very good interview,clears things up.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by SimBy
Printable View
very good interview,clears things up.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by SimBy
It would seem strange that a PC games developer would not have at least one card from both vendors, its not like it would break the bank.Quote:
Originally Posted by To(V)bo Co(V)bo
Maybe the help from NV was with installing the card.
Tapping on the shoulder of a company busy creating a game isn't going to get anything done. Nvidia has an entire marketing strategy and department based on this single thing called "The way its meant to be played" ATI has, hmm........idk....Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Example: Me and you have the same product. You go out all over the place displaying the product talking about it, working closely with other companies pushing it. and I just
sit with my development team, doing nothing, still making decent money cause the product is just as good. But for some reason (wonder what that is) im just not making as much as you.
So I blame you completely for sabotaging me, cause these other companies you have made connections with are helping your product make more money than me. So i throw a fit and say your
sabotaging me cause these companies wont come ask me to do the same thing as they are doing with you. (when you had to bust your but to get them to do this)Basically I want something for nothing.
That is my complaint. Not saying its right what happened, and theres no excuse for AA not to work with Batman on ATI hardware. But to be honest. This probably would haven't happened if
ATI made more of an effort to counter Nvidia's "The way its meant to be played"
We dont know whats happening behind the curtain. But even if Nvidia is bullying their way into the development of games and pushing ATI out. Its ATI's own fault
for not paying attention and being on top of their game with the marketing of their hardware.
I'm not a game developer so I don't know anything about that process. I also don't know much about the relationships they have with amd and nvidia and the making of their games. So if there are any real game developers that can explain it plainly, that would be awesome; I will add that knowledge to my brag folder.
All I know is I have a gaming PC with a gtx 285 that will soon be replaced with the amd 5870 and I am hopeful that it will work and run the games I play and the drivers work well better than my last card.
Hoping this post isn't off-topic. It is so hard to tell what is on or off topic in the news section here.
This is AA we're talking about. Not some obscure feature. The developers should be shot! I'm pretty sure ATI builds cards that any other capable developer can make AA run on :rolleyes:! AA running on cards from both of the two biggest cards should be mandatory. And nvidia should pretend it knew nothing about not being enabled for ati (whether it did or not is not a necessary assumption)Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
If they published the game, and instead AA ran on radeon only, I'd still be jacked off with the programmers for laziness. I'd still call it unacceptable.
I don't care whether TWIMTBP and or alleged dodgy nv tactics were involved in this at all. The programmers should never have done this.
For a deferred rendering engine, it is almost obscure.Quote:
Originally Posted by gumballguy
I'm interested to hear?Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer
Its one thing to invest in a game and make it a better game, and another to selectively improve the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
Nvidia is just rigging these games to fail on ATI hardware basically, only letting Ati have what they only allow them to have. This is just the same as political lobbying, rub my back rub yours bueracracy. Each company should have the same advantages to be a fair market. What isnt fair is when this activity becomes a standard practice and forces game developers to EXTORT hardware companies to fully support thier hardware. This is just the beginning and we can see this crap for what it is.
When I buy a game I expect and demand it to run great on any hardware, not just on Nvidas. Anything less is comprimising your standards.
Eidos and Rocksteady just lost all respect from me as a gamer. It only matters if your willing to take a stand against these practices, if your not then your just naive and deserve to lose your freedom as a gamer and a patriot. :shakes:
Hmmm
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Decami
To be more specific, it's MSAA that is the problem. You can still supersample but nobody really wants to do that because of the performance hit. Have a read of this, it's old but explains the problem somewhat:Quote:
Originally Posted by gumballguy
http://http.download.nvidia.com/deve...ed_Shading.pdf
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:Quote:
It would seem strange that a PC games developer would not have at least one card from both vendors, its not like it would break the bank.
Maybe the help from NV was with installing the card.
Come on now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mads321
Not everyone one who knows how to drive knows how to fill the tank.
Oh, wait a moment. I had decided not to write more on this topic (I think is fairly obvious that at this point everyone here has form an opinion about it, and it's not going to change it) but come on, there are some strange ideas around here.
Some of you are sounding like if the developpers were some guys who put the hand palm up waiting for ATI/NVIDIA to do the games for the them and then selling them or something. Let's clear some aspects:
GAME DEVELOPERS AND IHV's SUPPORT
*The developers (the name comes from the fact that they are the ones who develope the software) are some nice guys who make software through a process that includes an analisis and design of the project, its implementation (including coding and creating artwork), and testing and debugging, before the project is commercialized. Everything related to the product, and each and every of these phases is complete responsability of the developer.
*Developers are supposed to make their games without any external help. They have all the means to do that. PCs are shaped in a way that you can work over standards that have to be follow by side one (software) and the other side (hardware) so what a developer has to know, is how to develope over those standards. Once they have learned (studying, practicing...), they can start doing software.
*Hardware vendors are not needed across the process. Testing the software to not be buggy on the platforms advertised as compatible (every PC with usually some restrictions usually because OS and because of performance, known as "minimal requirements") is the developers responsability, like everything else regarding the game/sw (it's their game, heck, and they're getting money from this!). You don't need a hw vendor to teach you how to install a videocard to test your game (and you don't need a hw vendor to teach you how to install or run your game). You may need someone to teach you how to test sistematically and debug a program, or how to optimize or even develope a sw project, but that's not the hardware vendors affair. For example, I learnt at university.
*Hardware vendors (both ATI and NVIDIA in this case, even though NVIDIA advertises more to the public this fact) started a practice consisting in "supporting" the most known and influent software titles offering the developpers help to finish the titles. Why? Because sponsorings, because this way they could be sure that the most known and influent software, which is called to be the reference to test and compare the hw with, it was not horribly unoptimized for their hw, or had any bug specific to their hw, and so on, because this way they have early access to the software so they can address any issue with the hardware in drivers or develope profiles specific to the game to optimize the hw driver behaviour when running that sw since the moment of the release, making their hw look like better than competitors... image and media value, mainly.
That deal between the most influent games developers and the IHVs bring a secondary effect to the consumer: main titles and most influent sw comes to the market less buggy, more optimized and with hw more prepared than it would be without. So come on, great idea, no one's losing, everybody wins.
The reason why I tell all that is to finish with an obvious conclusion: even when that (interested) "help" that, potentially, a hw vendor may be giving you (as a developer), is being given, every responsability about the product you are selling is yours. If the game doesn't work properly with certain hw, you are the one who had made and are selling a defective product. If the game lacks some features that competitors have, you are the one who had made and are selling a 2nd line product. You can have the privilege of being helped by an IHV (if they're somewhat interested) but if not, it should be the normal situation, and if they do, the product continues being your product, not theirs.
Stop saying that "if X refuses to help, then it's their fault if XX things in a game don't work or aren't present". You are giving too much weight to a question that is merely image and advertising. The IHVs make hw, not games. And the developers make the games, not only ask a price for them (actually, who ask the price usually are the distributors, but oh well...).
Some people are ONLY NVIDIA consumers so I guess they don't care. I believe if AMD would start using the same tactics, the same people would be screaming bloody murder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Farinorco
I use AA on my HD4830s fine with UT3, pretty sure the option is even in the game settings dont need to use cccQuote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
2 words: "Market Share". Nvidia will do anything for that. They have already sold their soul to the devil, and their grannys soul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sly Fox
I wouldn't say that.. who do you think the devs are going to work hardest for? The side that throws them the most money. From this standpoint, ATi can't compete. They have never had as much money as nvidia. Its one thing to have a legitimate advantage, and its quite another having unfair competition. I can understand why ATi are calling unfair, but at the same time I would stop whining about it and just do what they have done before - Add the support for AA into their drivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
ED - To make it clear, when I say add AA support I'm talking about a invisible bit of code that detects if said game is being launched, and autmatically applies a ATI optimised AA path built into the driver.
Not to mention GDDR5, BC6/BC7 texture compression, GPU tesselationQuote:
Originally Posted by marten_larsson
since the developers probably didn't plan for ati owners to play the game
just pirate it
they probably don't need for ati gpu users to buy it since nvidia probably covered the overheads well.
Exactly.. !!Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse
quoting myself from another thread: "Looks like Nvidia is trying to gain a foothold in the CPU market, somewhat conceding on the gaming end of the business."
Don't touch them.Quote:
In the demo directory there is a file named BaseEngine.ini. I found these lines:
[Engine.ISVHacks]
bInitializeShadersOnDemand=False
DisableATITextureFilterOptimizationChecks=True
UseMinimalNVIDIADriverShaderOptimization=True
PumpWindowMessagesWhenRenderThreadStalled=False
The DisableATITextureFilterOptimizationChecks if enabled by putting False, runs a inbuilt OCCT GPU subroutine.
It's a joke. And it seems to me that anyone defending NV's actions either has something to gain, directly or indirectly, or hasn't thought it through very well. It seems pretty simple I'm not sure why it's necessary to complicate the hlel out of it, unless of course the goal is to seed a little FUD.
And they are no doubt grateful for this kind of discussion, because even though it's clear to see that their actions are blatantly wrong, a little FUD goes a looooong way to muddy the water.
But all that needs to be remembered are: Assasin's Creed, Futuremark Vantage, and now Batman. And those are just the titles that we know about because they are so obviously skewed in nv's favor.
Yeah, TWIMTBP is such a benefit to consumers, but as long as the sheep keep blindly following along, nv will milk them for all they're worth.
Mmmm.. waffles. I'm hungry now :p:
But the thing is & the points which some seem to over look & not for reasons of comprehension is that the so called Nvidia specific implementation does work on ATI cards but has been deliberately disabled.
There is no such things as guaranteed to work on everything on the PC because of its open platform nature & the only time features or SW is stopped from working is if it is known not to work.
Many games when installing on vista64 pop up a warning that it has only been tested on windows 32bit & never does it deliberately stop you installing unless it is known not to work which i have yet to come across besides 16bit installers.
So the guaranteed excuse does not cut it.
Its called AMD Game :rolleyes: http://game.amd.com/us-en/Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
So, the game doesn't support AA (which is not required of the game but a nice to have) because of this deferred rendering issue. NVIDIA volunteers to spend time and money to implement such a feature, which they test on their cards. Since they know this works on their cards, they enable a check to see whether an NVIDIA card is installed, in which case enable (because you know it'll work) otherwise disable (because you don't know whether it'll work, might use the NVIDIA hardware in a specialized way for all we know). Now everyone is upset because the developers didn't enable it across the board? Would you have NVIDIA spend more money buying hardware made by other manufacturers, test the code, if it works enable it for them and effectively lose the advantage gained by whatever time and effort was spent?
ATI/AMD, go to the developer, devote some time and money to work with the developer to ensure that there is a form of AA which works 100% on your cards (even if it's the same code that NVIDIA helped develop) and test it on your cards if you want said feature to be available to your clients. Be proactive if there's a feature that you want which a developer can't/won't include on their own.
No amount of marketing & promotion is going to keep the sheep blindly following if the consumer in the end doesn't get what they want or feel done wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
I personally don't see nothing wrong with a company pushing value added services to cater to their customer base.
EDIT: This debate should really be taken to the developer of the game, if you want AA take the fight to ATI/AMD and the developer to add the support.
I'm not going to say that isn't the truth, but business is brutal, and you cant call aggressive marketing corruption, unless NV actually did purposely disable AA, that would be the corruption part and unacceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
But man, ATI, seriously needs to consider being more aggressive with marketing. They are going to keep getting plowed into the ground if not. Corruption or no.
and for some other posts. Yes ATI should have the same advantages as NV. But who would you give more/all your time to. Someone who shows up with a bunch of hardware and money, on the ball and ready to work, or the company who calls 3 weeks late asking to be a part cause Nvidia is there and they are jelous?
I run my own IT business, and I can say right now compaines like nvidia I turn away at the door. Companies like ATi I deal with frequently. A harmonious partnership is much more productive than a dictatorship of a partnership. However, ATi do need to do a significantly better job in the marketing area.
So you're one of the 5 companies that ATi will actually answer phone calls and requests for? Most people can't even get them to send test hardware...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
I don't deal with ATi directly, just companies with principles similar to ATi, thats what I meant ;)
Then you have no idea what it's like trying to work with them... There's a reason everyone in the know says they give NO support to developers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
So, by your statement, you say a company that never assists with anything is the type of company you like to work with, and that's a harmonious relationship?
Well said. Add to this the fact that they deliberately make physics not work on a computer that has catalyst installed and i think we have enough reason for anyone that cares about the consumer to boycot nvidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
Ursus, you're clearly still new to the hardware scene... A boycott of NVidia, ATi, Intel, or AMD would be worse for the hardware market than you'd ever imagine. If any of the 4 fell and died, their competitor would have free reign to do as they please, which would lead to a stagnation, unbelievably high prices, and eventually the end of pc gaming.
I mean, if that's what you want, then so be it...
Quite the contrary, the phillosophy with the companies I work with who have similar principles to ATi is very clear, their message is; any troubles let us know and we will help you out.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Ati can't be blamed because somebody at a games dev couldn't be bothered to pick up the damn phone.
I do not think me boycotting nvidia is going to make them die. You are right of course, a world without nvidia would suck. So how should consumers let nvidia know they are going too far?Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Vote with your feet, buy the alternative. Once nvidia start seeing significant sales losses, then they will have to take a good long hard look at themselves and listen to their customers - their the ones that keep them in business.
Dont try to make out like one is better than the other, FFS people, AMD/Intel/ATi/Nv would all ring the neck of a cute kitten to get the profits up 1%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
I'm not saying ANY company is better than the other, its all down to the business ethics a company employs. Nvidia like a controlling dictatorship style, while ATi prefer a mutual respect and co-operation style. Both styles have their merits, but in the long run keeping participants in whatever project as satisfied as possible is more beneficial.
I click AMD games i see game they're supporting.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
So saying they give NO support to developers and that they never assists :down:
right, ati guys are just sitting around, doing nothing... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
i dont know man... i think that would only polarize the game dev community and cause lots of bickering and trouble and more compatibility problems...Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
so if your competition is a bully its your own fault if you dont act like a bully yourself... is that what your saying? :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Decami
even i would ring the neck of a cute kitten to get a few hundred million dollars.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
The issue is they pick and choose who they work with, and leave the others in the cold. That's the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Compare how many AMD work with to how many NVidia work with. :shocked:
So you never actually worked with ATI but yet you know what it's like? :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
I love how people think smaller company/underdog = more honest.
It's all baloney and I doubt you have any prove to post such at news forum. I would like to see a Moderator on non-vendor specific site a little bit less biased.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
The fact is AMD has a developers assistance team and sends ton of free hardware to game developers, the only difference is there is not always big check attached with the hardware. They're also not so stupid not to answer a game developer phone call. I'm absolutely sure Eidos doesn't have such problem.
Or are you trying to suggest that AMD's Richard Huddy is not telling the true (start watching at 10min mark).
I believe this was posted at Xtreme News before.
mhhhh not really... i worked for amd customer support and i did notice that dev relations arent exactly perfect... when game devs call the regular tech support cause they cant get a reply from any of their propper contacts for a while thats quite telling... :D
i still think its childish to turn a support offer down once you do get it... and its not really fair to your customers...
Ask around... Also, you DO realize I'm in the industry, right? NVidia send us hardware all the time(we had a DX10 part from them when they launched the 7800GTX 512mb), ATi? Never.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinz68
I do know what I'm talking about here, and many others have been vocal about it as well.
p.s. I can't say any more than that due to a little piece of paper they make us sign. Some people here know what I do, but I'm not going to get into a big spiel about it as we're preferred not to talk about it. :cool:
Saaya will back me up on developer issues with ATi.
So who are you what's the big secret? You can't tell because somebody let you sign some piece of paper?Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
All I know you're moderator at this forum and as such you should not be biased, some of your post sure look like that.
It's not any secret that AMD sends ton of hardware to developers. I rather believe AMD's Richard Huddy who isn't secretive about who he is.
Beside I did see other AMD's interview about the same subject and confirming the same.
Why should I ask Saaya? Is he game developer or are you game developer? Why should I listen to somebody hearsay. Like everything posted at forums is true.
EDIT
Beside why should I ask around. You posted in the news section this baloney:
"So you're one of the 5 companies that ATi will actually answer phone calls and requests for? Most people can't even get them to send test hardware..
So it's up to you to prove it.
Saaya worked for AMD's customer service... He'll tell you that frequently when game developers had to reach AMD they had to go through customer service because AMD's reps wouldn't take the call.
As for a piece of paper, ever heard of the letters N. D. and A? Before that, I use to freely talk about it. It's not so much secretive, but rather if I slip up and say something too far it won't fall back on my employers, which is why we're not suppose to talk about who we work for any more. It's a rather major 3d company, and we've NEVER been given a single piece of hardware from AMD, while NVidia has given us prototypes of cards that the consumer never even knows exists...
As for being "biased" do I have to remind you that in my rig right now is a 4850?
The most important thing to remember here, is that nv influenced the developers to disable features in Batman if you are running an ATi card. That's the bottom line no matter how complicated some want to try and make it. I seem to remember how big of a deal it was when Intel had a certain compiler that disabled features if an AMD cpu was detected. The similarities are striking.
you know he will pwn you on computer graphics. your just asking for it. maybe you should read some of his posts before assuming he knows nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Truckchase!
What if you only got a measly amount of stock options and had to give the rest to shareholders?Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I work with companies with similar ethics. I never said I worked with ATi. I love how people who don't own their own business have a opinion on something they know nothing about :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129
When i look at Nvidia parnetship i see only big games from big companies. And for you thta's AMD who chose who they work with? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Seems you greet Nvidia here at XS with nice unbiased post...Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
I understand why you understand Rocksteady attitude toward Nvidia. Nvidia both give you something that's totally fair you give us all can in return :down:
*Why so serious?* Play nice!
I am pretty sure this thread was beat the hell out of anyway and I think most said what they wanted to as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinz68
heinz, saaya's quote is probably the most telling in the thread... but it seems you skipped right past it....Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
No AA on the PS3 either. I downloaded the demo. Whooooa. Jaggies. I played the retail version on pc with a Nvidia sli set up with physx on high...yea she looks puuuurdy. Physx real does make the game pop in subtle ways. If its tru Nvidia seems to be sleeping on DX 11 IMO thats a huge business mistake considering the upcoming titles alledged to support DX 11.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
This whole argument about Nvidia paying to have AA support on Batman sort of sounds a lil like the whole Assassins Creed issue a while back with Dx 10.1 implemented with ATI cards, and Nvidia allegedy catching a hissy fit with Ubi for doing it then having Ubi removing the DX 10.1 support from the game.
Personally I was mad that Ubi actually caved in and released a patch to remove DX 10.1 but at the end of the day it is business. Its not always fair. It happens.
If u really want to show your disagreement for things like that happening start a boycott or something. Try to get it big enough that people will notice. Put pressure on the big wigs. That's a start. Better then just complaining about it in forums and "hopping" things change on their own.
If Nv did step to Rocksteady and said listen..we know the Unreal Engine doesnt support AA natively lets work with you, and spend some cash so the game supports AA atleast on our hardware then hey...that was a smart move. They jumped on a heavily anticipated game and it paid off for them. If Ati just didn't bother to contact the devs and basically thought the game would run fine as is thats on them.
If there was foul play Ati should file suit. Not sure what precedence they can base the suit on though.
And people complaining physx cannot be run with Ati cards is like saying Burger King wont sell McDonald's fries with thier value meals. We know u can find a work around but why would u expect Nv to actually have their physx work with the competition natively? I wouldnt. That's just me.
I ultimately blame the game developer! Some are weak and "whore" themselves out for money.
When NV said, "Hey, we want you to get AA working(in game) on our cards for the Batman game and here's some money/help." The game developer should have said, "Fantastic!, however, we will also try to make it work on ALL cards that can play our game, not just yours. If you don't agree with that then no deal!".
THAT'S what should have happened. The fact that NV "armtwists"(Huddy's word) the developers with all these different tactics only shows that NV thinks that bribing is the best way to help get their cards to work..and/or work faster than their competition. (This is arguably a shady tactic. I think there should be NO exclusivity. Help sure, exculsivity, NO!)
It's both company's fault. NV for throwing so much money, not just for extra features, but also for certain exclusitivity in certain games, but also the game developers who are "whoring" themselves out and not being up front and firm with NV and telling them, "Hey, we're going to make our games work the BEST with EVERY CARD we possibly can."
And I believe that any game developer would want EVERY card to run as fast as possible using their game...no way they would exclude any card from performing at it's highest possible unless they were told, bribed, coerced, (fill in the bank) by someone else.
how naive ppl are.
all those who complain are obviously worker bees hoping for a perfect world.
as pointed out by many. its a pure business.
this happens all the time and in many times ppl dont even notice it.
just because a big company like amd is ranting about it ppl notice it.
+1 for all those who just said this is just business.
every penny earned is always a penny less for somebody else regardless any self justification.
Oh, so because NVidia sends us hardware to test software on, we're automatically fanboys? They don't give us anything for our personal systems, only for the office, and it generally comes with a large NDA. Yeah, that's totally buying me off, isn't it. In fact, it totally bought me off into buying a 4850.. Yeah, NVidia did an awesome job buying me off with that one, didn't it. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
I say AMD should work with whoever asks for their assistance. If a company is developing something that the their consumers will enjoy, then isn't it in their best interests to help said company so those consumers will have the best experience possible with their cards?
Think about this for a second, the last time ATi helped sponsor a game anyone actually cared about was HL2 and maybe guildwars which did well for a little while(but GW could be run on any hardware, usually maxed out even still at any resolution), and then just fell off the planet. Not saying ATi should only work with big companies, but working with these side-car gangs only and expecting it to make a difference in everyone's eyes is being naive.
Let's put it this way, the original CoJ was the last title ATi worked with AFAIK, which was around the time the HD2900 came out. Now, since there's no sales data on the PC version, we'll look at the x360 version(which the console versions generally sell 3x as many as their pc counter-parts)... 250,000. That's right, only 250k copies sold. :rofl:
So, them putting in all that time and effort really made a big difference to AMD's costumers didn't it? They sure all did get to enjoy what AMD helped them accomplish. See the problem here? They should work with both small AND big developers, and multiple titles at the same time. The problem is, unlike NVidia, they lack the staff to do so.
Do you know why NVidia have multiple driver sets pop up every month? They have multiple driver teams all working at the same time, and it's no problem for NVidia to have each of those teams working with the various developers to make sure NV have a driver ready for the customer within 24 hours of the games release... ATi couldn't do that even if they tried to, that's the problem.
Basically, it narrows down to this. NVidia puts out a lot of work with it's developers, putting the costumers money to good use, in a way to gives back TO that costumer. AMD can't physically do it as they lack the man power or the money to do so, and as such everyone is all up in arms saying NVidia is bullying ATi around, because they're using the customers money to help bring more features to their customer? Are you serious? Do you NOT see how blatantly ridiculous this sounds?
Then, when NVidia does make something happen in a title that it wouldn't have happened in, and doesn't handle the testing for AMD, all of the sudden they're doing something bad for the consumer and should be burned at the stake? Lets see here...Compare some of the consumers having access to a feature to none of the consumers having that access.
I'm just going to say it, since I'm frankly tired of people complaining when ATi doesn't give developers support and NVidia does, so things end up bad for ATi and they blame NVidia. You knew ATi wasn't going to get the features added and NVidia were, why did you buy the ATi card.
p.s. Yes I know that sounded biased, but frankly it's the most realistic way to look at it. If you're that sick of ATi not having access to features, then why not buy the cards that do and quit complaining. :shrug: Sounds like a common sense situation to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Your_Boss
- AA have been working with AMD/ATI GPU cards with the demo, by simply change the ID of the cards, or remove from the INI, all things related to the detection of hardware and force AA by catalyst ( demonstration was made on ati Blogs).. when the final game have been released: a Securerom have been added who prevent this manipulation.
I have not try myself this method: so i can't tell if AMD/ATI lies on this point or not. But if it's true, all the "theory " like ATI could not use AA with Unreal3 are useless in this discussion ..
We all know when a game is in project, game companies look for money for this: - Nvidia is an investitors in many games company for the project they choose ( crysis, batman, etc.. all games they think will become blockbusters, it's good marketing)... i know the time are hard for game companies, so find peoples who want put money on their projects are not easy...
I will not say it's the devs team fault; mostly i will mostly look who pay them ( the game company) and what interest they have to keep good relations with Nvidia.
Business is business, nobody is questionning this.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstkl1
The question is about the way to make business.
please list one listed first board company that we wont questionQuote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
"the way to make business"
i noticed it when playing the game, and immediatly subtracted 1 credit off of nvidias karma account :D and yes, i actually base my hw purchase decisions on their karma scores... not exclusively, but it does matter...Quote:
Originally Posted by cstkl1
most people rant about companies being unethical all day and then support them as soon as they have an offer that saves them 10$...
Sure, and the Joker thought the people on the two ferries would blow each other up...and they didn't. But wait, that is just a movie....or is it.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
*Darth Vader voice* I find your lack of faith...disturbing.
http://maximusimperium.net/gallery/d...darthvader.jpg
this works like this for me tooQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
The problem isn't that NV is helping the devs implement a feature in the game. It's that they had them disable it for non NV hardware. Nobody in this thread is complaining that they can't use GPU PhysX on their ATI card, even though that is obviously a feature NV also helped the devs include in this game. But AA does work on both Nvidia AND ATI cards. Having code to detect cards and disable the feature while playing on competitor's cards is what the issue is about.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
I agree that AMD should change the way they interact with developers. But it's sad if this developer needed handholding from NV just to get AA implemented and then couldn't take the 5 minutes it would take to run the build on an ATI card to make sure AA worked there too.
