Nah man, there are way too many pot shots being taken in here. HUB serves a community of 100k gamers doing work benchmarking different combinations of hardware to help pc users save money when making their purchases. It’s annoying to read these conspiracy theories by people who don’t serve the community in any way shape or form. If you have criticism, try and make it constructive. If you feel that HUB is biased, go make your own YouTube channel and correct the perceived injustice you feel. It’s easy to hide behind the anonymity taking cheap shots. It’s not cool.
Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2022] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
Henry swagger
Newcomer
So you dn't want objective youtubers and want a unofficial amd marketing youtuber who tries to hide it ?
Unofficial AMD marketer? He's recommended people buy the Nvidia GPU in the vast majority of price points for the last several generations. Not being enthralled with the majority of current RT implementations and trade offs required doesn't make someone an "unofficial AMD marketer".
Actually, disregard my last post. I messed up. The 5700 XT according to Hardware Unboxed is 13% faster than the 2060 Super. The 2080 is about 22% faster than the 2060 Super. The 5700 XT would thus be closer in performance to the 2080 but really halfway between a 2060 Super and 2080.
In my view, Hardware Unboxed is just as useless as Linus Tech Tips for example. Both of them in a different way. There are many that are a better alternative.
If they want to continue to have 2014 and respectively last generation level of graphics they should clearly say so.
Last edited:
Pffft link or didnt happenSure there were also PR statements mentioning that UE5 was made possible by the power of the PS5. Just kindly ignore that in a video in China shortly after that, it was shown running on a developer's laptop.
There were even people on this forum that ran the first PC demo that was released on systems using a HDD. SSDs are recommended for Nanite at runtime but are not required as evidenced by many people who have run it off of a HDD in their system.
Regards,
SB
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
That was probably Brian Karis's talk at SIGGRAPH 2021. I don't know if it's generally available to watch. but his presentation (warning: long!) can be found here.
Sure there were also PR statements mentioning that UE5 was made possible by the power of the PS5. Just kindly ignore that in a video in China shortly after that, it was shown running on a developer's laptop.
Tim Sweeney was gushing about PS5 so you may be recalling that. That's borderline PR. Tim Sweeney has weirdly pro-Sony since at least the PS3-era.
I think it's pretty clear that Hardware Unboxed have a bias towards AMD. But I also don't think that's a bad thing. Everyone everywhere has bias towards/against things. The question is if they present their information objectively and truthfully, regardless of their bias.. and in the case of Hardware Unboxed, I believe they do. They may show certain benchmarks which favor AMD at times, or focus on price/performance when it suits AMD to make them look good/better... but as long as the information they present is accurate and truthful, I honestly don't see the problem.. Nobody should use only ONE source for their information... I believe a person should use multiple sources which they trust, and take them all into consideration.. to get the most accurate reflection of a products quality. As long as the testing and methodology is sound... then I don't see the problem. If X, Y, and Z games all perform better on AMD and they chose to show those games in their review... then what that means to me is that AMD is better in those games. And if they are better in those games, and those games specifically are important to me... then I take that into consideration. If they aren't.. I look at other reviews which DO cover the games I'm interested in knowing the performance of.
HUB isn't the only place out there... there are plenty which favor Nvidia and show benchmarks where AMD will do less favorably, as well. It's good to have opinions on both sides!
I think Steve and Tim are good at what they do. They are clearly objective, and have no problems saying when one is better or the other. They're not overwhelmingly biased.. they just have a slight obvious preference. Which to me is normal. I like the presentation of their information, the slides look great, and are easily readable. The production quality of their videos is high. They seem like good genuine people. Admittedly in the past they have annoyed me with some of their takes on certain things, but I get over stuff like that quickly.
That's my take anyway.
HUB isn't the only place out there... there are plenty which favor Nvidia and show benchmarks where AMD will do less favorably, as well. It's good to have opinions on both sides!
I think Steve and Tim are good at what they do. They are clearly objective, and have no problems saying when one is better or the other. They're not overwhelmingly biased.. they just have a slight obvious preference. Which to me is normal. I like the presentation of their information, the slides look great, and are easily readable. The production quality of their videos is high. They seem like good genuine people. Admittedly in the past they have annoyed me with some of their takes on certain things, but I get over stuff like that quickly.
That's my take anyway.
I can see a definite bias in Hardware Unboxed reviews and will be the factor people use to either respect or disrespect the content of their reviews.
The problem is some individuals want to shut down anyone who finds issues and biases in HUB reviews, which is not going to happen.
Different people have different viewpoints. If you can't take criticism from an opposing view without going ballistic then you should not be posting in the first place.
The problem is some individuals want to shut down anyone who finds issues and biases in HUB reviews, which is not going to happen.
Different people have different viewpoints. If you can't take criticism from an opposing view without going ballistic then you should not be posting in the first place.
Last edited:
Always wondered why UT3 launched on PS3 half a year before the 360 back then. Guess i got the answer today.
Tim Sweeney has been a vocal critic of Windows since... Well I think he might have liked XP, and I think he liked 64bit XP even more. But after that, he's only complained about it. So perhaps there is some built in bias against Microsoft. It was pretty funny reading all the complaints he had about Windows' built in app store, and even funnier when Epic built a store but couldn't figure out how to make a shopping cart for 3 years, though.
