Nvidia responds to Batman:AA

You know what you missing on ATI fanboys? On great gaming.
I'm a gamer first and hardware enthusiast second. And from GF2 days i was never disappointed with Nvidia. In most of the titles that i playd they made sure i get the best experience on their hardware. Almost any game i pick up now has TWIMTBP logo. What does that say? That Nvidia is working for a gamer with a game company.
I give ATI that they can make great cards. 9800pro for a while was a great card for its time. The recent line looks great. They can really make raw performance cards. But what is lacking is ATI involvement in game industry. Face it they are more of a hardware company.

And for people that think that it's simple to make better use of the hardware why does Nvidia release way more drivers then ATI? I almost always could get customized drivers for the current games. Hell almost every two weeks there is a driver. Support means allot to me.

Seriously any sane person would acknowledge that stuff like this is what really exposes ati and makes them look bad in gamer opinion. Most people are not fanatical hardware junkis and will simply buy stuff that works better. Why shouldn't i get maximum benefit for my hardware? i wish ati would stop talking and start doing.

One more point: There is allot of amatures here who do not understand software development and release control. I was involved in projects that would release to 300K users all over the world. If the feature can not be validated 100% working there could never be a release of it. The consequences are to grave for a large release. All the developer needs is 1000's of users having issues. We as of now do not know if this AA is 100% flawless with ATI cards do we? It is not a natural feature of the engine. It might work 95% on ati cards but until its tested and validated it will not go for a production release to possibly millions of users around the globe. What do you propose that Eidos gets all versions of ati cards and make their developers play the game to make sure you wont get lockups or weird artifact? Where is the involment from ATI side i ask you? When i release a software product i want it to be as less bug free as possible. And for quality reason I'm with the developer for not releasing 100% working feature.

LOE, so you're mad that NVidia doesn't support you for having an ATi card?

Does ford give you car support if you buy a chevy?
Can you call sony to fix your xbox 360?
Will Coke give you a refund if you buy a pepsi that turns out to be flat?

Think about this for a minute...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by railer

One more point: There is allot of amatures here who do not understand software development and release control. I was involved in projects that would release to 300K users all over the world. If the feature can not be validated 100% working there could never be a release of it. The consequences are to grave for a large release. All the developer needs is 1000's of users having issues. We as of now do not know if this AA is 100% flawless with ATI cards do we? It is not a natural feature of the engine. It might work 95% on ati cards but until its tested and validated it will not go for a production release to possibly millions of users around the globe. What do you propose that Eidos gets all versions of ati cards and make their developers play the game to make sure you wont get lockups or weird artifact? Where is the involment from ATI side i ask you? When i release a software product i want it to be as less bug free as possible. And for quality reason I'm with the developer for not releasing 100% working feature.

---

You're kidding right? What the fook are you talking about? Each and every game that launch needs to be patched (most often numerous times) afterward. There's no such thing as 100% validated in software busyness, not even close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by railer

You know what you missing on ATI fanboys? On great gaming.
I'm a gamer first and hardware enthusiast second. And from GF2 days i was never disappointed with Nvidia. In most of the titles that i playd they made sure i get the best experience on their hardware. Almost any game i pick up now has TWIMTBP logo. What does that say? That Nvidia is working for a gamer with a game company.
I give ATI that they can make great cards. 9800pro for a while was a great card for its time. The recent line looks great. They can really make raw performance cards. But what is lacking is ATI involvement in game industry. Face it they are more of a hardware company.

And for people that think that it's simple to make better use of the hardware why does Nvidia release way more drivers then ATI? I almost always could get customized drivers for the current games. Hell almost every two weeks there is a driver. Support means allot to me.

Seriously any sane person would acknowledge that stuff like this is what really exposes ati and makes them look bad in gamer opinion. Most people are not fanatical hardware junkis and will simply buy stuff that works better. Why shouldn't i get maximum benefit for my hardware? i wish ati would stop talking and start doing.

One more point: There is allot of amatures here who do not understand software development and release control. I was involved in projects that would release to 300K users all over the world. If the feature can not be validated 100% working there could never be a release of it. The consequences are to grave for a large release. All the developer needs is 1000's of users having issues. We as of now do not know if this AA is 100% flawless with ATI cards do we? It is not a natural feature of the engine. It might work 95% on ati cards but until its tested and validated it will not go for a production release to possibly millions of users around the globe. What do you propose that Eidos gets all versions of ati cards and make their developers play the game to make sure you wont get lockups or weird artifact? Where is the involment from ATI side i ask you? When i release a software product i want it to be as less bug free as possible. And for quality reason I'm with the developer for not releasing 100% working feature.

---

Are you pretending to imply that people who is criticizing that behaviour in this thread is a fanboy or something?

That's a pretty good way to start and lose all credit for the rest of the post. I think the word fanboy is starting to be overabused in forums as an intend to weaken other people opinions. Particularly coming from fanboys themselves, I should add. Ironic, isn't it? Not everybody (indeed, I should say that lots of people aren't) are interested to follow a vendor like if it were a sports team, I should add.

I shouldn't bother to give an answer to a post who start with a few disqualifications and false assumptions as a way to reinforce a basically unsure affirmation, but:

*OK, you're right, companies never launch a product without beeing 100% sure about everything working perfectly on all hardware. Must be the reason why I have never seen a bug in a game.

*Even more sure is that they have tested everything they have coded in their game for every piece of hardware, but they run out of time and they couln't test that specific feature on ATi hw. I don't know how to describe how hilarious that sounds to me...

*Mmmmh, Eidos must be the most inept game vendor in the world following your logic, since it's the first time that I know of that a working feature is disabled on specific brands of hw because they have not had time to test it.

EDIT: And let's try to keep on topic, please. We are not debating (suposedly) about which company has greatest developer support, but about the fact of Eidos disabling a feature of their game to one of the currently two main brands of domestic graphic hardware on the market.

Quote:

---

You're kidding right? What the fook are you talking about? Each and every game that launch needs to be patched (most often numerous times) afterward. There's no such thing as 100% validated in software busyness, not even close.

---

So you saying that i should knowingly release a feature that I'm not sure about it?
FAIL:down:

Quote:

---

That's a pretty good way to start and lose all credit for the rest of the post. I think the word fanboy is starting to be overabused in forums as an intend to weaken other people opinions. Particularly coming from fanboys themselves, I should add. Ironic, isn't it? Not everybody (indeed, I should say that lots of people aren't) are interested to follow a vendor like if it were a sports team, I should add.

---

You are missing the point. I'm a gamer. I don't care about all these things you mention. All i care is that my games are supported. I will buy which ever gpu does that best.
Btwy. Those physics effects with AA do look kind of nice in BAA. I enjoy it so much. I'm glad i made a wise choice for this exact reason.
:welcome:

Nvidia release beta drivers almost every days without support.
Why not put these Nvidia PhysX+ATI GPU in beta put a nice disclaimer et 'voilà'!
Same for Rocksteady and the AA feature in BAA!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by railer

You are missing the point. I'm a gamer. I don't care about all these things you mention. All i care is that my games are supported. I will buy which ever gpu does that best.
Btwy. Those physics effects with AA do look kind of nice in BAA. I enjoy it so much. I'm glad i made a wise choice for this exact reason.
:welcome:

---

And as a gamer you should be worried about companies doing things to make money at the expense of gamers. But I think you're missing your own point... if you don't care about all those things that I mention... why have you wrote a 5 paragraphs post about them? I'm sorry, but I don't mind about what you care or not. You have said some things, and I have answered them. Oh, and you should care about making assumptions about people when talking/writing with them.

Oh, and I'm glad you're enjoying your purchase decisions. But I couldn't care less :up:

So let me get this straight, This game did not have AA, Nv came along and helped them make AA work on there hardware but did not spend any time/money validating it for there competition. So what's the problem again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gallag

So let me get this straight, This game did not have AA, Nv came along and helped them make AA work on there hardware but did not spend any time/money validating it for there competition. So what's the problem again?

---

Apparently that's bullying to these guys.

"well, if they're going to spend time/money/resources to make it work for them then they should make it work for AMD too !!!1!1!!!one!1!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gallag

So let me get this straight, This game did not have AA, Nv came along and helped them make AA work on there hardware but did not spend any time/money validating it for there competition. So what's the problem again?

---

How about-
So let me get this straight,this game did not have dx11 support,ati came along and helped them make dx11 work on their hardware but did not spend any time/money validating it for their competition.So what's the problem again?

haven't you guys learnt something by now about the modern world?

the one who is an ass always wins, example's? nvidia and apple would be one's that feature in tech. It applies itself to people too, there was a survey about a month back saying that people who were complete :banana: :banana: :banana: holes in the office got payed more than people who were polite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Helloworld_98

there was a survey about a month back saying that people who were complete :banana: :banana: :banana: holes in the office got payed more than people who were polite.

---

how does one do a survey like that?

Question One: Are you a jerk (Yes/No)
Question Two: How much do you make

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by railer

So you saying that i should knowingly release a feature that I'm not sure about it?
FAIL:down:

---

FAIL is yours as i never said that. I'll make it clear for you to understand, every piece of complex software that's released these days has bugs, flaws and whatnot :fact:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

how does one do a survey like that?

Question One: Are you a jerk (Yes/No)
Question Two: How much do you make

---

:ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

how does one do a survey like that?

Question One: Are you a jerk (Yes/No)
Question Two: How much do you make

---

Asking people to rate how much do they hate every of their workmates, and then comparing the list of higher ranked to lower ranked with the salaries? :D

btw, thread title is "Nvidia responds to Batman" lol

And Batman responds:

SWEAR TO ME!!!!!!!!!

http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/imag...1233622213.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by railer

One more point: There is allot of amatures here who do not understand software development and release control. I was involved in projects that would release to 300K users all over the world. If the feature can not be validated 100% working there could never be a release of it. The consequences are to grave for a large release. All the developer needs is 1000's of users having issues. We as of now do not know if this AA is 100% flawless with ATI cards do we? It is not a natural feature of the engine. It might work 95% on ati cards but until its tested and validated it will not go for a production release to possibly millions of users around the globe. What do you propose that Eidos gets all versions of ati cards and make their developers play the game to make sure you wont get lockups or weird artifact? Where is the involment from ATI side i ask you? When i release a software product i want it to be as less bug free as possible. And for quality reason I'm with the developer for not releasing 100% working feature

---

With some big, mission critical, piece of software then yeah, debugging on every possible hardware/software config is important. But games are programed on industry standards, tested on the most common hardware, and sent out to the world. How much more in depth the testing goes depends on the developer. But having a feature in a game and not bothering to test if it on the only other major (discreet) graphics vendor's hardware speaks of one thing - laziness. And I program in x86 assembly for fun, so you won't get much sympathy out of me for lazy developers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gallag

So let me get this straight, This game did not have AA, Nv came along and helped them make AA work on there hardware but did not spend any time/money validating it for there competition. So what's the problem again?

---

The problem is that the developer takes the same amount of money for the game from NV and ATI customers, but doesn't give the latter half the features in the game. This isn't something like physics where they had to decide beforehand what API to use - which then excluded other hardware automatically. This is a feature that both the manufacturers handle just fine (AA). But the developers decided it wasn't worth the effort to include that feature for their ATI customers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamervivek

How about-
So let me get this straight,this game did not have dx11 support,ati came along and helped them make dx11 work on their hardware but did not spend any time/money validating it for their competition.So what's the problem again?

---

Big difference... DX11 is an api. You see, as long as your hardware is 100% compliant with the standard then it will work down the line.

Meanwhile, according to eidos and rocksteady, they implemented a different form of AA to make it work in Batman, as the engine does NOT support AA by default. It wasn't a DX standard form of AA, and as such would require verification to make sure it works as required.

See the difference here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

Big difference... DX11 is an api. You see, as long as your hardware is 100% compliant with the standard then it will work down the line.

Meanwhile, according to eidos and rocksteady, they implemented a different form of AA to make it work in Batman, as the engine does NOT support AA by default. It wasn't a DX standard form of AA, and as such would require verification to make sure it works as required.

See the difference here?

---

DX11 is an API, but whatever code you write over that API to implement whatever features you want, is your work.

The AA which we are talking about here, is programmed over DX9/10 (dunno which). So it's exactly the same. It's a feature you're coding over the API you are using.

Every code you have to write (whatever you get previously written) is code you have to write. Be it to implement features based on the new possibilities of a new API, be it to implement features based on the old possibilities of the old API.

The fact that the AA didn't come default in UE3 isn't any different than the new DX11 based effects being programmed on GRID2 didn't come default on their DX9/10 version of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

Big difference... DX11 is an api. You see, as long as your hardware is 100% compliant with the standard then it will work down the line.

Meanwhile, according to eidos and rocksteady, they implemented a different form of AA to make it work in Batman, as the engine does NOT support AA by default. It wasn't a DX standard form of AA, and as such would require verification to make sure it works as required.

See the difference here?

---

But unless they used some NV hardware specific AA method they probably used industry standard function calls. If they used standard shader calls then there is no reason that it shouldn't work on both manufacturer's cards. And being able to change the card ID and enable AA on ATI cards in the demo bears this out.

The difference here is that the code for the DX11 path of Grid 2 still run via the layer known as dx11. If the AA used in Batman: AA truly isn't standard DX 10 specification AA(if the game runs DX9 then there's NO WAY it's DX spec, UE3 uses deferred rendering which cannot support AA naturally) then it truly is a different situation. I'm pretty sure B: AA is DX10 though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

The difference here is that the code for the DX11 path of Grid 2 still run via the layer known as dx11. If the AA used in Batman: AA truly isn't standard DX 10 specification AA(if the game runs DX9 then there's NO WAY it's DX spec, UE3 uses deferred rendering which cannot support AA naturally) then it truly is a different situation.

---

It IS. How do you think it runs on ATi cards if it's not written over an standard layer known as DX9/10? Have they implemented on GT200 assembler and it runs on ATi cards by chance, or what?

Writting a shader or a piece of code over the DX9/10 API to implement an AA filter is not different than writing a shader in DirectCompute 5.0 or Domain/Hull Shaders to implement any other effect (AA or what you want).

It's no a different situation. It's implementing a piece of code, and you are using to it the standard API you want to use to do it. Nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

The difference here is that the code for the DX11 path of Grid 2 still run via the layer known as dx11. If the AA used in Batman: AA truly isn't standard DX 10 specification AA(if the game runs DX9 then there's NO WAY it's DX spec, UE3 uses deferred rendering which cannot support AA naturally) then it truly is a different situation. I'm pretty sure B: AA is DX10 though.

---

It isn't DX10(?) standard AA. But they still use the DX10 layer - they just use DX10 shaders to implement AA. It's still within the standards that both cards adhere to.