Nvidia responds to Batman:AA

[Final8ty]

As far as i'm concerned AMD are more concerned with PR & marketing than actually pulling their fingers out & getting developers to make PC Gaming better. I'm not saying I condone nVidia's/Eidos's actions but at least nVidia worked with the developer on getting a feature added to the game. What happened after that is not in best taste but AMD in my opinion just look worse for moaning & still not attepting to make AA available for their cards.

NV has been more about marketing then anything else.
The AA issue is marketing on NVs part as somehow AA is an emerging technology.
You see all over the web from review sites saying that Physx is being used more of a marketing tool than making any real physics changes to games that it is used in.

Ther Dx11 titles in development are being made with AMDa invoment & sometimes AMDs money as well.

It looks like you have fallen more for the marketing than the real facts.

[trinibwoy]

Question for all the bleeding hearts. Nvidia spends far more money on developer support. You think ATI consumers should benefit equally. Why? What business model supports that strategy? Is ATI a poor orphan that needs to suckle from Nvidia's tits?

[Final8ty]

Question for all the bleeding hearts. Nvidia spends far more money on developer support. You think ATI consumers should benefit equally. Why? What business model supports that strategy? Is ATI a poor orphan that needs to suckle from Nvidia's tits?

Cut your nose to spite your face.

Consumers are not the competitors.

The example you have put forward is in many other fields without the silly restrictions of usage on competitors products.

[trinibwoy]

In what way? The only people pissed off are current owners of non-Nvidia cards. How does that hurt them?

[Final8ty]

In what way? The only people pissed off are current owners of non-Nvidia cards. How does that hurt them?

ATI is spending money in getting games with Dx11 features that they would not otherwise have & ATI have no intention of using well there was no DX11 NV hardware for testing the games & seeing as we put the money up for DX11 in these titles then DX11 will be disabled on NV cards.

I mean its only fare.You think NV consumers should benefit equally. Why? What business model supports that strategy.

There are many custom picture enhancing features & methods in today's LCD TVs from each brand & none are disabled if used with input media from other brands.

[Jowy Atreides]

In what way? The only people pissed off are current owners of non-Nvidia cards. How does that hurt them?

Because games have to be playable for all users and when features are disabled for ATI then there can not be any gameplay changing physx features.

Imagine the gravity gun not working on half the userbase....

Puzzles using it would not be in the HL games.

As long as nvidia restrict features, those features will have nothing related to gameplay mechanics

How about if ATI disable DX11 for nvidia users in the games they paid to have it included?

Is THAT fair? Shoe on the other foot and it's kicking YOU this time.
Do you still feel restriction doesn't hinder consumer experience?

[Luka_Aveiro]

How about if ATI disable DX11 for nvidia users in the games they paid to have it included?

Is THAT fair? Shoe on the other foot and it's kicking YOU this time.
Do you still feel restriction doesn't hinder consumer experience?

DX11 is an API, AA is a technical feature; in this specific case, a technical feature developed by nVidia and the game developer in order to work with nVidia cards, due to UE3 issues with AA.

Once nVidia doesn't have to do testbeds and quality tests with rivals hardware, and apparently developer didn't care about it, they disabled AA with non-tested hardware, cause they couldn't guarantee 100% working scenario.

Amd whines about it; dev says they are open to work with Amd in order to fix it; Amd doesn't do anything.

Pretty regular situation, if you ask me.

[BakerT]

DX11 is an API, AA is a technical feature; in this specific case, a technical feature developed by nVidia and the game developer in order to work with nVidia cards, due to UE3 issues with AA.

Once nVidia doesn't have to do testbeds and quality tests with rivals hardware, and apparently developer didn't care about it, they disabled AA with non-tested hardware, cause they couldn't guarantee 100% working scenario.

Amd whines about it; dev says they are open to work with Amd in order to fix it; Amd doesn't do anything.

Pretty regular situation, if you ask me.

Must have missed this. Where did devs say they are open to work with AMD and where does it say AMD didnt want to work with devs? Source?

[Luka_Aveiro]

Must have missed this. Where did devs say they are open to work with AMD and where does it say AMD didnt want to work with devs? Source?

Where did I say Amd didn't want to work with devs? I said they don't do anything about it, according to lack of news...

However:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...8&postcount=47

[Farinorco]

Question for all the bleeding hearts. Nvidia spends far more money on developer support. You think ATI consumers should benefit equally. Why? What business model supports that strategy? Is ATI a poor orphan that needs to suckle from Nvidia's tits?

I couldn't care less about ATi, NVIDIA or anyone of them.

The point you (and some more people by here) are missing is that this is not a matter about balancing or unbalancing the race between them, or trying to make a more or less fair competition/game between them for us to watch.

