Microsoft’s push for a unified cross-platform gaming experience backfires

Over the past few years, Microsoft has made a few attempts to build bridges to the PC gaming community. More often than not, though, those efforts have ended with unhappy customers and the perception that Redmond is out of touch with PC gamers. For some time now, it's felt like Microsoft and the PC gaming community have reached an uneasy peace. Over the past week, though, it feels like we've gone from zero to "WTF?" again at a rapid pace.

This most recent spat started with the release of some weird-looking benchmark results for the latest beta of Ashes of the Singularity from the folks at Guru3D. Ryan Shrout at PC Perspective attempted to get to the bottom of this issue, and he discovered some troubling behaviors that might become par for the course for DirectX 12 games in general and Universal Windows Platform games in particular.

According to Shrout, vsync remains turned on for DirectX 12 games running on AMD hardware, even if it's turned off in a game's settings. He discovered that turning off vsync in Ashes doesn't actually do what one might expect. Instead, the game engine will render as fast as it's able, but any frames that fall outside the vsync interval will simply be dropped from the pipeline. Shrout warns this behavior can still lead to judder during gameplay, even if it does eliminate tearing.

Shrout says that's all that's thanks to games and drivers taking advantage of Windows Display Driver Model (or WDDM) 2.0. In conjunction with DirectX 12, this new model apparently requires games to use a new compositing method that's similar to borderless windowed mode in today's applications. Using this compositing path lets games run without tearing, but it apparently makes it harder for games to render with the uncapped frame rates that PC gamers have come to know and enjoy.

The furor only intensified when it came to light that Quantum Break, an upcoming DirectX 12 game from Max Payne developer Remedy Entertainment, would only be available on Windows 10 through the Microsoft Store. It appears that Store apps—specifically, UWP games—come with the same kinds of restrictions Shrout discovered when testing Ashes.

According to Mark Walton at Ars Technica, the Windows Store version of Rise of the Tomb Raider won't let users disable vsync, for example, and it has problems running with CrossFire and SLI multi-GPU configs. The Store version of RoTR also doesn't appear to expose an executable file to apps that need one to work, like Steam's Big Picture mode, graphics card control panels, and game overlays like Fraps.

Since other programs can't hook into Store apps, PC Perspective's Shrout worries that a wide range of tools that PC enthusiast sites use to benchmark hardware will no longer work. He thinks that restriction means developers will have to begin writing benchmarking tools into games themselves, something that Ashes of the Singularity developer Oxide Games has done quite competently.

Even if one developer has made a good tool, though, the implications of a fragmented benchmarking environment that only lets hardware reviewers get as much of a look into a game's performance as its developer allows is a chilling prospect. I think that development also puts control of benchmarking results into the hands of those with the most incentive to meddle with them, and it's a frightening prospect to consider that PC hardware reviewers might not be able to independently verify the truthfulness of the tools we're given.

It doesn't help that Microsoft's communication about effects of these new technologies and platforms has been quite muted, too, given the potential magnitude of changes they could hold for the future of gaming on Windows. The company held a press event last week to showcase its vision of the future of gaming across the PC and the Xbox One, two islands that it wants to bridge with universal Windows apps. The broader public is just hearing about the details of this event today.

Attendees brought up complaints about vsync and benchmarking (among other issues) with Xbox head Phil Spencer. Going by Sam Machkovech's account at Ars Technica, Spencer said "These [issues] are all in our roadmap…We hear the feedback from the community, and we will embrace it."

The problem from this PC gamer's perspective is that these issues have rarely been problems for games sold through any platform save the one Microsoft is trying to establish. If the company truly understood the wants and needs of the PC gamer, these issues would surely have been ironed out before major titles like Gears of War: Ultimate Edition and Rise of the Tomb Raider exposed them in another publicity firestorm.

No matter how you slice it, this debacle is another black mark on Microsoft's efforts to reach the PC gaming community, and it's one the company could ill afford given its past relationships with that market. Only time will tell whether the company will truly embrace community feedback and make Windows Store games into the kinds of experiences that PC players (and testers) value. For now, though, gamers can simply choose to put their dollars into other, more "open" platforms like Steam, Origin, Uplay, and GOG, and we imagine they'll do just that.

Comments closed
    • hansmuff
    • 4 years ago

    An interesting note from Build 2016 conference: V-Sync will be something the user can turn off with the Win10 anniversary update.

    • southrncomfortjm
    • 4 years ago

    So, I understand that using UWP will provide developers with libraries that will make development easier. Essentially, if they don’t use UWP, they lose access to those libraries and then have to spend the money to develop their own replacement. Does that sound right?

    If that is true, what would stop Valve/Steam, Origin, etc, from developing similar libraries for games distributed on their platform.

    In other news, if MS wanted to push for more rapid development of SteamOS, Vulkan and gaming on Linux, this is the way to do it.

    I hope this turns out basically how launching the Xbox One with Kinect only worked out for MS – lots of pain for them and an eventual reversal of policy to much rejoicing.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 4 years ago

    And then MS shutters 2 development studios… :^/

    So committed to gaming! Its not even like the start up lots of developers. Or that good developers are openly for sale. No worries. Its MS… they’ll figure it out. Remember when they closed down and sold off 2/3 of their game dev studios, ensemble studios is gone forever.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 4 years ago

    This is the traditional anti consumer mindset MS brings to their platforms.

    • LoneWolf15
    • 4 years ago

    “We hear the feedback from the community, and we will embrace it.”

    Yup. Like the feedback that resulted in Windows 8. Windows 8.1 (aka “We brought the start [i<]button[/i<] back!"). Windows 10. Etc. Microsoft hears. Microsoft listening? That's another story.

    • WaltC
    • 4 years ago

    This is strictly a developer decision–no developer has to support UWP–if they choose not to. It may be a requirement for the Windows store, but it surely is nowhere else. And unless Microsoft is offering to take substantially less than what Valve or GOG take as a percentage of the gross sale of each copy sold, there is little motivation for developers to embrace the Windows store at all. Further, WDDM2 is backwards-compatible with WDDM1.3 (it has to be) so getting around these issues should be doable for developers.

    • Goofus Maximus
    • 4 years ago

    According to the update at the bottom of the “Ashes of the Singularity” article you linked to, this is a problem with the AMD drivers, which don’t support the “Direct-Flip” spec of DX12. This is hardly Microsoft’s fault.

    Edit: Windows Store gaming does indeed sound stinky though! 😉

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 4 years ago

    Phil “Backpedal PR Guy of horrible decisions by MS” Spencer

      • bfar
      • 4 years ago

      He talks like a polititian. Drives me mad listening to him.

    • Gyromancer
    • 4 years ago

    This brings [url=https://techreport.com/blog/22085/snakes-and-ladders<]this[/url<] to mind.

