Obviously we can't see whats going on behind the scenes... but I haven't seen anything from ATI that reads like they have an AA solution of their own or are interested in developing one... as per your quote they just want to ride off nvidia's effort.
-
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.
AMD & nVidia at it again over Batman
- Thread starter BubbySoup
- Start date
Obviously we can't see whats going on behind the scenes... but I haven't seen anything from ATI that reads like they have an AA solution of their own or are interested in developing one... as per your quote they just want to ride off nvidia's effort.
Erm, because NV paid them not to!!
Well you can only go on the evidence presented, not accusations.
I don't understand why a game developer should have been "helped" in the first place, they couldn't get AA working and had to have a graphics card manufacturer step in and help - it strikes me that Eidos are incompetent. They shouldn't need other people coming in and helping out, they should develop the damn game themselves as that's what they're SUPPOSED to be doing!
I believe it has been shown before that ATI are frequently locked out from providing assistance to titles that are receiving TWIMTBP cash/assistance. The most recent example being RE5. ATI claim to have a solution, yet for some reason they have not made you party to the exact mechanics of what it involves, how strange.
Perhaps you could allude to being party to some information that you just cannot tell anyone just for a change.
Unless anyone here actually has first hand knowledge of the situation at hand, this thread is nothing more than p*****g in the wind by the usual suspects. (one of the reasons that while being a terrible place to ask for information, this forum provides boundless entertainment)
Last edited:
Perhaps - But non-Nvidia cards didn't get anything at all. Presumably when Larrabee turns up eventually it won't work on that either.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 1,039
- Location
- Norwich, UK
Nvidia created custom code to get AA working then made sure it only works on their cards.
I can understand that, AMD shouldn't get a free ride from Nvidias work with the developer.
HOWEVER, AA is an industry standard, the developer should be providing across the board support for AA. It maybe the Unreal 3 engine but it's been proven AA can be done many times. The root of the problem is developers either being unwilling or unable to impliment AA themselves. I'd probably run with unable, and thats probably down to lack of proper support in the unreal engine. A bit dissapointing considering they probably paid a pretty penny for it.
I can understand that, AMD shouldn't get a free ride from Nvidias work with the developer.
HOWEVER, AA is an industry standard, the developer should be providing across the board support for AA. It maybe the Unreal 3 engine but it's been proven AA can be done many times. The root of the problem is developers either being unwilling or unable to impliment AA themselves. I'd probably run with unable, and thats probably down to lack of proper support in the unreal engine. A bit dissapointing considering they probably paid a pretty penny for it.
OMG!! Why can't people get their heads around the fact that it is 99% likely that ATI want to provide assistance that shines a good light on them, but are unable to due to nvidia buying off developers?
Do you people honestly think that a company with the market share of ATI is going to make no effort to provide their customers with services that can compete?
It would be like Asda saying "well we would like to do our own thing, but lets just use Tesco's own brand products for handiness"
You could almost guarantee that the coding is pretty much generic, but ATI can't come to the party cos nvidia are basically Grima Wormtongue
Do you people honestly think that a company with the market share of ATI is going to make no effort to provide their customers with services that can compete?
It would be like Asda saying "well we would like to do our own thing, but lets just use Tesco's own brand products for handiness"
You could almost guarantee that the coding is pretty much generic, but ATI can't come to the party cos nvidia are basically Grima Wormtongue
This is most probably the single most sensible post in this thread so far.
I don't understand how people, and nVidia themselves don't understand this?
Obviously it's easier for a developer to not have to... you know... develop stuff but that's their job. To accept a method from nVidia that locks out ATi is disgusting. We want open standards and free competition, not shady deals that punish gamers not owning the "right" card. What next, games or levels that only work on nVidia cards? DirectX sub-standards that are incompatible between vendors?
I'm all for manufacturers working with developers to improve the performance of games but not at the expense of the competition. Adding PhysX is great, but disabling it with ATi cards present is not and not if they're going to deliberately nerf CPU performance. 3D Vision is great, but again I'd rather see standards implemented through universal specifications like DirectX. Having a "solution" that works only with nVidia hardware is no "solution" at all. You don't have to worry about which brand of processor you buy, only its performance - the same should apply to graphics cards. It should be about performance, not manipulation.
The reality is that nVidia isn't as competitive on performance as it used to be and is resorting to dirty tricks to maintain or increase marketshare.
Anti-aliasing isn't really something a video game developer should have to spend their time on... ideally they could just enable it with one command and away they go... unfortunatly with current setups especially when you throw a deferred shader pipeline into the mix things can get a little complicated.
The method from nVidia does not lock out ATI from doing AA in itself - it only enables that specific routine when approved hardware is found...
According to a lot of reports and general consensus, it actually does lock ATI out from doing it themselves. What's the point when the developer obviously can't accept any other solution than the nvidia one stipulated in whatever nasty little contract they signed?
I genuinely hope the tables are turned some day soon so people like you can choke on your fanboy words!
Bit harsh that.
He still has a point though, Rroff seems to deny anything remotely negative about nVidia and bash everything he can about ATi.
Granted he does admit nVidia's 190.XXX drivers have been utter junk lately, but then he'd have to admit that, to deny would be even too far for him.
I don't automatically deny anything negative about nvidia and have been quite vocal of my dislike for some of the things they have done lately... unlike some people I don't look for every and any reason to blindly bash them.
I am going to defend some aspects when people bash them based on a lack of understanding for what is actually going on... the blind mis-informed mob mentality bashing in this thread is kinda tiring... if your going to attack them for the things they have done badly - atleast get it right and bash the bits where they deserve it...
I'm going to say it again as people seem to be only reading and interpretting what suits their agenda to bash nvidia despite it being shaky ground to bash them from without looking silly...
The license for the nvidia multisampling code DOES NOT stipulate that AA can't be implemented on other vendor's cards... neither does it prevent AA from working on other vendor's cards - it only allows that specific implementation to run if authorised hardware is found it does NOT prevent any other implementation from working... the license does stipulate that the developer can't modify the code to change the vendor id checks and that they can't use the code as a base to build their own version of the code on.
If other agreements were made between nvidia and eidos that lock out other vendors thats an entirely different matter.
I am going to defend some aspects when people bash them based on a lack of understanding for what is actually going on... the blind mis-informed mob mentality bashing in this thread is kinda tiring... if your going to attack them for the things they have done badly - atleast get it right and bash the bits where they deserve it...
I'm going to say it again as people seem to be only reading and interpretting what suits their agenda to bash nvidia despite it being shaky ground to bash them from without looking silly...
The license for the nvidia multisampling code DOES NOT stipulate that AA can't be implemented on other vendor's cards... neither does it prevent AA from working on other vendor's cards - it only allows that specific implementation to run if authorised hardware is found it does NOT prevent any other implementation from working... the license does stipulate that the developer can't modify the code to change the vendor id checks and that they can't use the code as a base to build their own version of the code on.
If other agreements were made between nvidia and eidos that lock out other vendors thats an entirely different matter.
Last edited:
If other agreements were made that's a different matter?
So if ATI cards aren't accepted then they have no right to moan cos nvidia did their own development? But at the same time if any other agreement was made that automatically rejects ant attempt to implement an ATI solution, that's a different matter.
God, I wish ATI weren't so lazy.... At getting their wallet out to bribe developers.
BTW, you're the one blinded by corporate spin Rroff.
So if ATI cards aren't accepted then they have no right to moan cos nvidia did their own development? But at the same time if any other agreement was made that automatically rejects ant attempt to implement an ATI solution, that's a different matter.
God, I wish ATI weren't so lazy.... At getting their wallet out to bribe developers.
BTW, you're the one blinded by corporate spin Rroff.
why cant they just make love not war
much like ati did with intel over crossfire, heck when amd bought ati, they are still allowing crossfire on intel chipsets
the thing with batman as in understand it is that nvidia coded AA, and put a Device ID detecter that only allows NVIDIA cards to use the code and gave it to Eidos as IP, so Eidos cant edit it, so basicly locking ATI out
how the heck is that fair?, its like if Intel codes DXVA Blu-Ray Decoding in Windows 7 to run great on their Crapstics also known as Intel GMA graphics and disable completey for AMD/NVIDIA IGPs
the same thing can be applied here