Imagine working to offer paid mods, have them leaked AND have a site like techpowerup reporting on it WITH source. Oof.

happytohearImagine having worked to offer paid mods, have them leaked AND have a site like techpowerup reporting on it WITH source. Oof.

Modding should be free/donation basis imho, unless its actual content. Well played

Super XPThis is great if you have a weak graphics card.

This is the way to go

happytohearImagine working to offer paid mods, have them leaked AND have a site like techpowerup reporting on it WITH source. Oof.

This is quite a yikes xd

Vayra86Modding should be free/donation basis imho, unless its actual content. Well played

I did not argue for paid mods. I feel sorry for him having put the effort into it and his work being leaked. I myself dislike paid mods.
Damn, Callisto Protocol does not work correctly. Halves the FPS when used. :-(

happytohearI did not argue for paid mods. I feel sorry for him having put the effort into it and his work being leaked. I myself dislike paid mods.

It's also advertisement for his future mods. I think many implied it already.

The rights to redistribute, modify, ship along privative software or charge for open source software depends on the license.

happytohearI did not argue for paid mods. I feel sorry for him having put the effort into it and his work being leaked. I myself dislike paid mods.
Damn, Callisto Protocol does not work correctly. Halves the FPS when used. :-(

It's a broken arsed mod that he paywalled, trying to make bucks on something that doesn't work. Doing this before AMD releases wide spread support, feel more like making a quick buck before his mod is pointless.

My current games I am playing , DLAA is all I use , do like Ray Reconstruction .

Vayra86Modding should be free/donation basis imho, unless its actual content. Well played

I dont agree, I know its basically unmanageable otherwise, that was what Bethesda showed, just people downloading and re-uploading the mod.

But either way you are putting in time and effort to make a product better, why would that not be a paid service?

FreedomEclipseNot entirely true although your claim has some merit.

What killed it primarily was Microsoft with Windows Vista that changed how the OS handled the Directsound APi and Creative released a 'work around' in the form of their 'Alchemy' app that would act as a wrapper and translate audio from EAX supported games to EAX if it was turned on but results were always great and a lot of games were quite buggy with it on in my experience (and I owned a hell of a lot of Audigy and XFi cards in my time)

OpenAL or a similar thing was supposed to fill-in where DirectSound took off but Either Creative was lazy or Creative and their partner Loki Entertainment ran into other things which left OpenAL in limbo. Nothing has changed much. OpenAL is still in limbo but Loki Entertainment closed its doors in 2002 and I dont think creative care that much about it as EAX has been dead for a long time.

Yes, MS changed it to software CPU based for sound instead of hardware. And even though Creative fixed alchemy to keep it alive for its own cards (I myself have one) but because it only gave inferior EAX to other brands (like Asus, M-audio, Realtek) it never gained enough of the market to matter in the long run. It's basically dead for that reason.
And this is also why I wanted physX to die, same with Nvidias VRR, it needed and expensive module that added 150 USD to monitor price. Don't won't do it as it's too expensive, we need a cheaper alternative and AMD is better in this case, it tends to work with everything.

R0H1TGenerally but it's not a fait accompli by any means, take CUDA for example!

Entirely different circumstances when there is persistent use of the tech, and its not gimmick software oriented at gamers.

Not to mention the professional industry is highly resistant to change once they’ve picked a software/hardware path.

It's funny how fast we went from fake frames to a standing ovation, a time honoured tradition. Tried it in AW2 and so far it's relatively impressive now that VRR works and it can be underpinned by DLSS SR if you are on Nvidia.

Gotta hand it to AMD on this one, compared to DLSS SR and following up with FSR 1 then 2, this is a MUCH bigger success imo, the speed to get their workable open solution to market is worthy of much praise.

This FSR3 frame gen is already good that it made older RTX cards usable to enable ray tracing which is impossible before without frame rate tanking hard. Because of this I bought used RTX 2060S last night because that's more than good enough for 1080p games that I play. Tried CP2077 with high setting and RT enabled it gets 30-50fps in Night City but in Dogtown market early in DLC have frame rate tank HARD till below 25fps, with FSR3 frame gen enabled I get over 50fps at the same scene.

People don't get mad at this 'fake frames' but mad at Nvidia locking to only new gen cards, I said this before, this is a game changer for low and older gen cards as it make using RT possible now. That 2060S I bought is less than half the price of cheapest 4060.

I really wanted to buy AMD cards but some things like CUDA makes me buy Nvidia cards as I did use some programs other than games for it.

