Haha, nope mine would gone too. I'm a developer, but not of games :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
Printable View
Haha, nope mine would gone too. I'm a developer, but not of games :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
really? i have to say, that when i spend money on a high dollar nvidia card i enjoy knowing that nvidia have spent lot's of money, time, and effort making sure that the card will work well with many of todays most popular games. i have no problem with nvidia lending devs a hand with validation and testing, if the competition isn't devoted to ensuring their product will satisfy their customers, then so be it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mads321
again, really? nvidia DOES warn you that they helped with development, they place the [nVIDIA TWIMTBP] logo on the back of the box and in the opening credits for the game! again, i as an nvidia customer, like this. when i buy a game with the TWIMTBP logo i know my card will have no problems playing the game with eye candy and awesome framerates. amd simply GIVES devs money (codemasters, dirt2, $1,000,000) for development and no-one would ever know without some research. also, i believe the "slippery slope" arguement is a bit stale here, as this has been going on for years from both sides and never has the x game for y hardware prediction come true. not with hl2, fc2, dow2, or baa.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mads321
ive never seen an ati branded game not work with NV parts, except for dx10.1 or 11 but if NV supported it i would bet that it will work.
and having an NV logo on the game shouldent mean warning if u have a non NV card you will be missing basic features
Thats obviusly not what i meant.. Of course Nvidia should be working their asses of, ensureing new games run great on their cards - all GFX manufacturers should be.Quote:
really? i have to say, that when i spend money on a high dollar nvidia card i enjoy knowing that nvidia have spent lot's of money, time, and effort making sure that the card will work well with many of todays most popular games. i have no problem with nvidia lending devs a hand with validation and testing, if the competition isn't devoted to ensuring their product will satisfy their customers, then so be it.
Where the line is crossed, is when the game ends up with standardized features, working exclusively on Nvidia's GFX. That's what i mean when I say Nvidia should "simply get the hell out of the software delvelopment".
Yes, they should be there for optimizing purposes, NOT for making cheesy deals under the table, making standardized features consciously disabled, only to favour Nvidia's cards over the competition.
Yes indeed, again! The TWIMTBP-logo tell's me that nvidia has helped optimizing the game, NOT consciously disabled features, only to favour Nvidia's cards over the competition. This is exactly where the line is crossed.Quote:
again, really? nvidia DOES warn you that they helped with development, they place the [nVIDIA TWIMTBP] logo on the back of the box and in the opening credits for the game! again, i as an nvidia customer, like this. when i buy a game with the TWIMTBP logo i know my card will have no problems playing the game with eye candy and awesome framerates. amd simply GIVES devs money (codemasters, dirt2, $1,000,000) for development and no-one would ever know without some research. also, i believe the "slippery slope" arguement is a bit stale here, as this has been going on for years from both sides and never has the x game for y hardware prediction come true. not with hl2, fc2, dow2, or baa.
Who gives a flying :banana::banana::banana::banana: about how much money they spew at the developors, as long as they don't expect to have their freaking cards run standardized features exclusively :shrug:
if nvidia didnt help them, the game would probably run worse for everyone, and the game just wouldnt have AA for anyone, like GTA4.
If you think there was some sabotage or conspiracy or something, you dont understand that developers typically have near total control over their own games, and that developers typically want their game to be as good as possible. Cause, ya know, they get the vast majority of their money from the sales of the game, not from hardware companies.
so, im really not buying the narrative that people are trying to create here: an ominous evil nvidia who has immense control over how games are made, and this innocent ati, who could be doing so well in these games if it wasn't for evil nvidia and their shysterism.
^ This.Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer
Rockstar did the same with their Rage engine ( thus why GTA 4 is a jaggy fest from the early 90s ) Deferred rendering is ideal when you want to use high lighting counts as the render cost for full scene dynamic lighting is much much lower. The devs usually consider it a fair compromise to have all of these fancy shadows. However using DX10-11 AA *can* be supported (key word can ; as mentioned GoWs PC DX10 AA support is sketchy )
I still think their response is a tad :banana::banana::banana::banana:y and ignorant but perhaps that is just me...:p:
I remember BF2s release. Nvidia had a TWIMTBP add inside the boxes saying something along the lines of "With Geforce 7 series gpus you get advanced effects not available with the competition" Now I believe in this case that was merely due to a lack of SM3 on current gen ATI hardware but It kind of reminded me of this a tad.
:clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by grimREEFER
Yep, and all the complainers wouldn't care. But because Nvidia put in their time, effort, $$$ etc to get it for their consumers all of a sudden it's a goddam tragedy.
Honestly as time goes by the ATI shills are getting more and more pathetic, Nvidia is a 'business' and honestly I'm surprised they do not do more underhanded back alley dealings to get your 3-sizes too small panties in a bunch. Just use the hack, get more mature with your complaints or just shut up already! The mindless partisanship that gets more and more acute is really getting on my nerves.
Have to disagree and agree with some of you. Nvidia is about business but what they fail to understand is by further polarizing the industry in more fronts just causes the PC gaming to falter further from consumer frustration.
/agree and if you notice these "games meant to be played" anytime there is a problem with an ATI driver that isnt the fault of ATI. The developer never issues a fix...almost always denying the claim the bug even exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadov
this just happened. i dont think you have one of the six.Quote:
Originally Posted by jstutman
Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
By all means, please enlighten all of us oh master of knowledge. Your three troll posts on the thread thus far haven't added much value to my life. Are you withholding information that would settle this debate once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
Why don't you tell us how this AA algorithm is both superior and at the same time inappropriate for ATI cards? Tech specs please, this is after all, a technology forum!
Now is your time to shine and show us all how much you know about game development!
As opposed to previously knowing that the game was built on the Unreal Engine 3? And therefore missing a basic feature? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
Granted, when I made my comment I dont have "facts" to back it up, but ANY person who has played any PC game in the last several years from a large developer should see how the "$$$$" comes before the games, with a few exceptions from developers. Why so many patches for bugs that could have been found by a indie developer? Why do they release half completed games, why are some games programmed to benefit one vendor and not the other? It all boils down to the money game.
So what this boils down to is money.
AMD/ATI didnt give the software developer money they dont include the code.
Nvidia pays a software developer to include code that gives AA.
Well seen as I own an AMD/ATI graphics card, I dont see no point in buying the game if it doesnt contain all the features, the only people who really lose out is the people selling the game . . . tough luck, plenty of other games I can buy probally clear it in a few days & get rid of it anyway.
Other games dont get restricted like this, I wonder how much money Nvidia paid, at the end of the day if everyone was like me the people who made the game will end up losing out anyway.
It's a pity Nvidia dont spend more money on sorting out their drivers, having to switch drivers so that I get higher fps in one game to another, or having to disable sli so a game doesnt crash or sli doesnt work with one driver or gets broken in the next, thats why I got rid of my GTX295.
How do you do this? Can somebody help me out. I'd like to try. I am downloading the demo now.Quote:
Additionally, the in-game AA option was removed when ATI cards are detected. We were able to confirm this by changing the ids of ATI graphics cards in the Batman demo. By tricking the application, we were able to get in-game AA option where our performance was significantly enhanced.
Dunno if this works, but could be worth a shot:Quote:
Originally Posted by SamHughe
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads...tor_v1.22.html
Regardless, it probably doesn't work exactly as it would with an ATI card. It's no secret that Unreal Engine 3 does not natively support AA (it uses deferred lighting) and the claim that being TWIMTBP certified locks out ATI from working with the developers is completely untrue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadov
I see this bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: as a piss poor move on nvidias part. I believe this is all connected with batman. I think batman was suppose to be a "revolutinary" turning point for nvidia. Thats why they killed physx on ati cards at the same time. I have a ageia ppu for my ati card that has worked for years till now and this really stinks. They basically made the game a nvidia only game, and if you own a ati card there just fooling you into thinking that its same game. HONESTLY, IF I BUY THE GAME, I SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO THE WHOLE GAME! not just some parts of it, and I should be able to use it any way I like. It should be sold as a different game for less money if you own ati hardware then, since im paying for the extra development done by nvidia and not using it. If your a NVIDIOT you can suck the part from my butt to my belly. I cant see this helping us as consumers one bit, and believe me this is a line in the sand. I vote with my dollars and Ati you deserve it. Ati is only advancing technology not kock blocking it. If you think adopting propietary standards with "conditions" help us, than there is no hope for us. Ever wonder why blue ray disks cost so much? I fight for freedom, not senseless hearding. Ati is back, bigger and better than ever, thats why were forced with all this nvidia nonsense.:nono:
I remember using a tool called 3DAnalize back when I had a Geforce 4MX and wanted a game to think it was a Geforce 5200 :PQuote:
Originally Posted by SamHughe
You can set the Device ID to be used with each game, alongside many other things i recommend NOT touching (Mostly Pixel&Vertex shaders forcing and manipulating, back in the early DX9 era).
The way I see it:
Prologue: Unreal 3 has problems with AA
Chapter 1: NVidia works with the devs to solve it. This means investing developing time (=money) into the game
Chapter 2: NVidia addresses the problem
Chapter 3: Since if NVidia hadn't invested time there would be no in-game AA; they obviously don't want ATI/AMD to also take advantage of NVidia's investment
Epilogue: NVidia invests money to an issue and they don't want ATI to benefit from their investment. So they don't get in-game AA.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I see nothing wrong with this.
Why wouldn't you buy the game mate? You're missing out, it's a great game with or without physx and AAQuote:
Originally Posted by Sadasius
I will correct you , Basically the consumer is affected by their hunger for more money , and cripples choice to us the consumers . Its like the branding is starting all over the place . Here you get to have full use of the game since you bought our product . Oh sorry you only get 1/2 of the game because you failed to buy our product . Its just cheap and unethical . I'm sure people with deep pockets don't give a damn , but for the everyday consumers its a big deal . Same if Ati takes the same steps . Physx I understand if they block it , but why the AA ? Im sure if they decided to share , the would make more profits out of it , instead of making it like they are doing now .Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Prologue: Unreal 3 does not include AA at all. Why would this be Nvidia's problem? Saying it's ok for them to support Eidos develop it is one thing, but saying it's ok AND make it exclusive for Nvidia is another. It's like saying it would be ok if a company that made toasters, were to support only one kind of bread, because they helped make the recipe - you cath my drift.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Chapter 1: Nvidia puts (perhaps too much) money into the development of the game, and in return get's Eidos to detect, and disable AA if there is not an Nvidia card in your computer.
Chapter 2: Nvidia buys an insane amount of copy's of the game, to bundle with their cards
Chapter 3: The money Nvidia has now indirecly invested in Eidos, may or may not have an influence of features in the game itself, but by no means should any kind of lobyism (let's face it, it reaks of it) allow a game devloper to disallow competitors any features ingame, just because Nvidia is throwing them a party.
If we as consumers accept this, then PC-gaming as we know it will become increasingly more expensive for the end user in the years to come.
We could only dread the outcome, should ATi decide to fight fire with fire in this situation. This has nothing to do with fanboyism, trolling or favouring one over the other. It's simply saying what you will, and what you will NOT accept as a consumer - by any part!
The extra creepy part of this, is that you almost can't avoid getting the game in a bundle with Nvidia's cards theese days, and so you but money in both Eidos and Nvidia's pockets. It's a dual whammy.
Consider yourself corrected ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Meh. If there's no AA this is not NVidia's problem but if they can work with the developer to include AA exclusive for NVidia, it can be NVidia's advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mads321
You're talking as if the game by itself had AA but NVidia paid money to disable it for ATI hardware, but you then also say the game didn't have AA at all.
Fact 1: This game would not have any in-game AA at all if it weren't for NVidia's investments (development => work hours => money)
Fact 2: NVidia isn't a charity organization working for the betterment of our feelings - it won't invest money in something if it doesn't make them compete better in the hardware arena.
NVidia's options:
1. Do not do anything, let the game stay AA-less. Outcome: No money spent. AA-wise competitively, there is no difference between Nvidia and ATI.
2. Invest money, put AA in the game, and allow this for everyone. Outcome: AA-wise competitively there is still no difference between NVidia and ATI. But NVidia has spent money.
3. Invest money, put AA in the game, and make it exclusive to the owners of YOUR cards. Outcome: AA-wise competitively NVidia now has advantage that justifies the money they spent.
Now, I don't think any one of you is stupid enough to say (prove me wrong if you will) that NVidia are cold-hearted evil people because they have not taken the 2nd route (lose money, gain no advantage). The only logical routes to take are 1 or 3.
If they had taken 1, ATI owners would still be AA-less, so no difference for them. And if that were the case, would you be complaining because "NVidia hasn't spent money to enable AA?". No, if they had gone with route 1, I do not see anyone complaining about that.
But they have taken route 3, which didn't rob ATI users of anything at all, but merely added a feature for NVidia users.
Problem officer? I see nothing wrong with that.