Because the largest gaming GPU manufacturer in the world says so. Unfortunately they have the clout to drive this narrative to devs who will accommodate them because devs dont want their game to look like shit on an Nvidia gpu.
I think that these technologies are still very new. Nvidia arent going to let us know what their skunkworks is up to and what the next generation of the tech is going to look like.
This seems more like just a reality of LCD / LED display tech than anything. CRTs (remember those?) can do a lot of resolutions pretty well no problem, but new stuff not so much. I remember using a lower rez on early LCDs as a ‘free AA’ effect before AA got better/cheaper. This just seems like a response to folks getting ~4k or similar high rez displays and gfx card performance unable to keep up.
I was just playing around with gamescope that allows for this kind of scaling stuff (linux with AMD gfx). Seems kinda cool, but not exactly a killer feature type thing. It’s very similar to the reprojection algos used for VR.
For some reason, Larian shipped an old version of DLSS with the game. It looks better if you swap out the DLL for a newer one. I use DLAA on my 3070 TI and it looks good, but I did have to swap the DLL.
You can either use DLSS Swapper or manually download a new DLL and drop it in yourself. It’s essentially just replacing the nvngx.dll in the game’s directory with a new one.
There are some issues, though - for example, upgrading from a version prior to 2.5.1 will disable the use of the sharpness slider. I mitigate this by using DLSSTweaks to force preset C, which favors the newest frame more heavily.
I upgraded the dll file and tried it again last night. It was much improved. BG3 is the only game I’m playing at the moment but I’m going to try it when Cyberpunk dlc comes out.
Framework’s already been encouraging this, they released some designs for a Mini-PC when they released the first upgraded board kit. I think it’s an awesome use case for old laptop parts.
I'm not sure how good it's going to be, considering the lack of discrete GPU... but that said, even onboard graphics would be plenty for many games, and certainly for streaming them from a more powerful computer.
The exciting part here is the shell, not the insides. Indeed the Intel boards aren’t that great for gaming, but once Framework start shipping the AMD boards next month, this thing would become a real contender to the Steam Deck, ROG Ally etc. Load up something like ChimeraOS on it and you’d get a near-Steam Deck like experience.
Framework is also releasing their GPU modules. Hopefully someone finds a way to make that work with a handheld as well, although the form factor of the module might not be handheld-friendly.
If somone wants to mid end game on a gaming handheld disregarding price, people have to hope that AMDs Strix Halo (40CU apu, 6700xt for example is a 40 CU gpu) is a real product next year.
It’s not like you’ll be installing it in there permanently. If you’ve got a Framework laptop or PC case for instance, you could also use it in there. Basically it’s a BYOM (bring your own mobo) situation, so when you’re not gaming on the go, instead of wasting that piece of idle hardware, it could be put to good use. Or vice versa. Maybe you already have a Framework laptop and want to convert it into a handheld gaming device.
The Steam Deck doesn’t have a discrete GPU either. Though this was with an Intel chip, and they don’t have anywhere near as good onboard graphics as AMD.
I would go so far as to say that I would count that as a negative if I considered buying it. Who wants to be the weirdo whose handheld device lights up their surroundings with changing colors?
There are people for everything. But this group ain’t big. Being a handheld also means staring into the shifting lights. Like facerolling your keyboard instead of looking at the screen.
Basically everything outside of Steam itself is open source. The only problem is distributing a device with Steam preinstalled, as that requires distribution rights from Valve.
I think that’s part of the issue. It would be cool to have an easily available ISO, and partnerships with manufacturers, like they did back in the steam machine days. That might make it more likely that we see handhelds without windows preinstalled.
Remember back when triple AAA games were released and didn’t need to be patched immediately so you can play because the game devs actually decided to make a proper functioning game instead of going for greed?
I lived it and fucking NOPE so many broken games. Check out AVGN or any Games Done Quick glitch speed run for many examples.
Games had less moving parts back then so they seemed like they worked, until you find out that there were entire spells that didn’t work in Final Fantasy or how you can jump just right and enter a game breaking bug thay required a reset (SMB1 minus world). Or how uninstalling the game would uninstall Windows (Kohan? And Pools Of Radiance 2)
Plus now they can make patches in between the time they start pressing discs (gone gold) and release, hense the “day 1 patch”. Personally I’m glad games can be fixed post release although I would prefer it to be more complete/fix at launch than usual.
Yeah, a mix of both would be ideal. The fact that we’re surprised that Starfield and Baldur’s Gate 3 were solid on release is a problem, all AAA releases should have that level of quality at a minimum on release.
If games are consistently solid at release, I’d probably preorder like I used to. Now I wait and see because, more often than not, it’s a buggy mess the first few weeks.
I remember those days as having no Internet let alone high speed, I recall reading old ads for some PC games. So they don’t seem as great as you’re implying because at least the game will most likely be fixed with an accessible patch these days. You’d have to do a lot more work to get one before or completely wasted your money in rare cases.
Also usually publishers set the release date, though in this case I’m not sure if it was in house or not so may not be a point, though you called out developers so figured I’d add it in.
This is pretty normal behavior in response to any game published by an AAA studio.
Intel is trying to break into the home GPU market, and you’re surprised that they’re trying to make sure a game that has a lot of interest is able to be run on their GPU?
People who buy or recommend GPUs expect to be able to use them to run any software that relies upon a GPU. It’s already a bad look for Intel that this is a problem. The article says you can’t even launch the game at the moment.
Imagine if Word or Excel or Chrome failed to launch because of the GPU you had installed?
They always do. The main reason graphics drivers are so fucking huge is that they contain tons of game specific patches. Nvidia has what they call “game-ready” updates which are supposed to increase performance of popular games or patch specific bugs.
Why? They do that pretty much with every major release, especially for demanding titles. People tend to build PCs specifically for a specific game, so the major GPU vendors want to fill that high end need.
In terms of looks, I will say the rocky textures are pretty nice. Also they managed to map actors faces without getting that weird bugeye effect so many other games suffer from.
The character models seemed pretty simple for such a demanding game. I was hoping at least major characters would be a little more detailed. Then again, this was from watching a stream on my phone, so maybe it looks better in person.
Aside from looks, the voice acting I saw seemed a little odd. It could also just be a poor script, but it just didn’t seem all that great.
But overall, the game seemed pretty good, but not something I’m dying to run out and buy. I’ll have some more time this fall, so I’ll probably wait for a few patches to land.
This is pretty common. A graphic card company bragging it can now run X game. Cyberpunk did this. Doom eternal. Hell, I remember when Dishonored 2 from a few years ago was the highlight.
tomshardware.com
Najnowsze