Funcom told us they wouldn’t. They upgraded to 4.15 during Early Access. It took a ton of resources and time to do so. So they have a really good idea of what it would take. Now we’re dozens of major updates later plus nearly a dozen DLC later.
Do they not want to upgrade? No. They absolutely do. They’d love to be in UE5, they’ve said that. But engine upgrades this far in development are a fantasy. I’ve been on a game project that had an engine upgrade. In the time it takes to get everything working and swapped over, it upgrades again. It sucks. But this is how these things go.
And just to reiterate, its not only on 4.15, its on a custom 4.15. There is features made in the custom engine for Conan Exiles to use. All of those things would not only be needed to be ported over, but analyzed to even see if they can be. If not, then its simply a no-go. And it wouldn’t just be Conan Exiles that would need to be redone from the ground up. But mods like Pippi and others who have been in development for years. Potentially causing a major problem for the majority of players who play on PC private servers.
But as Multigun has said, there’s many discussions, developer response in both forums and videos, and so forth. If it requires anything past 4.15, its a dead subject.
My only comment was it was not for us forum posters to say whether or not another may post about a subject on these forums. That is for again Funcom to decide. If you don’t personally want to read about a post subject again simply put don’t , but we posters do not get tell other posters what they are allowed to post about.
Yup, minds and plans are always subject to change.
One thing I can attest to, is that implementing either DLSS or FSR is one of the simplest tech injections I’ve looked at in a long time! The schemes occur very late in the pipeline so there isn’t much testing to do and all of the hard work is already done in both cases. FSR would be my first choice for a heavy project though. It works equally well on either platform AMD or NVidia and supports a massive backlog of older hardware. The implementation of FSR would affect nearly 100% of FC’s player base; so all these “worth it” arguments kinda fly out that window at that point. To say as well, that the current state of FSR can be as affective and look as good as DLSS in almost all cases. And of course as stated previously, FSR isn’t version dependent on any tools that might be in use.
Beats me. It likely could be if a) FC thought is was even needed at all and b) they decided to do it. It wouldn’t be a bad thing in any way I can conceive of. It’s all just up to Funcom.
I understand that only the dev can decide whether to upgrade an engine or consider suggestions.
From my point of view, it is not a question of possibility, because it is possible to add DLSS support to an earlier released game. Examples may be No Man’s Sky (Release 2016, DLSS 2021) or Minecraft (Release 2009, DLSS 2020). Both games run on custom engines, and they did it with an SDK provided by NVidia.
So it is purely a question of cost-effectiveness - I think all can agree with that. So I thought it worthwhile to mention that it became easier (meaning more cost-effective) to implement DLSS than in the past.
I didn’t mean to be disrespectful to the dev by posting a description and links in my suggestion.
I thought it might be helpful and easier for them to implement if they don’t have to search for downloads and documentation. And easier again means more cost-effective.
Also, even though the people at Funcom are professionals that know their share about recent developments in the industry, they are also working on multiple games atm and may not have the time to read every patch note of a new DLSS release, and DLSS made huge progress since it’s the first release.
Also considering that there is a Dune game coming, that will (I think) probably feature DLSS, adding it to CE may be easier based on know-how collected for Dune, or the other way around - adding it to CE could be a test scenario that would be helpful for Dune.
And if it is not, if I am wrong with everything, it is still just a suggestion.
Nobody did that, unless you choose to interpret “/thread” as some kind of a command to stop posting, rather than a very short way of saying “and thus anything else written past this point is pretty much pointless”. And let’s face it, the rest was pretty pointless.
I think it is rude - just a fancy way to say “shut up”. And I think it wasn’t pointless - but that is subjective.
If you deem a thread to be pointless, I suggest not writing or reading in it.
You wouldn’t meddle into a conversation of strangers on street either, just to say “topic ended”.
It’s pointless to discover and learn about the software we use, the individuals developing and designing it, the policies and mindsets which direct it, and the potential in any of those areas for change or growth?
I am sorry I will have to respectfully disagree with disregarding someone’s opinion just to replace with one else’s “more important one”. I don’t want to go down any rabbit holes with anyone . At the end of the day there was a lot of opinon on whether the subject was explored enough or not . That seems to have been the base issue midway throught the thread. /thread posted not by the OP on their thread in many circles is considered rude.
@TeleTesselator seems on their post 6 hours ago to have the same point of view as me on this though didn’t go exactly the same route as I do/did though I have no issues what so ever with that as they are not trying to just kill the discussion outright.
Yeah, this kind of thing is exactly why I called the rest of the thread pointless, because people can’t deal with the fact that not all opinions are equal.
Then again, I don’t wanna go down any rabbit holes, either. I’ve seen this kind of discussion way too many times, and @Multigun summed it all up already.
To offer feedback and suggestions, and discuss them. Nothing I’ve said here invalidates that idea. But there’s also the possibility that some of the feedback and suggestions presented on this forum might not be good ones, no matter how well-intended.
Your suggestion wasn’t a very good one. Several people pointed out why and explained it in detail. Yet here we are, adding a whole bunch of off-topic noise and making a big deal out of how one of those people was “rude”.
Sure, but almost everything s/he said depended on it being DLSS and nothing else. As soon as FSR enters the discussion nearly all the points s/he made become moot.
Anyway, I have no idea what’s going on with all this “/thread” nonsense, seems more childish and controlling than even I - and that’s pretty bad. On the other hand I dunno what else there is to discuss. Both DLSS and FSR are easily implementable to any game engine including CE’s if only Funcom so decides it’s advantageous to do so. FSR would allow for higher frame rates for all CE players on all platforms just as a simple mater of fact. In excluding FSR from the overall consideration @Multigun kinda did theirself a disservice - such a nice long and thoughtful message blown away via the alteration of a single variable.
Oh well, whatever, I don’t think any of this really matters outside of academics, as it’s totally Funcom’s call and probably not a feature which they would consider user feedback about. I could always be wrong though.
On the other hand I dunno what else there is to discuss. Both DLSS and FSR are easily implementable to any game engine including CE’s if only Funcom so decides it’s advantageous to do so. FSR would allow for higher frame rates for all CE players on all platforms just as a simple mater of fact. In excluding FSR from the overall consideration 