But back then, Sony was positioning PS3 as this open platform amongst closed computing devices. You could run Linux, it had a web browser, it only does everything. And UT3 launched on PS3 with mod support not from any regulated source. You could load mods from a USB drive and play them. It also supported KB and mouse input. I don't know if Epic had some 6 month agreement to keep UT3 console exclusive but I can see why PS3 may have been the first platform it was released on based on the bias Tim Sweeney had against some of Microsoft's policies. Or, maybe it's just that Gears of War was already secured as an Xbox exclusive and Sony wanted an Unreal Engine showcase of their own.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
You can dislike specific products without being biassed against CompanyX. I am not a fan of recent Windows at all, it's a platform I've been using since Windows 98 and I've used every version except Windows 8, and macOS is a better fit for how I work. Untroversionally I think the Microsoft Store and Microsoft Teams are absolutely trash; slow, clunk with a poor UI. I am a fan of Office and happily pay the Office 365 subscription to use it. My Series X is a fantastic console apart from the flakey auto-update and ad-ridden hellscape interface.
Epic compete with Microsoft in a number of markets, including storefronts so don't expect a balance view in that sphere, or anything else when a spokesman is talking about a competing product or service. For keyboard and mouse on 360, did 360 even support KB&M in games? I didn't know Xbox 360 officially supported keyboard and mouse, so that may not be fair evidence of bias.
But you can also be biased against a company having had negative experiences with them. This is important to recognise when trying to parse the truth from statements - is a commentary unbiased, or biased? Are spokesperson's remarks regarding Console Q correct and factual, or genuinely-intentioned though inaccurate or misguided, or prejudiced for/against based on emotions? On the one hand Sweeney (and other execs) is a corporate executive wanting to do business with big companies. OTOH, he's a human being and somewhere on the specturm of influence from human foibles, including potential emotional prejudice.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Of course, people develop biases - conscious and unconscious - all of the time. But developing a bias against company with as broad a portfolio as Microsoft, over a few products you do not care for would require almost a complete lack of objectivity. I think it would be difficult from someone like Tim Sweeney to cultivate a company like Epic without being remaining objective. For an example of a person lacking any objectively, look no further than Twitter.
Being able to separate personal feelings from those of the business is what matters and as far as I can see, Epic has supported all platforms equally badly.
It is interesting how we target Tim Sweeny for his bias, when just as @DSoup said, the guy had an opinion but his business didn't reflect any bias. He supported all consoles equally and Epic was mostly associated with XBOX and less with Playstation during the PS360 thanks to the amazing work Epic has done with Gears of War. It was a generational center piece with its incredible visuals and robust gameplay.
That was a system seller that made the 360 show incredible teeth against competition. The sequels were even used to demonstrate Unreal's capabilities even after MS acquired ownership of the IP.
That was a system seller that made the 360 show incredible teeth against competition. The sequels were even used to demonstrate Unreal's capabilities even after MS acquired ownership of the IP.
As an avid UT gamer back then 3 was generally not well recieved, it being ’consolised’ topped with gears of war art style.
I dont think i fully shared that idea, while its departure from ut2004 i still think to this day, with mods to restore to true UT, it was quite decent. Visually not that bad either maxed with some tweaks and mods.
UT4 is nice just too bad development is mostly halted.
I dont think i fully shared that idea, while its departure from ut2004 i still think to this day, with mods to restore to true UT, it was quite decent. Visually not that bad either maxed with some tweaks and mods.
UT4 is nice just too bad development is mostly halted.
davis.anthony
Veteran
What has this thread turned in to!
He can have perfectly fine working relationships with MS while style gushing over the competition. A preference for PS as described (releasing on PS3 earlier for no particular reason) wouldn't negatively impact operations on MS. So long as he's not gimping MS version of UE etc., he's free to run the business successfully yet make outlandish claims about PS hardware as per personal preference.
Edit : You're literally the one who called out Sweeney's bias!
The current tangent is still relating to the topic tying back to comments about the performance of the SSDs. The take-away I think is no execs word should be taken at face value, though there's presently discussion seemingly suggesting otherwise. ??? I'm a bit confused over the point about professional business practices along public comments.
Is there not consensus that comments still need to be scrutinised and biases or influences factored in their appraisal, no matter who from? We can only go by fact-based comments backed up by facts.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
That's how I see it. Tim Sweeney was pretty gushy over PS3, whilst also publicly critical of the complexity of develop for it, which demonstrates objectivity. He's been gushy over PS5's I/O as well. At the time Sweeney was gushing over PS3, Epic was firmly embedded into Microsoft developing Gears of War and building elements of their Unreal around that new generation of GPU technology. Most UE games ran way better on 360 than PS3.
I said he was gushy, not biassed. I just want to be clear about what I mean by bias - grabs dictionary - which is an unfair prejudice or inclination. You can favour something without being biassed against alternatives I think the word 'bias' is being used when perhaps 'preference' is more appropriate.
Similar threads
- Locked