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

[LoadsaMoney]

Should have changed your cards id.

 

[unknownsock]

I'm sick of all this crap from the greens, port everything to OpenCL and everyone will be happy.
None of Nvidia's so called business ploys are good to the end user what so ever.

NVIDIA statement on Batman AA
A representative of AMD recently claimed that NVIDIA interfered with anti-aliasing (AA) support for Batman: Arkham Asylum on AMD cards. They also claimed that NVIDIA’s The Way It’s Meant to be Played Program prevents AMD from working with developers for those games.
Both of these claims are NOT true. Batman is based on Unreal Engine 3, which does not natively support anti-aliasing. We worked closely with Eidos to add AA and QA the feature on GeForce. Nothing prevented AMD from doing the same thing.
Games in The Way It’s Meant to be Played are not exclusive to NVIDIA. AMD can also contact developers and work with them.
We are proud of the work we do in The Way It’s Meant to be Played. We work hard to deliver kickass, game-changing features in PC games like PhysX, AA, and 3D Vision for games like Batman. If AMD wants to deliver innovation for PC games then we encourage them to roll up their sleeves and do the same.

NVIDIA Developer Relations

Maybe, maybe not, but they can't deny the fact that they are just making it even more worse for the end user once again.

 

[Calabi]

Its just a stupid statement to start with, what kind of developer needs a hardware manufacturer to hold their hands when developing a game.

If it was required that Nvidia and Ati had to work closely with every developer that made games they'd go out of business or have no time to do anything else. Plenty of developers get along just fine without help, and have full functionality to boot.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Its just a stupid statement to start with, what kind of developer needs a hardware manufacturer to hold their hands when developing a game.

If it was required that Nvidia and Ati had to work closely with every developer that made games they'd go out of business or have no time to do anything else. Plenty of developers get along just fine without help, and have full functionality to boot.

Good point.

 

[MikeHunt79]

would Nvidia pay me a few million if I made a super funky version of Pong which used PhysX when the dot bounces off the side?

Isn't openCL also supported by Macs? That would give a few extra same sales I imagine...

 

[MR.B]

Just ran both OCCT & Furmark on my 3870 without a hitch so they are not disabled.

But that's besides the point as its nothing like what the topic is about.

Furmark and OCCT will not run on 4xxx series cards with latest drivers. It crashed these cards because of no hardware over current protection, so ATI disabled the software from running on 4xxx series. Some 3xxx cards would crash but it mostly affected 4xxx series, so only they were disabled.
And i know it has nothing to do with the thread, but i was very clearly replying to the quote from Kylew in my post because this stuff had been mentioned. Which was Obvious. So the only reason for you saying that was because as usual you simply dont like seeing anything bad about ATI mentioned.

 

[Mr Paul]

Furmark will run, the driver detects the appliation and lowers the clock speeds so nothing bad happens. It does not crash.

 

[Martini1991]

How's limiting furmark bad?..

 

[Final8y]

Furmark and OCCT will not run on 4xxx series cards with latest drivers. It crashed these cards because of no hardware over current protection, so ATI disabled the software from running on 4xxx series. Some 3xxx cards would crash but it mostly affected 4xxx series, so only they were disabled.
And i know it has nothing to do with the thread, but i was very clearly replying to the quote from Kylew in my post because this stuff had been mentioned. Which was Obvious. So the only reason for you saying that was because as usual you simply dont like seeing anything bad about ATI mentioned.

No its because you was not clear that it was just the 4XXXX card that has been disable.

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.

Seeing as i don't get a buzz from running these programs so have only ran Furmark, OOCT gfx test a total of 2 times each now & seeing what Duran & what you said which was not specific to one card & the fact that many drivers have since passed & it is to late to fix the problem for the 3xxx 4xxx range at the hardware level like the 5xxx it would make since that the disabling would have to remain is place for the foreseeable future & seeing as you did mention the 3xxx as being the effect list & the that driver does not know which range of the 3xxx is effect then the driver would have to disable the programs from running on the 3xxx range.

If you had made it clear at the time it was just the 4xxx that was disable then i would not of wasted my time in downloading the programs yesterday & running them.

Try not to presume to much because you end up puttying words into peoples mouth like you just did..

 

[layte]

Furmark will run, the driver detects the appliation and lowers the clock speeds so nothing bad happens. It does not crash.

You can rename the executable and then furmark runs at full speed on ATI parts, or at least appears to..

http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~layte/pics/furmark.png

 

[Final8y]

Link to the Furmark thread once again.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17997995

Any more Furmark talk directed at me will be replied there.

 

[Freddie1980]

Over the last year I have really developed a loathing for Nvida's business practices, if I didn't know any better I would say it was being run by J R Ewing and it's now got so bad I now put them up there with Creative with a group of companies that I won't do business with.

- Cutting out reviewers for the GTS250 (see here also)
- TWIMTBP cutting out AA options in recent games
- Not being able to use PhysX if you primary video card isn't an Nvidia (even if you have a Geforce sitting in a spare slot)
- Scandalous prices for it's hardware ($650 for a GTX280 anyone? )

There are things I don't like about ATI as well such as the lack of any life time warranty offered by its board partners in the UK but as soon as the 2Gb version of the HD5870 comes out I plan to replace my 8800GT ASAP.

 

[SE-Lain]

There's been far too much baseless speculation in this thread. Nvidia assisted the developers in the implementation and testing of anti-aliasing on NVDA GPUs. Testing wasn't performed on ATI cards, so it was disabled to prevent ATI owners from experiencing potential graphical corruption.

ATI has it's own developer relations program - "Get in the Game". TWIMTBP and GITG are not mutually exclusive for developers, because if it was - if Nvidia or ATI were forcing developers to choose one or the other - we would have heard it from ATI's initial statement regarding Batman. Nvidia's recent statement confirms this.

Also, ATI contributed $6 million to the development of Half Life 2. HL2 has sold over 8 million copies, bringing in a revenue exceeding $250 million. Developers are not going to intentionally cripple their games for such a small percentage in revenue.

From ATI's initial statement:

• Batman - ATI did not participate in the testing of AA running on ATI hardware. Option disabled to prevent graphical corruption and incompatibility.
• NFS: Shift - ATI found some issues with the game engine that were suboptimal on ATI hardware. Their developer relations did not manage to collaborate closely with the devs to optimise the game before launch.
• Resident Evil 5 - ATI's developer relations did not collaborate with the developers, despite the game being announced 4 years ago on July 20, 2005.

ATI's poor developer relations could explain the many other problems I've found with rendering on ATI hardware.

 

[LeJosh]

would Nvidia pay me a few million if I made a super funky version of Pong which used PhysX when the dot bounces off the side?

Isn't openCL also supported by Macs? That would give a few extra same sales I imagine...

Apple came up with the idea/developed of openCL then handed it over to some company which I forgot the name of. So yes, I'd imagine it would.

Edit - Apple claim openCL 1.0 has been released with Snow Leopard.

 

[rypt]

From ATI's initial statement:

• Batman - ATI did not participate in the testing of AA running on ATI hardware. Option disabled to prevent graphical corruption and incompatibility.
• NFS: Shift - ATI found some issues with the game engine that were suboptimal on ATI hardware. Their developer relations did not manage to collaborate closely with the devs to optimise the game before launch.
• Resident Evil 5 - ATI's developer relations did not collaborate with the developers, despite the game being announced 4 years ago on July 20, 2005.

It is not for ATI to develop stuff for the game companies, ATI are prepared to assist companies in doing things, but really once AA works for NV it should work for ATI as the implementations are not that different

 

[Rezident]

I have never liked the whole nvidia way it meant to be played BS

We have standards for a reason , so everyone is on the same page

I will be thinking long and hard about my next graphics purchase
As well as performance / power / costs I will also be considering a new criterion
Its called morals , is the company I am about to give money to acting in my
best interests or its own selfish reasons ?

Tho to be honest , I think some blame goes to the game writers as well , they are
the ones who are making things difficult for the other team.

Same as, I'm complaining to Eidos. Not enough people actually complain in writing about these things. When you complain in writing, sometimes things actually happen.

 

[kppanic]

• Batman - ATI did not participate in the testing of AA running on ATI hardware. Option disabled to prevent graphical corruption and incompatibility.
• NFS: Shift - ATI found some issues with the game engine that were suboptimal on ATI hardware. Their developer relations did not manage to collaborate closely with the devs to optimise the game before launch.
• Resident Evil 5 - ATI's developer relations did not collaborate with the developers, despite the game being announced 4 years ago on July 20, 2005.

ATI's poor developer relations could explain the many other problems I've found with rendering on ATI hardware.

It should be the other way around, really.

Game developers have a common envelope called DirectX, which technically should be low-level agnostic. All the game developers need to worry about is to develop a game around DirectX.

ATI and nVidia's jobs are to make sure that their low-level drivers are able to "replicate" what the game developers tried to do under DirectX. When I see statements like "hardware company should work closely with game developers" is a little confusing to me. It makes the game developers look real lazy.

Honestly, I have no idea what it means when they say AA was not tested on ATI's hardware. Shouldn't AA be handled the same way whether on ATI, nVidia or any other hardware (from a software developer's view)?? What is it in DirectX that makes certain features like AA a "proprietary" function call to specific hardware? I understand there are differences in game engines, but even then shouldn't those game engines -- however they choose to AA, frankly I don't care how the AA is done algorithmically as long as it is "done" -- adhere to DirectX AA call, or is there no such thing as standard AA in DirectX?

edit: rypt ahh sorry you've already said it more abridged. You were able to say whatever I spewed on this post in 2 sentences. Nice one.

 

[Final8y]

Same as, I'm complaining to Eidos. Not enough people actually complain in writing about these things. When you complain in writing, sometimes things actually happen.

Only if they think they will lose sales by not doing nothing when people complain.

Oh there are always great games coming. I have a responsibility to myself as a consumer to not advocate the practices of Nvidia. Until lately I turned a blind eye to a couple things that were spotted in reviews a couple times etc but this time it is not funny. People actually have the PPU card for christ sake that now will not work because they have an ATI card. That just freakin blows a mile high and wide and then Nvidia tops it off by having the devs to take AA off the game once it detects ATI. This seriously is going to be the first step in a direction in which you will not like as a consumer and will be the final axe to the PC game industry when the crap hits the fan even worse. Console gaming will pick up the slack of ticked off PC gamers who don't want to play this game anymore. It's the principle of what is going on that makes me keep my money in my pocket for a better product by a more respectable company. The answer is always in the actions, not the words. Anyone can talk their way out of a jam and make it sound legit. The actions Nvidia made as of late makes me want to throw their hardware in the garbage and not look back. Nope, this game will not be bought and hopefully as consumers you will not either and take responsibility as consumers to show that you will not allow to be treated as such and participate in such childish behavior. Companies will get away with whatever they can. It's business and it's cutthroat and cold. It's consumers like you and me that shape the economy. Learn to take responsibility for your actions too or you really will have no say in how companies treat you. Right now there are choices, but for how long? Constant complacency is what is causing this crap behavior to begin with. That's why I won't buy the game.

Can you imagine a world in which consumers took responsibility? Seriously think about it. Your phone company decides to make another hike in monthly payments to cover infrastructure (as they say) but yet give the CEO's a massive bonus. Now if consumers were smart and responsible they would move over to a different company forcing the other company to shape up. But this does not happen as so many people in this world is as complacent as a deer in headlights and it is really sad. You basically have given the companies the golden shovel to do as they wish and to behave as they wish. Many of you think competition is the real economy shaper. It is not. It simply offers choice. The reason why competition is so regarded today is because the consumer has become stupid and irresponsible. Look at the economy and look at what caused it to fall. That's right..."irresponsibility". Sometimes I am embarrassed to call myself ...human and wonder if I was put here as a cruel joke. There are a few here that get it but it is in short abundance and the rest of us will suffer under the ignorance of others. It is sad indeed.
__________________

 

[mmj_uk]

It is not for ATI to develop stuff for the game companies, ATI are prepared to assist companies in doing things, but really once AA works for NV it should work for ATI as the implementations are not that different

Well that's the kind of attitude that is costing ATI, if NVidia hadn't worked with the developer then they wouldn't have had support either, ATi can't expect their rival to fix things on their cards.

As SE-Lain pointed out ATI have a LONG history of not fixing bugs until after a game is released (Hotfix drivers etc), it seems they're only making an issue of these bugs because they effect benchmarks.

 

[fini]

Next up - L4D2 automatically has the zombies run towards you if an ATI ID is detected