• 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.

Hardocp on "nv 3d vision"

Rroff said:
While everyone would like to see an open standard... its just not going to happen...
Click to expand...

I was a bit foggy on this point - it sounds like the author is trying to say he will 'beat down on Nvidia' if Nvidia prevent other companies from using surround display technologies. I know he says 'open platform'*, but I think he meant it in the sense of Nvidia using patents or proprietary connections to block AMD from fully utilising the tech somehow (again, I have no idea how they would accomplish this given AMD seems to have the tech fairly nailed down). I find it kind of funny that he says something in a way that is supposed to 'not mince words', when he's made it as ambiguous as possible.

That brings me onto another point: surely 3Dvision wouldn't work properly with a multi-monitor setup because the frames have to be 'projected' at certain angles to make the stereoscopic effect work, but multi-monitor setups tend to be at different angles, and you're not necessarily always going to be looking at a multi-monitor setup head-on.
 
I think they are saying something along the lines of nVidia blocking stereo vision/multi display working in a game other than with nVidia hardware... but in most cases multi-monitor and stereo vision support doesn't really work like that and is a specific implementation driver side to each GPU vendor... tho games can include features to make it work a bit better - i.e. ability to hide ingame HUD/crosshair, etc.
 
it will be very interesting to see if ati's eyefinity games work on nvidia new system and of course vice a versa, else whos gonna go batter down amd's door...:D
 
It was all coherent and gentlemanly then boom last paragraph! :p Made me laugh.

If they do block eyefinity from a TWIMTBP/NV IP game that'd be pretty shocking. (I think that's what he was getting at.)
 
Bloody hell Kyle bennetts really on a tangent

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1035160789&postcount=89

:eek:

I just do not want to see TWIWMTBP games coming out with multi-display features that are specific to NVIDIA cards. This simply hurts PC gaming and will hold it back.

This is my gut feeling as to what is going on behind the doors at NVIDIA...and I have no proof of this. "Wow, that Eyefinity stuff is awesome, why did we not do this? - Well we can do it easily, we have just been holding the feature back so it would not fubar our Quadro market. - Well the genie is out of the bottle now, we have to get on board. - OK, let's do it. - Now how can we push features through that we can lock down with drivers and TWIWMTBP so it ***** it up for AMD? - Let me get back to you on that, but I have a few ideas."
Click to expand...
 
He has a point, there are plenty of things that make eyefinity work well, or not, support for the HUD, actually designing the game for peripheral vision usage and putting things there rather than not, supporting the resolution by standard, there are lots of design options that can make it a terrible, or worse experience, similarly to 3d where hiding the crosshair and very basic little things can improve an experience a lot. If Nvidia wanted to pay dev's to make it harder to support on other hardware, well, we've seen this is possible.

I think the backlash and bad pulicity after Batman, to the developers more than to Nvidia should scare both Nvidia and future developers from actively supporting features on one brand of card over the other.

The thing is, Nvidia could take a pretty huge leap, make Physx open source, but maintain control over the drivers, they can still optimise the physx code to run best on their type of hardware, theres nothing wrong with that, just without optimising it to run on a different shader setup, they should maintain an advantage but it would also mean Physx could be used for a long time in the future.

By keeping it a closed standard, it will simply die, dev's will choose to use an open source equivilent, thats cheaper to use, supports all cards and has more support.

Nvidia could lead the way and put Physx forwards as the standard, get it working on open cl, make it open, and they could put "Nvidia physx" on every game box for years to come.

If now Havok, by being more open and working in open cl becomes the easiest to use for all hardware, you can get Intel's Havok engine writen on every box and game webpage for years to come.

I can't actually remember, were [H] not insanely pro Nvidia several years back, maybe fairly maybe not, but really it just highlights just now many are being irked by Nvidia's behaviour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom