God Rays in FO4 doesn't "screw over" anyone. Read the Hard|OCP review, it impacts NV and AMD GPUs nearly equally. However, there are times that GW as a whole may work better on NV GPUs and there is nothing wrong with that as NVIDIA has expended the resources and man power to work with developers to incorporate it. His argument tried to make it sound as if it splits the market in a detrimental fashion when it doesn't nor is it intended to. Ultimately the fault is AMD's for having weak tessellation, poor DX 11 drivers, poor leadership, declining market share and no vision. If the 2/10 guys want it all, they can ditch their AMD products and go NVIDIA like the rest of us and enjoy their hardware or stop whining and direct their complaints to AMD for being an impotent competitor.
we need to end this team green/team red, and get games about GAMES and not about GPU vendors.
Yeah like fight over team Steam vs team Greenman instead.
The first time i had the terminal stuck bug, i tabbed out to google. My solution was adding fallout4.exe to rivatuner and set the frame cap to 88fps (just randomly picked that). I have had no other issues.
SO, i dont think the limit is 60fps. My son runs in windowed mode without rivatuner. My desktop is 100hz (custom).
He doesnt seem to have issues either.
Scroll up to see the proof but I can't say specifically since call outs are against AT rules. And while you may want some utopia where AMD/NV are 50/50 and games are developed for the PC in a generic fashion, that reality doesn't exist. Besides, like I said, with the market so largely in favor of NVIDIA, what you want is already there since GW caters to 8/10 PC gamers.
I don't think it's game works itself but rather that so far nearly every implementation has been to paste game works in and not tailor it for their engine. The witcher 3 for example offered sliders to adjust the levels. With some other games it's either on or off and likely is not optimally used.
What I want is for Gameworks to NOT be tacked onto a Game engine, and cause that Game to run at a lower performance level comparative to the average of games releasesd which is exactly what happens when Gameworks is implemented....
As I remember TW3 added sliders after the benchmarks were in.
'Whoops, 64x tesselation isn't a good idea, who'da thunk it? Everyone done testing and [redacted]? Ok, you can turn it down now.'
I don't think it's game works itself but rather that so far nearly every implementation has been to paste game works in and not tailor it for their engine. The witcher 3 for example offered sliders to adjust the levels. With some other games it's either on or off and likely is not optimally used.
Shadow distance is what gives you those ridiculous drops, maxes out my CPU at least (2500k @ 4.5 + R9 290 @1100). I set shadow distance to medium, godrays to high, and everything else at ultra (TAA) and I am at solid 60 fps with almost no random drops now. Something is definitely awry with the shadow distance thing.
I mean, Bethesda + Fallout + Gameworks. It's not like anyone expected it to work perfectly out of the box, right?
got FO4 yesterday and I'll eventually figure out what setting is affecting my FPS
when looking at the Red Rocket building, my FPS goes from 60 to 45-48
I've only tried changing God Rays so far but going from Ultra to Low and FPS still ranges from 45-48
what's the next most demanding graphic setting? is it Shadow Distance?
playing with an i7 4770K @ 4.4 & R9 290 @ 1150 /1500 with 16GB RAM & SSD drive
What I want is for Gameworks to NOT be tacked onto a Game engine, and cause that Game to run at a lower performance level comparative to the average of games releasesd which is exactly what happens when Gameworks is implemented....
That is inherently the problem. Without the involvement of AMD or Nvidia we wouldn't see anything special in the PC versions of console games. We have two sides of the same coin if you ask me.
.....
It's sad that we have to get a vendor to make "extras" for our games when devs won't do it (or rather should I say publishers won't fund it).
Hopefully though the next generation of consoles and DX12 at least pushes graphics forward more than this generation has. This generation has been PATHETIC.
I agree, somewhat.
Consoles have always been geared towards more casual, plug-and-play users who just want to play their games. Most value 'good' visuals but do not require specific performance from their favorite titles. Consoles *did* present a pretty good value for the money.
But now in 2015? Consoles are more like PCs then they ever have been. Always connected to the internet and are used to do much more than gaming (Netflix and other video, general internet content, OS like interface, access to many system settings).
Recently read an article about Sony considering making 'more powerful' versions of the PS4. WHAT?!?
What then is the point of a console now? You have to pay to use the internet you are already paying for. You are limited to certain hardware subsets. What's next, the capability to use a keyboard and mouse with your XBOX TWO Extreme Edition with extra RAM and higher GPU clocks locked behind $50 yearly fees?
Surely the buck has to stop somewhere...
Besides, like I said, with the market so largely in favor of NVIDIA, what you want is already there since GW caters to 8/10 PC gamers.
I don't think so.
Gameworks is simply a way to shift PC gaming development costs off to someone else (Nvidia). At the end of the day, the cost is still happening to make the PC version better. It's just coming from Nvidia now. You still pay for it (that Nvidia premium). Publishers simply have found a cheaper route that benefits their bottom line. Gameworks. Instead of them having to pay for devs to improve the engine. They're taking the freebie from Nvidia to tack on a lighting feature at the end of the game or some other feature. I'm just not that impressed, and you can see it as this is the generation with the least graphical improvement in my opinion.
It's just not as well implemented as before since now it's being tacked on at the end of a game development. Before, we paid this cost and it was implemented at the game engine level. Now, we pay the cost (Nvidia premiums), and it's tacked on afterward, and the end result is not polished.
I believe if we didn't have GW, we'd just pay a higher cost at the game level in some way though. Someone is making their money. Personally though, I'd rather pay a higher cost at the game level than a higher cost at the GPU level, and enjoy a feature that is built into the game, rather than a feature that's tacked on at the end. This model works though since a lot of gamers simply don't care about graphical improvement but it sucks to see PC gamers needing even faster hardware, but games not getting graphically better....
Hopefully though the next generation of consoles and DX12 at least pushes graphics forward more than this generation has. This generation has been PATHETIC.
Hmm. I'll have to test it out on my 6700K OC + 290 OC when I get a chance. Though I suspect you are correct and it will likely be a game patch and/or driver update that will help with shadow distance related FPS drops.
I mean, Bethesda + Fallout + Gameworks. It's not like anyone expected it to work perfectly out of the box, right?
It is what you said Railven maybe I'm just being overly optimistic in thinking if GW and to a lesser extent GE (I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD use Async heavily in their games while Nvidia struggles there), that those bolted on features for PC would be better.
I see your point though. From my lurking on other forums though, people seem to be happy with graphics and aren't pushing for major improvements. They'd rather use their current hardware longer and play games.