Jump to content
rllmuk

mushashi

Members
  • Content Count

    15,390
  • Joined

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

7,541 profile views
  1. So essentially the games making up the Top 100 games ranked by playtime on a console then...
  2. I'm confident I correctly understood what was said to the extent I'm willing to bet a bollock on it and £100. My previous post clarified what Mark Cerny stated in verbatim. The only people confused at this point in time are those who wish to believe the fever dream fantasy that the PS5 is only compatible with less than 100 PS4 games. If anybody here still thinks they are correct about it, they can take me up on my bet, can't they?
  3. The amount of posts since I last read this thread is a bit much at the moment, but this discussion by Jason Schreier and other people on their weekly podcast does kind of sum up the impression I get of the general level of discussion that a skim read of a few pages of this thread since the hardware reveals
  4. I think you really must be hard of fucking hearing then. This is exactly what was said about BC: He essentially meant it might have the same problems as boost mode on PS4 Pro might possibly have when running PS4 games at boosted performance. Without testing them, they cannot be sure what quirks might result in each game, which is why they locked away that functionality originally, to maintain 100% BC between PS4P and older games designed for the PS4 only. He also stated "Backwards compatibility modes", which to me infers a repeat of their PS4 Pro approach, something backed up by the Github testing data:
  5. Pretty sure you can sort of already do that to an extent... via The Power of the Cloud.
  6. It's done by Xiaolin Zeng, a 3D artist, as a demo for some Australian professional conference opener (judging by all the big hitters listed during it, NASA, Lucasfilm, etc). It's not playable or runnable in real-time at present, as the rendering times must have been pretty lengthy for that level of quality. https://www.nutscomputergraphics.com/en/ispirational/pause-2017-opening-titles-2/ He uploaded a behind the scenes video for it too:
  7. Quake 2 actually uses the Next-Next Gen implementation, Path Tracing, which is a much more complete physically accurate lighting solution than the hybrid RT solutions being deployed in more advanced game engines currently, way too computationally expensive at present except for ancient and simplistic games. Otoy's Octane uses it and it's also an option in UE4 and other game engines, just not for real-time usage at present. This is what it's capable of, just not in real-time :)
  8. The founder of that company, Reuven Bakalash, certainly has a track record and his patent list is interesting, quite a few related to doing Ray-Tracing computationally cheaply so I wouldn't write his solution off as vapourware just yet.
  9. Control is considered a flagship implementation of RT currently, and unless you are blind, the differences are stark and that game is primarily about 'shiny reflections' too.
  10. Nvidia have devoted a shitload of real estate to their RT/Tensor core hardware solution (~20% extra die space used), any AMD solution will have to do the same if they want to match what RTX can do currently, otherwise the RT implementations will be similar to this new one or Crytek's software solution.
  11. Interesting solution with some interesting claims. Be interesting to see the quality/performance versus the brute force hardware approach. Shouldn't have that long to wait if he's claiming that somebody is releasing a commercial game with it this year:
  12. This is the crux of the problem in terms of confusion from some consumers. You DO NOT OWN the game in the way you think you do. You were sold a limited license to run it on certain hardware, not carte blanche to do what the fuck you liked with it. You can certainly ignore your license restrictions, but expecting a commercial company like Nvidia to be able to do the same is a much more questionable assumption. In an ironically amusing turn of events, Nvidia themselves updated their own EULA to cockblock usage of their own consumer hardware as people were not buying their expensive professional cards for data centre usage, so clearly Nvidia thinks EULAs are perfectly legal and enforceable :D https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/topic/1027999/cuda-programming-and-performance/driver-eula-update-no-datacenter-deployment/ https://www.techpowerup.com/239994/nvidia-forbids-geforce-driver-deployment-in-data-centers A company which came out with a service to allow people to stream their DVDs across the internet lost in a court of law against Hollywood, how much is anybody betting a lawsuit against the ESA or UKIE is going to go? https://phys.org/news/2011-10-movie-studios-lawsuit-zediva.html
  13. I don't know why Nvidia doesn't change their strategy on this to an extent. It started off as a sort of subscription service for their Android hardware device family where they were paying devs to participate and then morphed into a monthly PAYG/free time share service and now is sort of that, without the very low monthly time limit and the promise of being able to use most of your existing PC content library. The backend tech they have for it could very easily morph this into the Netflix of gaming as the Windows OS PC has 99.99% of the non-mobile games in production available to it, a major roadblock is the closed ecosystem devices preventing them from offering it to the widest available hardware base as it only works on non-ring fenced hardware, unlike Netflix which is available on a huge range of devices, including the ring-fenced hardware systems. But then it would come down to their inability to compete on the Cloud datacentre infrastructure side of things, which is why I suppose Microsoft didn't consider them a credible threat, unlike Google or Amazon. Netflix runs on their biggest competitor's Cloud infrastructure, which I doubt Nvidia are interested in doing as this entire project is just another avenue for reinforcing the dominance of their GFX technology on home PC and all their current major Cloud game streaming competitors are using proprietary AMD technology instead.
  14. Amusingly enough, the sales pitch to developers for GFN was that it would expand the market for their games to non-gaming PCs and other devices, but people are arguing about using their existing content library with it, which doesn't quite fit with that sales pitch. Here's a hypothetical for all the people who might care about this service: If all the major publishers pulled their content but you could play literally everything else that runs on a Windows OS PC, would it be worth the money still? Or is running premium content the big draw?
  15. They do have an intrinsic cost though, otherwise Sony wouldn't have taken a huge bath on the PS3, despite charging above the then accepted market price for it or Microsoft losing $Billions on selling the first Xbox. Pricing has a floor dictated by cost of materials and associated costs of production, selling below those costs is usually only done if you believe you can recoup that at a later stage. Currently supply/demand is in favour of supply so the cost of production is being driven up and somebody is going to have to pay for that. If console pricing was really driven by the desires of middle aged men with too much money, they'd actually be selling you the exact same hardware but with a healthy profit margin, rather than a marginal or negative profit margin. The only company to do that ironically is the one most appealing not to middle aged men
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.