"Don't come in here talking about anti-consumer behavior when nVidia is far and away the worst offender. "
Already dealt with... yes nVidia has done shady stuff in the past and nVidia have hauled over the coals for it as per the video posted .... that does not give AMD a free pass. Both companies should be held to the same standard yet you a Salty AMD fanboy seem to be willing to let AMD away with things - they aren't going to give you free stuff you know because you support them - you are still only a walking $ as far as they are concerned and they are not your friend.
"It's been said over and over but DLSS can't run on AMD hardware. Therefore, using your same logic as being applied to this game situation, nVidia is blocking AMD GPU's."
Nope... that thinking is just plain wrong, nVidia is allowed to develop features that only work with its hardware as is AMD, no one is stopping them so this one does not even hold water. The fact of the matter is AMD does not have the hardware to be able to do this and that's an AMD problem, not an nVidia problem.
"If DLSS is so great and so good for the consumer, nVidia should do that."
Why... Why should nVidia write what would be an inferior product for hardware which doesn't meet the requirements anyway and that they didn't develop. Of course they want you buying nVidia but that is not nVidia entering into agreements which specifically blocks their competitors from being included in a 3rd party product which is what it is suspected that AMD is doing so again a flawed argument on your part.
"Regardless of FSR being inferior, you thinking killing it is pro-consumer? "
I suggested you let the technologies go head to head and which ever one could not compete should die which suggests from your statement that you already know that the AMD product is inferior.
"You think there's any case at all for the FTC when talking about one competitor not implementing another competitor's proprietary technology? "
That's not what I said was happening here, we are not talking about AMD being forced to implement DLSS we are talking about AMD not being allowed to block DLSS from being added to games as AMD it is believed through agreements with 3rd parties it blocking nVidia DLSS - that is what the no no is. You guys really do enjoy twisting words into salad don't you?
"Upscaling technologies are not core to the playability and purpose of the game. If this was a case of Starfield being blocked on nVidia GPU's altogether, or purposeful artificial performance drops for the competition, yes, that would actually be unethical and wrong. "
No it's a case of AMD trying to force non AMD users to suffer an inferior experience because AMD does not want them to have a superior experience on the competitors product thus showing the AMD product to be inferior... that is anti consumer and unethical. AMD is punishing the consumer for not buying AMD product and forcing them to use something inferior.
This statement is irrelevant to this conversation "you can be guaranteed that if AMD developed better FSR tech" -- they are working on it, lol. It doesn't happen overnight. FSR 2 was a nice jump over 1. It's only by. Perhaps what AMD really needs to do is keep FSR going forward as open source but focus more on RSR to offer a proprietary upscaler that better rivals DLSS."
We are talking about what is going on NOW not what AMD MIGHT do in the future.
For god sake watch the HUB video - it explains everything that you are going on about in far better detail it's like you deliberately trying to obfuscate proceedings in the favor of AMD which would make you a "salty AMD fanboi"