That's a bit of an exaggeration, RT improvements have been minimal to barely worth mentioning coming from the the top 3xxx cards. Without fake frames you could very well say that 4xxx are a major fail, also despite Nvidia's insistence the only reason FG isn't a thing on the older gen is because they want to sell these overpriced cards.

Apocalypseethat 2060S I bought is less than half the price of cheapest 4060.

We oddly have 2070S selling for exact same buck as 2060S so I'd buy a 2070S if wasn't saving money for a 6900 XT I'm planning to butcher.

ApocalypseeTried CP2077 with high setting and RT enabled it gets 30-50fps in Night City but in Dogtown market early in DLC have frame rate tank HARD till below 25fps, with FSR3 frame gen enabled I get over 50fps at the same scene.

Have very similar performance on 6700 XT but my 4K display for some reason dislikes frame generation as Freesync stops working properly (tested both FSR3 mod and AMD Fluid Motion Frames). Using my mate's display, I had no such issue. Haven't found the solution yet. 4K gaming with FSR: Balanced and RT+FG both disabled ain't bad experience though.

Beginner Micro DeviceWe oddly have 2070S selling for exact same buck as 2060S so I'd buy a 2070S if wasn't saving money for a 6900 XT I'm planning to butcher.


Have very similar performance on 6700 XT but my 4K display for some reason dislikes frame generation as Freesync stops working properly (tested both FSR3 mod and AMD Fluid Motion Frames). Using my mate's display, I had no such issue. Haven't found the solution yet. 4K gaming with FSR: Balanced and RT+FG both disabled ain't bad experience though.

Price is all over the place in my place. 2070S and 2080S can be as cheap as RM150 (USD 32) more than 2060S that's for Dell 2070/2080 blower card usually it's RM250+ (USD 52) more which is about the same price as used 3060/Ti. Though all this is cheaper than 4060.

Forgot to mention I play at 1080p high preset with all RT enabled (shadows/ reflection) at medium DLSS set at quality with sharpness at 1.

ZoneDymoI dont agree, I know its basically unmanageable otherwise, that was what Bethesda showed, just people downloading and re-uploading the mod.

But either way you are putting in time and effort to make a product better, why would that not be a paid service?

Its not your product. Its feeding off someone else's work. Without having to do anything related to running an actual business. Monetization has no place in modding most of the time, because the entire market condition isnt about a product sale. You would pay but you have no rights as a consumer of a bought product.

Modding ONLY works as a community service. Thats why Bethesda fails too. If it is paid its no longer modding, its about selling products - making profit - with all of its nasty drawbacks. No longer is it a project of goodwill and cooperation - its a business without being honest about it.

Donations fit modders much better, as those are made in the same spirit as modding.

Vayra86Its not your product. Its feeding off someone else's work. Without having to do anything related to running an actual business. Monetization has no place in modding most of the time, because the entire market condition isnt about a product sale. You would pay but you have no rights as a consumer of a bought product.

Modding ONLY works as a community service. Thats why Bethesda fails too. If it is paid its no longer modding, its about selling products - making profit - with all of its nasty drawbacks. No longer is it a project of goodwill and cooperation - its a business without being honest about it.

Donations fit modders much better, as those are made in the same spirit as modding.

Of course, this depends on the goodwill of the company that owns the copyright on the game.

Yeah, I think a fair way to monetize content would be to create a Patreon and videos. Some modders simply do such a great job that they deserve to not only receive financial benefit but also be hired by these companies.

DenverYes, but there is also the fact that he is selling open source technology, isn't that also illegal? :rolleyes:

I agree.

I think amd should just do a simmilar thing where you load an app to convert fsr2 to fsr3 for all gpus and then it would be the end.

The reason why people really dislike frame gen is that Nvidia only supported it on RTX 40 series and old cards as young as RTX 30 where left in the dust. I've also tried the DLSS3 to FSR3 mod on cyberpunk and much preffer to use framegen making path tracing playable now at almost or over 100FPS on my 3080 ti. So I think it's high time Nvidia learn a lesson.

Thanks amd for making gaming better for us with "older" graphics cards. I think with a bit more work Frame gen is the future and amd is already proven to be better today due to what a mentioned above.

wolfIt's funny how fast we went from fake frames to a standing ovation, a time honoured tradition.

DLSS3 frame gen had some problems in the first implementations that were eventually solved, but the bulk of the criticism was obviously directed at Nvidia artificially preventing the tech from being used in the Turing and Ampere graphics cards.
And then they used DLSS3 to make dishonest bar charts that tricked people into thinking the 4060 was 2x faster than the 3060 (with most games not supporting frame gen), as their whole plan was to price all their ranges a tier above.

There's rarely any reason to complain about a tech. It's the dishonesty surrounding its applicability that need to be called out by people and reviewers.

DiceairI think amd should just do a simmilar thing where you load an app to convert fsr2 to fsr3 for all gpus and then it would be the end.

I'm not sure this can be done with no developer intervention without breaking the UI in most games.

FreedomEclipseNot entirely true although your claim has some merit.

What killed it primarily was Microsoft with Windows Vista that changed how the OS handled the Directsound APi and Creative released a 'work around' in the form of their 'Alchemy' app that would act as a wrapper and translate audio from EAX supported games to EAX if it was turned on but results were always great and a lot of games were quite buggy with it on in my experience (and I owned a hell of a lot of Audigy and XFi cards in my time)

OpenAL or a similar thing was supposed to fill-in where DirectSound took off but Either Creative was lazy or Creative and their partner Loki Entertainment ran into other things which left OpenAL in limbo. Nothing has changed much. OpenAL is still in limbo but Loki Entertainment closed its doors in 2002 and I dont think creative care that much about it as EAX has been dead for a long time.

This is also how I understand the situation.

Dang, all I can say is, it's a crying shame. EAX titles, especially Bioshock (Original) and F.E.A.R just sound so good, sooooooo good. We need to get an EAX alternative in some shape or form again.

Vayra86Its not your product. Its feeding off someone else's work. Without having to do anything related to running an actual business. Monetization has no place in modding most of the time, because the entire market condition isnt about a product sale. You would pay but you have no rights as a consumer of a bought product.

Modding ONLY works as a community service. Thats why Bethesda fails too. If it is paid its no longer modding, its about selling products - making profit - with all of its nasty drawbacks. No longer is it a project of goodwill and cooperation - its a business without being honest about it.

Donations fit modders much better, as those are made in the same spirit as modding.

see but now you are basically just disregarding software as a product really.
Tuning kits for cars? waterblocks for gpus? D-brand decals for consoles etc? all of those are addition to "improve" or customize or, dare I say it, "modify" the original product they did not make.

If a game runs poorly and the devs dont give a crap to fix it, and you would put in months of sifting through the code to come up with a patch that fixes it, are not not allowed, in your opinion, to ask money for that end product?
If a piece of software lacks all kinds of integrated then many people so desperately want and you put in the effort of adding that integration, you are not allowed to ask for money for that work?
If a company refuses to release new drivers for an older product with the mindset of "just buy our newer products" and someone puts in the efforts of making those drivers so people can use their product for longer, again, better not ask anything for that effort yo!?

If someone asks you to install a boiler for them, its obvious you are going to ask money for that time and effort despite the fact that you did not design the boiler, build the boiler, have anything to do with running that business, you are also feeding off of someone elses work, if they did not make the boiler, you would have no job installing it and what about the roads we need to drive over to get to the house with the boiler, that is someone elses work as well.
hell, voice actors in germany rely entirely on other peoples work so they can provide a german narration for the audience.

If someone asks you to make a mod to make a piece of software work, better do that crap for free yo..... well and fingers crossed that someone throws you a dime on patreon or so I guess, seems fair.

ToTTenTranzthe bulk of the criticism was obviously directed at Nvidia artificially preventing the tech from being used in the Turing and Ampere graphics cards.

It's fairly natural for someone who has the vision to innovate an idea, wants to capitalize on it when in an industry and market like this. I can't say for certain that it was verifiably, artificially and purposely withheld from Ampere and lower gens when developed with hardware acceleration for the desired experience. AMD broadly accomplishing the same task, a year later with the benefit of studying the competition, and then bringing their own mostly baked solution with it's own unique set of nuances and drawbacks doesn't necessitate that version of history. Nvidia was working on this for years to make it viable at a level that was genuinely marketable whatsoever, it had to be good at what it said it was going to do. The two solutions are compared because they in effect do the same thing, but they clearly go about it in very different ways, with different results, and the players have different market dynamics, one is a leader and one is a follower. People are quick to vilify because of what has been done, perhaps without considering the how it was done.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very pleased with how it has turned out, as an RTX 30 series buyer with an eye to RDNA4/RTX 50 as my next upgrade, AMD would all but appear to have crushed FG being a point/pro in a given GeForce's favor that will very likely carry no weight in my decision now, a point which has yet to be won by FSR Upscaling Vs DLSS Upscaling imo. Especially considering my praise of AMD's FSR3 FG is based on it adding frames to a DLSS upscaled game, the FSR upscaled game I tried was no bueno.

wolfIt's funny how fast we went from fake frames to a standing ovation, a time honoured tradition. Tried it in AW2 and so far it's relatively impressive now that VRR works and it can be underpinned by DLSS SR if you are on Nvidia.

