At least three studios allegedly removed DLSS support before launch due to AMD sponsorships

[Cal Jeffrey]

TL;DR: Over the weekend, John Linneman from Digital Foundry stirred up some ongoing controversy regarding AMD blocking developers from including Nvidia's DLSS tech with exclusivity deals. The tweets got people on both sides of the argument riled up, and some subsequent deletions and explanations were required to clear the air.

Before sorting out what Linneman said and what he meant, it might help to recap the drama.

In June, Wccftech pointed out that many AMD-sponsored games have FSR upscaling but lack Nvidia's version of the tech, DLSS, which led to speculation that AMD was preventing developers from implementing its competitor's technology. When asked about the trend, AMD was vague and non-commital, pointing out that plenty of past releases have DLSS but not FSR.

Episode #118 might be the one Linneman referred to, but no mention of studios dropping DLSS appears in the most relevant section. Could it have been a different show? Linneman has no idea.

Eventually, speculation rose about whether or not Starfield would have DLSS, and most indicators pointed to no, it wouldn't. So last month, AMD directly addressed the issue, saying it did not block Bethesda from implementing DLSS in its sponsorship contract.

"If they want to do DLSS, they have AMD's full support," said AMD Chief Architect of Gaming Solutions Frank Azor, adding that nothing is blocking Bethesda from using it. Some took Azor's statement as an opaque way of saying, "We won't stop Bethesda from pulling out of our partnership."

Thanks to early reviews and confirmation from pre-order players who were allowed early access, we know that Starfield does not have native DLSS support. Although worry not, there's already an app for that. However, it still does not answer whether AMD's sponsorships involve exclusivity clauses or other types of discouragement from using DLSS.

Just to re-iterate - if you see this post, it is NOT about Starfield at all. It is about other, unrelated games - we reported on this weeks ago. Some reddit people took this to mean Starfield but it is absolutely NOT related to Starfield. https://t.co/Zcdo4Vl72k

– John Linneman (@dark1x) September 3, 2023

Over the weekend, John Linneman seemed to confirm that Team Red was forcing studios to forego DLSS implementation. He claimed to have spoken with three developers who had already coded DLSS support into their games but were told to remove it because it would damage their AMD sponsorships.

Although he never mentioned Starfield, many people thought Bethesda was one of the three studios. Linneman says his comment was regarding a weeks-old episode of DF Direct, in which they discussed the controversy. However, going through several recent shows, we could not find any mention of these claims. However, Linneman was vague in his reference to the show in question, even when directly asked for the episode, so we may have just been looking in the wrong place.

The one where we were talking about Starfield some weeks ago. I can't recall exactly.

– John Linneman (@dark1x) September 3, 2023

Regardless, the misunderstanding sent an uproar through the community. Linneman deleted his original tweet and reposted a clarified version, repeatedly stressing that he was not referring to Starfield. There is some speculation that Bethesda or AMD asked him to remove the post, but he didn't indicate as much, and we could find no evidence that was the case. Linneman claims he removed it because people immediately made the link to Starfield and misconstrued the comments.

So what do we know?

Well, we know that Bethesda did leave DLSS support out of Starfield. That is not smoking gun proof that AMD forbids developers from implementing it, but it sure is terrible optics on an issue that the company has failed to deal with decisively and transparently. Linneman's claims would also support the idea of an AMD conspiracy to stifle Nvidia tech using sponsorship deals. However, without any way to fact-check his tweet other than a vaguely referenced DF Direct podcast, you'll want to keep your salt shaker handy.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/100038-least-three-studios-allegedly-removed-dlss-support-before.html

 

[yRaz]

allegedly

I must have been redirected to Buzzfeed, I thought this was a news website

DLSS is better than FSR in every way aside from the one that matters and that is universal platform support. Xbox and Playstation both use AMD hardware, DLSS will only reach the few PC gamers that are willing to shell out stupid amounts of money for hardware.

More games use AMD hardware and it makes sense to develop for it. It's the same reason that "Gsync" doesn't exist anymore. it "exists" but is now essentially nVidia certified FreeSync.

 

[Dimitriid]

This is still not just a nothing burger but I am particularly ticked off Starfield is the example they keep bringing up: That's definitively the best example of Machine Learning upscaling (Yes, I am also intentionally calling it ML and not AI because it's not really AI) doing actually more harm that good: Starfield needed to be delayed at least a couple more months for optimization as it is basically a terrible looking game for the performance it requires: texture work in some places is passable and in some others is a complete joke: on the level of Fallout 4 a full 8 years ago yet it requires like 10x the GPU power to run for no good reason.

This game would have been basically another Cyberpunk PR disaster for Bethesda and Microsoft if it wasn't for FSR 2 and that's the reason why they enable it by default on all presents no matter what GPU card you throw at.

Yet nobody is going to be outraged and a good part of it is because it has FSR 2 and can be easily modded to have DLSS as well.

 

[yRaz]

This is still not just a nothing burger but I am particularly ticked off Starfield is the example they keep bringing up: That's definitively the best example of Machine Learning upscaling (Yes, I am also intentionally calling it ML and not AI because it's not really AI) doing actually more harm that good: Starfield needed to be delayed at least a couple more months for optimization as it is basically a terrible looking game for the performance it requires: texture work in some places is passable and in some others is a complete joke: on the level of Fallout 4 a full 8 years ago yet it requires like 10x the GPU power to run for no good reason.

This game would have been basically another Cyberpunk PR disaster for Bethesda and Microsoft if it wasn't for FSR 2 and that's the reason why they enable it by default on all presents no matter what GPU card you throw at.

Yet nobody is going to be outraged and a good part of it is because it has FSR 2 and can be easily modded to have DLSS as well.

I think FSR is more about not having to develop DLSS for a game for 20, 30 and 40 series graphics cards. Developers can just add FSR and include all PC hardware AND consoles.

nVidia fragmenting their own "standards" has always been an issue. It didn't take long for PhysX to drop out of the spot like. Gsync is now just freesync with an nVidia badge on it. DLSS is a great tech, I don't think anyone has said that it is the inferior up-scaling tech. The thing is, no one can use. Developers do have a budget. The fragmentation of DLSS passes the cost onto developers.

Something that's important to keep in mind when it comes to up-scaling, the people who need it the most aren't the ones who are paying $2000 for graphics cards. This is frankly why I think FSR is winning and will be the winner in the long term. I think DLSS will have a place in video rendering where fidelity is more important than cost. I don't think DLSS will have a place in gaming much longer.

 

[nnguy2]

Wccftech, the national enquirer of tech website.

 

[amghwk]

I am no fanboy of either the red or green team ( I now have both my favorite Sapphire 5700XT and Palit 4090) and usually get what is the best for my value, (I admit 4090 is poor value but it was sold almost near the MSRP here and I wanted to play my favorite older games at 4K with minimum 60fps without any hiccups whatsoever), but I feel the latest move by AMD to block the DLSS in AMD sponsored titles is in poor sportmanship spirit. And I won't hesitate and won't deny than Nvidia may and had already done the same in the past.

 

[brucek]

I get the sensitivity on this topic because for me it is the kind of emotional content that can lead to an ongoing grudge even if there wasn't any actual harm done.

If in fact this is true I can see where AMD would want to try hard to not let it surface. I understand the various justifications (Nvidia did similar too, dlss doesn't actually matter, etc.) presented here but at the end of the day I'm currently an Nvidia user and yes I will hold a grudge against AMD if I believe they went out of their way to pay a developer to yank an already developed feature I should otherwise have been able to enjoy. That despite in almost any other way they ought to be able to position themselves as "the good guy" in the field.

I'm still mad at Epic Games Store for its exclusivity deals causing titles I wanted to have on Steam, instead only be available on their less capable, less convenient (for me) platform. Yes it's petty, but yes it also matters - as a result I will go out of my way including spending somewhat more to not give them my business and that may end up being a lifelong pattern established over this grudge.

Bottom line I think this is a petty policy that will not serve AMD well in the long run.

 

[hahahanoobs]

I'm just wondering why anyone would think it would make sense for the guy in the number two spot to be the one calling any shots.

 

[wiak]

Always double standards, nobody gave a fck when there is no FSR support in a game, but now everyone losses their mind because their precises dlss is not in a game, its ridiculous

I miss the old days when developers actually cared and did optimizations to their games, now they just use upscaling crap

why cant they just make a fcking standard?! there is 3 different vendors, how hard can it be?!
oh wait, USB and HDMI are now jokes of epic proportions, HDMI 2.1 can be anything now apparently, and USB is kinda epicly dumb now as every single motherboard vendor you look at list usb 3.1/3.2 gen1/gen2 blablabla

I miss the days when HDMI 2.0 gave you 4k60, and USB 3.0 gave you 5Gbps

 

[ScottSoapbox]

I'm just wondering why anyone would think it would make sense for the guy in the number two spot to be the one calling any shots.

Because the second biggest market share company’s money spends just as well as the first.

 

[b3rdm4n]

Something is fishy at AMD. Either they are in some way, shape or form, blocking, disallowing, disincentivising or restricting competitor technology, or for a multimillion dollar company have an utterly incompetent marketing and PR team... or both I suppose. As someone with multiple rigs including AMD video cards, I am disgusted on this move because I like using XeSS when it's supported too, and at a fundamental level, as a PC gamer, I want to have the choice to use the best tech my current card supports. Sort your s**t out AMD, make your features the best, because despite it being repeated ad-nauseum, FSR's wide support isn't bloody well good enough, and neither is the excuse that the effort isn't worth it for these massive AAA releases. That's Olympic grade mental gymnastics.

 

[Kam7r]

When AMD use Nvidia's tactics it's a scandal... but when Nvidia do it and even worse... nobody give a fck... Double standard ...

 

[Scalios]

Check out Moore's Law Is Dead video from 02.09.
Nothing to do with AMD in the case of Starfield. Nvidia just focuses more and more on AI and neglects gaming.

 

[DSirius]

I must have been redirected to Buzzfeed, I thought this was a news website

DLSS is better than FSR in every way aside from the one that matters and that is universal platform support. Xbox and Playstation both use AMD hardware, DLSS will only reach the few PC gamers that are willing to shell out stupid amounts of money for hardware.

More games use AMD hardware and it makes sense to develop for it. It's the same reason that "Gsync" doesn't exist anymore. it "exists" but is now essentially nVidia certified FreeSync.

Minor observation about DLSS - can be better than FSR sometimes, and only slightly, other times FSR can be slightly better than DLSS.

 

[dangh]

If I were a person to make a decision and having limited resources, I would always go with a single solution working on largest number of devices. Then, with resources releases I could assign a project to implement more specific solutions. That is not a developers decision, but a product owner and director.

 

[scavengerspc]

I bet it wouldn't happen at all if DLSS support was added to AMD cards.
But yeah, good luck with that. Nvidia won't even allow new DLSS tech on their older cards that support it.
FSR2 is quite good already, and it looks like FSR3 will be a big improvement.
It would be fine with me if no AMD sponsored game added DLSS ever again.

 

[Burty117]

I love how everyone in this comment section try to make it sound like it would take serious resources to implement.

Yet a single person can create a mod that does it in a couple days...

I think we all forget, the information that DLSS needs from the game engine is the same as FSR and XeSS, implementing one solution, means you've done 99% of the work for the others...

 

[bviktor]

We need a standard that works on both cards. Everyone would benefit (AMD, developers, owners), except NV. It's a sad story, it's CUDA all over.

 

[Athlonite]

We need a standard that works on both cards. Everyone would benefit (AMD, developers, owners), except NV. It's a sad story, it's CUDA all over.

There is a standard that works on all GPU's regardless of manufacturer and it's called FSR

 

[neeyik]

There is a standard that works on all GPU's regardless of manufacturer and it's called FSR

There are two more standards that work on all GPUs that support the required shader model — Nvidia’s NIS and Intel’s XeSS (HLSL version). While FSR is arguably the better of the three, it’s still not ideal that there are three standards.

 

[jbgtly]

Good, Its what they should do. Not only should they block dlss, they should be proud of it. They should state it outright.
Nvidia does this BS all the time. There are far more games that have dlss and don't have fsr.

Nvidia fanboys are just mad that Starfield is the best looking game out right now, and AMD Dominates Nvidia on it.

 

[b3rdm4n]

When AMD use Nvidia's tactics it's a scandal... but when Nvidia do it and even worse... nobody give a fck... Double standard ...

I suppose if you totally ignore the constant bringing up of every bad thing Nvidia has ever done, that takes place here and all over other forums and social media. Double standard lol, best joke I've heard all day. Virtually all discussions about either company is guaranteed to have at least one person bring up Nvidia's past transgressions. Nvidia never gets a pass, and rightly so, they've done some properly shady stuff, so if what they've done in the past that hurt gamers makes you mad, so should this, that's the double standard I'm seeing. Nobody should get a pass, call out any and all terrible behaviours when they're seen.

 

[Kam7r]

I suppose if you totally ignore the constant bringing up of every bad thing Nvidia has ever done, that takes place here and all over other forums and social media. Double standard lol, best joke I've heard all day. Virtually all discussions about either company is guaranteed to have at least one person bring up Nvidia's past transgressions. Nvidia never gets a pass, and rightly so, they've done some properly shady stuff, so if what they've done in the past that hurt gamers makes you mad, so should this, that's the double standard I'm seeing. Nobody should get a pass, call out any and all terrible behaviours when they're seen.

I never said it was ok for AMD to do the same sh!t NV did... I'm just asking where were all those outraged ppl when NV did even worse ...

 

[Freedom Now]

I must have been redirected to Buzzfeed, I thought this was a news website

DLSS is better than FSR in every way aside from the one that matters and that is universal platform support. Xbox and Playstation both use AMD hardware, DLSS will only reach the few PC gamers that are willing to shell out stupid amounts of money for hardware.

More games use AMD hardware and it makes sense to develop for it. It's the same reason that "Gsync" doesn't exist anymore. it "exists" but is now essentially nVidia certified FreeSync.

Most people don't understand is that the inputs to DLSS are exactly the same as the inputs to FSR. Once you do it for one its as simple as plugging it into the other. This is not about resources or time for engineering. Perhaps it would be worth investigating what does it mean to be a "sponsored" title. My understanding from my game industry contacts is that Nvidia offers free HW and engineering resources where as AMD offers free HW, engineering resources, and money. I don't know this for a fact but I would think some investigative journalism would be helpful for this. "Sponsored" titles are not good for the consumers. They put barriers between each of the HW vendors. Game's should stay neutral and try to make the game the best it can be for as many people as possible. Nvidia owns 80% of the PC gaming market and I understand that AMD wants to try to compete but do it by making a better card or better software.

 

[yRaz]

Most people don't understand is that the inputs to DLSS are exactly the same as the inputs to FSR. Once you do it for one its as simple as plugging it into the other. This is not about resources or time for engineering. Perhaps it would be worth investigating what does it mean to be a "sponsored" title. My understanding from my game industry contacts is that Nvidia offers free HW and engineering resources where as AMD offers free HW, engineering resources, and money. I don't know this for a fact but I would think some investigative journalism would be helpful for this. "Sponsored" titles are not good for the consumers. They put barriers between each of the HW vendors. Game's should stay neutral and try to make the game the best it can be for as many people as possible. Nvidia owns 80% of the PC gaming market and I understand that AMD wants to try to compete but do it by making a better card or better software.

That is a gross over simplification. It is not as difficult as my post implied, but considering that there are 3 versions of DLSS that work with 3 different generations of cards(and not AMD), why wouldn't you just add FSR to cover everything and call it a day?