I repeat, I couldn't care less about they IHVs. Those are their business, not mine, so what they have regarding to advantages, disadvantages, or what they want, is not my problem.

I care about my situation as a consumer. And I think that a turn from a situation A where support means optimizing game / debugging / developing additional contents to a situation B where support means developing exclusive contents that only can be run on a certain brand of sw is harming / damaging my situation as a consumer.

Oh, and you continue about your theory about ATi/NVIDIA consumers. There's no such things. OK, yeah. There are a little few people who IS NVIDIA consumer (they only buy NVIDIA) and a little few people who IS ATi consumer (they only buy ATi). Most of us are simply hw consumers, and we buy videocards regardless the brand. We buy the product we prefer each time we need to buy one. If one of those people were about to buy a card now, for example, he/she would be being punished by the decision of Eidos to not allow to run the feature in half the cards in the market (probably the good half right now to make things worse).

[BakerT]

Where did I say Amd didn't want to work with devs? I said they don't do anything about it, according to lack of news...

However:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...8&postcount=47

Ah ok so you assume they are not doing anything.

[Luka_Aveiro]

Ah ok so you assume they are not doing anything.

I think it's far more reasonable than assuming they are indeed doing anything at all.

[randomizer]

It's easier to kick up a fuss with the press than fix the problem.

[LesGrossman]

Question for all the bleeding hearts. Nvidia spends far more money on developer support. You think ATI consumers should benefit equally. Why? What business model supports that strategy? Is ATI a poor orphan that needs to suckle from Nvidia's tits?

How can someone make a question like this after 15 pages is beyond me.

Maybe you should read more and write less, AA Runs in ATI with ZERO developer support, so what has Nvidia help develop?

Nvidia money doesn't develop nothing, it just makes 10.1, AA and basic visual effects in non physx version disappear, and make benchmarks tools give higher scores to a card with Nvidia ID.

[BakerT]

I think it's far more reasonable than assuming they are indeed doing anything at all.

Is it? I dont see it that way. With a game this popular and sitting on your ass doing nothing to make this game better and show better results in benchmarks would be more than stupid.

There might not be news in the matter but does that mean the world stops?

[Farinorco]

How can someone make a question like this after 15 pages is beyond me.

Maybe you should read more and write less, AA Runs in ATI with ZERO developer support, so what has Nvidia help develop?

Nvidia money doesn't develop nothing, it just makes 10.1, AA and basic visual effects in non physx version disappear, and make benchmarks tools give higher scores to a card with Nvidia ID.

NVIDIA helped developping that AA code that runs on ATi so well.

NVIDIA money developes lots of things (the same way that the AMD money does).

But never until this game that supported things have been locked to not be compatible with competitors. THAT's the wrong thing in all this mess. It's a turnaround that make our consumer's situation worse than it was. Many people seem resigned to it because they think those companies have the right to do it. And some others not (amongst other things because we are the ones who give our money to them, so I think that we shouldn't let work for them practices that pretend to get more of our money by harming us).

[Luka_Aveiro]

NVIDIA helped developping that AA code that runs on ATi so well.

How do you know it runs so well? tested it by yourself?

[Final8ty]

I couldn't care less about ATi, NVIDIA or anyone of them.

The point you (and some more people by here) are missing is that this is not a matter about balancing or unbalancing the race between them, or trying to make a more or less fair competition/game between them for us to watch.

I repeat, I couldn't care less about they IHVs. Those are their business, not mine, so what they have regarding to advantages, disadvantages, or what they want, is not my problem.

I care about my situation as a consumer. And I think that a turn from a situation A where support means optimizing game / debugging / developing additional contents to a situation B where support means developing exclusive contents that only can be run on a certain brand of sw is harming / damaging my situation as a consumer.

Oh, and you continue about your theory about ATi/NVIDIA consumers. There's no such things. OK, yeah. There are a little few people who IS NVIDIA consumer (they only buy NVIDIA) and a little few people who IS ATi consumer (they only buy ATi). Most of us are simply hw consumers, and we buy videocards regardless the brand. We buy the product we prefer each time we need to buy one. If one of those people were about to buy a card now, for example, he/she would be being punished by the decision of Eidos to not allow to run the feature in half the cards in the market (probably the good half right now to make things worse).

Exactly the fight is between NV & ATI not between NV & me or ATI & me So they better not involved me in there underhanded tricks to hurt each other which NV is sadly doing to all.

[annihilat0r]

They "not involve you in their tricks to hurt each other"?? This is the most pointless thing I have ever heard. Companies hurt each other by making sure their product is better and is bought by a greater number of "you" 's. Whatever they do involves you because YOU are the one that buys the graphics cards.

[trinibwoy]

Because games have to be playable for all users and when features are disabled for ATI then there can not be any gameplay changing physx features.

Nothing was disabled for ATI.

I care about my situation as a consumer. And I think that a turn from a situation A where support means optimizing game / debugging / developing additional contents to a situation B where support means developing exclusive contents that only can be run on a certain brand of sw is harming / damaging my situation as a consumer.

Wow, I'm surprised you're that naive. Do you honestly think that games are equally optimized for Nvidia and ATI architectures? Just because this PhysX and AA thing is getting all this hype and attention, don't be fooled into thinking that typical games don't favor one architecture over another. That's why you see cards trading blows depending on the title.

We buy the product we prefer each time we need to buy one. If one of those people were about to buy a card now, for example, he/she would be being punished by the decision of Eidos to not allow to run the feature in half the cards in the market (probably the good half right now to make things worse).

Precisely! And outside of forums like this with all this crying, regular consumers don't consider themselves as being "punished". They see, oooh Nvidia has cool physics stuff, let me get that. Honestly, do you even talk to regular people who don't browse forums all day? They don't take up all these pseudo-moral crusades that you guys seem to enjoy. If one product has advantages over another they buy it, plain and simple.

[Farinorco]

Wow, I'm surprised you're that naive. Do you honestly think that games are equally optimized for Nvidia and ATI architectures? Just because this PhysX and AA thing is getting all this hype and attention, don't be fooled into thinking that typical games don't favor one architecture over another. That's why you see cards trading blows depending on the title.

Who has said nothing about games are equally optimized for every company? Exactly that's the point of supporting sw makers. And I have said it at least 10 times along this post. What I don't get is how that's the same thing that directly creating a feature that then you disable for every hardware that's not yours.

Now, if you want to put words in my mouth to call me naive and make my opinions look weaker, that's your choice.

Precisely! And outside of forums like this with all this crying, regular consumers don't consider themselves as being "punished". They see, oooh Nvidia has cool physics stuff, let me get that. Honestly, do you even talk to regular people who don't browse forums all day? They don't take up all these pseudo-moral crusades that you guys seem to enjoy. If one product has advantages over another they buy it, plain and simple.

And that's why I think we should make all this unaware people to know about why they can't use certain features and why they shouldn't support such practices.

PS: I have been noticing a trend that consists in using the word naive to defend the agressions made by companies, trying to give the people the impression that you are more "clever" if you accept to be trampled by them, and you are "naive" if not... that's strange.

[Final8ty]

They "not involve you in their tricks to hurt each other"?? This is the most pointless thing I have ever heard. Companies hurt each other by making sure their product is better and is bought by a greater number of "you" 's. Whatever they do involves you because YOU are the one that buys the graphics cards.

I don't regard making better products as playing underhanded tricks & yes i did not use underhanded as i thought the context of this thread was enough that i did not have to absolutely spell out everything to the enth degree, my mistake obviously.

[Sadasius]

In what way? The only people pissed off are current owners of non-Nvidia cards. How does that hurt them?

Nice blanket statement. I own both thank you very much as many others here do as well. I like to have both in a rig as well. One for the PhysX and the other as the main card. They disabled that too but there are patches out there. It's too bad they are acting like this and it's too bad you have no idea how to run the world as you let the world run you. Some people are not as submissive and actually like to stand up against the things mentioned here. Others treat their rights like a old horse and put it down to pasture.

[annihilat0r]

I don't regard making better products as playing underhanded tricks & yes i did not use underhanded as i thought the context of this thread was enough that i did not have to absolutely spell out everything to the enth degree, my mistake obviously.

You fail to make any sense in regards to your previous post: "they shouldn't involve 'me' in their tricks"

Sorry but that sounds like there might have been tricks in the past that do not involve 'you' in it, which sounds funny.

[trinibwoy]

I have been noticing a trend that consists in using the word naive to defend the agressions made by companies, trying to give the people the impression that you are more "clever" if you accept to be trampled by them, and you are "naive" if not... that's strange.

Perhaps, but I can guarantee that when I use it, it's only in response to actual naivete.

Nice blanket statement. I own both thank you very much as many others here do as well. I like to have both in a rig as well. One for the PhysX and the other as the main card. They disabled that too but there are patches out there. It's too bad they are acting like this and it's too bad you have no idea how to run the world as you let the world run you. Some people are not as submissive and actually like to stand up against the things mentioned here. Others treat their rights like a old horse and put it down to pasture.

Let the world run you? Heh, are you on the wrong forum? This is a thread about a graphics card and a video game so you can save the grandiose proclamations for something else.

Your rights as a consumer are no way impinged by what Nvidia is doing. Do you have a right to AA in Batman? You right is to spend your money on whatever products you want and for those products to work as advertised. You have no right to dictate what those products should be.

The only thing I've seen Nvidia do so far that may be illegal is to disable Ageia PPUs when AMD cards are installed.