seems actually positive to me. That vendor-specific “superiority” must be fought.

    • Sev@pawb.social
      3·
      1 year ago

      Agreed. The net effect of this kind of choice - what the person above you is saying - is exactly the intended effect. It lowers the value of Nvidia users’ cards to them, but, critically, only because Nvidia plays these bullshit exclusivity games.

      Nvidia users can’t get the most out of their cards on a big, popular new game and they’re all mad about it? Well, there’s an easy fix, Nvidia, to prevent these situations in the future: Just open DLSS up to everybody. Boom, done. AMD and Bethesda aren’t the ones being assholes, here, and it’s not their fault that Nvidia’s customers aren’t getting the most out of their cards.

    • Poopfeast420@feddit.de
      0·
      1 year ago

      Blocking support for a superior technology, that almost half of all Steam Users can use, is truly what’s best for gamers.

      It would be one thing if you had to choose between FSR and DLSS (or XeSS), but these aren’t mutually exclusive. You can actually add all three, quite shocking, I know.

      • Mika@beehaw.org
        1·
        1 year ago

        but it’s cool to say fuck the other half entirely for the other 99% of games? because FSR1 isn’t comparable to FSR2 or DLSS and that’s what happens when a game is sponsored by NVIDIA, they don’t allow FSR2. but a game dev could still add DLSS to an FSR2 sponsored title, but why do free labour for NVIDIA?