I think NVidia already has it figured
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rava6e
Why a game developer would do this, i have no idea. Will this cause them to lose 2 mill in revenue? I dont know, but i know that i will not be paying for this game as i got ATI. Perhaps alot of other ATI people will also not pay for this, making the revenue for the game less. Would be fun to have a parallel universe where the developer didnt take the 2 mil, and compare the 2 end results hehe.
Let's face it, NVidia and the developer already have this figured. They know there are a certain number of raving red fanboys that under no circumstances would be caught dead saying a kind word about NVidia, and would also, given any public opportunity, avoid any TWIMTBP game, or at least screech publicly they would never buy it.
So NVidia and developer figure the non fanboys just shrug their shoulders and buy it anyway, even if they have an ATI card. Maybe the developer doesn't want raging fanboys buying their game, because those types complain and moan a lot about the game with conspiracy theories concerning their cards competitor. They probably don't want the nasty emails and grief. So, if fanboys don't buy it, they are happy.
Next, NVidia figures those looking for a videocard likely want to play Crysis 2, so it's likely that future purchasers that see your attitude decide they will buy an NVidia card so they can play CRYSIS 2 at maximum speed. More sales for NVidia that way. So complaining is good for NVidia.
Not only that, everyone who has an NVidia card already wants to buy it now that it's NVidia friendly. The installed Crysis 2 playable NVidia card base is what, 5 times larger than ATI's ? Something like that. So they WIN, period.
Your only hope is that everyone else that already hates NVidia as much as you do doesn't buy Crysis 2, which is probably not going to happen anyway, as the link angry monkey avatar guy showed - it was all NVidia TWIMTBP on the 1st Crysis, and it apparently sold like crazy for a long, long time.
Finally, they figure, like any sane human being or corporate person (I bet that drives you mad that NVidia is a corporate person) would figure, if they had an ATI card and it ran Crysis 2, they'd buy it anyway because there are a thousand other TWIMTBP games with massive NVidia dollars and programmers work pumped into them, and their ATI cards run those games anyway. In other words, they're banking on sanity in the general populace.
So, although it sounds all protesty, and all hopefully that you can help stab a big knife in NVidia's back because "they screwed you" (according to you), it's much more likely that ATI will make sure the puniest of ATI cards can make a stab at running Crysis 2, although all of them only on the reduced tessellation textures they are limited by, anyway.
--
Perhaps the only valid ATI card owner whine is: " Dangit ! NVidia did it again, they delayed another game I was drooling to play, Crysis 2, and all they're doing is pumping up the tessellation and my ATI can't do that worth a crap anyway ! - So I'm waiting for no good reason ! "
Yeah, now that maybe is a valid complaint. That complaint I wouldn't complain about.:up:
Ok, I'm done cross examining.
Ok, so you favor ati, with the usual complaints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spursindonesia
Oh sucks, now this thread turns into another fanboy jam session. :ROTF:
EDIT:
Okay, i'll play along. AMD graphic gets goodwill, at least from me, nVidia mostly don't. Why ?
1. Card pricing strategy, eversince the sweetspot strategy was implemented, AMD cards have been offering mostly good to great value, i can't say the same over nVidia unless their back are on the wall (GTX 460)
2. TWIMTBP, it's totally okay to get first access & early driver optimization with this program, i even commend them for it. But pulling $h1ts like Batman MSAA blocking, Assassin Creed DX 10.1 patch debacle, over tesselating without in game option, etc, those are really annoying me as hell.
3. PhsyX and propietary stuffs, i don't really care actually if they make sure that it runs like crap on software (with CPU) & can only be run well with their hardware, but blocking competitor card as main rendering card while using their card as PhysX accelerator card, that's one big LOL in my book. This is PC world, hardwares should be compatible, and playing blockade game to suit your marketing interest best is a disgusting tactic from consumers perspective.
4. So many lies and PR spinnings, it gets tiring & exhausting in the end. I'm so tired with woodscrewed card and announcement of an announcement delay tactic, promising heaven while delivering dungs, they can shove 'em through their rear.
If nVidia cards offer great value & suit my need+preferences, i'll still get them in the future -just as my oldies GeForce 4 Ti 4200, GeForce 6600 GT, and GeForce 8800 GT can testify, but they have to win totally on merit, since i got no sympathy at all to the company that manufactures them at this moment. :cool:
That's fine with your attitude for you, but I certainly don't share that nonsense. I'll reply with my perspective so you can see why, to your bullet points.
1. Sweetspot might work for a few dollars on a few frames with certain resolutions and generally zero or low AA, and a lack of other features, like game bundles, for instance.
Be aware I'm in the USA, and pricing is different around the world, so I've seen some complaints that look valid going in both directions for both companies, depending on the country the informer is from.
A few dollars for stable drivers, Cuda, PhysX, easy installing, a better control panel, free games like Warmonger, free screensaver PhysX, free Sled game, better video transcoding, etc, easily trumps a few frames or a few dollars when comparing of course, for ati fans "only a certain frame rate bench and $5-$10", or 10% total purchase price, for instance.
Besides, the prices are equivalent, not one better than the other. That's the real truth - at least in the USA it is.
I just can't do it for ATI for a few bucks if I can find the deal - all the added value, and stable drivers to boot, and a better control panel, and... it just goes on and on all in NVidia's favor.
2. Well TWIMTBP is part of the better drivers and gaming experience and added features like PhysX.
As far as Batman AA, NVidia never blocked ATI from making their own drivers.
Richard Huddy claimed in the Hexus interview he had his best programmer on it. He was vague and avoiding when he was asked if they "were blocked", because of course they were not. MUCH later a patch came out for ATI cards, and ATI and it's fans never said who made it or how it happened.
Seems to me ATI should do their own work from the word go, and not demand NVidia do it for them, or whine NVidia "locked them out" when it never happened.
What the ATI fans really wanted was NVidia's work to be open and free for ATI cards. NO- go do your own work, OR PAY NVIDIA enough $$$ that they let you use it !
How about ATI pay NVidia 25% of the costs of every TWIMTBP program since it helps games get released that run just fine on ATI cards.
In other words, ATI owes NVidia a lot of money, and a lot of THANK YOU's. That's the REAL TRUTH.
That's what is REALITY - without NVidia's big dollar gaming program, ATI would have far fewer games that run their cards.
ATI has been low on money for a long time and can't PAY UP like NVidia does for programming efforts.
Well, that's why NVidia drivers are better, period. They PAY $$$$$$$$$ to make them better.
I'm not going to play games and blame NVidia when ATI cannot deliver.
3. Use the HACK developed by NGOHQ, it's around, if you want PhysX with your ATI card as main. In FACT, Eran, who created the wrapper, got help from NVidia and got slammed by ATI, and publicly stated that ATI purposefully broke his wrapper in their next driver release, while NVidia had sent 2 programmers to help ERAN make sure it worked well.
If you don't like or don't care about PhysX, what is the problem ? No problem, your ATI card doesn't waste time running PhysX, so caring that NVidia has it is total hogwash.
The real problem is ATI card users want PhysX very, very badly, but they cannot admit that, lest they let on NVida cards are superior in saying so.
So, the end result is a bunch of ATI carders screeching NVidia has some crap PhysX junk that they are severely angry is blocked on/w ATI cards, even though they can't stand crappy PhysX and don't care about it.
Needless to say again, I don't believe the sideways words of it.
The truth is they want PhysX, and ATI hasn't anything like it (bullet is nothing to compare, -and developed on nvidia cards/ havok ha ha not that either), and isn't going to be making anything like it with the huge debt they have (since so many of their fanboys don't care for PhysX anyway as ATI hears - they could care less about it, too, huh. BACKFIRE !),
.... so the only solution is to SCREAM loud enough, in hopes that NVidia gives it to ATI for free, or some gigantic tyranny like the EU or some body of standards shoves some "open source" law down everyone's throat and NVidia is forced to port PhysX to open standard - the equivalent of a successful theft from NVidia, which of course would please the ATI fanboy immensely. So good luck on the big theft - NOT.
4. All I can say that's too bad you are that whacked out in the head over nvidia.
---
Why in the world would I care about any of that spin you have, whining about their "spin" ?
I'm not here to run any corporation, tell them how to run it, nor pretend I have the only proper ethics capable of doing so, nor would I DARE make my card purchase dependent upon some crazed hate filled notion about some internet wacko FUD concerning either company's in question "morality".
What I do look at is all of everything, and that means with AMD/ATI's massive debt, little to no hired driver team people, lack of anywhere near by a very long shot TWIMTBP equivalent, and thoroughly beaten set of "added values", not to mention the fear of bankruptcy and collapse with the billions of debt- that would mean more stagnant and crashing drivers and problems.... there just is not a current contest.
So I base my decisions on sane and sound data and pretty stark facts.
I'm not going to support ATI because they are an underdog, or are perceived as an underdog "but really are not *anymore", or are so broke and in debt they might soon be screaming "Underdog Underdog!" " Help! Help Help !" like Sweet Polly Purebread...
And, I'm certainly not going to buy an ATI card because "they came out 8 months ahead of NVidia" as I was told to do when the 400 series and it's iterations were released.
I figure the latest release is probably going to be the best release when separated by as much as 8 months, especially in this industry, or rather, I just look at the competitors and compare.
I wondered how many people fell for that PR line "ATI was released 8 months earlier so you should buy it instead of the NVidia 400 series- it was "late" ".
I mean you have to be a moron to spew that one, or fall for it, and I saw it everywhere a lot.
So there you have it, more of my perspective.
I will say this, I am very much looking forward to seeing the 4D shader change that is rumored to be coming with Cayman [that was supposed to come with Barts (5830 rebrand) and did not]. It would be really nice to see ATI actually make a real change and not a rebrand from the HD2900 onward.
I also think that if they make that core change, enough of a core change, it is possible a lot of the driver problems and endless list of frustrations for end users and techs could clear up - I know it sounds like a fantasy and miracle unlikely to happen, but one can always hope for a change for the better.
PS - Of course NVidia is paying up for great and positive changes in Crysis 2, and of course it has been the plan for a long, long time - as gaming companies are well aware that NVidia assistance is at the ready - from the word GO - years ago - they banked on it.
DUH DUH DUH ! :rofl:
Wow, you're really positive...
Snip !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zanzabar
seriously, that has to be the most ill informed thing that ive seen for months, they dont want to make it better, how would they make it better by paying a dev like crytec who already has a 3d engine (not 3d vision) and already is pros at using tessellation, the only thing that this has any chance of doing is making the game suck for every1 like crysis 1. the g80 and its theoretical tri-sli were what it was coded for but guess what by making it for 1 gpu and what it should do with tri sli it ended up making it broken for every gpu and it made it so it would not scale. so if they are making it for what im thinking is a full GF100, it will suck for all as its ROP starved so we wont get nice dynamic textures (but its also on consoles so i doubt there will be good textures) and from 1st game do u really want a gpu specific optimization. so all that can come from this is requiring 3d vision for 3d, breaking physX configs so it wont work with the cpu and or uses 1 core, and it wont scale with future products.
...Snip !
Ok, let's see what you said.
1. Nvidia is evil, they don't want to make it better
Conspiracy mindset...
2. Crytek is already a pro at tessellation (new DX11 stuff no one is a pro at yet, since new cards just came out using it, and not many games - in fact the best we have so far is a benchmark, NOT a game)
So Crytek couldn't possibly need any assistance?
I guess that works for ATI and ati fans... gee maybe that's why ati doesn't help game developers - no help needed ! roflmao :rofl:
Hey, those hundreds and hundreds of programmers and card geniuses from Intel, Nvidia, and the few from ATI, we'll just tell 'em all to go home - forever, since you know it's already " easily done". WOW:up: Great, you've convinced me...:rofl:
3. Crysis 1 sucked for everyone, according to you. :rofl:
:up: Great ! You got that perspective I always shoot for, it sucked, but, you care ! Hmm... another convincing drama...