Gotta hand it to AMD on this one, compared to DLSS SR and following up with FSR 1 then 2, this is a MUCH bigger success imo, the speed to get their workable open solution to market is worthy of much praise.

These are still fake frames! Nothing changed wrt that. They still hit latency and create a disbalance between input and visual feedback.

But the same principles apply here as they do wrt 'paid vs unpaid' modding. Nvidia monetizes FG, and AMD doesnt, its not trying to lock it down but rather enable it on as many cards as possible including RDNA2. Well - AMD monetizes it, but not towards its consumer base, but rather to further their console offering. They need it there. Thats a smart business model that doesnt throw consumer under the bus, but rather is based on a positive move forward that just happens because the market moves there. Thats how you secure market adoption proper. Incentivize, rather than Nvidias stranglehold forcing people towards Ada.

FSR3 is simply a bonus and therefore nice to have - while Nvidia is actively pushing it to sell GPUs. That is the key difference and for the exact same reason modders have no right or place to make money off it.

Money corrupts. Simple. If a party requires me to pay money, I want a real, complete product in return. Until then I feel like a paid beta tester, well fuck that. Now until eternity. Im not an idiot making someone else's living with my time. If no one is making money off my back, Im all for cooperative activity to get stuff done. Heck Ill go the extra mile. But when you ask money, or upsell tech through an overpriced GPU with artificial tech limitations, we have a contract. Its a different world.

wolfIt's fairly natural for someone who has the vision to innovate an idea, wants to capitalize on it when in an industry and market like this. I can't say for certain that it was verifiably, artificially and purposely withheld from Ampere and lower gens when developed with hardware acceleration for the desired experience. AMD broadly accomplishing the same task, a year later with the benefit of studying the competition, and then bringing their own mostly baked solution with it's own unique set of nuances and drawbacks doesn't necessitate that version of history. Nvidia was working on this for years to make it viable at a level that was genuinely marketable whatsoever, it had to be good at what it said it was going to do. The two solutions are compared because they in effect do the same thing, but they clearly go about it in very different ways, with different results, and the players have different market dynamics, one is a leader and one is a follower. People are quick to vilify because of what has been done, perhaps without considering the how it was done.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very pleased with how it has turned out, as an RTX 30 series buyer with an eye to RDNA4/RTX 50 as my next upgrade, AMD would all but appear to have crushed FG being a point/pro in a given GeForce's favor that will very likely carry no weight in my decision now, a point which has yet to be won by FSR Upscaling Vs DLSS Upscaling imo. Especially considering my praise of AMD's FSR3 FG is based on it adding frames to a DLSS upscaled game, the FSR upscaled game I tried was no bueno.

You seem to be turning around towards AMDs approach, starting to understand it better. Big respect points here from my end, its refreshing to see people open to change of their perspective.

Also youre not wrong. All new tech is a case of chicken/egg, someone needs to push it forward before it gets momentum. Nvidia and AMD know their place in that dynamic. Nvidia leads. AMD follows, it gets universal and boom we have it everywhere.

ZoneDymosee but now you are basically just disregarding software as a product really.
Tuning kits for cars? waterblocks for gpus? D-brand decals for consoles etc? all of those are addition to "improve" or customize or, dare I say it, "modify" the original product they did not make.

If a game runs poorly and the devs dont give a crap to fix it, and you would put in months of sifting through the code to come up with a patch that fixes it, are not not allowed, in your opinion, to ask money for that end product?
If a piece of software lacks all kinds of integrated then many people so desperately want and you put in the effort of adding that integration, you are not allowed to ask for money for that work?
If a company refuses to release new drivers for an older product with the mindset of "just buy our newer products" and someone puts in the efforts of making those drivers so people can use their product for longer, again, better not ask anything for that effort yo!?

If someone asks you to install a boiler for them, its obvious you are going to ask money for that time and effort despite the fact that you did not design the boiler, build the boiler, have anything to do with running that business, you are also feeding off of someone elses work, if they did not make the boiler, you would have no job installing it and what about the roads we need to drive over to get to the house with the boiler, that is someone elses work as well.
hell, voice actors in germany rely entirely on other peoples work so they can provide a german narration for the audience.

If someone asks you to make a mod to make a piece of software work, better do that crap for free yo..... well and fingers crossed that someone throws you a dime on patreon or so I guess, seems fair.

Simple answer: no.

It corrupts everything modding stands for. Principles matter. Without principles you are lost.

A crucial piece of information missing from the article. It does not work on AMD cards.