"PCR: AMD slams tragic Gameworks" closed why?
- Thread starter Grall
- Start date
- Status
Good question. Was just about to post a thread here asking the same thing.
On the surface it seems a "mod" wanted to have the last (subjective) word on the issue and closed the thread before anyone could respond. The issue is current and posts were on topic for the most part.
I don't know if Roderic was the one that closed the thread but at first glance it seems very petty and childish. Of course an explanation for the closure would avoid such unnecessary assumptions
On the surface it seems a "mod" wanted to have the last (subjective) word on the issue and closed the thread before anyone could respond. The issue is current and posts were on topic for the most part.
I don't know if Roderic was the one that closed the thread but at first glance it seems very petty and childish. Of course an explanation for the closure would avoid such unnecessary assumptions
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
The subject has been approached several times in several other threads. Just because there's yet another interview of Huddy saying the exact same thing, doesn't make it a new subject.
To be honest, it seemed like a thread started/developed with the purpose of bashing AMD/Huddy about their outspoken opinion over Gameworks.
It was rather flamebaity and I'm glad it got closed.
To be honest, it seemed like a thread started/developed with the purpose of bashing AMD/Huddy about their outspoken opinion over Gameworks.
It was rather flamebaity and I'm glad it got closed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah. Nothing wrong with the discussion as such (IMHO), but that interview by itself wasn't particularly thread-worthy[*].
We already had a perfectly good thread: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/nvidia-game-works-good-or-bad.55289/
Just merge it into that (if some mod cares) or leave it closed.
[*] Besides, the link in the OP was partially just parroting stuff from another site that was already posted as a separate thread...
We already had a perfectly good thread: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/nvidia-game-works-good-or-bad.55289/
Just merge it into that (if some mod cares) or leave it closed.
[*] Besides, the link in the OP was partially just parroting stuff from another site that was already posted as a separate thread...
As someone who was in the middle of making a post I too demand answers!
In all seriousness, after thinking more about it I actually agree with the thread closure. What is there to be said that hasn't been said? But more importantly if there are things left to be said, why can't they be done in one of the already existing Gameworks threads? I'll take the heat for being a bit lazy and not closing the thread immediately.
At some point though I think we'll have to cap the discussion. It feels like we're just spinning wheels. Gameworks provides short-term advantages mostly to Nvidia customers (better/faster graphics) and provides long-term disadvantages to all customers (reduces options). Now whether these short-term advantages outweigh the long-term disadvantages (or if there are alternative methods to achieving the short-term advantages) is up for discussion. But the problem I'm seeing is fans (on both sides) can't seem to acknowledge either the basic advantages or disadvantages. I believe someone even suggested proprietary features don't hurt consumers! If the argument is "there's nothing wrong with Gameworks" vs "capitalism is evil", I really don't see the value in continuing the "debate".
In all seriousness, after thinking more about it I actually agree with the thread closure. What is there to be said that hasn't been said? But more importantly if there are things left to be said, why can't they be done in one of the already existing Gameworks threads? I'll take the heat for being a bit lazy and not closing the thread immediately.
At some point though I think we'll have to cap the discussion. It feels like we're just spinning wheels. Gameworks provides short-term advantages mostly to Nvidia customers (better/faster graphics) and provides long-term disadvantages to all customers (reduces options). Now whether these short-term advantages outweigh the long-term disadvantages (or if there are alternative methods to achieving the short-term advantages) is up for discussion. But the problem I'm seeing is fans (on both sides) can't seem to acknowledge either the basic advantages or disadvantages. I believe someone even suggested proprietary features don't hurt consumers! If the argument is "there's nothing wrong with Gameworks" vs "capitalism is evil", I really don't see the value in continuing the "debate".
Fair enough. It could've really just been added to an existing thread. The nature of the closing though reeks of a kid taking his ball and going home cause he doesn't want to play any more. Mods probably shouldn't moderate topics that they feel strongly about so that they can retain some semblance of objectivity.
Well you're paraphrasing somewhat. What I actually said was nobody has formed a coherent argument as to why/how it hurts consumers. I think that's worth discussion. But I'll leave that decision to those who apparently know better.
If these proprietary features and performance gains grow big enough, you are basically vendor locking the best version of the game. If both AMD and NVIDIA do this, you would need to buy two different GPUs to enjoy the best version of each game. This is not good for consumers.
Anyone up for a thread Fusion Dance?
It would be nice to continue this discussion in the main thread but...
The notion that differentiation is bad stems from a desire for everyone to have an "equal" experience even if that means an "equally bad" experience. I fundamentally disagree.
I would gladly trade the status quo for greater investment in quality games and faster adoption of advanced features. As a consumer all I care about is the quality of my experience. Playing to the lowest common denominator doesn't benefit me at all.
There's another solution to this of course. If developers and publishers delivered optimal PC experiences to begin with there would be no opportunity for IHV intervention.
Yes, but WHAT exactly is it you're agreeing with?
Many replies to this thread now - and even from you, a mod - and still no genuine justification for closing the thread.
We've had overlapping, or even duplicate threads before and it has worked out fine. It's not always a good thing necroing an old discussion that may have several, sometimes a dozen pages of old posts hanging off of it, months out of date or possibly even longer. Also people who were participating and contributing to the now closed thread may not find their way over to the recently necroed thread, in which case everyone suffers.
Closing a thread should always be accompanied by the mod in question giving an explanation why it is done! Otherwise it risks looking like abuse of mod powers, especially if the mod has posted in the thread, championing one view over another. Hell, it might still be abuse of mod powers, but an explanation is still much better than no explanation.
Yes the manner in which the thread was closed was extremely poor.
I also don't quite get the concern about discussing something that has been discussed before. Is B3D running out of storage space for new posts?
If a topic is current and relevant to this forum and the discussion is civil there should be no reason to close a thread. If a mod is sick of seeing the same points being made over and over then simply stay out of the thread.
I also don't quite get the concern about discussing something that has been discussed before. Is B3D running out of storage space for new posts?
If a topic is current and relevant to this forum and the discussion is civil there should be no reason to close a thread. If a mod is sick of seeing the same points being made over and over then simply stay out of the thread.
Infinisearch
Veteran
Wow that picture is so F'd up I don't know what to say.
I'm going to Hell, and it'll be a laugh a minute ride.
edit - Did you make it yourself?
I've seen it various places over the years. It's one of my all time favorite things on the internet.
Watch Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood.
I knew it bloody communists
It's not policy to always leave a note for every moderator action. That's why this forum exists, so you can ask questions about anything you're not sure about.
What is policy is to take a dim view of calls of bias (doesn't matter if they're aimed at a moderator or not), even in meta threads like this. I've lost count of the number of times I've had to point out that if you have something to say about that, there are other mechanisms available (emailing or PMing me being the best) to discuss issues you have with other posters and how they post. Either combat what you perceive with reasoned argument or let me know, but crying wolf about it in a thread isn't something that we do around here (and are encoded specifically in the rules, a link to which is at the bottom of every thread).
What is policy is to take a dim view of calls of bias (doesn't matter if they're aimed at a moderator or not), even in meta threads like this. I've lost count of the number of times I've had to point out that if you have something to say about that, there are other mechanisms available (emailing or PMing me being the best) to discuss issues you have with other posters and how they post. Either combat what you perceive with reasoned argument or let me know, but crying wolf about it in a thread isn't something that we do around here (and are encoded specifically in the rules, a link to which is at the bottom of every thread).
- Status
Similar threads