      • Kraft75
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah no kidding, I’m paraphrasing someone’s comment said here in the barrage of comments :

      [quote<]Microsoft does best for PC Gaming when it does nothing.[/quote<] That sums it up right there to me. DirectX sure, but trying to ram a new version of windows down our throats when tying in a new release of DirectX to a new version like they tried to do with DirectX 11 on Windows 8 is bull. Want to help PC Gaming, get out of its way.

    • brucek2
    • 4 years ago

    I understand that a “vsync” implementation that drops the frame rate to say 30fps instead of 58fps, or that has high rates of judder, or that presents a frame that’s 3 frames older than it needs to be, has issues that can and should be improved.

    But beyond what I think of as bugs, I fundamentally don’t see the need for most gamers, most of the time, to generate far more frames than their monitor can display. In the end those extra frames are going to be dropped somewhere. Might as well not waste battery life creating them.

    If there is an aspect of benchmarking that is not observable in any way other than the creation of frames that will never be displayed, I would argue that the benchmark is a misleading failure. If journalists can truly find no other way to describe why one setup is better than another other than using these artificial numbers, maybe the setup isn’t actually better in the first place. We might be better off if a change forces reviewers to adopt metrics that more truly represent actually gamer perception and enjoyment.

    But I don’t think that will happen anyway. Reviewers will probably find ways to create differentiation that is still under the cap, just as to use high frame rate monitors, overly aggressive settings (128x multisampling!), etc etc.

      • Jaksa
      • 4 years ago

      Finally someone who has some sense!

    • Krogoth
    • 4 years ago

    To be honest, PC gaming has never been Microsoft’s primary demographic and this will never change.

    Xbox platform is their gaming and living room baby.

    PC gaming is only popular on their platform because of sheer marketshare and momentum from their dominating days (1990s till early 2000s).

    This is just another round of beta-testing for Microsoft Store 2.0…….

    • DarkUltra
    • 4 years ago

    If Ubuntu did this there would be a fork that brought it all back in a very short time. I want my savegames backed up and my exe files to let Logitech Gaming Software to use my custom bindings.

    With Steam everything is there and you don’t need to redownload and reconfigure games after an OS reinstall.

    • Axiomatic
    • 4 years ago

    I respect MS for trying to do something for Windows gaming but I’m sorry to say the you must achieve parity with the status quo first. What MS forgets is that things that don’t become ensconced in PC Enthusiest land usually don’t survive. Did you look at the PC enthusiest money spent last year? Everyone wants part of that pie.

    • dikowexeyu
    • 4 years ago

    Microsoft is his own worst enemy.

      • Voldenuit
      • 4 years ago

      Also, ours.

    • southrncomfortjm
    • 4 years ago

    Can something really backfire if it was never really intended to work in the first place?

    MS is not really in the business of making the PC an amazing gaming platform, we know that, so it only makes sense that this was never really intended to work very well, if at all.

    • swaaye
    • 4 years ago

    GFWL didn’t die……it was rebranded!!!!!

    • odizzido
    • 4 years ago

    Backfires? Seems more like some minor problems that they can take care of. Calling this a debacle is an extreme overreaction.

    The problems for me are vendor lock, vendor lock, and a few other things which are more W10 problems than gaming problems though they come as a single package so I mention it.

    • TheMonkeyKing
    • 4 years ago

    So…Microsoft is trying to do what Apple does for its own ecology? And this gets down-voted?

    Look, Microsoft is trying to enfold all of their platforms so it makes sense, at this fledgling phase of development, that not all controls are going to work. It would have been better if they started off doing this but now they have years of separate development methodologies to overcome.

    I’m not excusing this however. I don’t like having to be forced or goaded into a new platform (Win7 to Win10), especially with what seems like beta level drivers all over the place. So like I see with Android ROMs, I’d like a listing of what does and does not work with every new update. As for built-in benchmarking tools, yeah it’s going to suck for sites like this where it might be hard to compare this to that without a set of complete and independent tools.

    So where does this leave us? Microsoft is going hard and fast to create a ubiquitous development platform that all starts with Microsoft tools (see recent acquisition, Xamarin) and to push developers to use their tools, which might exclude building on top of Vulkan. Which may be a bad, bad thing in the long run.

    And as for sites like this? It will make ti tougher to run true comparisons and end up perhaps coming up with reviews that are similar to sound card reviews — some real benchmark test results but at the end of the day, an anecdotal feeling that perhaps this new game, software is better or worse than others.

    • joselillo_25
    • 4 years ago

    valve royalties are a disgrace for the videogame creators. another store is always a good thing. In some cases they take 30% or 40% . Is ridiculous for a online store taking all this money away from the videogame industry.

      • NTMBK
      • 4 years ago

      Valve handle distribution, hosting the games on their (extremely fast, reliable and widespread) servers, distributing updates, and so forth. Providing enough bandwidth for millions of >50GB downloads every day isn’t free.

      Besides, how much of the profit do you think Best Buy used to take?

        • LostCat
        • 4 years ago

        retail got 70% of the take. digital is commonly ~30%

          • bfar
          • 4 years ago

          I paid a rare visit to my local Gamestop as I was passing today. Took one look at the price tags and laughed to myself.

          Steam isn’t perfect. Origin, uplay PSN Store and Xbox s live store aren’t perfect, but they’re pretty handy. MS Store is the only one that requires you to bork your game.

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        Peak bandwidth of 2Tbps in the last two days, and ~40PB of data downloaded over a week. It’s crazy.

        [url<]http://store.steampowered.com/stats/content/[/url<]

        • joselillo_25
        • 4 years ago

        Is so ridiculous that some of you think that is a good thing that only one store takes the online distribution and get 30 or 40 % of the developers profits. Is simply ridiculous how other stores are being destroyed by online opinions (origin, uplay etc…), ridiculous and a bit suspicious BTW.

        retails are gaining less than the 10% in much cases selling videogames or consoles. try to open a franchise and you will see.

        so this attack against Microsoft and the arguments are laughable if you compare with the potential support that pc videogame creation could have.

          • Voldenuit
          • 4 years ago

          I’m guessing by ‘retail’, they mean the total cut taken by physical publishers, distributors and store outlets, and not just Gamestop.

            • joselillo_25
            • 4 years ago

            this is not retail then, but also this is not important. valve is getting a huge amount of money from developers, making crazy and amazing discounts and having a huge % of the market.

            This money need to be in the hands of developers and for this we need more stores and is always a good thing that Microsoft or any other open one.

            and yes, this include origin, uplay or whatever.

            • yogibbear
            • 4 years ago

            And those other stores don’t take a similar % of the cut?

            • joselillo_25
            • 4 years ago

            more stores more % for the developer.

            more stores more visibility for the game of the developer, which is a point that no one consider.

            adding a new store to the gaming community cannot have a bad result for the gamers so I do not know why this crazy overreaction.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            The existence of Origin, GFWL, and Uplay absolutely run counter to the idea that a new store cannot have a bad result.

            • brucethemoose
            • 4 years ago

            Origin isn’t that bad anymore.

