No, FSR Is NOT Exclusive In Starfield
video description
Always seemed to me, if a studio is getting paid to prioritize a technology that most of the hardware that their users can use, why would they even bother spending the time and money implementing a competing technology that a subset of their players would be able to use.
Date: 2023-08-27
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 19
Jon
The whole episode is shameful. AMD should have immediately issued a comprehensive statement that could have exonerated them. They did not. That makes everything they say suspect, even if they never intended to do anything nefarious. Refusing to comment clearly in the first place, is nefarious in itself. What a massive waste of everyone's time this all was and there's no legal restriction on the contract. That's just a contract between them and Bethesda and they could have phoned them and said, 'Do you mind if we say something that doesn't make us both look like awful companies?' 'Why no, AMD, of course not! That's not the point of the contract. In fact, why don't we both make statements, and we'll confirm we're also working on DLSS so that the fans aren't upset for no reason. After all, there will be so many day 1 bugs the fans will be upset enough, because they will decided this will be our first ever release that wasn't bugged beyond belief on day 1 for some reason, having forgotten every other AAA launch of the last fifteen years or more.'
I would forgive them, but they're not a human being, they're a company so there's no benefit to doing so and the whole thing is just sordid. But I totally believe Apple is supporting a right to repair law because they like their customers and respect them, and not because they perceive some fractional competitive advantage. sighs
reply
The whole episode is shameful. AMD should have immediately issued a comprehensive statement that could have exonerated them. They did not. That makes everything they say suspect, even if they never intended to do anything nefarious. Refusing to comment clearly in the first place, is nefarious in itself. What a massive waste of everyone's time this all was and there's no legal restriction on the contract. That's just a contract between them and Bethesda and they could have phoned them and said, 'Do you mind if we say something that doesn't make us both look like awful companies?' 'Why no, AMD, of course not! That's not the point of the contract. In fact, why don't we both make statements, and we'll confirm we're also working on DLSS so that the fans aren't upset for no reason. After all, there will be so many day 1 bugs the fans will be upset enough, because they will decided this will be our first ever release that wasn't bugged beyond belief on day 1 for some reason, having forgotten every other AAA launch of the last fifteen years or more.'
I would forgive them, but they're not a human being, they're a company so there's no benefit to doing so and the whole thing is just sordid. But I totally believe Apple is supporting a right to repair law because they like their customers and respect them, and not because they perceive some fractional competitive advantage. sighs
reply
TiberiuS
I don't think it would be legally viable and maybe reason for nVidia to sue if it were really exclusive (aka Bethesda is forbidden to implement DLSS tech). But of course when you have a partnership and probably get a lot of money from AMD they want you to prioritize their technology over the one of other GPU manufacturers. It is marketing speech, but not hard to see what they mean here. Also it makes very much sense for Bethesda to prioritize FSR over DLSS since the XBox has AMD GPU hardware and can't make use of DLSS. With a major release on those consoles it's perfectly in Bethesda's interest that the game runs as smooth as possible on that hardware.
It could even be that the contract says something along that FSR (maybe even FSR3) needs to be fully implemented and bug free until Bethesda can put resources into developing DLSS support. Since Starfield had a 1 year delay and they were able to polish a lot of features we might see native DLSS support soon after release if that is true. Plus it is also in Bethesda's interest to make the game run at a higher FPS on nVidia cards, since they are used by a large portion of PC players (even though in this case not as large as the AMD hardware group (PC and consoles)).
reply
I don't think it would be legally viable and maybe reason for nVidia to sue if it were really exclusive (aka Bethesda is forbidden to implement DLSS tech). But of course when you have a partnership and probably get a lot of money from AMD they want you to prioritize their technology over the one of other GPU manufacturers. It is marketing speech, but not hard to see what they mean here. Also it makes very much sense for Bethesda to prioritize FSR over DLSS since the XBox has AMD GPU hardware and can't make use of DLSS. With a major release on those consoles it's perfectly in Bethesda's interest that the game runs as smooth as possible on that hardware.
It could even be that the contract says something along that FSR (maybe even FSR3) needs to be fully implemented and bug free until Bethesda can put resources into developing DLSS support. Since Starfield had a 1 year delay and they were able to polish a lot of features we might see native DLSS support soon after release if that is true. Plus it is also in Bethesda's interest to make the game run at a higher FPS on nVidia cards, since they are used by a large portion of PC players (even though in this case not as large as the AMD hardware group (PC and consoles)).
reply
Spanner
AMD is the console market, for a game that needs FSR to run at a proper framerate (starfields locked 30) it would be crazy if it didn't have it. Nvidia's biggest problem with developers is the segmentation that comes with DLSS, DLSS 2.X, DLSS 3/ frame gen and soon DLSS 3.5 in (2 to 5 games announced none out) is all over the place for hardware and usage. For AMD, developers can use FSR, it works on ALL nvidia, intel, and AMD cards, but FAR more importantly it works on the consoles. DLSS does not, for devs this is part of why they don't implement DLSS on a lot of games that already support FSR. FSR for most devs is Good Enough. The AMD selling point is that it just works thank you todd howard. DLSS claims it requires cuda to work and each generation 2000, 3000, and 4000 have different versions of this so they can't all do the same thing. At this point for starfield is being CRUNCHED they are rushing to get it ready for launch and will be working on it for years, just look at fallout 4 and skyrim. It will be a large launch on pc and it will get DLSS and likely xess, but FSR is good enough to start for pc xbox and ps5
reply
AMD is the console market, for a game that needs FSR to run at a proper framerate (starfields locked 30) it would be crazy if it didn't have it. Nvidia's biggest problem with developers is the segmentation that comes with DLSS, DLSS 2.X, DLSS 3/ frame gen and soon DLSS 3.5 in (2 to 5 games announced none out) is all over the place for hardware and usage. For AMD, developers can use FSR, it works on ALL nvidia, intel, and AMD cards, but FAR more importantly it works on the consoles. DLSS does not, for devs this is part of why they don't implement DLSS on a lot of games that already support FSR. FSR for most devs is Good Enough. The AMD selling point is that it just works thank you todd howard. DLSS claims it requires cuda to work and each generation 2000, 3000, and 4000 have different versions of this so they can't all do the same thing. At this point for starfield is being CRUNCHED they are rushing to get it ready for launch and will be working on it for years, just look at fallout 4 and skyrim. It will be a large launch on pc and it will get DLSS and likely xess, but FSR is good enough to start for pc xbox and ps5
reply
Markus
FSR2, DLSS2, and XeSS operate using virtually the same inputs. There's nothing stopping a studio from implementing all three at the same time. Doing the development effort to get one working knocks out the majority of work it takes to get the others implemented. A developer could also use Nvidia's Streamline, which is open-source framework that allows for a single integration to support all three vendors, which simplifies the process even more.
More clarifying questions would have been great to see AMD's responses on. Interviewers tend to focus on upscaling without thinking about the fact that frame-generation is a separate technology. If developers are supposed to priortize FSR, does that mean that feature parity is enforced such that DLSS3 frame generation cannot be implemented until FSR3 is implemented in Starfield? Does AMD enforce timed exclusivity? Does AMD prevent studios from launching their game with support for other upscaling and/or frame-generation technology?
reply
FSR2, DLSS2, and XeSS operate using virtually the same inputs. There's nothing stopping a studio from implementing all three at the same time. Doing the development effort to get one working knocks out the majority of work it takes to get the others implemented. A developer could also use Nvidia's Streamline, which is open-source framework that allows for a single integration to support all three vendors, which simplifies the process even more.
More clarifying questions would have been great to see AMD's responses on. Interviewers tend to focus on upscaling without thinking about the fact that frame-generation is a separate technology. If developers are supposed to priortize FSR, does that mean that feature parity is enforced such that DLSS3 frame generation cannot be implemented until FSR3 is implemented in Starfield? Does AMD enforce timed exclusivity? Does AMD prevent studios from launching their game with support for other upscaling and/or frame-generation technology?
reply
MarcasswellbMD
I usually use Radeon so I Ok with it. I have the XFX 6800XT but I get it if Nvidia PPL are mad about no DLSS at launch. Maybe they will put it in later.. But it is nice to know Nvidia cards can use FSR too at least.. I know FSR continues to get better and better too. And I get why AMD isn't pushing Nvidia Tech. It's not like Nvidia lets Radeon Cards use DLSS 1 or 2.. I am old enough to remember when Nivida games would run slow ATI/ Radeon Cards performance on purpose.. Even if ATI made a more Powerful GPU than Nvidia their Games would still run better on Nvidia. I remember when it was ATI and not Radeon.. AMD has taken them a long way from the days when GPU's has 256mb to 512mb Total Memory.. And it was worse before that, I think the Nvidia 8800GT was a 1gig card back then? LOL, I remember when having a 1Gig VRAM buffer was Huge.. LOL..
reply
I usually use Radeon so I Ok with it. I have the XFX 6800XT but I get it if Nvidia PPL are mad about no DLSS at launch. Maybe they will put it in later.. But it is nice to know Nvidia cards can use FSR too at least.. I know FSR continues to get better and better too. And I get why AMD isn't pushing Nvidia Tech. It's not like Nvidia lets Radeon Cards use DLSS 1 or 2.. I am old enough to remember when Nivida games would run slow ATI/ Radeon Cards performance on purpose.. Even if ATI made a more Powerful GPU than Nvidia their Games would still run better on Nvidia. I remember when it was ATI and not Radeon.. AMD has taken them a long way from the days when GPU's has 256mb to 512mb Total Memory.. And it was worse before that, I think the Nvidia 8800GT was a 1gig card back then? LOL, I remember when having a 1Gig VRAM buffer was Huge.. LOL..
reply
Shane
Future game development is going to focus on pixel quality instead of quantity, with reconstruction of higher resolution detail. Since some form of upscaling will have to be integrated, developers are going to use the open-source version first because they don't need to worry about licensing and support. The MIT license is 1KB and familiar to every developer while the DLSS license is a 25KB wall of text. Any edge cases encountered can be fixed by the devs themselves, instead of having to wait for support from Nvidia. Delays in DLSS integration probably aren't even technical, it's the months of auditing to ensure they don't accidentally cause the proprietary parts to become subject to an open-source license somewhere else in the codebase. These are the things that matter to developers and they decide what will be included
reply
Future game development is going to focus on pixel quality instead of quantity, with reconstruction of higher resolution detail. Since some form of upscaling will have to be integrated, developers are going to use the open-source version first because they don't need to worry about licensing and support. The MIT license is 1KB and familiar to every developer while the DLSS license is a 25KB wall of text. Any edge cases encountered can be fixed by the devs themselves, instead of having to wait for support from Nvidia. Delays in DLSS integration probably aren't even technical, it's the months of auditing to ensure they don't accidentally cause the proprietary parts to become subject to an open-source license somewhere else in the codebase. These are the things that matter to developers and they decide what will be included
reply
Michael
I think this whole saga is basically a upscaler reversal of CP2077 situation . At the launch of Starfield it ll be FSR and down the road DLSS and XESS will be introduced to the game. I m an RTX user and NOT bummed by this move tbh. As we saw in CP2077 DLSS was introduced, but waaaay down the track unfortunately, FSR was introduced to the title .. as long as the non-FSR upscalers aren t introduced more than 2-3 months down the road I m fine with that. Besides I guarantee, like other game titles, such as the recent Jedi game, modders changed FSR to DLSS and made it available to the masses.
