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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Simple answer: no.
It corrupts everything modding stands for. Principles matter. Without principles you are lost.