            GFWL and UPlay, on the other hand…

            • Prestige Worldwide
            • 4 years ago

            UPlay is fine now, but I would have agreed with you a year ago

            As for GFWL, may the lord have mercy on its soul

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            Chris Roberts did a talk on this. In the 90s if you were a developer you got $12 from a $50 sale. Now developers earn $35 from a $50 sale, and this is a bad thing?

            Also, Valve doesn’t discount any games but their own. They do ask other publishers and developers to participate in sales, but those entities are free to say no. I know at least one indie dev who has said no.

            They generally don’t because those deep discounts are actually hugely beneficial (they actually drive future sales as word of mouth spreads about the game).

            • Voldenuit
            • 4 years ago

            [quote<]This money need to be in the hands of developers and for this we need more stores and is always a good thing that Microsoft or any other open one.[/quote<] More stores is a good thing if they aren't used to restrict developers from publishing on other services/platforms. Valve has Steam, but sells games on xbox and playstation. They also don't stop publishers from selling games on other storefronts, as long as any DLC available for the games is also made available thru Steam, which was a sticking point for EA. Ubi has Uplay, but sells games on Steam and consoles. EA has Origin, they don't sell new games for PC on other storefronts, but they do develop for both consoles. GOG has Galaxy, but don't stop developers (or themselves) for using other publishers. The fear is that MS will use their OS monopoly on the desktop to stifle competition and restrict other online retailers, especially since their UWP implementation so far has been very restrictive to traditional PC gaming mores and expectations, and given the company's past history. From what I've heard they've already singled out Steam by having their UWP games share communities with Origin and UPlay (not sure about this one), but specifically excluding Steam users.

            • w76
            • 4 years ago

            The market place is telling you you’re wrong: developers want to be on Steam (look at Greenlight, they campaign to be on Steam), consumers vote with their dollars, a tiny percentage of both parties ever complain, and Steam provides a service on a scale never before done by any game distribution platform. Can count on one hand the number of companies on the planet probably that move that much data on a sustained basis.

            But you’re apparently smarter than everyone partaking, by free choice, in that exchange, as well as Valve and the developers that flock to it themselves. What’s the utility-maximizing cut for an online distribution network considering all stakeholders? If you could explain it, you could publish a paper and it’d definitely make global headlines in the economics press. It’d sure be more exciting than the average NBER working paper.

            Also, if uplay or Origin struggle, it’s because they suck. GOG to my knowledge has no problems, is well liked, patronized by many Steam customers (including myself) and actively improves its service all the time.

            • joselillo_25
            • 4 years ago

            you probably have never been on steam or do not know the problems steam have when you want to sell your game. there are more than 10.000 games on steam and only the first 500 are making SOME money at all. In fact the developer needs to make it own promotion as the game never appears on the store for the costumers.

            that is the reality of a lot of small developers of steam, they game never appears in any list, is just a entry in the database that no one is consulting or buying.

            This is the actual state of the PC videogame development that is happening out of the steam front screen that you can see everyday.

            So the market need to improve and to find new ways to sell the games, to increase the % for the developer and to increase the visibility of the games and of course this need to be done increasing the number of stores.

            And no, I am sorry but Microsoft is not going to destroy the PC gaming market for publishing its games in its store.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            Microsoft won’t destroy the PC gaming market no matter what they try. That doesn’t stop them from trying though.

          • brucek2
          • 4 years ago

          Most of us are probably directly familiar with playing games on Steam, and on some of their competitors. Steam’s been providing a solid experience for years now. My experiences with the competitors is often no where near as good, and this article is suggesting that Microsoft’s Store will continue that trend.

          But it’s even more than that, because even when a competing service has managed to avoid screwing it up, I usually still end up unhappy that I’m now having to maintain a second account, second friends list, etc etc all for just one or two games. Often I decide I’d rather just play something else on Steam.

          Finally, I’m surprised by your feelings that 30% for a full service retailer is an unusual cut. Can you provide any other examples of someone doing a good job at the retail, distribution, backend and community functions for substantially less?

          Bottom line is I’ve had the Good Thing, and plenty of other Not As Good Things, and I’ll keep voting for the Good Thing as long as it stays that way.

          • robliz2Q
          • 4 years ago

          Did you actually get forced to install Uplay?
          I’m guessing not, as I remember it as annoying and obtrusive.

          • coolflame57
          • 4 years ago

          Like every other capitalist enterprise, the strong companies survive. Online stores seem to be stronger than retail now….

        • dodozoid
        • 4 years ago

        Nowhere apart from steam downloads was I able to use full 300 Mbps speed. Steam is faster than your everyday usb3.0 flashdrive. They deserve their pay

      • Concupiscence
      • 4 years ago

      Another [i<]good[/i<] store is potentially good for competition, and there are at least a few out there (hi, GOG!). Microsoft's current incarnation of the Windows Store has significant problems. It would be a disservice not to discuss them in a public forum. Pretending that all are equal and that Steam is bad principally because it's convenient and popular is intellectually dishonest, and makes it look like you have an axe to grind.

      • mcarson09
      • 4 years ago

      This is Microsoft WE are talking about here. All they do is reinvent the wheel except in this case MS would want 60%.

    • Chrispy_
    • 4 years ago

    Microsoft have been screwing over PC gamers since 2002 when the XBox, a piece of hardware running Windows and DirectX started artificially fragmenting the market and locking PC developers into console exclusives.

    Ever since then, they’ve continued to damage, lie, and tease PC gamers with promised improvements, but they only improvements they’ve ever made are token gesture reversals of damage they caused in the first place.

    It really really is a case of two steps backwards with every step forwards and everyone would be much better off if Microsoft just didn’t get involved AT ALL.

      • Krogoth
      • 4 years ago

      They never care about PC gaming in the first place.

      Microsoft’s biggest concern in the mainstream market has always been dominating the living room. They have trying to seize it since the mid 1990s with various attempts. Xbox One is just the latest attempt.

    • w76
    • 4 years ago

    Easy solution! Treat it like how many enthusiasts have treated Origin: Avoid at all costs. A game is exclusive to Origin/MS Store? That’s OK, there’s a hundred unplayed games in your Steam account you need to get to anyway.

    I don’t think I’ve had open the app store in Win10 more then three or four times, just periodically checking to make sure it’s still a joke. Might have to accept Win10 as the modern OS from Microsoft, but until they finally implement what is obviously the end goal (slamming shut the gates on a walled garden PC platform as if its a smartphone) I do not have to buy in to their horrible software platforms. I’m not an anti-MS troll, I’d change my position if MS improved the quality of their offering and established a track record of better decision making, but that’s just not the reality yet.

    And, when MS does implement the end-game one day, well… Then it’s the Year of the Linux Desktop (Whether We All Want it Or Not!)

    • Anovoca
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<] The furor only intensified [/quote<] *stomps ground and outward palm salute.

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      lol

    • Ifalna
    • 4 years ago

    Windows store? Is that really a thing now?
    Have Win10 since it has been release, never even opened it, doubt I ever will.

    If they push the exclusivity BS… oh well there’s always…

    *ARRRR*

      • mcarson09
      • 4 years ago

      I buy all my games from steam at least it gives you a choice of platform. I’m still mad is MS over the delay of Alan Wake on the PC, but I did purchase it when it came out on STEAM. The sad thing about the steam version was the lack of an eye patch. I pro-ordered Alan Wake American nightmare when they did the simultaneous release on all platforms. Windows live game platform was a joke and a headache I suffered through it for gta3, but if you think I’ll buy anything from the MS store, hell NO!

      QB is just a single player game. I really want AW2 instead.

        • Meadows
        • 4 years ago

        That doesn’t make sense. Alan Wake was single player as well.

      • JonnyFM
      • 3 years ago

      I’ve had the unfortunate task of trying to deploy a Windows Store app in an enterprise environment, and let me tell you, it is a disaster. How it is implemented makes Origin look good. It is absolutely no surprise to me that Store apps don’t play well with all the other tools in the PC gaming ecosystem.

    • Krogoth
    • 4 years ago

    Protip: All of Microsoft’s attempts at “PC gaming” since 2000 have been nothing but beta tests for their Xbox line-up.

    • djayjp
    • 4 years ago

    I’d say the intro is a little on the sensationalist/disproportionate side. It’ll get fixed and I’m sure coding wizards will be able to create some kind of fraps-esque tool soon enough.

      • bfar
      • 4 years ago

      The only credit MS had in the PC gaming space was Direct X. There was always a certain trust that as an API development tool it would remain vendor independent, so no outfit would be given any competitive advantage or disadvantage by its use. This is a key selling point of Windows as a PC Gamer’s OS.

      Whether intentional or not, hobbling DX12 apps in order to push their own unloved store front would be viewed as a very sly move on the part of MS. They have now set a very unwelcome precedent, because so far they had resisted the temptation to mess with the API implementation in order to push their own products.

      I think the story is significant, as there’s a huge breech of trust here against anyone who implements the API or sells products that use it.

        • Prestige Worldwide
        • 4 years ago

        Yup, if this is what DX12 looks like, sign me up to team Vulkan.

          • bfar
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah! That’s the thing I don’t understand though. MS had no real competition with previous versions of DX. It allowed vendors like AMD and Nvidia to implement their own performance tweaks at driver level, thus boosting performance at a per title level, and relieving some pressure on developers. You couldn’t do that to the same degree with OpenGL, as it had to meet a more exacting standard to meet its cross platform and professional user standards.

          With the new “to the metal” mantra of the new APIs, pretty much all control of the hardware is moved to the developer, and the driver has much less bearing on overall performance. This means that MS has a more threatening competitor in Vulkcan.

        • djayjp
        • 4 years ago

        Read the article again. It says such current restrictions apply to Windows store dx12 releases as well.

    • yogibbear
    • 4 years ago

    Imagine there’s some alternate universe where instead MS released GoW:UE, Forza 6 Apex, Quantum Break, etc. on Steam, GOG & retail with no additional DRM, just as 1st party publisher games on the PC platform with support for VR, 4k, 144hz, Freesync, etc…. imagine that exists somewhere…… Damn you and this reality I’m in. How hard would it have been to do that and take instant praise from the entire PC crowd?

    • bfar
    • 4 years ago

    I knew it! Run a mile when MS mentions PC gaming!

    Fortunately they can’t execute to save their lives in this space. Watch UWP crash and burn as MS machine gun their own feet off. It’ll end with a handful of poor Xbox conversions and a lot of mobile micro trans games that nobody cares about. A major U-turn will be pulled on the DX12 compositing thing; too many publishers have offered vocal support for Vulcan already, which is ironically probably a better fit for multi platform development anyway

    • NTMBK
    • 4 years ago

    I hope Vulkan really takes off. Valve need to throw money at it, build a ton of great tools, and provide assistance to developers to help them move to it. Maybe in 5 years’ time SteamOS will be ready.

    • NTMBK
    • 4 years ago

    If only there were some other big gaming company in Seattle which could tell them how to run a gaming storefront…

    • auxy
    • 4 years ago

    Does DX12 work outside of the Windows store? If you have to have your game on the Windows Store to use DX12, well, I might have to find a new hobby…

      • LostCat
      • 4 years ago

      Yes.

        • auxy
        • 4 years ago

        Even so, the article seems to imply that if you are using DX12, you have to use this Windows presentation thing, which requires non-exclusive fullscreen, which is not super great IMO.

          • LostCat
          • 4 years ago

          It’s possible that DX12 functions the same in win32 and UWP, but unless we hear more details from someone (MS, the Ashes dev or Nixxes) I’m not sold on it being the same as non-exclusive.

          It might be, but right now it’s just more speculation.

          • Spunjji
          • 4 years ago

          My understanding from reading around it’s that’s how it works by default, but that currently workarounds exist to get full-screen mode in DX12. That’s how nVidia is currently treating AotS and thus how it gets the neat frame-time graph from FCAT measurements /until the user alt-tabs/ at which point it breaks again.

          • torquer
          • 4 years ago

          Incorrect and the article is poorly written. An editorial written as news, which granted we’ve all become accustomed to in the last 20 years since journalism no longer exists beyond political activism.

    • yogibbear
    • 4 years ago

    How are they continuously this stupid?

    Do they not read all the early criticisms against Steam/uPlay/Origin and at least TRY to not repeat those same mistakes? No they literally saw those mistakes, repeated them, and then went we need to add in a whole boatload of even worse mistakes so that people ignore all the other problems that are also present and don’t whinge about them too!

    • Sabresiberian
    • 4 years ago

    I’m not forming an opinion on these issues until the changes happen.

    That being said, Microsoft seems to have an attitude that taking away features from Windows is what’s needed to make it run better. Or something. It’s the removal of features that has me hoping that Linux and Vulkan overtake what MS offers.

    Any new version of a product should offer more and better features, not less. Really, the one and only reason I stick with Windows is for gaming, and if they screw that up I’ll just be done with them.

    • brucethemoose
    • 4 years ago

    The more I think about this, the more this smells like GFWL 2.0

    Forcing developers to do everything though WDDM 2.0 so Microsoft can add Windows in-game overlays? Promises to fix some issues that have apparently existed for awhile? These are NOT promising signs.

      • Krogoth
      • 4 years ago

      Because it is Windows Store 2.0

      I really don’t understand why people are so shock or surprised by this. It was a foregone conclusion the day that e-tailers started to take over B&M in software sales.

    • torquer
    • 4 years ago

    Author should really update the article. Mike Ybarra has clearly stated Microsoft is working on and will fix the vsync issue, and multi GPU does in fact work. That leaves the wonky full screen mode which I don’t see any of them commenting on publicly.

      • LostCat
      • 4 years ago

      The renderer might still be in exclusive mode. The UWP documentation is a little light in that regards though.

      • yogibbear
      • 4 years ago

      Just because multi GPU “does in fact work” doesn’t excuse the platform from launching with no dev being able to implement it working on UWP. It’s still their [MS] fault.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        Considering there is only one “game” (glorified tech demo), I’d hardly say “no dev is able to implement it.”

    • BobbinThreadbare
    • 4 years ago

    I guess it’s time to post the neogaf thread again [url<]http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=100400267[/url<] If you are too lazy to click it, it catalogs from 2005-2013 MS promised to support and grow PC *every single year* only to actively try to make it worse or ignore it. The take away I get from all the decisions MS has made since the Xbox 360 was announced. "Dear consumer, we really wish you would stop using that annoying open platform of yours you call a PC. We have lovely walled gardens called Xbox and Windows Phone. Please switch to those."

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    Apple was right. Different strokes for different folks. They knew each class of device had to be customized but they all also needed to work seemlessly together.

    Microsoft chose to unify everything: their phones look like miniature versions of full-fledged Windows 8/8.1/10 PCs, and hating the look and feel of Windows 8/../.. also makes me not want to buy a Windows phone. And now this one-size-fits-all approach is ultimately hurting devices across the ecosystem.

    I have never been an Apple fan and in fact I like Microsoft because up until Windows 7 (excluding hiccups like Vista) their OSes have been great and I’ve always relied on them, but I never believed Microsoft’s approach in the post-7 era for a second. Apple was right. Steve was right. The other Steve was wrong.

    • brucethemoose
    • 4 years ago

    AFAIK, this spell trouble for post-processors like ReShade as well. Gone are the days of improving image quality above-and-beyond the in-game settings when you have processing power to spare (or if the game uses a trashy AA implementation).

    Oh well. If MS screws up DX12, it’ll give Vulkan a chance to catch on.

      • AdamDZ
      • 4 years ago

      I thought ReShade and SweetFX stopped working in Windows 8.x. That was the reason I went back to 7 from 8.1 because none of the post processing mods for Skyrim worked in 8.1.

        • K-L-Waster
        • 4 years ago

        Can’t say about reshade, but SweetFX and ENB work fine in Win10.

          • Voldenuit
          • 4 years ago

          Do they work for UWP/Windows Store games?

          • brucethemoose
          • 4 years ago

          ReShade works fine in W10 as well.

      • gmskking
      • 4 years ago

      Downvote for anybody that uses AFAIK. SPELL IT OUT.

        • LostCat
        • 4 years ago

        AFAIK you’re the only one who cares.

        • yogibbear
        • 4 years ago

        what then does gmsk stand for? If it’s minimum shift… then SPELL IT OUT. Oh what that’d be you being a hypocrite… so clearly gmsk is a word in some language.

    • DrDominodog51
    • 4 years ago

    Now is Vulkan’s chance.

      • brucethemoose
      • 4 years ago

      It’s getting support on the Android front as well.

      This might be Vulkan’s time to shine.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        It’ll shine every bit as much as OpenGL has for years, meaning ID will support it on the desktop, and otherwise it will be relegated to mobile and Linux.

          • brucethemoose
          • 4 years ago

          Vulkan has (supposedly) shed some of OpenGL’s baggage (differences in driver implementations, performance issues etc.)

          You’re probably right, but the wind could blow in Vulkan’s favor if MS really messes up DirectX.

            • Spunjji
            • 4 years ago

            Vulkan’s release has been really encouraging thus-far too. The execution is unlike anything OpenGL ever managed before.

          • robliz2Q
          • 4 years ago

          Wow, you sure sound and seem like a shill for MS!!

            • brucethemoose
            • 4 years ago

            Maybe, but he’s right about OpenGL’s issues.

            • Concupiscence
            • 4 years ago

            OpenGL’s a crufty old API burdened with the responsibility of not leaving a lot of old guard content creators in the dust. That’s what hobbled the release of OpenGL 3, and the mechanics of the API are now so divorced from how modern hardware works that it’s supremely difficult to harness that power in an efficient way, let alone in a highly multithreaded scenario across all supported platforms. That cross-platform compatibility and a perennial lack of focused guidance and prioritization have also impeded efforts to create a quality SDK or set of debugging tools. Mercifully it looks like Vulkan’s making aggressive strides to remedy that and make the low-level API as painless as possible.

            Direct3D has always had the twin advantages of being locked to a single restricted range of platforms and starting fresh with each major revision. It’s also generally targeted the needs of games and relatively quick ‘n’ dirty 3D over professional applications, which is valid given its most frequent use cases. But Direct3D 12 looks like a significant misfire if the currently cited limitations are baked deep into the spec; if it’s possible to work around them gracefully it’ll probably take a revision – say, Direct3D 12.1 – and that always runs the risk of breaking compatibility with any D3D12-capable hardware that’s available or planned.

            What a mess. I have other thoughts too, but don’t really feel like being downvoted into a smoldering crater based on a set of hypotheses.

          • LostCat
          • 4 years ago

          EA, Valve, and Stardock already pledged support for it I believe.

          • Cannonaire
          • 4 years ago

          I don’t think id Software has done anything new with OpenGL since Carmack left. That was kind of his thing.

          But as Savyg said in another reply, EA, Valve, and Stardock have pledged support. I definitely remember seeing Epic Games’ logo on the Vulkan announcements, as well. Hopefully that means we will see extensive support in their engines at some point.

            • Concupiscence
            • 4 years ago

            It looks like Doom 2016’s still running OpenGL, so somebody’s still carrying a torch for it over there. I don’t know whether id Tech 6 will ever support Vulkan, but it wouldn’t be the most surprising possible outcome.

      • tsk
      • 4 years ago

      Yes, it’s time to strike!!!

        • Tirk
        • 4 years ago

        Yes, a returm of the jedi there will be.

      • Kretschmer
      • 4 years ago

      Yes, its chance to be the next ignored version of OpenGL on the desktop.

      • Neutronbeam
      • 4 years ago

      It’s the logical choice.

    • Laykun
    • 4 years ago

    Oh well, at least [s<]Mantle[/s<] Vulkan exists. I was asked the other day how Linux gaming would ever become a thing, and it's moves like this that Microsoft keeps making that gives me the answers I need. The sad truth is though 90% of PC gamers won't even know that this is a thing and will play the games any way, reinforcing the platform and Microsoft's confidence in its awful decisions. They'll feel its effects, they'll know something has changed, but they won't know exactly what it is and just accept it as par for the course. EDIT : thanks robliz2Q

      • robliz2Q
      • 4 years ago

      Mantle was the catalyst for DX12 & Vulkan, AMD open sourced it as abandonware; but the whole initiative has born fruit, allowing thinner driver layers and async shading etc

        • Laykun
        • 4 years ago

        Oh god, I meant to say Vulkan, not Mantle.

      • auxy
      • 4 years ago

      I don’t really think this is the case:[quote=”Laykun”<]The sad truth is though 90% of PC gamers won't even know that this is a thing and will play the games any way[/quote<]Have you read reddit, or /v/, or any other place where gamers congregate? The overwhelming response to the Windows Store games has been "hahaha. no." I think this will fall apart just like GFWL did.

        • LostCat
        • 4 years ago

        RotTR on the store needed a patch or two (as did the win32 version from what I’ve read,) but it’s been working great for me. I definitely won’t mind playing more games from it.

        (The current version of a game I’m under NDA on is pretty awesome too…)

        • K-L-Waster
        • 4 years ago

        [quote<]Have you read reddit, or /v/, or any other place where gamers congregate? [/quote<] That assumes that the majority of gamers (i.e. people who game) are also posters (i.e. people who post on those sites about the fact that they game). I suspect you'd find there are bazillions of people in group A who are not in group B.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          One only has to look at the market share of Steam and Windows Store to realize where the majority of gamers are.

        • Laykun
        • 4 years ago

        You and I are talking about different communities of gamers. Whether you like it or not, the majority of gamers don’t go to reddit or /v/, they go to IGN and Gamespot, that’s 90% of gamers, you’re talking about the 10%.

          • auxy
          • 4 years ago

          You’re not wrong in terms of population. However, that’s irrelevant. The gamers on reddit and /v/ and other “niche” boards like that are the [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_consumer<]Alpha consumers[/url<] of the gaming world. As the Wii proved, even if your platform manages a large install base in the mass market, that doesn't guarantee continued success without the support and interest of the core group.

            • Krogoth
            • 4 years ago

            PC Gaming is no longer the leader anymore and it will never come back again. The baseline is now gaming consoles and portables. The big publishers are all about making multi-platform franchises. The era of platform exclusives is over.

            PCs are nothing more than appliances in the eyes of mainstream customers and tools to real work in the eyes of professionals.

            • swaaye
            • 4 years ago

            I don’t know if it ever really lead. Whatever “leading” means anyway. There have always been some genres unique to PC gaming but I think that’s much less the case these days. It certainly isn’t the leader in the multiplatform stuff that I think most people here are playing.

            I’m not convinced these social media sites have much influence over the huge publishers either. It’s an easy power delusion to get caught up on though.

    • LightenUpGuys
    • 4 years ago

    I honestly didnt know Microaoft had any kind of game selling thing for the PC, with all my money going towards Steam on my Windows 7 PC that will never be running 10.

    I cant wait for SteamOS.

      • robliz2Q
      • 4 years ago

      It’s been around since Win 8, UWP phone style apps, with all their attendant dumbed-downness

        • LostCat
        • 4 years ago

        The Windows 8(.1) and Windows Phone 8(.1) apps were not UWA/UWP.

      • Meadows
      • 4 years ago

      People have said the same about Windows XP. You will capitulate eventually.

    • AdamDZ
    • 4 years ago

    So the massive train wreck that is Windows 10 isn’t showing any signs of slowing down. I have no interest in running my games on console hardware so this whole cross platform nonsense is not welcome. PC gamers suffered enough Consolitis. Leave us alone Microsoft, go fuck with your Xbox, leave PC games alone.

      • dyrdak
      • 4 years ago

      “would only be available on Windows 10 through the Microsoft Store.” – does this mean that Windows 7 users are fine? Not that I was going to get this game but there’s no way in hell I’m going to get anything through theirs Store. One has to keep some standards and signing to Windows with Microsoft account is just falling too low.

        • brucethemoose
        • 4 years ago

        Newer DX11 games will supposedly inherit some of these problems, so W7 users are not completely safe.

          • Chrispy_
          • 4 years ago

          Not that I’m advocating cracked software, but you can bet these problems will be cracked because they are artificial problems that exist solely to server Microsoft’s somewhat shady agenda of late.

    • ultima_trev
    • 4 years ago

    Does the MS Store still force you to download apps to the primary Windows drive? A lot of people with SSDs as boot partitions (including myself) shutter at the thought.

      • dyrdak
      • 4 years ago

      1st question to ask is why would you like share some of your money with Microsoft (and support their plans in the process). Save a buck (or two), get bigger SSD and shop for games elsewhere.

      • robliz2Q
      • 4 years ago

      yep, it does the usual MS thing of deciding they know what’s best for you, better than yourself.
      The stuff is stored so it’s hard to even browse the application folders, where the game data is stored is also opaque.

      They just expect you to lie back, trust them .. and then find you’ve been screwed later when something goes wrong

      • LostCat
      • 4 years ago

      It downloads there, but you can move it afterwards (if you know where to find the option, heh.)

      I haven’t had much luck with that, but I’ve only tried once with an external HD so far.

      • Jigar
      • 4 years ago

      Nothing to worry here, I just deleted the store and called it a day.

    • torquer
    • 4 years ago

    Lets not forget that Microsoft has also made a lot of positive changes over the last couple of years where gaming is concerned. This stuff is stupid, granted, but they have responded that they intend to address it and I think we should give them a chance before bringing out the pitchforks and torches.

    I for one embrace the notion of having a platform where I can play a game on a console or PC and share savegames, etc. So long as Microsoft doesn’t screw it up (or choose not to fix screw ups) it has the potential to be really cool. I find a lot of value being able to play the same game on multiple devices while only buying one copy and sharing savegames. Its something Sony just can’t match.

      • LightenUpGuys
      • 4 years ago

      Positive? Like what?

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        Game streaming, giving you a copy of Quantum Break on PC if you buy it for Xbox, tight integration with Twitch, numerous UI and other changes to the dashboard to make the Xbone faster, more usable, and better performing, great support for indie games… is that enough? Should I go on?

          • brucethemoose
          • 4 years ago

          It just pales in comparison to all the bad they’ve done.

          Also, XBone improvements =/= PC gaming improvements.

            • torquer
            • 4 years ago

            Except when it benefits those of us who appreciate both for their individual strengths.

            What exactly have they done thats so bad for PC gaming? They’ve done a lot of stupid things over the years, but so has everyone else. Convenient to forget that Microsoft is almost solely responsible for DirectX, without which we might still be dealing with proprietary crap like GLide.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            [quote<]Convenient to forget that Microsoft is almost solely responsible for DirectX[/quote<] I disagree with this completely. It has always been a joint effort between MS, ATI/AMD, and Nvidia. [quote<]What exactly have they done thats so bad for PC gaming?[/quote<] Games for Windows Live, Games for Windows Marketplace, killing Microsoft Flight Simulator, killing Ensemble, killing Mechwarrior on Windows, forcing Bungie to only release their games on Xbox, killing 3d accelerated audio, killing the Sidewinder joystick.

            • alrey
            • 4 years ago

            I’ll add some more:

            1. no significant update to directx for so long. we will see soon enough if dx12 is worth the wait.
            2. emphasis on gaming is only on xbox since its release .. urging developers to prioritize consoles.
            3. adding crap features to windows instead of just making it lean and mean.

            • torquer
            • 4 years ago

            Factually incorrect: [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct3D[/url<] DIrect3D was the product of an independent company which was bought by Microsoft. GPU manufacturers got on board later but they were not responsible for its development. So failed game franchises make you hate Microsoft? What company are you aware of that continues to pour money into franchises or products that fail to turn a profit? YI assume then you'd rather move to OSX, Linux, or PlayStation for your gaming needs since MS is so awful and hates gamers?

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            There is no evidence those companies or products were losing money. Not to mention it’s MS’s “leadership” that turned companies making fun million dollar selling franchises into shuttered studios.

            • robliz2Q
            • 4 years ago

            Direct X is proprietary!! MS is trying same as Apple and lock you in to an ecosystem, hoping to make exploitative profits later

            • torquer
            • 4 years ago

            Considering DirectX has been around since 1992 in one form or another, that’s a hell of a long time to wait to make “exploitative profits later.”

            They must know something we don’t if all of these lucrative profits are still waiting in the wings almost 25 years later.

            • odizzido
            • 4 years ago

            They have been making profits because of DX for ages. How many people stay on windows because of DX lockin? 100% of people I’ve polled(meaning myself) do.

            • robliz2Q
            • 4 years ago

            MS has taken plenty of profit out of the desktop .. where have they blown it?
            On various net services & in phone.

            Today, I’ve had my laptop effectively crippled because “something” in Win 10 or Store, was priority downloading on a slow rural Internet conenction, which took 10 hours to complete!!

            I haven’t got a clue what it was doing or why.. and as they have dumbed down everything, you don’t get any choices to postpone this BS!!

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            While I sympathize with your points, it’s not a zero-sum sort of thing. They need to execute in a way that benefits everyone, not benefits some at the expense of others.

            Having more-or-less quit PC gaming (I kinda got out of it when I was writing here, oddly enough—too much time on the computer—and haven’t really gone back since leaving in December), what they do benefits me, but I can also see how it hurts people still gaming on PCs.

          • f0d
          • 4 years ago

          barely any of those help if you have a pc only or pc and ps3

          so to get the positives of microsoft gaming on the pc you have to buy an xbone? that kinda sucks if you are not interested in consoles in any way shape or form

          i have nothing against consoles – i just dont want one

            • torquer
            • 4 years ago

            So you don’t use a GPU? Without DirectX your GPU is either an expensive paperweight or a nice addition to folding@home.

            Unless you also purely run Linux and no emulators, you can also thank Microsoft for being able to do *any* gaming on the PC.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            You can use OpenGL and Vulkan on Windows.

          • rechicero
          • 4 years ago

          So, you buy a game for Xbone, they give you a copy for PC.
          You play with Xbone, you have better Twitch integration.
          You play with Xbone, the UI is better.
          You play with Xbone, the dashboard is better.
          You play with Xbone, better support for indie games.

          And this is what you use to prove MS does good things for PC gaming? Really?

            • torquer
            • 4 years ago

            I’ll repeat my statements above. If you can think of a better API and OS combo than Windows and DirectX for gaming on the PC, I’m all ears.

            • rechicero
            • 4 years ago

            That means you accept that all you said in #30 was useless?

            And Windows and DirectX exists since… how many years? This is not about Windows or DirectX in the past. It’s about “Microsoft’s push for a unified cross-platform gaming experience backfires”.

            The fact that you try to argue about different things makes me think you are desperate to defend MS and, in this case, you have no argument at all, so you need to resort to simple points like “most games are published on Windows”.

          • LightenUpGuys
          • 4 years ago

          None of that is relevant to PC gaming.

      • slowriot
      • 4 years ago

      What in the world are you talking about? They are doing the best for PC gaming when they’re doing nothing at all.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        Yeah, if only we’d stayed on DirectX 8 and Windows XP we’d be a lot better off.

        Keep em comin, guys

        • mdkathon
        • 4 years ago

        Go work for a large software company (or a mid-sized one for that matter) and get back to me. Nothing is ever as easy at it seems. If MS is acknowledging that this is an issue and saying they intend to investigate and provide fixes (where they can) I see that as a positive step.

          • brucethemoose
          • 4 years ago

          Except they’ve done that year after year after year without really fixing anything.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            See my neogaf link. Quote by Microsoft Windows, graphics, and technology general manage Dean Lester

            [quote<]He also reaffirmed the remarks he has previously made with regard to integration of XNA--Microsoft's proposed unified platform for PC and console development. Lester stated that the various tools that Microsoft has issued are "getting more mature, and showing more equivalency" across the two platforms, and even cited an example of an unnamed game in development for publisher Take-Two actually managing to double its frame rate by using XNA tools. XNA Studio (XNA's library of graphics and sound), is in development, and the Xbox's sound API is currently being beta-tested for use with XNA as well. Lester also reaffirmed Microsoft's commitment to bring Xbox Live functionality to the Windows platform, along with unified controllers. [/quote<] Well XNA has been killed, Xbox Live functionality *sort of* appeared with GFWL then was killed. So the only promise kept, 10 years later is xbox controllers working on windows (what a coincidence that could break down a barrier of getting people to switch from PC to Xbox). [quote<]we were shown a demonstration of "Tray and Play" with the PC version of Need For Speed Underground 2. "Tray and Play" is exactly what it sounds like--dropping a game disc into an optical drive and loading it up immediately, rather than having to install it to a hard drive.[/quote<] Hey what happened with that? (not that I really care since discs are dead anyways, but still) But really MS is working on this. It's only been ten years, you have to give them enough time alright.

      • James296
      • 4 years ago

      the key phase here is “So long as Microsoft doesn’t screw it up” and unfortunately Microsoft has been screwing it up alot lately

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        Other than these issues which Mike Ybarra has already committed that they’ll fix, what are you referring to exactly? DirectX 12 perhaps? Windows 10? Game streaming? Backward compatibility?

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]I find a lot of value being able to play the same game on multiple devices while only buying one copy and sharing savegames.[/quote<] You know, we've had this for over 3 decades now. You buy a PC game, you can play it on any other PC, and you can transfer saves. It's pretty amazing I know.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        I guess multiple devices wasn’t clear enough for you. “Multiple devices” means something other than a PC. In this case, an Xbox. If I can buy one copy of a game and play it upstairs on my gaming PC and then continue it downstairs on my 80″ TV, I consider that a positive.

        I’m sure some of you will somehow find a way to say thats actually a negative. Kind of like the xbone fanboys who bitch to high heaven because their precious exclusives are now coming to PC.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          It’s neither a positive or a negative. You could just as easily have a PC downstairs on your 80″ TV.

          edit: I suppose it’s good in an absolute sense, but seriously they’re playing catchup to decades ago. You don’t even have to sign into an account to transfer saves with PC games!

      • robliz2Q
      • 4 years ago

      But if you actually play a Win Store game, you can find it’s so locked down you can’t even have spare save files, never mind sharing them. I’ve lost a lot of time & money investment in a game just lost through a corrupt save file which then crashes the game and NO help from support!

      • Chrispy_
      • 4 years ago

      Now [b<]*that*[/b<] is a near-perfect demonstration of Stockholm syndrome.

        • Concupiscence
        • 4 years ago

        Junkie loyalty. Misguided or outright delusional and self-serving as some of Microsoft’s behavior has been, the biggest and most popular games still come out on Windows. Therefore, Microsoft must be doing right.

        I don’t really need to dissect the problems with that logic.

      • joselillo_25
      • 4 years ago

      no my friend, Microsoft is the evil as you can see. they cannot even launch its own game in its own store because they are going to destroy the pc game industry.

      everything in internet is rigged, this is no more 1998 or 2001, online communities are infiltrated and overreact about ridiculous things like a company launching its own title in its own store.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 4 years ago

    Interesting. So if I’m understanding right, it seems this choice of “run as quick as possible and show the last frame at the next refresh” should reduce latency. But because of fixed refresh rates it stutters.

    That means that for VRR systems, there wouldn’t be stutter *and* there’d be the lowest possible latency.

    So it’s just time for PC gamers to get on the VRR train, right?

      • derFunkenstein
      • 4 years ago

      And yes, I know that my comment ignores many of Jeff’s concerns. Still, it’s possible that—once VRR tech matures—things could eventually be better overall. Unfortunately having competing VRR standards and no monitors that do both hurts.

        • AdamDZ
        • 4 years ago

        VR won’t mature for many years and right now VR is not relevant. There will always be games that will not work in VR and VR will remain a niche for a very long time due to cost and limitations. So, no VR will not save PC gaming.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 4 years ago

          No, you misunderstand. VRR. Variable refresh rate. G-Sync or FreeSync (or VESA adaptive sync).

          FWIW I think virtual reality is a gimmick that will die almost as fast as it did the last time.

            • AdamDZ
            • 4 years ago

            Oh, I’m sorry:( I never saw it abbreviated that way. My apologies. Yes, now your post makes total sense to me.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            It’s my fault. I should have spelled it out at least once rather than rely on acronyms. Sorry about that.

            • AdamDZ
            • 4 years ago

            No worries 🙂

            • Kretschmer
            • 4 years ago

            Why are you both so polite? This is the internet!

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            An oversimplified paraphrase of something that Ghandi kinda-sorta said: “Be the change you want to see in the world.”

            • LostCat
            • 4 years ago

            I don’t know how to be a catgirl.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            +3 for making me think of Anne Hathaway in DKR.

            • CuttinHobo
            • 4 years ago

            Shut up, jerk! I hate you!

            • mcarson09
            • 4 years ago

            Damn hobo! STOP asking for money and GET a REAL job!

            • CuttinHobo
            • 4 years ago

            Asking? I’m a *cutting* hobo – I don’t ASK!

            • Shinare
            • 4 years ago

            “This wireless [radio] thing is just a fad, it will never catch on.”
            -Robert Crawley, Earl of Grantham, 1920

            • DreadCthulhu
            • 4 years ago

            “For me it’s absolutely inevitable that entertainment will be 3D, it’ll all be 3D eventually, because that’s how we see the world. When it’s correct and convenient for us, we pre-select for that as the premium experience.” – James Cameron, noted film director, 2013.

            Sometimes a new tech development catches on, like radio, and sometimes it flops hard, like 3d televisions.

      • DPete27
      • 4 years ago

      I think you’re possibly missing the fact that VRR eliminates the need to use vsync, and yet it’s being forced on regardless. My understanding is that having a VRR monitor in this situation will produce absolutely zero defence since vsync is sending the frames at a fixed rate to the monitor.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 4 years ago

        My understanding is that it’s not a fixed rate. It’s just “at the next VBLANK” – which for a VRR display is just kinda whenever.

          • Spunjji
          • 4 years ago

          It looks like the effect will depend entirely on how the VRR system interacts with Windows and its display driver stack. I think this current implementation would break GSYNC entirely and necessitate a total rethink at nVidia’s end. Probably the same with FreeSync, though it might be less tricky for them to fix.

            • Tirk
            • 4 years ago

            So in the current situation Gsync and Freesync do not work on any DX 12 game? It seems that as long as WDM can accept the refresh range of the Freesync monitor rather than a fixed refresh, it should be possible for VRR to work 100% of the time, regardless of fullscreen or windowed.

            AMD and Microsoft I’m looking at you to work together and make this happen. If WDM is going to be the preferred rendering output it only makes sense to accept a refresh range that a monitor has. And it’d make Freesync look like a huge advantage over a broken Gsync. AMD GET TO WORK!

      • Flapdrol
      • 4 years ago

      The lowest latency is with “real” fullscreen mode. This UWP thing forces full window.

    • danny e.
    • 4 years ago

    Microsoft has a large number of douchebags making key decisions.
    I find that these decisions are almost never from engineering teams but management levels above them.
    At least id like to think that no engineer ageees with some of the stupid decisions

      • danielravennest
      • 4 years ago

      I used to work for a big aerospace company. Engineers got overridden by dumb management decisions all the time. First-level managers were usually OK, because they were engineers who got promoted. It was the director and VP levels where the stupid crept in. That’s where you got MBA, finance, and people who used to be managers in other industries, but didn’t understand ours.

        • dyrdak
        • 4 years ago

        Well, they have to explain their presence with money grab schemes. BTW, it’s all for the benefit of the customer;)

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        I think that’s why Intel and Nvidia usually do well, most of their core execs are from within the company and have a ton of experience with the things they’re dealing with (esp. at Intel).

        • ludi
        • 4 years ago

        I have a friend who still works for a big aerospace company. He said that by Year 2, he had to stop reading Dilbert because it went from being funny to causing terrible, searing flashbacks.

        • GrimDanfango
        • 4 years ago

        I think that’s essentially the way all companies over a couple-hundred-employees operate.

        As soon as you need a significant proportion of your workforce employed simply to “coordinate” the rest, everything goes stupid. I don’t think it’s possible for someone in a senior managerial role to simultaneously know how to manage *and* how to do the jobs they’re managing.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          I think this is true as stuff exists now, but I also think that companies could probably break into small enough groups that each project manager knows his or her stuff, and that managers above them listen to the people who know what’s going on.

      • oldog
      • 4 years ago

      A group of engineers agreeing about design with an eye toward efficiency, cost and time constraints?

      Hmmm. Could happen I guess.

      • kilkennycat
      • 4 years ago

      As long as Mr. NUT-ella is in charge of Microsoft, do not expect any change from top-down bean-counter-type decisions.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This