Ian McNaughton goes out against The Way it's Meant to be Played

Duran · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:33

kylew said:
If you hadn't noticed we're not talking about consoles and even if we were, are you aware that ATi has the dominance there? They make the graphics chips in the Wii and Xbox, both of which are doing better than the PS3, and before anyone starts, no I'm not an Xbox or Wii fanboy, I have a Wii and a PS3, I Just haven't bought an Xbox, yet.

This hassle free gaming non-sense is just a large lie, As Taken said, you've been conned and it's pretty funny I suppose.

All companies have issues, have a think what hassles are there? If there are some, nVidia are behind a few, like the Batman AA being disabled if an ATi card is detected.

Yeah, that's a hassle, but it's nVidia's doing, no?

What about all those people with nVidia based laptops? I'm sure they absolutely LOVE their hassle free experience, oh wait, their laptops don't work any more since the GPUs overheated and died.

talk about completely missing the point... arguing with you is like talking to a brick wall. do you know what a console maker is? Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo. doesnt matter where the parts come from, all it matters to them is how many games they sell. Both MS and Sony pay off developers in order to make their games exclusive or have more features or even slight things like extra costumes for characters. This is what nvidia is doing which is perfectly normal. If ati wants equally optimised games they need to stop "QQing" and put their hands into their pockets. until then Ati owners can keep waiting for their lovely hot fixes. you should be angry at ati not nvidia.

straxusii · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:34

deuse said:
All this crying over a game

If you think this issue and debate is about a video game you really don't understand what is going on here.

Final8y · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:49

deuse said:
It's called business

How come you never moaned at ATI when they deliberately nobbled there own drivers to stop people using certain programs?

It would not surprise me if they have done it for the 5870 cards as well.

I have no idear what your on about.

Edit: i see Furmark mentioned, i was not aware of ATI stopping it from running on its hardware besides drivers throttling which would be fine if it was causing serious problems for the cards. but more importantly i don't recalled ATI stopping Furmark from running on competing hardware.

Consoles are not open platforms they are closed platforms so have a completely different business model to the PC.

JoeFX69 · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:51

straxusii said:
If you think this issue and debate is about a video game you really don't understand what is going on here.

^

deuse · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:53

Final8y said:
I have no idear what your on about.

Then read the thread and you will find out or look a few posts up.
Trolling again... Oh dear

=VTA=MANFACE · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:55

Duran said:
Thats another reason for me to stick with nvidia, hassle free gaming.

EH ?

deuse · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:55

straxusii said:
If you think this issue and debate is about a video game you really don't understand what is going on here.

Yes I do, ATI don't want to pay NV for it so they won't get it and you cry..simples

JoeFX69 · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:57

deuse said:
Yes I do, ATI don't want to pay NV for it so they won't get it and you cry..simples

Unbelievable....

=VTA=MANFACE · 29 Sep 2009 at 11:58

Duran said:
Both MS and Sony pay off developers in order to make their games exclusive or have more features or even slight things like extra costumes for characters.

Yeah, but, they don't do anything to make the other consoles not to work with the game.

Oh dear, get a grip.

krooton · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:04

Duran said:
talk about completely missing the point... arguing with you is like talking to a brick wall. do you know what a console maker is? Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo. doesnt matter where the parts come from, all it matters to them is how many games they sell. Both MS and Sony pay off developers in order to make their games exclusive or have more features or even slight things like extra costumes for characters. This is what nvidia is doing which is perfectly normal. If ati wants equally optimised games they need to stop "QQing" and put their hands into their pockets. until then Ati owners can keep waiting for their lovely hot fixes. you should be angry at ati not nvidia.

You can't seriously be comparing created content to a universally existing function that is being disabled?

Stanners · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:04

No your right, They just do not bring out the game on that console.

londonbairn · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:05

In simple terms

Product A is produced to work for both Company X and Company Y
Company X coerces maker of Product A to make it work at less than it is capable for at Company Y

No matter how you want to spin this, this is anti-competitive and in any other industry, they would be raped by competition comissions...

MR.B · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:10

kylew said:
I bet furmark is the only application you can list that has intentionally been disabled.

I just wanted to point out that ATI disabled OCCT too.
FurMark and OCCT overheated and crashed some ATI 3xxx and 4xxx cards because they do not have hardware overcurrent protection. ATI then purposely stopped these programs from running.
The 5xxx series finally have overcurrent protection.

It would be possible to write a power virus for ATI cards, that runs something similar to FurMark or OCCT, and causes a computer with older ATI hardware to crash.

straxusii · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:12

deuse said:
Yes I do, ATI don't want to pay NV for it so they won't get it and you cry..simples

Ah OK I see now, you're just trolling, thanks for clearing it up.

Chronictank · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:22

deuse said:
NO, they tried that with computers and it never took off(MSX anyone).
As I say email ATI to pay the cash for Physx and stop asking for freebies and crying when you don't get them.

There is a vast difference between a Physics API and MSX... it just sounds to me like you are now clutching at straws to be honest :/

The only way to make physics big in games is an open standard (the right word?) not controlled by a single CPU/GPU manufacturer who hide the source

You just have to look at Havok to see how much of a dead fish PhysX really is

And in hypothetical land, IF ati did pay Nvidia what good do you think it would really do? Nvidia could and based on their history would just nobble the performance for Ati cards in the code (which is not and will not be available to Ati) if their flagship wasn't up it

deuse · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:23

rafster said:
In simple terms

Product A is produced to work for both Company X and Company Y
Company X coerces maker of Product A to make it work at less than it is capable for at Company Y

No matter how you want to spin this, this is anti-competitive and in any other industry, they would be raped by competition comissions...

straxusii said:
Ah OK I see now, you're just trolling, thanks for clearing it up.

Stop moaning like a bunch of girls and email ATI to pay for Physx.

here is the link for you to tell ATI http://developer.nvidia.com/object/physx_downloads.html

They can put Physx into there drivers and all will be ok

deuse · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:26

Chronictank said:
You just have to look at Havok to see how much of a dead fish PhysX really is

If it's dead as you say, then why are you moaning about it?
ATI can have Physx.

Chronictank · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:27

deuse said:
If it's dead as you say, then why are you moaning about it?
ATI can have Physx.

Are you being deliberately dense?

krooton · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:33

Chronictank said:
Are you being deliberately dense?

Pointless question is pointless

sturmtruppe · 29 Sep 2009 at 12:47

Why hasn't this thread been locked? Its turning into your x is smaller than my x sort of thing you get with cars.