• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Nvidia unofficially, officially caught cheating in Crysis 2

Ejizz said:
Please Rroff, don't sink to that level of personal attacks, especially as he doesn't deserve such treatment...
Click to expand...

Yeah? maybe I don't deserve the crap people are throwing at me for having an opinion in this thread either? ever thought of that?

Have a look at your first post in this thread - it was neither constructive or adding anything of interest in regards to showing how nVidia or the developer may be at fault here or anything of such nature - instead it was directly confrontational of the fact I put forward an opinion.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
So lock someone away because they happen to have a history of robbery and happened to be in the area when a bank robbery took place? don't worry about the evidence they have to be the right person coz they have a history of it right?


Also your examples are of preventative measures and can't be used as a basis for proving or suggesting someone was behind something.
Click to expand...

No the probability 'alone' is not good enough in this case, as upon being released he should be given the benefit of the doubt this once, but if he was spotted outside, say 5 different banks shortly before them being robbed, then case closed, as it is with Nvidia...
 
Ejizz said:
No the probability 'alone' is not good enough in this case, as upon being released he should be given the benefit of the doubt this once, but if he was spotted outside, say 5 different banks shortly before them being robbed, then case closed, as it is with Nvidia...
Click to expand...

No he would merit closer investigation... your doing a good job of proving what I said tho... not the most intelligent of replies in here.

On that note as the thread is completely derailed, I'll refrain from posting in it til its cleared up and back on an objective debate of the topic rather than fanboy accusations.
 
Rroff said:
You are truly pathetic... I have never backtracked over GPU PhysX, my opinion of it is exactly the same as it always used to be, I have always promoted hardware accelerated physics (not PhysX specifically) like the second coming as I do believe that hardware accelerated physics will go a long way to moving games on generationally when used properly. I've promoted PhysX as with the lack of a mature Open alternative its well supported, polished/stable and light years ahead of any potential competition unfortunatly. I've always said it needs a killer title to push PhysX into the mainstream and unfortunatly we aren't likely to see that due to the fact that it cuts off a large part of the potential gaming audience. I was also very vocal in denouncing nVidia when they locked it out to people not using nVidia hardware for rendering... maybe you've conveniently forgotten that.

I've never promoted NV 3D (except rightfully over the competition when people are hell bent on going for a 3D solution of one form or another), infact inside the GPU forums I don't think I've even mentioned it - not sure on that - but most of my posts on it have been in general hardware and monitors... and you will find I've always been of the opinion it was not a logical step forward for gaming.
Click to expand...

And that is my point that as soon as NV got hold of PhysX it was over & i could see it right there & then but you would not accept that & what it needed was irrelevant because of the way NV handles it, those things needed would never happen.

No the first time NV blocked PhysX when ATI cards doing the rendering you where there defending NV own excuse, when it got unblocked by mistake in a beta driver then you started to change your tune & backed with the evidence of the reverse PhysX mavity when ATI cards doing the rendering & the lack of new games with GPU PhysX in any meaningful way.

The 3D NV in games i knew would be an issue from the get go & you were saying how great it was for a long time until the novelty wore off.

You see i could already see the novelty side of it.

And you didn't prove that the AA in batman was a problem on ATI cards even though all evidence says it was not & you then lecture about needing 100% proof when you don't present any.
 
Last edited:
Haven't posted in the graphics forum for probably a year, nothing changes though... I pop in take a look at a few threads and the same people are still fighting the same arguments. Awesome work guys... Now you can carry on. :D
 
Rroff said:
Yeah? maybe I don't deserve the crap people are throwing at me for having an opinion in this thread either? ever thought of that?

Have a look at your first post in this thread - it was neither constructive or adding anything of interest in regards to showing how nVidia or the developer may be at fault here or anything of such nature - instead it was directly confrontational of the fact I put forward an opinion.
Click to expand...

Rroff, it's not like you have an opinion, it's like you have some sort of repeated irrational thought process that put's Nvidia on some kind of pedestal where it's not even conceivable to you, that Nvidia could possibly of carried out underhanded strategic tactics.
Every time you will argue even the weakest of defences to death.

My original comment Rroff was simply to try to get you to think about how you reason with your self, which will hopefully open your mind to other possibilities other than Nvidia is always completely innocent.
 
Rroff said:
No he would merit closer investigation... your doing a good job of proving what I said tho... not the most intelligent of replies in here.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it would get further investigation, but it wouldn't need it, the probability alone make it EXTREMELY unlikely he wasn't involved.


Rroff said:
On that note as the thread is completely derailed, I'll refrain from posting in it til its cleared up and back on an objective debate of the topic rather than fanboy accusations.
Click to expand...

Who's a fanboy Rroff?
 
I expect they will release results of the FEA analysis on the road block some time in the future but looking at the detail we may be waiting a while.

Crytek drop way down the list of top game designers with Crysis 2. Nothing in the modern world is about over doing something, everything is focused toward efficiency and using the least resources for a given result, major fail :(
 
Is it any surprise that Crysis 2 has been designed to be unplayable at Ultra settings, on any currant card plus and card produced in the next 3-4 years?

The original Crysis was released in 2007, and current top end cards still struggle. There have been much prettier games released since Crysis that do not require the same amount of horsepower. It has been made primarily as a benchmark and the game itself is a bonus:).
 
555BUK said:
Is it any surprise that Crysis 2 has been designed to be unplayable at Ultra settings, on any currant card plus and card produced in the next 3-4 years?
Click to expand...

Well it was not unplayable at Ultra settings before the the paid for tessellation.

Anyway the AMD tessellation slider should take care of that.
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't understand how some posters continue to gloss over the fact that with the DX11 patch Crysis 2 is doing unnecessary work for no other reason than it will run slower on AMD cards, the extreme Tessellation factor chosen adds NOTHING to the visual quality of the game, it adds no extra detail or IQ, it purely makes the cards render more for no gain, come on one person explain why you would render the entire ocean when it's not even visible.

I refuse to believe that the developers of Crysis are that incompetent to have done this deliberately and by choice. Now perhaps if Deus Ex 3 that has been mainly developed on AMD cards also has stupid levels of Tessellation then maybe people would have a point.
 
Fluidmark running with new Physx Software 9.10.0222 and Hybrid ATI+NV

Uploaded by MrJohn02 on 18 Mar 2010

New Physx Software 9.10.0222 (debuted with Metro 2033) broke Hybrid ATI+NV Physx hack.

Fluidmark starts ok, but at middle of test GPU Physx dies and CPU starts processing physx effects.

The same happens in games (Mirror's Edge, Batman AA, Metro 2033)

=´(




physxgravityreverseneur.jpg


What ? NVIDIA has introduced a timebomb in their ForceWare / PhysX drivers to prevent the use of GeForce with a Radeon ?
Now I understand the mavity reverse effect I saw in this video of FluidMark:
Click to expand...
http://www.geeks3d.com/20100422/hybrid-physx-patch-1-03-with-reverse-mavity-timebomb-fix/
 
Last edited:
Ejizz said:
My original comment Rroff was simply to try to get you to think about how you reason with your self, which will hopefully open your mind to other possibilities other than Nvidia is always completely innocent.
Click to expand...
Em...ain't that a bit of double-standard here? Cause I am getting sighs of people here painting a clear picture of "whenever AMD/ATI performance suffer, Nvidia MUST BE the big bad behind it", despite most are baseless accursations without solid evidence.

By that logic, may be there should be a conspiracy theory for game developers secretly working with AMD to code their games to "over-use" VRAM to make AMD 2GB cards seems better than Nvidia cards (i.e. Shogun 2)? :o

Even IF Nvidia was responsible for the "over-use" of tessellation in Crysis 2 (not that there's ANY evidience points to that), has AMD got anyone to blame but themself that they fail to deliver competitive tessellation performance to their rival, when they clearly marketing their cards as dx11 cards? If anything it is their weakness in tessellation that lead to the opportunity for their rival to exploit, thus leading to crippled performance across ALL graphic cards.

It's getting a bit tiring to see people keep painting AMD as a "victim" and Nvidia as a "big bully", even though the truth is that there are areas on AMD products that can be improved. Bashing Nvidia for what they might have or might not have done is pointless...the simple truth is if AMD was truly Nvidia's rival, their customers should expect them to deliver compariable dx11/tessellation performance...it is as simple as that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom