It makes sense to use features available to the hardware being used in the not-like-for-like comparisons. Why pick a GTX card for comparison and not use it's features?
Value of NXGamer technical investigation videos *spawn
- Thread starter pjbliverpool
- Start date
It makes sense to use features available to the hardware being used in the not-like-for-like comparisons. Why pick a GTX card for comparison and not use it's features?
No, you should not stick to percentiles. Gaming has been around for half a century or more. If you take percentiles of course you will get the expected result. What percentage of gamers has access to it ? The percentage that buys games monthly and that matters. Which games have DLSS ? Most of the big games that are coming out. Ignoring it or being pedantic about it is neither in good faith at this point nor does it help anyone
What? theres 24m rtx gpus out there, without counting laptops. Rtx gpus launched 2018.
Who said limit yourself to the total userbase or library? You can select a meaningful representation, of active users and AAA titles or whatever. Whatever, people need to pick a meaningful target. Otherwise you just have this, people arguing over which numbers to compare, which aren't even expressed in logical ways. "We should use this metric because X, Y ,Z. You're right. Okay, so here's what A manages and here's what B manages on the same scale."
No we just get," 24 million this, you're wrong. No, 8% that, you're wrong. Na-ah, because 78% of your 8% of my 120 million trumps your 300,000 last month over $230. You so dumb!! Lolz. 330,000 last month, actually, while you only 5/16ths out of 22% annually for last quarter's 14 titles with an A in the tile."
Silent_Buddha
Legend
There's so many angles from which to approach this that it makes it hard to have a meaningful comparison.
For example, what if the argument was reworded as: How many games on PS5 feature reconstruction from 1080p to 4k that is pretty decent? And how many PC games can have decent reconstruction from 1080p to 4k (DLSS, FSR, or developer made custom reconsctruction)?
Of course, that opens a whole new can of worms.
Isn't it enough to say that in this one game on PS5, it has good enough reconstruction from 1080p to 4k that you might mistake it for native 4k. And then also mention that this isn't exclusive to this game on PS5 or even exclusive to PS5. That PC's can do the same thing with the same quality? And if an Xbox developer wanted to do it on Xbox that the Xbox consoles could do it as well.
Bleh. As you rightfully point out, there's no good way to debate these things when most of the arguments are filled with numberless hyperbole and no agreed upon constant from which to debate.
Regards,
SB
People are going to do what people are going to do; there's very little we can do to stop it. We can have two perspectives of the same thing, one looking at PS5 performance optimistically (ie NXGamer) and someone looking at PS5 performance pessimistically, ie 3090 performance trounces it. The reality is, this is just the way it will always be, and we shouldn't be spending too much time writing about slants and bias. Since the reality is everyone posting on this forum will have some form of unconscious bias even though they aren't actively trying to slant it. It's easy to just write something in a way that favours your perspective.
NXG does look at PS optimistically, which is fine.
My only preference is that he presents all the information to justify his analysis. ie: everyone knows that ultra settings are significant performance hogs over high/medium, which is traditionally where console settings sit at. COD Vanguard would be the first console title I would ever know to run all ultra settings for instance. So if you're going to do any sort of comparison, there has to be some sort of baseline and it's important for a reviewer to establish some sort of baseline when doing a comparison.
- Baseline on settings
- Baseline on resolution
- Baseline on framerate
- Baseline on price (which is essentially what he did.. unfairly without mentioning he was doing this)
tldr; I don't care about his bias. RE: what he should do; just do some baselining if you're going to do comparisons. And if you're going to attribute performance to something technical, just be sure to actually explain it instead of just passing it off as knowledge they have but do not care to explain. Whether they are wrong or right on the explanation is up to the viewer to determine, but it's better than not offering anything at all.
You mean like FSR? Which is also available in this game. Which NXGamer also didn't use.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Or, if we're aiming for zero tolerance on mistakes, let's apply that to the technical forums. Any post containing a mistake will earn the poster a months vacation? Sounds cool to me.
I mean these high standards of analysis should apply to everybody... right?
No. Most of us don't have the ability to misinform millions of people. NXGamer as an amatuer analyzer could be easily forgiven for mistakes as most amateurs don't have the resources or the connections to readily connect the dots.
But he is not an amatuer anymore. You would think that IGN, DF and other large professional content providers would have easy access to most developers. How in hell were they all going to E3 all those years and not building those type of relationships with big name pubs and devs. However, there must be some general understanding that developers don't like to engage video game "journalists" regarding specific technical questions.
Because I find it generally unacceptable when big content providers theorize about some technical aspect of a title and but never mention an attempt to communicate with the dev of the game to get feedback from the people who were intimately involved with its development.
To me, either there is some unsaid industry rule or professional video game journalists aren't the most inquisitive bunch when it comes to actual investigation or analysis of their field of business.
Last edited:
Cynicalking
Regular
I agree. If the poster keeps making the same mistakes, passing assumptions as facts, and not correcting himself even when repeatedly being called out, he should definitely stop posting for a while.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
You might want to look at NXGamer's view counts, he's not getting millions of views - many of his videos don't crack 2,000. He's said in relatively recent videos this is a hobby.
I don't see he has "easy" access to devs, nor does DF. This is apparent by their narrations which is speculative most of the time. If they had "easy" access to devs they could be a lot of more definitive about some things.
If people want the quality of content to improve, they should be willing to make an effort to ensure what they are posting is correct in the first place and take the hit when it isn't. When there is a consequence for getting things wrong, it promotes better fact-checking which can only improve dissemination of information and the overall quality of debate, whilst reducing noise and arguments.
Last edited by a moderator:
zero tolerance is bad. Obviously the discussion around zero tolerance is bad as per the sarcasm in your post.
I think it's been established that anyone can make mistakes, and in this case, I think there is enough support here to state that some mistakes have been made. Shit happens.
I don't care if he's biased either. I guess for me, I'm less interested in what he did that was wrong, but why he did it. For instance, I don't care that he made a 3090 run the gauntlet, max ultra with no help and compared it to a PS5 with less than ultra settings combined with TAAU from 1080p to bring it up to 4K. I only care for him to explain why he did. Whether he's right or wrong is up to viewer to debate, just explain to me why someone would configure the test in such a fashion. I just want to say that he does, very passingly. But effectively his review was: I chose the 3090 to be absolutely ultra settings with no help because I wanted to see what the best graphics this game could output, and see how the PS5 image quality stacks up to that. And at these settings this is how the PS5 performs and the 3090 performs.
The latter rubs people the wrong way, because it's no longer about image quality. Now it's about PS5 vs 3090. Not PS5 IQ vs Vanguards best possible IQ. And so by making a sweeping statement that in his earlier benchmark because PS5 IQ looks like ultra IQ, fairly close, and most unnoticeable to the human eye, moving the discussion into frame rate is basically where some viewers are jumping the boat because there is a hard implication that they run similar IQ with now similar frame rates. If I had spent $2600 on a GPU, maybe I'd jump the boat too, lol I dunno. But obviously, if you're going to make a sweeping statement about IQ being exactly the same, you may as well run the 3090 at 1080p with TAAU and ultra settings and just outright deny the 4K native mode to begin with.
Hopefully this sums up this thread, people need to accept NXG's slants here; they can't stop it nor will he stop it, and he will continue to do it. Let's just move on. No reason for people to be typing essays over this.
What is actually sad about this whole debate, is the spin off. It represents that we didn't learn anything technical about the game, about engines or features or the consoles from the video.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Ahem. How many words were in your post? ;-)
And in the absence of explicit explanation, people just guess based on their own biases/preconceptions. Let's fill in the blanks with guesswork that fits our mental model, and then argue the world is as we guess it is against those who filled in the blanks with different options. He's an imperfect amateur. He's a raving fanboy. He's a paid Sony shill. nVidia ran over his cat and he's out for revenge.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
Yeah it will likely arrive, going by the Geforce Now leak which at this point is basically like a press release.
We'll see then how much the engine improvements matter, they've continued to improve it post-release as well, it is not the exact same engine with just checkerboarding removed. I'd like to see it on the PC just for the potential frame buffer fixes + far better contrast alone.Flappy Pannus
Veteran
There's FSR as well, which is available on *all* PC's, which I mentioned specifically for that reason. That was also not covered.
There's probably more games with DLSS now than checkerboarding on the PS4 Pro during its lifetime. Literally 10 games just last month. Any game release that doesn't ship with DLSS now that isn't a tiny indie title is invariably questioned as to why. It's obviously long past being an esoteric feature and just expected with modern titles.
https://sirusgaming.com/10-new-dlss-games-for-october/
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
Eh, I would seriously question that. I don't think people upgrade their TV's that often.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
Yeah, this is the critique I try to focus on. It's perfectly valid to have a preference for a platform and express a subjective opinion on say, a reconstruction tech where you feel it provides 'good enough' results and in the aggregate is just a better optimized solution where the brute force approach provides diminishing returns. I mean every engine and graphical technique is trying to 'trick' the viewer to some degree in terms of presenting a realistic image with the least resources used possible, that's basically the hallmark of 'optimization' and it should be celebrated when a dev delivers it.
Like, I think Alex from DF does have a clear preference for the PC as a platform, this can come out when stating the visual difference some enhanced PC settings can bring to a title that I may think are more meagre in overall visual impact. That subjective opinion is fine though - it's when NxGamer authoritatively states, repeatedly, the 'technical' reasons for these differences when it's far more of a 'theory' - and ones that are often not based in anything that coherent. You want to give a guesstimate as to the reasons some platform may be behaving the way it is fine, but you gotta couch those opinions with the necessary humility.
I am not referring to NXGamer in particular especially with his own personal channel. However, I would still assert my point even if I changed the wording from millions to thousands.
You as DSoup on B3D could constantly declare that DLSS is a standard feature available on every gpu and game. And yet, you would probably have literally no ability to ingrain that belief in us (who are typical well informed enough to know the truth) and most general gamers (who don't visit B3D). However, if you were a content provider for IGN with its 16 million subscribers, constantly making that assertion might create a belief amongst less informed subscribers who might make buying decisions based on your false declarations.
And yes, I imagine DF or most big content providers to have easy access to developers. I don't think its hard for an email to sent to the marketing or public relation arm of a pub or developer and that email finding a much easier time making it to the relevant people especially given who its coming from. Doesn't mean DF or whoever is guaranteed a response but even the attempt at getting a response is part of due diligence.
Ultimately, the impact of your mistakes grows with the number of people who read, watch, listen and trust your content. The more people you can touch the higher the standard that should be applied.
That being said, perfection is never the standard. I am just saying the impact of a potential mistake should always be weighted against the effort made to avoid it.
Last edited:
Similar threads
