This is harmful for players!
This is harmful for players!
I explored various Nvidia and AMD technologies and discovered this... Yes, I own an Nvidia card now and I’m really upset about it. You might think the fix would be switching to AMD, but that’s not sufficient! If market share shifts, I bet AMD would have followed suit too. What else can be done? This issue also stems from the fact that game developers rely on GameWorks, which reduces frame rates instead of improving image quality—something you noticed in Crysis 2 and Witcher 3. At the same time, performance suffers for many gamers who don’t have the newest Maxwell cards, including those who own AMD GPUs. And for those with Maxwell, brace yourselves: once Pascal arrives, your GPU will be a disappointment.
Several thousand games are being released without stopping Nvidia. The focus is on profit, not people's opinions. You can disable GamesNotWork if you wish. I turned it off for Witcher 3 and it worked. It hurts the community, but ultimately they're driven by money. Sadly accurate.
I understand and there’s no escape. They’re almost a monopoly. And to let you know, we can’t be angry at Nvidia; maybe we should hold the developers accountable or just… I don’t know, who’s responsible for all this mess? But if this keeps going, there could be a major disaster in the gaming industry eventually, as I see it.
Most titles include a "nvidia gameworks" option allowing adjustments. Tomb Raider used "tress fx" but faced performance issues on NVIDIA hardware. Companies tend to prioritize this, creating specialized tech for their own chips and potentially compensating NVIDIA. In reality, gameworks isn't the main concern—AMD could improve compatibility, and many games still run smoothly on AMD platforms.
I don't share your view—Nvidia created impressive tech that met expectations for the Witcher 3. It works best on powerful GPUs, though some older systems struggle. Progress is inevitable; no one should be blamed. Think about Microsoft Windows—why would they back XP or 7 for decades when many still use them? Upgrading is unavoidable. Regarding games, it seems developers sometimes fail to optimize their titles for new hardware. Batman Arkham Knight was a major performance hit, proving that dedication and effort can lead to great visuals while others fall short.
Money plays a role, but the intense pressure on developers to ensure compatibility across countless hardware setups might be influenced by more than just finances. Consider this: when building a PC game, you need it to perform well, look great, and work seamlessly on virtually any system. That’s a huge challenge for anyone working in the field. If a manufacturer like Nvidia offers support that makes implementation easier with little effort from your side, it sounds like a strong opportunity. Others have seen AMD use similar approaches with tools like TressFX, though they lack the capacity to fully commit developers to such projects. I think this explains why AMD has supported open-source options like Freesync and Vulcan—they promote broader accessibility. Still, it’s worth imagining how different things might be if those companies had more resources. The point isn’t to label it right or wrong, but to evaluate all perspectives and see what steps are needed moving forward. A true monopoly isn’t ideal, as it harms everyone in the long run.
In Witcher 3, a 960 often delivers smoother performance than a 780 due to Maxwell card optimizations and tessellation improvements (possibly around three times faster than Kepler). Disabling hairworks will let the 780 run better since it relies on those same optimizations. Regarding GameWorks settings, there is an option in the menus to disable them if needed, and developers don’t mandate their use. People have noted that without the newest hardware, you won’t always access the latest in-game features.