Nvidia and AMD should stand up against these stupid Console port

[desprado]

In my point view enough is enough.After seeing Witcher 3 for being awesome and amazing now it gone down to worse that i never imagined.Both need to take a stand and stop this 1:1 Console port.

If they cannot do it than stop selling GPUs like Titan X,GTX 980,R9 290X or R9 290 it waste than.To play Console port u dont need that kind of a horse power.

I hope AMD and Nvidia realize these kind of Console ports will hurt their high end GPU sale.

 

[digitaldurandal]

In my point view enough is enough.After seeing Witcher 3 for being awesome and amazing now it gone down to worse that i never imagined.Both need to take a stand and stop this 1:1 Console port.

If they cannot do it than stop selling GPUs like Titan X,GTX 980,R9 290X or R9 290 it waste than.To play Console port u dont need that kind of a horse power.

I hope AMD and Nvidia realize these kind of Console ports will hurt their high end GPU sale.

These console ports are already pushing the limits of the high end GPUs though. I think if they had kept the graphics at the level they were hoping for, you would need SLI Titan X to play the highest settings 1440p. They're already recommending high end GPUs for high graphics settings 1080p and that is not including hairworks.

While I do agree that the original videos for Witcher 3 and Watch_Dogs looked much better - if no one can run it, it just becomes Crysis all over again.

They should develop Ultra texture and shader packs for DLC and sell it so they can easily gauge the market for it.

 

[desprado]

These console ports are already pushing the limits of the high end GPUs though. I think if they had kept the graphics at the level they were hoping for, you would need SLI Titan X to play the highest settings 1440p. They're already recommending high end GPUs for high graphics settings 1080p and that is not including hairworks.

While I do agree that the original videos for Witcher 3 and Watch_Dogs looked much better - if no one can run it, it just becomes Crysis all over again.

They should develop Ultra texture and shader packs for DLC and sell it so they can easily gauge the market for it.

Totally Wrong.

Titan X is waste for Console port 1:1 and u wont any difference even at 4K.

If console port like these are future than GTX 770 or R9 280X is more than enough.

 

[sandorski]

Console Ports are a problem, but not the biggest. That would be Proprietary/Closed/Vendor Specific shenanigans to Game Code meant to cripple competitors.

 

[zlatan]

The only way to change this is a new developer centric ecosystem model, where every IHV bring full ISA and hardware manuals, shader disassembler, usable tools and an own graphics API.
The closed-source middlewares and unusable black-boxes won't help the PC. Everybody can say that this is indutry problem. No. This is an ecosystem problem. Even if AMD has full ISA and hardware docs, GCN disassember, CodeXL, Mantle, we need these from NVIDIA and also from Intel.

 

[Silverforce11]

It's just about money, nothing new.

If PC is the major revenue source, developers would give it more attention.

I respect devs that still focus on PC and eventhough its a cross-platform game, they design it for PC first and then tone down for consoles.

 

[zlatan]

PC is a very good revenue source. With Steam and GoG you can get big money. We can get additional money from the publisher for the PC port, if we can guarantee that our research will work when the game will release. Now this is the problem. We can't guarantee that with black-box APIs, and closed-source black-box middlewares, and in the end they won't give the additional money.
On the other side we get much more money for the consoles, just because we can guarantee that the new "somethingamazing" effect will work.

 

[sontin]

The closed-source middlewares and unusable black-boxes won't help the PC.

Sure it helps. It makes it easier to implement effects and saves money.

 

[redzo]

Nvidia andAMD should stand up against these stupid Console port

Because we want more delicious nvidia GW titles or some similarly successful GW AMD initiative.
nvidia is already helping by pushing their highly successful GW program. Their answer will probably be that TW3 needed more GW.

This disruptive tactic(GW like) hurts the entire gpu customer base. Support something like this and pretty soon you may end up buying a specific GPU for every title out there.

 

[Leadbox]

Gameworks is cancer

 

[desprado]

It's just about money, nothing new.

If PC is the major revenue source, developers would give it more attention.

I respect devs that still focus on PC and eventhough its a cross-platform game, they design it for PC first and then tone down for consoles.

Games like Skyrim, Dragon Age 3 ,Witcher 2, Crysis 1, The Sims,BF3 and BF4 sold more on PC than any console.

It is about interest and money.Problem is that both MS and Sony are willing to Pay huge amount to developers to tone down PC graphics to console level this why i am saying AMD and Nvidia need work together on this sort out solution and stop console port.

 

[zlatan]

Sure it helps. It makes it easier to implement effects and saves money.

No. It makes harder to implement the effects. When you don't able to change the source code, or even don't see it, than there is a huge chance for some compatibility issue with the engine. In this case the only option is to rewrite a portion of the engine, because the effect source is untouchable. This is much harder than just changing the effect source code. There is a chance that the effect wont work and you need to deactivate it.

Any black box and closed-source option is bad for the PC, and it will give an advantage to the consoles, where you can write everything for yourself. Knowing my code, and the ability to profile and change every portion of the application is a huge advantage.
It is possible on PC, but not with these black box and closed-source approaches.

Profanity is not allowed in the Video Cards and Graphics sub forum.
-Moderator Subyman

 

[zlatan]

Problem is that both MS and Sony are willing to Pay huge amount to developers to tone down PC graphics to console level this why i am saying AMD and Nvidia need work together on this sort out solution and stop console port.

They don't need to do this. MS and Sony knows that the PC is not a good ecosystem for innovation.
AMD, NV and Intel don't need to work together. They just need to be openness. Documentations, tools, analyzers, a specific API, all the things that MS and Sony can give us on the consoles. And than we can do the same work for PC. This simple.

 

[desprado]

They don't need to do this. MS and Sony knows that the PC is not a good ecosystem for innovation.
AMD, NV and Intel don't need to wort together. They just need openness. Documentations, tools, analyzers, a specific API, all the things that MS and Sony can give us on the consoles. And than we can do the same work for PC. This simple.

They did with with Watch Dog and Witcher 3 and mostly Microsoft is to be blamed.
That is why i want Microsoft far away from PC.

If witcher 3 final Build was same as 2013 than i grantee that PC sale would be more than GTA V at 1st hour of game launch.

 

[3DVagabond]

The only way to change this is a new developer centric ecosystem model, where every IHV bring full ISA and hardware manuals, shader disassembler, usable tools and an own graphics API.
The closed-source middlewares and unusable black-boxes won't help the PC. Everybody can say that this is indutry problem. No. This is an ecosystem problem. Even if AMD has full ISA and hardware docs, GCN disassember, CodeXL, Mantle, we need these from NVIDIA and also from Intel.

Wasn't this the idea with Mantle? I'm hoping DX12 keeps this aspect where the API allows for the game to make calls more directly to the hardware.

 

[desprado]

Wasn't this the idea with Mantle? I'm hoping DX12 keeps this aspect where the API allows for the game to make calls more directly to the hardware.

DX12 will have more Console port than the entire history of Pc gaming.It will be total monopoly by Microsoft.

 

[zlatan]

They did with with Watch Dog and Witcher 3 and mostly Microsoft is to be blamed.

Why? They did nothing wrong. Sure D3D11 is a very bad API for these modern games, but D3D12 is on the way.

That is why i want Microsoft far away from PC.

They do a lot of good things for PC game development. More than anyone. But they can't force the IHVs to build an openness ecosystem.

If witcher 3 final Build was same 2013 than i grantee that PC sale would more than GTA V at 1st hour of game launch.

I saw the Witcher 3 PC port, and it's awesome. The scaling is brilliant. They didn't implement all effects, but that's why I said that the PC is not a good platform for innovation. It need some changes. We have to throw out all black box and closed-source approaches.

 

[zlatan]

Wasn't this the idea with Mantle? I'm hoping DX12 keeps this aspect where the API allows for the game to make calls more directly to the hardware.

Mantle or any explicit API is just one element. There is still a need for super tools, disassembler, ISA docs ... all the elements what we get on the consoles.

 

[desprado]

Why? They did nothing wrong. Sure D3D11 is a very bad API for these modern games, but D3D12 is on the way.


They do a lot of good things for PC game development. More than anyone. But they can't force the IHVs to build an openness ecosystem.


I saw the Witcher 3 PC port, and it's awesome. The scaling is brilliant. They didn't implement all effects, but that's why I said that the PC is not a good platform for innovation. It need some changes. We have to throw out all black box and closed-source approaches.

No one that biggest Reason of Witcher 3 and Watch Dog downgrade was to success Console Sole and so that it dont look bad against PC.

PC sale can overtake Console but it needs companies like AMD and Nvidia to back PC because their main business is totally based on PC gaming.

 

[sontin]

No. That's bullshit. It makes harder to implement the effects. When you don't able to change the source code, or even don't see it, than there is a huge chance for some compatibility issue with the engine. In this case the only option is to rewrite a portion of the engine, because the effect source is untouchable. This is much harder than just changing the effect source code. There is a chance that the effect wont work and you need to deactivate it.

If you were able to rewrite unknown source code you wouldnt need any help from nVidia or AMD to create these effects.
Otherwise it is nVidia's job to provide a "black box" which works flawless with your engine.

Any black box and closed-source option is bad for the PC, and it will give an advantage to the consoles, where you can write everything for yourself. Knowing my code, and the ability to profile and change every portion of the application is a huge advantage.
It is possible on PC, but not with these black box and closed-source approaches.

No game developer is investing the same amount of money into graphics ip like nVidia. nVidia is creating these libaries and giving them away for free.
You dont like them? Dont use them when you have a better solution.

 

[zlatan]

No one that biggest Reason of Witcher 3 and Watch Dog downgrade was to success Console Sole and so that it dont look bad against PC.

PC sale can overtake Console but it needs companies like AMD and Nvidia to back PC because their main business is totally based on PC gaming.

Do you really think that the users are care about graphics. We get plenty of steam datas what you don't able to access. 83 percent of our Steam PC userbase didn't even change the default (1024x768) resolution in our games. They don't know how to change it or they don't care.

 

[zlatan]

If you were able to rewrite unknown source code you wouldnt need any help from nVidia or AMD to create these effects.

And how should I know what are the best optimization solutions for Nvidia? Is there an ISA&hardware manual for it, or a shader disassembler? I'm not a god, I don't know how the hardware works if they don't tell me. The best thing I can do is to assume that all Geforce hardware works exactly the same way like GCN. Do you think this is good for the PC, for the whole ecosystem? Do you think this will help us to bring better PC ports?

You dont like them? Dont use them when you have a better solution.

I don't care about GameWorks, and don't care how much money they burn with it. But I care that they don't provide an alternative approach, that should help my job, that should help me to bring better PC ports.

 

[exar333]

Not trying to stir the pot here, but does MS and Sony really pay these devs to 'tone down grapchis' on the PC? It seems this is taken as the truth, but I guess I have not see an actual case of this, unless maybe I missed it?

I get that the devs are encouraged, and maybe even provided incentives to push the consoles as far as possible, but are they actively handicapping the PC or is that just an opportunity cost in pushing the PC version?

I guess where I am coming from is that if the devs want to build efficiently, and the consoles ARE a limiting factor, how do we expect them to build a well-performing, scalable arch that works (and looks great) on both the consoles and PC, in all cases?

Maybe it is just the case that consoles are slow, and devs struggle to make a game that shines on both, with the budget at hand. I feel that it is more likely the publisher/dev that pushes on them for a lower-budget, and they still need to release for all platforms.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

 

[Insomniator]

These console ports are already pushing the limits of the high end GPUs though. I think if they had kept the graphics at the level they were hoping for, you would need SLI Titan X to play the highest settings 1440p. They're already recommending high end GPUs for high graphics settings 1080p and that is not including hairworks.

While I do agree that the original videos for Witcher 3 and Watch_Dogs looked much better - if no one can run it, it just becomes Crysis all over again.

They should develop Ultra texture and shader packs for DLC and sell it so they can easily gauge the market for it.

I'd rather Crysis all over again than this. At least Crysis pushed the envelope. High/Ultra is just a meaningless label for settings. If they made a game that only ran on medium on anything but dual Titan X, but still looked better than anything out today I'd be happy playing it on medium.

 

[Kenmitch]

AMD believes in industry standards, NVIDIA believes in winning at all costs. How would that work out?