Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of games with FSR support


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling. czar 23:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

List of games with FSR support

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I don't see how on earth this qualifies to be a wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not a support website. Article fails WP:GNG and probably more than that. Govvy (talk) 20:57, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

So its the same thing as the page for DLSS support. The page isn't fully complete yet and needs a little work but its an informative article. 7Prefix7 (talk) 21:24, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * agree, see List of games with ray tracing support and List of games with DLSS support --92.206.225.115 (talk) 22:19, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree? You logged out of your username to post from your IP raises a red flag if you ask me. Govvy (talk) 22:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree too, this page is just like the page on DLSS support. DLSS is limited to Nvidia GPUs while FSR works on both AMD and NVIDIA GPUs. Amir Abdullah (talk) 00:17, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it's an informative page just like the DLSS one. Badhunter0303 (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree too, it's just like the DLSS page, it's too early to judge while the page is still being written and maintained. Edit: seeing the other discussions, and the fact that the DLSS page has been merged into a unified List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling then I highly recommend to merge this as well into that, it will be much easier to maintain and more helpful for the community than two separate articles, especially when the list becomes longer and some games can support both technologies in the same time. Xajel (talk) 08:07, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Grovy you seem to be making a conspiracy theory that person has been making edits without an account. This is also an informative article you seem emotionally invested in trying to get removed for unknown reasons this isn't a support page no one is helping people figure out fixes for things its just a collection of information about a technology similar to the pages I have helped on with DirectX and other technologies. This is also the exact same as the DLSS article which is up. 7Prefix7 (talk) 01:51, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Generally speaking, if pages like List of games with DLSS support and List of games with ray tracing support are to be allowed, then I don't see why this one wouldn't be. Are those similarly "Support articles?" If you would like to delete those (not necessarily deleting the article describing Deep learning super sampling of course) then I suppose I'd tend to agree. Obviously I haven't contributed much or logged in much recently; but I was looking at this article and noticed the deletion request. I think Svetroid has sound logic that would include this, as per their post on the talk page of List of games with DLSS support: "At any rate, I believe this article as well as this this related article deserve to stay up as standalone pages due to the lack of online centralized resources providing this specific information, where Wikipedia is perfect for filling in that gap. Svetroid (talk) 06:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)" Perhaps it's lacking some refinement, but it otherwise feels as valid as the many other lists of games meeting very specific criteria. Silvershot10 (talk) 07:09, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Corrected a mistake where I linked to the wrong article. Silvershot10 (talk) 07:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Move to FidelityFX Super Resolution and slightly refocus to be a general article on the technology, rather than a list of games. There are a few decent references in the article, but they're mainly focused on the technology in general, rather than lists of games that support it. Since there only seems to be 19 games that support/have announced support for the tech I don't think the list is long enough to require a split into a separate article at the moment, and the current lead does a decent job of summarising what the technology is. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 11:15, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, after making my prior post, I thought this might be a better option; or moving both of them to GPUOpen. FSR itself might only be stub worthy at the moment; and it's part of the GPUOpen library. A list of games/software that supports GPUOpen and its different features might be more valuable. Silvershot10 (talk) 14:32, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * My thought was that there are multiple in depth sources covering the technology - both the pieces by the verge and the piece by PC gamer are substantial, reliable, independent coverage - so the technology itself appears to be notable. The list of games, however, is mostly sourced to press releases and promotional material, so it does not appear to satisfy WP:LISTN. If a substantial number of games add support for the technology there may be an argument for a standalone list serving a useful navigational purpose per WP:LISTPURP, but with so few entries I'm not seeing any reason why this couldn't be integrated into the article on the technology for now. I would remove the unsourced table of "developers that have pledged to support FSR" rework the sentence about Microsoft supporting the technology into the lead and refocus the article on the technology, part of which could include a list of games that support it. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 14:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Comments My name is spelt Govvy, not Grovy, lets see, what Wikipedia is not. We have WP:NOTDIR Wikipedia is not a directory, there is WP:NOTGUIDE and certainly it's not a support website. Which I feel the article and the others of this type kinda violate. Do you see where I am coming from? I don't use reddit that much, and I am use to sock-puppetry. I've never heard or ever seen mass reddit interference before to an AfD and I've been editing wikipedia on and off for years! Now I learned something new, you can exploit reddit for ones gain at AfD. Although all very interesting, I fail to see how any of the comments above have provided any solid wikipedia policy based arguments for keeping. Govvy (talk) 11:45, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that's a fair assessment. There is, however, a significant number of articles which are very similar to this one. It'd be quite the undertaking to try to delete all of them. Silvershot10 (talk) 14:32, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Groovy this list fits the exact same as dozens of other similar lists. Also please stop spreading conspiracy theories against me or I am going to report you to the admins. There is nothing about this list that makes it violate any wikipedia rules and unless you are going to remove all these similar lists like list of games with ray tracing technology, list of games with dlss support and even things like list of unreal engine games etc this list should stand. This is not a support page its an informative standalone list that just mentions the games that support it. You seem very disingenuous in this argument and very emotionally pushed to want this gone for unknown reasons. This is a popular technology where people are constantly googling to figure out what games have support for and wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia of information for various topics to help people in need of information. 7Prefix7 (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

While I agree with the statement above "A list of games/software that supports GPUOpen and its different features might be more valuable." by silvershot it could actually be good to fit it there because of the way other lists are on wikipedia especially considering that we have a page for RTX games and DLSS games separately because they are different. GPU open is a huge suite of tools and as of right now FSR has not been added to GPUOpen its only coming soon. It has already been released as a standalone tech and implemented in 8 games with dozens of studios pledging to support it in new titles. 7Prefix7 (talk) 19:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Conspiracy theories? You can't even spell me name right, that's pretty much a fact! I don't trust you, you've already shown you have violated WP:COPYVIO, you haven't given any wikipedia policy response for keeping the article yet. There is already an ANI post, you can complain there about me, but I doubt anyone would be interested! Govvy (talk) 19:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Helping people is more important than following some rules/policies (depends on the rules/policies that are being broken of course and the people that is being helped). And Govvy, “Complaining about a problem without posing a solution is called whining.” Badhunter0303 (talk) 20:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

The page is fine, informative, and absolutely in line with Wikipedia policies. There are plenty of List pages, from List of Netflix original programming to List of Bethesda Softworks video games and List of compositions by Richard Strauss to probably several hundreds more. All are quite useful, I know I use some of them several times a week. 128.140.142.58 (talk) 23:13, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I am not as well-versed with Wikipedia's guidelines as Govvy, but as a technology journalist, I find pages like these to be incredibly helpful when doing research - and isn't research the reason people come to Wikipedia? These are not "support" pages. They are useful to gamers who care about the technologies. --Deathspawner (talk) 23:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete As Wikipedia is not a directory or guide. This seems to be an indiscrimate list rather than anything encyclopedic. doktorb wordsdeeds 04:33, 28 June 2021 (UTC)


 * For the consideration of discussion participants and admins reviewing this DR: the creator of the article recently shared it on Reddit's /r/Amd, a community about the company that created the technology that is the subject of the article. The post is currently the second most upvoted submission in this community that has almost a million subscribers and several thousand concurrent users, and in the comment section of the post, the hate train on "Wikipedia gatekeepers" is in full swing due to the deletion request. Also, the comments here about "other list articles" echo comments made there. This may explain the presence and activity by some IPs and users with little previous activity.
 * In fact, it seems the idea for creating this article was suggested in that same community a couple of days before the article itself was shared as a submission. Just something to consider when evaluating the discussion here. --Veikk0.ma 04:43, 28 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete, at least for now. As already stated by others, Wikipedia is not a directory (there are plenty of list articles that shouldn't exist, so that's not an excuse), and there is another article which merges information on games with high-fidelity image upscaling technology, which currently includes both DLSS and FSR and has the potential to also be useful for other such technologies as well.
 * Furthermore, the technology has only been out for less than a week. It remains to be seen whether FSR will establish itself as the kind of widely known-about and long-term marketed technology in the same way as DLSS has. Because AMD has stated that FSR will be released under an MIT license somewhere around mid-July, it's possible it will become so ubiquituous that making a list of games that use it wouldn't make sense, just like a list of games using MSAA or various other technologies in common use today wouldn't make sense. And since MIT licenses are highly permissive, marketing around the feature, AMD branding, or even the use of the name "FidelityFX Super Resolution" won't be required of the games that use the technology. The current wave of games using FSR are doing so explicitly in partnership with AMD, since the technology isn't yet open-source.
 * Waiting costs nothing. If a dedicated list article seems appropriate in a few months, the page can be re-created. In the meantime, interested editors can help improve the page List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling. --Veikk0.ma 05:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge to List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling, at the very least this appears to be an unnecessary fork of an existing article, opinion on whether they count as a directory notwithstanding.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling. This was created as someone on Reddit was slightly annoyed that there was an article on list of games with DLSS support (which has been merged to the aforementioned) but not one on the equivalent AMD technology.  Merging is the completely reasonable option and will solve all of our problems. We don't need a separate article on this or DLSS and I don't doubt that the list of all games that support this tech is notable enough for its own page. The hype about Reddit canvassing is overblown given that the OP of that thread didn't actually canvass but merely linked the article which wasn't nominated for deletion at the time. That being said I would like to see an inline citation for every entry. Chess (talk) (please use&#32; on reply) 08:30, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete List_of_games_with_FSR_support and maintain and update the merge List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling as long as having a list with FSR supported games is still useful. Badhunter0303 (talk) 10:16, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * That should be a merge or at least redirect rather than delete, this article title is very much a plausible search term.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:06, 28 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge per Chess. Sungodtemple (talk) 12:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.