Testing and debugging takes more than 5 minutes for any feature. Something could run from the jump, and later crash if you stand at a specific angle of a certain room if a body is in a certain spot. Thus, the reason why the developer said they haven't had time to validate it for ATi based cards, because NVidia did all of the validation work for their end for the developer.
Remember, this is an engine that has been known to have problems with AA.
no, i read it, and thats what my post was directed towards...Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
yes, their support probably isnt very good, but refusing their help once they DO come through cause they previously let you down is childish imo...
and like i said, its punishing quite some of your customers that havent done anything wrong...
No, the engine has not any problems with AA. It simply uses a technique (deferred shading) that is not compatible with standard MSAA and that requires a custom AA implementation if you want some AA.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
About the testing thing, I simply refuse to believe that they have tested all the game, with all the features, in all cases, in an exhaustive way, for ATi hw but they have leave out of time to test just exactly with the AA they have just programmed, and they have decided to program a check to not let ATi users to run it just in case and this way protect them... :ROTF:
Even if that was the case, seeing as in a first view the filter works correctly, there's no single developer that would have took it out for ATi hw. They would leave it as it were, and if it was buggy, bad luck and patch when it is known. Like if it were the first time that a game goes on sale with a bug.
Everybody knows perfectly good why the AA doesn't work on ATi.
Just testing the basic functionality of the feature could be done very quick. Full testing to make sure it works as expected and doesn't crash could be done by a beta tester. Surely they have at least 1 beta tester with an ati card.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
If they properly coded the feature using standard instructions and it still crashed or didn't work on ATI cards then the responsibility would be on ATI to fix their drivers or hardware. But instead they decided to limit a feature that, in fact, does work on ATI hardware just because they were to lazy find out that it does.
Ohhh please, how it was working after some modding in the demo ( disable the detection of ATI card), and then when game was released this mod was no more working.. If the game was crashing cause the fault of ATI, they will have the possibility to say : ATI need update their drivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
You speak like game companies thoses days cares about the " gamer experience ", but we all know theres only one way they think: money, money, money,... how games like GTA4 can hit the market if it was different?
At first page of this thread: the reasons why AA was not working was: cause ATI can't do this type of AA, now, it's cause devs was not sure AA with ATI will not make crash the games on certain part of the game .., then what it will be?.. AA look ugly with AA cards and they don't want show a ugly game?..
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
You're innocent since you prove guilty. That's the way that's functionning in almost the whole planet because that's the right way.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstkl1
Basically you want me to prove you that AMD is innocent, thinking that if AMD isn't innocent, it's guilty.
Implicitly, you confess that Nvidia is guilty but you think that is they both guilty, there is no problem.
Uhm, that is a very very strange way to put it...Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Noone expects nvidia to do any testing for amd and you know that very well. What people expect is that when nvidia helps to make a basic feature available, the developer is not forced by nvidia to disable this feature on other hardware it runs on as well.
I don't understand. You seem very impressed with nvidia somehow, yet claim this is not the result of them sending you hardware. Why are you so impressed with them? So they have the luxoury to be able to throw more money at dev relations than ati, this does not give them the right to ask gamedevelopers to disable certain things on ati hardware.
And the "this is business" argument doesn't really make much sense either. It's not business for ati... Were basic features disabled in hl2 cause ati helped with that game? No.
Ultimately i think some folks in here have a hard time looking at this from a consumer point of view. Competition is good, keeps prices low, makes companies perform, but sabotaging the competing products is not healthy, innovative competition, it's the opposite of that and makes us move backward instead of forward.
First, CoJ was, up until the past few months, the last title ATi had in their GitG program as far as I can tell. If you can find one besides the upcoming DX11 titles, feel free to point those out.
Abel, I've said a few times we HAVE asked ATi/AMD for support(not even just hardware, but run into rendering snags with their hardware), that's how I knew that you end up stuck calling customer service, which Saaya confirmed... We asked, they ignore, we get stuck on a loop. It's so bad sometimes that if we have a problem we make the new guy do it, when it should usually be someone who really knows the issue. NVidia support any developer who calls them, ATi you're lucky if you finally get patched through to someone who knows what they're talking about... That's the cold hard truth. You say I have no proof, what am I suppose to do, start illegally recording my conversations to prove to people on a web forum that amd CAN do wrong? You have a very well respected member of this forum(Saaya) who DID work the job on here for AMD telling you this IS what happens, what more do you need?
Where I come from, we call that a witness. Now it's my word WITH a witness from the company against ATi's claims... You know what judges call that? Guilty. If you really want to be that naive, and think that because AMD said they work with developers it's true, be my guest, I'm tired of arguing with those who are too dense to understand that this IS the case, even when multiple sources, including ex-AMD staff, development houses, etc all tell you otherwise...
As for who nvidia works with, if you look they work with companies big and small. Thanks for posting the link and reminding everyone of that. You see, there's more titles that NVidia's TWIMTBP touched in the past year than ATi's GitG has in it's entire existance. I don't need to go out of my way to prove that, a 2 second glance at NVidia's website does that for you. How's that program funded? NVidia's profits. Where does NVidia's profits come from? The customer. As such, it's them using the customers money to help make sure games play fine with the hardware the customer invested in. There's no opinion to that, it's right in front of you
In any way, shape, or form you look at it you're arguing a losing battle. It's getting tiresome and frankly boring, because you're just going to make the same claims even though the proof is right in front of your eyes. The fact that you ignore it only shows your true motivation in said situation.
I'm impressed by hardware period. I just find it funny that everyone acts like NVidia is the devil, and that AMD is the saint, when they've never dealt with either company on a business or personal level. I'm impressed by how well nvidia DOES work with developers to help out, and if you need hardware to test your software with they will have it to you rather quickly and painlessly. Most of the time they even pay for the shipping themselves. We don't get to take those cards home, so it's not like we're being bribed on a personal level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ursus
That may sound like a cop-out, or however you want to look at it, but it IS the case. My old 8800GTX I bought myself, and my current card is an ATi because I sold my 8800GTX(for a killing, might I add) and for the money I was going to spend the 4850 1gb was the best for my buck.
The only thing I have an issue with is the misinformation thrown all over this forum, and ironically enough it's usually pro-ati.
'Get in Game' is over because that was ATI partnership program. So if you look for 'Get in game' for DX11 titles you can search a long time. But if your search for AMD support for next DX11 you will find with ease. Sure that not the mighty TWIMTBP but it exist. Sayaa even post a link about AMD developers policy : http://tv.hexus.net/show/2008/09/Int...Richard_Huddy/
Saaya said :
Does Sayaa says AMD give NO SUPPORT at all (you imply that Diltech) : NO.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Does Sayaa says AMD support far from perfect : YES.
Maybe Sayaa can give more informations and effectly tell that the situation he explains happened all the time?
About the link i failed to see small developer sorry. An if you watch closely in 2009 there is 15 games sponsored by Nvidia.
For AMD, there are here and i count 7 games for 2009.
http://game.amd.com/us-en/play_games.aspx
For you're praising about Nvidia and the noble way they use money customers give them. I find it because you tell yourself before that AMD lack staff and money to do their best.
So basically you want AMD to do exactly the same than Nvidia (thing they don't want just watch the interview), but you know they can't with the same magnitude than Nvidia because they lack money and employees.
What you want seem impossible so just burn AMD? :shrug:
It's not so much impossible, just that they need to work harder to achieve it. Just a little support is a good start. I don't expect them to do what they can't financially afford, they just need to be willing to work with those who ask for a bit of help rather than those they choose because they think their game will have the most marketing impact.
I don't say they don't give support ever, by the way, I said it's very VERY difficult to get in touch with them to get said support.
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...
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
Are you pretending to imply that people who is criticizing that behaviour in this thread is a fanboy or something?Quote:
Originally Posted by railer
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.
So you saying that i should knowingly release a feature that I'm not sure about it?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.
FAIL:down:
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.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.
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!
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by railer
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?
Apparently that's bullying to these guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
"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!!"
How about-Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
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.
how does one do a survey like that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Helloworld_98
Question One: Are you a jerk (Yes/No)
Question Two: How much do you make
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 railer
:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
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? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
btw, thread title is "Nvidia responds to Batman" lol
And Batman responds:
SWEAR TO ME!!!!!!!!!
http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/imag...1233622213.jpg
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 railer
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 gallag
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamervivek
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
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.
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.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 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?Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech