Nvidia responds to Batman:AA

So that's why GT300 is late - all Nvidia engineers and devs were sent to Eidos to teach them how to code. :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

“In the case of Batman's AA support, NVIDIA essentially built the AA engine explicitly for Eidos - AA didn't exist in the game engine before that. NVIDIA knew that this title was going to be a big seller on the PC and spent the money/time to get it working on their hardware. Eidos told us in an email conversation that the offer was made to AMD for them to send engineers to their studios and do the same work NVIDIA did for its own hardware, but AMD declined.”
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=791

---

This batman game ideai is going to be a bug seller.
Get ATI & NV round to do some of the gfx work.
Get AMD & Intel todo some of the core code.
Get Creative & Realtek to do the sound fx.

All for free, coool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro

It's so nice to know AMD/ATI didn't fail at all in this whole episode :up:

:rolleyes:

---

Is this sarcasm i hear ? Care to elaborate and make your posts more useful ? Why are only quoting part of my post , work for FOX ?

After reading trough the whole thread , i see no way in which AMD/ATI failed , i only see random posts with no opinions but only links to statements which mean nothing to me .

So apparently all ATi had to do, was send a guy down to Eidos enter in their device id's and BAM everything would have worked. But then why send a guy when you could just pick up the phone.

Hmmm what is the point of DirectX then? It's getting ridiculous!

what we are seeing is companies trying to get every penny they can, to raise their stock's price, all while sacrificing our enjoyment of games. no company mentioned here is innocent, and at the same time none are guilty by any obvious standard. BUT ALL could have corrected this at an insignificant cost to their efforts.

lack of pc gamers dosnt kill pc gaming, its corporations worrying about dollars more than review scores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sadasius

Hmmm what is the point of DirectX then? It's getting ridiculous!

---

talk that up with Tim Sweeney. he hates directx.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chumbucket843

talk that up with Tim Sweeney. he hates directx.

---

Then he should take up OpenGL like Carmack.

Oh wait, he hasnt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

Then he should take up OpenGL like Carmack.

Oh wait, he hasnt.

---

he hates fixed function. he needs every bit of help he can get. he is making unreal engine 4 by himself. lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chumbucket843

he hates fixed function. he needs every bit of help he can get. he is making unreal engine 4 by himself. lol.

---

John Carmack is making idtech5(an engine those of us in the know have a MAJOR eye on) all by himself as well. He also made all the rest of the id engines solo. Then again, the man is an entire development team by himself. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

“In the case of Batman's AA support, NVIDIA essentially built the AA engine explicitly for Eidos - AA didn't exist in the game engine before that. NVIDIA knew that this title was going to be a big seller on the PC and spent the money/time to get it working on their hardware. Eidos told us in an email conversation that the offer was made to AMD for them to send engineers to their studios and do the same work NVIDIA did for its own hardware, but AMD declined.”
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=791

---

:rolleyes:

Wait what, doesn't UE3 already have built in AA? Seems like the only thing Nvidia worked on was making sure AMD cards couldnt run AA and turning some of the special effects into PhysX effects.

Scattering pappers on the floor as you walk by? C'mon...even crytek inhouse physics engine is better then that and they didnt need PHYSX to run it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LiquidReactor

:rolleyes:

Wait what, doesn't UE3 already have built in AA? Seems like the only thing Nvidia worked on was making sure AMD cards couldnt run AA and turning some of the special effects into PhysX effects.

Scattering pappers on the floor as you walk by? C'mon...even crytek inhouse physics engine is better then that and they didnt need PHYSX to run it.

---

No, UE3 doesn't have AA built into it.

Quote:

---

“In the case of Batman's AA support, NVIDIA essentially built the AA engine explicitly for Eidos - AA didn't exist in the game engine before that. NVIDIA knew that this title was going to be a big seller on the PC and spent the money/time to get it working on their hardware. Eidos told us in an email conversation that the offer was made to AMD for them to send engineers to their studios and do the same work NVIDIA did for its own hardware, but AMD declined.”
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=791

---

This is getting more hilarious by the minute...XD

Now, not only they claim that they built the AA engine for Eidos (fail), but that Eidos extorted AMD to work on the game too (fail) or there would be no AA for ATI cards (and almost half their customers - fail). Add this to the PhysX exclusive basic visual effects that they were too lazy to double code for the other half of their customers (fail), and we get a fairly accurate view of what TWIMTBP actually did for that title (just add epic to the fail).

I don't think that EA will even think of doing sth like that again...the backlash is already global, and certainly justified...Of course, the AA problem with be fixed by a patch by Eidos asap (if they are not suicidal that is). Mainly because there is no problem to begin with (ATI cards are reported to work flawlessly with AA, as soon as you trick the system into thinking...they are nvidia cards)...:ROTF:

The only sad part, is that there are consumers (gamers and GPU buyers alike) that think this was a good move...without EVEN considering what the implications would be for the game industry if actions like these go mainstream...

So whats next? DX11 effects in games AMD helps only working on ATI cards? Games that use only PhysX for basic gameplay elements? AMD shutting down sli or/and nvidia support on their motherboards? Games starting only if id device checks are made?

This is a glass of hideous snot thats forming, and the consumers should be the least inclined to chug it. Period.

Disclaimer to fanboys: I am not an ATI fan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro

It's so nice to know AMD/ATI didn't fail at all in this whole episode :up:

:rolleyes:

---

so you say nvidia build engine lol and they asked ati to built there own engine either :ROTF: instead of using nvidia engines it will come with two one for ati and one for nvidia :ROTF: and ati must send an engineer to every f..... game company in order to make there game work on ati hardware i mean saying that amd failed is even moronic than believing this crap sorry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dante80

This is getting more hilarious by the minute...XD

Now, not only they claim that they built the AA engine for Eidos (fail), but that Eidos extorted AMD to work on the game too (fail) or there would be no AA for ATI cards (and almost half their customers - fail). Add this to the PhysX exclusive basic visual effects that they were too lazy to double code for the other half of their customers (fail), and we get a fairly accurate view of what TWIMTBP actually did for that title (just add epic to the fail).

I don't think that EA will even think of doing sth like that again...the backlash is already global, and certainly justified...Of course, the AA problem with be fixed by a patch by Eidos asap (if they are not suicidal that is). Mainly because there is no problem to begin with (ATI cards are reported to work flawlessly with AA, as soon as you trick the system into thinking...they are nvidia cards)...:ROTF:

The only sad part, is that there are consumers (gamers and GPU buyers alike) that think this was a good move...without EVEN considering what the implications would be for the game industry if actions like these go mainstream...

So whats next? DX11 effects in games AMD helps only working on ATI cards? Games that use only PhysX for basic gameplay elements? AMD shutting down sli or/and nvidia support on their motherboards? Games starting only if id device checks are made?

This is a glass of hideous snot thats forming, and the consumers should be the least inclined to chug it. Period.

Disclaimer to fanboys: I am not an ATI fan.

---

Well said^^ ...!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129

No, UE3 doesn't have AA built into it.

---

lol...didnt know that.

If this is what its coming too then ATI should have done the following.

Pay Eidos to fix the "aa problem" and also pay Eidos to add dx 10.1 and dx 11 suppport :ROTF:

Now that would have been hilarious. I wonder if Nvidia would still stick around if Eidos added DX 10.1 and DX 11 support just for ATI cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LiquidReactor

lol...didnt know that.

If this is what its coming too then ATI should have done the following.

Pay Eidos to fix the "aa problem" and also pay Eidos to add dx 10.1 and dx 11 suppport :ROTF:

Now that would have been hilarious. I wonder if Nvidia would still stick around if Eidos added DX 10.1 and DX 11 support just for ATI cards.

---

Too bad, even if Eidos asked AMD to add DX 10.1 and DX 11 support on top of AA, AMD still would have declined. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~CS~

Is this sarcasm i hear ? Care to elaborate and make your posts more useful ? Why are only quoting part of my post , work for FOX ?

After reading trough the whole thread , i see no way in which AMD/ATI failed , i only see random posts with no opinions but only links to statements which mean nothing to me .

---

Yes, it was sarcasm

AMD/ATI failed when they declined testing AA and then came to public whine because it was unavailable for untested hardware. Simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eric66

so you say nvidia build engine lol and they asked ati to built there own engine either :ROTF: instead of using nvidia engines it will come with two one for ati and one for nvidia :ROTF: and ati must send an engineer to every f..... game company in order to make there game work on ati hardware i mean saying that amd failed is even moronic than believing this crap sorry

---

Moronic is not wanting to test the work done from others to check if it's compatible with the very own hardware you sell and then come to public and bash that work because it's locked.

That's moronic and sad.

Lets look at what a developer should say in situations like this then. Here is what Ian Bell, developer for the NFS: Shift game had to say about the optimization issue.

Quote:

---

We’ve worked hard to add additional optimisations for ATI cards with success. This will be coming in a future patch. In the mean time, using a profile from other games helps. I’ve heard that renaming the exe to grid.exe helps a fair bit on ATI cards.

---

It also appears that he also said this in the comments section:

Quote:

---

We have been working on further ATI optimisations that will be released ina future patch. We’ve seen some substantial gains.

---

source

This IMO is how a developer shows good faith that they will fix their game. Yes, it remains to be seen however, I do like the initiative from him to communicate with the community about their concerns.

Noooo Nvidia will never allow them to release an ATI fix because Nvidia paid them off and are using strong arm tactics to cripple ATI. </sarcasm>

Good to hear there is a fix in the works so the pitch forks and monotovs can be put away.

This whole thread would make for a great southpark skit...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by highoctane

Noooo Nvidia will never allow them to release an ATI fix because Nvidia paid them off and are using strong arm tactics to cripple ATI. </sarcasm>

Good to hear there is a fix in the works so the pitch forks and monotovs can be put away.

This whole thread would make for a great southpark skit...

---

I don't believe you fully understood what I mean. Let me elaborate a bit as the slow performance issues people were experiencing wasn't:
-Specific driver issue
-AMD lacking developer relationship with SMS
-etc
SMS simply decided to further communicate with AMD get their game fully optimized for their customers so they can release it in a patch. Which contrasts what I read later in this thread from another company. This is why I said this is how a developer should handle situations like this.

Quote:

---

Good to hear there is a fix in the works so the pitch forks and monotovs can be put away.

---

I think you have a point. It is sad to see how passionate people become over issues as insignificant as this. People are dying of hunger, aids, genocide or murder all over the world, but we go on and on about how bad this is.

Get a live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle

I don't believe you fully understood what I mean.

---

Alright fire up the monotovs and brandish ye pitch forks I guess... :)

Ok I assumed you're quotes where in regards to batman, its still a matter of waiting on ATI and the developer to deliver a solution/patch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VoodooProphetII

I think you have a point. It is sad to see how passionate people become over issues as insignificant as this. People are dying of hunger, aids, genocide or murder all over the world, but we go on and on about how bad this is.

Get a live.

---

Well thanks for that bit of perspective. When you put it that way, why are we even playing games or messing with computers? I should be teaching people how to grow wheat in the namib.

Man, grass in the Namib would be great. I can do with that. No, but back on topic. It is just funny to see how passionate we sometimes get when it comes to things like this.