Nvidia responds to Batman:AA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by highoctane

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.

---

Although this post has nothing to do with my explanation I am sure you understood what I said :D

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.

---

First of all , why the get a life ? just because society thinks otherwise ? Ignorance has no limits , second we all have a life , we choose how we want to live it .

People have been dying since the begining of days , theres no stoping it even if you weep or pray . Also just because you find this insignificant , does not mean that others will find it to , We all have our passions , if you want to be humanitarian so be it ,if others choose to fight over right or wrong so be it , I dont see any wrong about it , such is human behavior . What they did was wrong , makes no difference if its significant or not , its still wrong .

Wrong is wrong no matter if its big or small , same for good .

We need to vote with our wallets , only way to teach companies to not do as they wish , its what the consumer wants not the other way around . They will keep doing such as long as we enable them .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro

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.



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.

---

Except that it's not the AMD's business to do nothing with software from other companies, except if it relates somehow with the hardware itself or its drivers (because the hw --or its drivers-- fail to work as it should with the interface layers it's supposedly compliant to).

Eidos knew about the potential sales of this game, and they wanted to use that as a way to extort IHV's to make for them some work for free (that it's responsability of Eidos, not of the IHV's). AMD didn't want to do that (probably amongst other things because the game was going to carry a label with the NVIDIA's logo, for starters), and NVIDIA did. How does it mean a fail from AMD?

The only thing bad (and very bad) in all this matter is the lock to the AA feature in the software to ATI hw:

*If it is so because a pressure from NVIDIA (what I thought before the Eidos response) the only one to blame would be NVIDIA. It doesn't seem the case here.

*If it is so because Eidos want to punish AMD for not wanting to work for free for them (punishing to part of their consumers as well) to force them to do it the next time, the only one to blame is Eidos. They are damaging the consumer (as if they would care about it) to put pressure on other company to give them money (work is money in industry), in an old mafia-like style...

*If it is so because Eidos didn't want to do their work and test some of their code into some of the compatible platforms which they are selling to as compatible, then it's also Eidos fault. They are being negligent at offering their customers a finished product.

A software not working properly is never fault of any IHV (except if it's sw developed by this IHV, or it does not work properly because of hardware fault).

So no, AMD didn't fail. Their hardware works flawlessly with the standards the game uses. Eidos did. Their game isn't working properly with all the hardware which should be compatible with it. AMD (and of course the consumers) is the victim (because they are receiving damage), not the culprit (because they don't have any kind of responsability). Saying otherwise is to make the game for Eidos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LC_Nab

First of all , why the get a life ? just because society thinks otherwise ? Ignorance has no limits , second we all have a life , we choose how we want to live it .

People have been dying since the begining of days , theres no stoping it even if you weep or pray . Also just because you find this insignificant , does not mean that others will find it to , We all have our passions , if you want to be humanitarian so be it ,if others choose to fight over right or wrong so be it , I dont see any wrong about it , such is human behavior . What they did was wrong , makes no difference if its significant or not , its still wrong .

Wrong is wrong no matter if its big or small , same for good .

We need to vote with our wallets , only way to teach companies to not do as they wish , its what the consumer wants not the other way around . They will keep doing such as long as we enable them .

---

So be it then.

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

---

PCPer isn't a trustworthy source for any vendor related news, (ANY vendor) they're far to integrated into the supply chain. Conflict of interest.

This thread Is getting crazy. Nobody is convincing anyone of anything @ this point. I guess my "give me back my jacket" post was too subversive and therefore removed. That's a first in four and a half years. Thanks.