reply
I think this whole saga is basically a upscaler reversal of CP2077 situation . At the launch of Starfield it ll be FSR and down the road DLSS and XESS will be introduced to the game. I m an RTX user and NOT bummed by this move tbh. As we saw in CP2077 DLSS was introduced, but waaaay down the track unfortunately, FSR was introduced to the title .. as long as the non-FSR upscalers aren t introduced more than 2-3 months down the road I m fine with that. Besides I guarantee, like other game titles, such as the recent Jedi game, modders changed FSR to DLSS and made it available to the masses.
reply
Ben
I honestly think a lot of this was drummed up by Nvidia fans that hated the fact AMD was the brand associated with one of the biggest games of the decade, and were afraid their Nvidia cards would perform poorly in the title... We only need to look at how Nvidia has handled their sponsored titles in the past to see how bad things can go when a game developer is 'incentivised' to optimise for one set of hardware and software features, and not the other (cough, Cyberpunk)
reply
I honestly think a lot of this was drummed up by Nvidia fans that hated the fact AMD was the brand associated with one of the biggest games of the decade, and were afraid their Nvidia cards would perform poorly in the title... We only need to look at how Nvidia has handled their sponsored titles in the past to see how bad things can go when a game developer is 'incentivised' to optimise for one set of hardware and software features, and not the other (cough, Cyberpunk)
reply
Krush
ok... Then what's the point getting priorities one over other? If you have time after finsihed implementing it you can implementing other technology fearing that they cannot implement their technology if they have not give priority to it??? Its sounds bonkers but this sounsd the most sane while being not sane reason at all... For me it sounds like after the bribe became obvious they went back and created this priority bs to not look scamy.
reply
ok... Then what's the point getting priorities one over other? If you have time after finsihed implementing it you can implementing other technology fearing that they cannot implement their technology if they have not give priority to it??? Its sounds bonkers but this sounsd the most sane while being not sane reason at all... For me it sounds like after the bribe became obvious they went back and created this priority bs to not look scamy.
reply
Raging
AMD DID NOT tell Microsoft that they wanted to prioritize FSR. Microsoft (Xbox) told AMD that they wanted FSR prioritized on their AMD console.
Phil Spencer has one priority, Xbox (made by AMD). Anyway AMD can squeeze more performance out the Xbox AMD hardware, Phil wants it. He does not care about Nvidia and Intel. That is not his job. To be honest, AMD PC's probably wouldn't have gotten FSR if it didn't work on the console.
reply
AMD DID NOT tell Microsoft that they wanted to prioritize FSR. Microsoft (Xbox) told AMD that they wanted FSR prioritized on their AMD console.
Phil Spencer has one priority, Xbox (made by AMD). Anyway AMD can squeeze more performance out the Xbox AMD hardware, Phil wants it. He does not care about Nvidia and Intel. That is not his job. To be honest, AMD PC's probably wouldn't have gotten FSR if it didn't work on the console.
reply
Mark
I HATE the word Exclusive it just needs to END for good for all platforms and be completely universal launch on ALL platforms and FEATURES. EVERYONE should be able to use all features of their hardware no matter what kind of hardware the gamer has. Exclusive is just another word for gamergate and I HATE IT. Hopefully the Star Field team and Nvidia will release rtx features in a day 1 patch.
reply
I HATE the word Exclusive it just needs to END for good for all platforms and be completely universal launch on ALL platforms and FEATURES. EVERYONE should be able to use all features of their hardware no matter what kind of hardware the gamer has. Exclusive is just another word for gamergate and I HATE IT. Hopefully the Star Field team and Nvidia will release rtx features in a day 1 patch.
reply
Mega
DLSS is more stable even at 4k and less artifacts but the differences are less noticeable. That said, anyone using a 2k monitor/resolution or lower and has a nvidia card capable of running dlss 2 is going to be at a disadvantage.
I'm going to assume the DLSS mod is going to be very popular around launch for a lot of gamers, specially if FSR ghosting is noticeably worse.
reply
DLSS is more stable even at 4k and less artifacts but the differences are less noticeable. That said, anyone using a 2k monitor/resolution or lower and has a nvidia card capable of running dlss 2 is going to be at a disadvantage.
I'm going to assume the DLSS mod is going to be very popular around launch for a lot of gamers, specially if FSR ghosting is noticeably worse.
reply
Vincent
If you're AMD, and a major game developer was just acquired by Microsoft, who you already have a partnership with, you would want to jump in and offer funding to that developer to help them get the most out of their development for that hardware. It's almost like Microsoft and AMD will make more money if they sell more hardware...
Crazy!
reply
If you're AMD, and a major game developer was just acquired by Microsoft, who you already have a partnership with, you would want to jump in and offer funding to that developer to help them get the most out of their development for that hardware. It's almost like Microsoft and AMD will make more money if they sell more hardware...
Crazy!
reply
George
The ignorance in this comment section is over flowing.
FSR is not hardlocked like DLSS. You can even take advantage of FSR on a GTX 1080 GPU. But you cannot use DLSS3 on that same card.
If anything everyone should be celebrating the focus of FSR in one of the biggest games to come this year for the Xbox and all PCs.
reply
The ignorance in this comment section is over flowing.
FSR is not hardlocked like DLSS. You can even take advantage of FSR on a GTX 1080 GPU. But you cannot use DLSS3 on that same card.
If anything everyone should be celebrating the focus of FSR in one of the biggest games to come this year for the Xbox and all PCs.
reply
chris
well it is an Exclusivity cause they don't allow DLSS and this is 1 of the reason that games will be trash on release but could u imagine if AMD says FSR will be there only for those who got AMD cards while that deal with Starfield was happening,not only the game will floop big time but PC gamers will smoke them for that
reply
well it is an Exclusivity cause they don't allow DLSS and this is 1 of the reason that games will be trash on release but could u imagine if AMD says FSR will be there only for those who got AMD cards while that deal with Starfield was happening,not only the game will floop big time but PC gamers will smoke them for that
reply
Mr.
Frankly I wish Microsoft were the ones defining new graphics features instead of leaving it alone to Nvidia and AMD. That's how it used to be whenever new things came out. Unfortunately that won't happen without someone of import causing a major drama. Microsoft's laurel scented offices will be their demise.
reply
Frankly I wish Microsoft were the ones defining new graphics features instead of leaving it alone to Nvidia and AMD. That's how it used to be whenever new things came out. Unfortunately that won't happen without someone of import causing a major drama. Microsoft's laurel scented offices will be their demise.
reply
Steven
At least they (AMD) are saying they aren't restricting support to just FSR but prioritize can mean a lot of different things. Anyway, I am not too concerned about FSR and Starfield because I think Starfield's worst problem is likely to be performance or bugs or both and not if it has DLSS support
reply
At least they (AMD) are saying they aren't restricting support to just FSR but prioritize can mean a lot of different things. Anyway, I am not too concerned about FSR and Starfield because I think Starfield's worst problem is likely to be performance or bugs or both and not if it has DLSS support
reply
Robert
Yeah ridiculous if it doesn't have DLSS and XeSS. Without those, you may be keeping some from getting the game because they may have a borderline system that won't give them a good enough experience as FSR is only a half step to a better experience than a native upscaling tech for specific GPUs.
reply
Yeah ridiculous if it doesn't have DLSS and XeSS. Without those, you may be keeping some from getting the game because they may have a borderline system that won't give them a good enough experience as FSR is only a half step to a better experience than a native upscaling tech for specific GPUs.
reply
Eschaton
I figured they wanted FSR priority to show off FSR3 against Nvidia... But several FSR3 games have been announced (most of them awful), but Starfield isn't even one of them.
So now I don't have a clue what they're thinking. Not a good PR move.
reply
I figured they wanted FSR priority to show off FSR3 against Nvidia... But several FSR3 games have been announced (most of them awful), but Starfield isn't even one of them.
So now I don't have a clue what they're thinking. Not a good PR move.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
1:8:44