4. No G80 tri sli, so no Crysis fun ? :D:D:D Whoo hoo !
So a game that drives videocard and system development is bad ? "Can it play Crysis ?" - meant a lot of cards and a lot of computer hardware was sold, and that my friend, is good for all of us computer gamers ! :up:
Besides it runs w/ my 'crappy' vidcards, too - just not with the triple digits fraps a rockin'.
So, the problem was, the problem is, a game was made that wilted your epeenie ? :shrug:
5. " it would not scale " - Well, I guess I'll provide a link.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...-sli-review/21 good enough ? near doubling on scaling... I know that's Warhead - same difference whatever- if not offer proof - and I'll destroy the rebuttal
6. " so if they are making it for what im thinking is a full GF100, it will suck for all "
One word: " UPGRADE ! "
Or downgrade, whatever, "it will suck for all and it sucked for all!!!" < that's YOU.
Also, the whine is rather pathetic since many, many, many games are not played on the high let alone highest settings by the vast majority of computer gaming cards.
If yer sys is like little sis, either do what 99% do in that case and go with the autodetect in Crysis, or don't play.
Just because it's a big game that requires big boys to play at the top, doesn't mean it's bad. Something has to drive the future, and without it - welcome to the 3rd world.
I suggest covering the tiny epeen if necessary, and not pointing out it's deficiencies. :rofl:
7. " breaking physX configs so it wont work with the cpu and or uses 1 core "....
blah blah X87 blah .. blah... X87, blah blah, my cpu has only 1/5th or 1/10th the transistors and has to run the OS, but , but but, blah blah blah, tiny core cpu so few transistors but it can blah blah blah... blah.
The reason GPU's are online for the big compute is because they are HUGE compared to tiny silicore cpu's. A cpu just ain't gonna cut it until it grows 5-10X in transistor count size.
----
Ok, you had such a sourpuss bad attitude there, I do admit I kinda feel sorry for you. I hope you can make it past this whole Mean Green Money Making Crysis 2 Machine thing of total total suck for everyone. Nice critique, I think the NYT may hire you. :clap:
Well, you have a sequence of events, that's why
Quote:
Originally Posted by
STEvil
Why would nV send him engineers to make it work rather than just disabling the check themselves? Also have you forgotten that nV was programming their driver releases to work around his hacks? Why would they do that if they were helping him?
ATi users do not want PhysX. They want the content that PhysX is holding back (most of it anyways, depending on the situation).
I think NVidia sent him the engineers because they were hoping it would make ATI play ball. In that case ATI would pay NVidia.
When AMD/ATI said no, alongside NVidia deciding then driver issues and cost of supporting that without ATI's official sanction, not to mention the threat of LAWSUIT from ATI or end users for "wrecking their cards" performance or burning them up with "proprietary code" - was just too much, so NVidia took the change in direction they had to.
PhysX isn't holding back any content - buy an NVidia card, PhysX delivers content, (or God forbid put the hack in. Heck, you know PhysX runs w an ATI card alone).
There's no have a right to what YOU DIDN'T PAY FOR ! You wanna pay for "the content" of PhysX, GO BUY THE NVIDIA CARD, or better yet, go make your OWN IMPLEMENTATION.
Ragging about a company who made something, and now people want to take it for nothing. PAY UP ! :ROTF:
Look, the whole free Western World is based upon ownership of property. Unless ATI and Intel pony up some giant sum of $$$:D$$$:D$$$:D$$$ to pay Nvidia for all the costs and all the future benefit, F O R G E T about' it !
It's not "take for free". Gimme gimme gimme, I want I want I want, and all the hatred the type spews at NVidia, coaxing that friendly freebie out with all that honey, huh.
I mean let's face it, if NVidia never gives the ati a speck of PhysX, EVER, just to grind it back as deserved, no one in the entire world could properly blame them. :up:
Yeah, all that honey the wanters send toward NVidia, surely that PhysX "content" is on it's way....:rofl:
Everyone knows the bottom line is if ATI pays enough, it's ported tomorrow. "ATI" is "broke".
