- 0 Posts
- 76 Comments
Frame generation objectively reduces motion blur and frame consistency.
Neural network-based upscaling is a far better alternative. Previously, in the time of the dinosaurs, we’d get better frame rate by turning the resolution down and letting the monitor handle upscaling. This looked bad but higher frame rate often is more important for image quality than resolution. Now we get the same performance boost with much less loss of visual clarity, and some antialiasing for free on top of it.
Upscaling and frame generation are good technologies. People are upset at the marketing of graphics cards which abuse these technologies to announce impressive FPS numbers when the hardware isn’t as big of an upgrade as implied.
Marketing departments lying about their products isn’t new, but for some people this is the first time that they’ve noticed it affecting them. Instead of getting mad at companies for lying, they’re ignorantly attacking the technologies themselves.
Frame generation is a requirement if we’re going to see very high refresh rate (480hz+) displays become the norm. No card is rasterizing an entire scene 500 times per second.
Calling it fake frames is letting Internet memes stand in place of actual knowledge. There’s a lot of optimizations done in the rendering pipeline which use data from previous frames to generate future frames, generating an intermediate frame while waiting for the GPU to finish rendering the previous frame is just one trick.
The generated frame increases the visual clarity of motion, you can see at https://testufo.com/photo.
We’re not going to have cards that can pathtrace at 4k@1000hz anytime soon, frame generation is one of the techniques that will make it possible.
It’s one thing to be upset at companies marketing teams who try to confuse people with FPS numbers by tweaking up scaling and frame generation. Directing that frustration at the technology itself is silly.
e: a downvote, great argument
it’s there on others (edges can get a bit shimmery with tsr) but really bad with dlss
Yeah that’s my experience as well. TSR seems to be doing the same thing but it isn’t applying the oversharpening which makes them stand out.
What launch options are you using if you don’t mind?
ENABLE_HDR_WSI=1 PROTON_ENABLE_HDR=1 PROTON_ENABLE_WAYLAND=1 gamemoderun %command%
You have to be using GE-Proton10 or above in order to use Wayland’s HDR. I don’t think you need ENABLE_HDR_WSI (I believe PROTON_ENABLE_HDR makes Proton set a bunch of environmental variables on startup.) but I’m not sure.
Using GE-Proton10-15, HDR works great too.
I did notice the edge flickering artifacts with upscaling. XeSS is a bit higher quality than TSR but it also has the flickering. FSR framegen causes the flickering to happen on some particle effect that they use for atmosphere effects (like pieces of dust floating in the air) so it isn’t very usable currerntly.
The game isn’t perfect, but it’s very playable for me after some settings adjustments. I didn’t have any crashes in 5.5 hours of playtime, but I did notice the shader compiling stutter and there were some spots where you could tell that it was loading a zone if you walked over a specific point and I was in combat at the time so I ran across that point a few times and that caused some framerate issues.
A HUGE amount of the stuttering was eliminated by setting the Textures Streaming Speed to Very High, it looks like this is throttling disk IO for performance reasons. If you have an NVME SSD then I can’t think of a reason not to set it to reason not to set it to very high.
That’s good to know that Steam co-op works. I’ll try it later today, my friends are all running Linux too and didn’t want to buy a copy if it wasn’t going to work. I happened to be home yesterday so I was the guinea pig.
I tried updating the DLSS version (using PROTON_ENABLE_NGX_UPDATER=1), the flickering still occurs. Same with using RENDER_PRESET_K. It almost looks like they’re applying too much sharpening when you’re using DLSS, but I don’t see a way to adjust that specifically.
Playing, on Linux (Arch, btw) with no issues. The defaults were a bit harsh (45fps@4k) but once I ran the graphics setting autodetection and it went to medium with balanced upscaling I was getting 60+ FPS.
I couldn’t connect to the matchmaking servers (my system doesn’t meet the requirements, apparently) but it otherwise ran just fine.
Both the OP and the article are both about a Reddit post by one user who got a weird error when trying to run both games at the same time.
Then the lead developer at Riot responded on X explaining that the error was caused by running both clients at the same time.
That’s the entire story.
There’s nothing presented, in either article, that suggests that it is a widespread problem.
Just because the clickbait press is reporting the same story with different headlines doesn’t mean it is a widespread problem. They’re both writing about the same Reddit post and the same X reply.
It’s a non story
Why did you link an article that you haven’t read?
From your article:
AnAveragePlayer tried to run both games simultaneously on his PC, which led to the problems. This is generally not a particularly good idea, as both programs compete for the available hardware.
The problem can be easily solved by not trying to play two games at the same time. Which is actually impossible with two fast-paced first-person shooters.
The headline makes it sound worse than it is.
From the article:
Riot head of anti-cheat Phillip Koskinas cleared up the misunderstanding in an X post earlier this week.
“Vanguard is compatible with Javelin, and you don’t need to uninstall one anti-cheat to use the other. However, BF6 does not currently allow the VALORANT client to be running simultaneously, because both drivers race to protect regions of game memory with the same technique.”
So, you can play play BF6 and VALORANT at the same time… not exactly a massive issues unless you’re running a mainframe, I guess?
I thought it was a good idea too, I even watched the content for a bit.
It’s entertaining in a weird way, but watching some guy getting beat up and then seeing the, heavily edited, “evidence” being presented really turned me off. There was a controversy, the 18 year old guy showing up for a date with a “17 year old” and being assaulted was a real incident, and so the police were involved. Their investigation found all kinds of shady things: credit card fraud, CSAM, chat logs including sexual chats with minors etc.
It all sounds good in theory, but the kind of people who would choose to do this are not the kind of people who you would trust to do it effectively. It’s more like that they want to prey on people too and that’s a lot easier to do (i. e. Generate funding) if you’re pretending to do something noble.
These vigilante groups already existed, there’s an entire genre of “pedophile hunter” content creators that lure people (including children who were pretending to be adults) into traps, often in person, and film them being harassed/assaulted.
Not surprisingly, they use tactics that are illegal for law enforcement, like entrapment and fabricating data, and have very flimsy standards of guilt (which become even more flimsy if they need more content).
These guys are not heroes, go watch their videos. They’re people who want to illegally stalk, harass and assault people and use “protecting children” as cover.
You’re buying into their cover without critically examining their tactics, methods and results.
It sounds real good right up until it is your 18 year old son or nephew is lured by grown men into a fake date, assaulted on camera and blasted all over YouTube or social media as a pedophile.
These people are scumbags.
I mean the actions of predators also eventually resulted in the company and law enforcement actually doing something about the predators.
Being a part of the problem isn’t a solution.
If you look into how these guys operate, it’s not something you would support. For example they often conduct “undercover” stings where they pretend to be a child and exchange sexual message with other users in hopes of finding a predator.
In reality it’s some guys sexting random Roblox users (who are, statistically, primarily children). It looks exactly like a predator’s behavior, even if you believe their good intentions.
Law enforcement has procedures, some form of oversight of their operations and their interactions are documented.
I am one of those nerds.
I also use, on Arch, btw, a TPM, and self-sign my own UKIs in order to use secure boot.
The majority of cheats which effectively evade kernel anti-cheat won’t be affected. This will prevent efi cheats (cheats that load before Windows), but that’s about it.
It won’t prevent DMA access to memory and, unless they force using signed drivers (which, I think is a feature limited to Server packages) and only whitelisting specific hardware, something not really feasible if they want their game to run on a wide variety of computers, it’s trivial to hide these cards as a NIC or other innocuous hardware.
It also doesn’t prevent the aimbots that use computer vision running on external hardware because all they need to have out of the PC is display and they mimic being a mouse (another unwhitelistable piece of hardware).
What’s more is that this still requires them to make kernel anti-cheat. One of the easiest ways to get access to memory is to make and install a driver. The driver isn’t affected by secure boot (absent enforced driver signing, see above) and runs in ring0. The only way a game can detect that is to ALSO have software running in the kernel.
Though, to be fairrr, efi cheats are relatively simple and cheap, as they don’t require extra hardware. So, it may be that this is the most common kind of undetectable cheat and worth enforcing secure boot in order to prevent. But the “best” cheats, DMA are unaffected. AI aimbots require cheaper hardware so they’ll probably become the next most popular cheat.
It’s not allowed.
There’s only one opinion on AI allowed on social media: It’s the worst thing to ever happen and produced by stealing from starving child artists. The ouput is somehow simultaneously the worst quality imaginable with no redeeming qualities and also about to put every creative out of a job by next quarter.
The fact that you don’t hold this opinion tells everyone what a horrible person that you are for not knowing the right opinion to have.
Enjoy being downvoted out of the conversation between tech illiterate children who believe everything they’re told and tech illiterate creatives who haven’t found a hyperbole that they cannot employ in their Luddite quest to stop advanced linear algebra
The language about collecting and using data have been in TOSs for basically every online service since the early '00s.
I’m not saying that this is okay. The data that these services collect, which we’ve given them unlimited rights to, has only become more valuable and the incentives for these companies are always for them to gather more data about you.
You can use archive.org if you want to look at older policies from the same company. But, if you pull up any other game with an online component you will see that they all are essentially “Don’t cheat our services or hide your identity, We’re going to collect your data and use it how we want, and you have to enter into binding arbitration” with various levels of detail and verbosity.
I’m sure I believe a lot of nonsense from reading the Internet.
That’s okay, we’re just human. The problem is when people try to ‘inform’ people of things that they ‘know’ from reading social media. That’s how these situations are created, so many people believe this because so many other people believe it and then repeat it as fact without themselves ever checking.
It’s like a feedback loop of ignorance, caused entirely by people who care more about getting social credit for talking and less about saying things that are true.
The point is that the license agreement for this game and others owned by this company didn’t say this shit before, and now they do.
That’s just not true.
Here’s a Reddit user trying the same kind out outrage farming 7 years ago using Take 2’s TOS and implying it allows spyware: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/8naopt/take_two_a_spyware_apocalypse/
If you look at Valve’s TOS or any other game developer who has games with an online component, you will see the exact same language regarding data collection. The language being added is to comply with laws, like the GDPR, which requires specific language indicating what data is collected and how it is used.
The data that is being collected is the same as it was 10 years ago. There’s nothing new here, just a YT video that got a lot of views and social media being full of people who don’t fact check anything.
Thats a windows thing so it can put files in “protected” folders like program files
The unfortunate thing about the UAC prompt is that it gives the software permission to put files in protected folders, but it also gives the software root permission so it can do literally anything else without prompting the user. Except, I believe, if it tries to install unsigned kernel drivers, then the user has to click a new prompt… but you can completely compromise a machine with the permissions that users routinely give to executables that they download from the Internet.
They added spyware to it.
No, they didn’t.
Just because something sounds outrageous, doesn’t mean it is true.
Borderlands 2 hasn’t been updated since 2022:
Borderlands - Last updated: 3 August 2016 Borderlands 2 - Last updated: 4 August 2022 Borderlands 3 - Last updated: 8 August 2024
No Borderlands titles include anti-cheat: https://areweanticheatyet.com/?search=borderlands
Here is another person, 7 years ago trying the exact same outrage-based engagement farming strategy of linking a TOS update and implying a nefarious intent: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/8naopt/take_two_a_spyware_apocalypse/ It’s exactly the same “Take two is spying on you!!!” content and yet, none of the Borderlands games have added spyware and none have added kernel anti-cheat.
Also, if you read the 2018 and 2025 TOS you will notice notice that the information that they collect in the 2025 TOS ( https://www.take2games.com/legal/en-US/ ) is exactly the same as it was in 2018.
TL;DR - Just because you read it on the Internet, doesn’t mean it is true.
It is also worth nothing that no Borderlands games use anti-cheat, much less kernel anti-cheat. I’d even go as far as to say that no Gearbox, Take2 or 2k Games use kernel anti-cheat.
This is boilerplate language for games which include an online service component. Publishers often use the same Terms of Service across all of their games, so they include language that is often irrelevant for any specific game.
The only thing that’s different about this is that there are a bunch of bored people who consume engagement farming content, which often make outrageous claims in order to earn money from engagement farming. This “story” is not an actual story, but it is a great example of how a mob can be summoned with some creative writing and a credulous audience.
So…if Steam is running in a Flatpak, and Borderlands is launched from Steam, how much can they even see…really?
Without using exploits to escape the container, not much. A very empty Windows environment with a single game installed, your network interfaces and any directories that the Flatpak has access to (usually just the SteamLibrary directories).
The TOS (https://www.take2games.com/legal/en-US/) changes are mostly related to data that they collect via their interfacing with Steam and through their website. This idea that they’re requiring you to agree to a root level access or installing a spyware rootkit is just nonsense.
He said it
That not misinformation…
It is misinformation if the things he said are not true.
So, let’s look into the claims.
Here’s the TOS:
https://www.take2games.com/legal/en-US/
There is nothing about root level access.
In addition, if you look at the patch history for Borderlands 2 on SteamDB, you will see that the last update for the game was 4 August 2022.
So, to be clear:
There is nothing in the TOS that requires you to submit to a rootkit and there is no spyware that has been added. The comment in the OP is simply wrong.
This is what happens when you simply read social media and repeat what you’ve heard without checking to see if you’re spreading misinformation.
Yeah, marketing lies. I mentioned this in the last paragraph.
You’re skeptical of the benefits, that is obvious.
You’re wrong about it being subjective though. There are peer reviewed methods of creating photographs that display motion blur as a human eye would experience it. People have been using these techniques to evaluate monitors for years now. Here’s a very high level overview of the state of objective testing: https://blurbusters.com/massive-upgrade-with-120-vs-480-hz-oled-much-more-visible-than-60-vs-120-hz-even-for-office/ . We are seeing diminishing returns because it, roughly, takes a doubling in the refresh rate to cut the motion blur in half. 60-120 is half as blurry, 144 to 240 is only 25% less blurry.
If you want to keep seeing noticeable gains, up to being imperceptible, then display refresh rates need to continue to double and there have to be new frames generated for each of those refresh rates. Even if a card can do 480fps on some limited games, it can’t do 1000fps, or 2000fps.
We need exponential increases in monitor refresh rates in order to achieve improvements in motion blur, but graphics cards have not been making exponential increases in power in quite some time.
Rasterization and Raytracing performance growth is sub-exponential while the requirements for reducing motion blur are exponential. So either monitor companies can decide to stop improving (not likely since TCL just demoed a 4k 1000hz monitor) or there has to be some technological solution for filling the gap.
That technological solution is frame generation.
Unless you know of some other way to introduce exponential growth in processing power (if you did you would win multiple Nobel prizes), then we have to use something that isn’t raw rendering. There is no way for a game to ‘optimize’ its way into having 10x framerate, or 100x framerate.
Yes, game companies are lazy and they cover the laziness by marketing their game with a lot of upscaling so that they can keep producing crazier and crazier graphics despite graphics cards performance growth not keeping up. This is the fault of gaming companies and their marketing and not of upscaling and frame generation technology
Frame generation gives all cards better FPS, which objectively smooths out motion. Going from 30 to 60 fps cuts motion blur in half. Nothing supposed about it.
A developer’s choice to optimize their game and their choice to support upscaling and frame generation are not mutually exclusive choices. There are plenty of examples of games which run well natively and also support frame generation and upscaling.
Also, frame generation only adds latency when the frame time is long (low FPS). As the source framerate increases the input latency and the frame time converge. In addition, it’s possible to use frame generation to reduce input delay (blur busters: https://blurbusters.com/frame-generation-essentials-interpolation-extrapolation-and-reprojection/). Input latency is a very solvable problem.
My point is that you’re not understanding the trajectory of display hardware development vs the graphics card performance growth and presenting frame generation and upscaling as some plot by game developers and graphics card designers so that they can produce worse products.
It’s conspiracy nonsense.