What makes me laugh is the people who side with nvidia cannot see how bad this could be if amd start doing the same, like if they went to blizzard and said cripple nvidia cards on wow and d3 and sc2,then next nvidia counter with another company and so on if you not careful the games will be optimized on hardware you got from which company.
-
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.
Ian McNaughton goes out against The Way it's Meant to be Played
- Thread starter Final8y
- Start date
I know, my point was tiny link to avoid the censor
First time for everything, thanks.
http://tinylink.com/?aPqfgykT9P
What happened with HL2 is completely different, it had more to do with the way nVidia had implemented directx in their crappy FX5800 cards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_FX_Series this link expalins the short comings of that series of card.
All the while nvidia have the greater market share then you can expect them to dictate the 'style of play'. Cash is king, though it was certainly a good thing that AMD bought ATi. Things are better for them now and I see it continuing to improve for a time yet.
What's even worse is that those fanboys defending this behavior are calling everyone else fanboys for thinking it's wrong for nVidia to do this.
LOL. that is the first time that word has been used that i thought was funny.
nVidia seems to be making big powerplays vs MS & Intel. The compete against AMD. The are getting a bad name with punters due to thier pricing and tactics.
I just dont see that their agressive and (reportedly) anti competative stance will get them other than in trouble as soon as they have some dificulties. They can't just equal the competition they must keep ahead else the friends they lost will prefer their competion unless there is a clear reason to keep with nVidia.
I just dont see that their agressive and (reportedly) anti competative stance will get them other than in trouble as soon as they have some dificulties. They can't just equal the competition they must keep ahead else the friends they lost will prefer their competion unless there is a clear reason to keep with nVidia.
AMD are getting cosy with Microsoft lately, imagine if they got DirectX to stop working when an nvidia card was detected?
Of course that would be anti-competitive, but when the market leader nvidia does something like that, it's fine. Sadly, I think nvidia have enough blindly brand-loyal fans to get away with anything they want and abuse their dominant market position. It really is sad for the future PC gaming.
Soldato
I think you will find that NV are in bed with Microsoft
"NVIDIA today announced work with Microsoft to promote NVIDIA Tesla graphics processing units (GPUs) for high performance parallel
computing using the Windows HPC Server 2008 operating system."
The grammar is bad in at least in one place & i have yet to find an official link, no site reports a source as if they all got it first hand..
And you can be in bed with more than one partner.
Found it.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1254126305481.html
Last edited:
The bottom line whether you're pro-ATI or pro-Nvidia (you shouldn't be either to be honest, it's retarded to think that one company is intrinsically different than the other) is that the developer of this game developed a vendor-specific AA implementation, ignoring the vendor-agnostic DirectX implementation that is used everywhere else, simply because Nvidia chucked them some money.
Any way you slice it the ATI-owning consumer loses out for no other reason than because Nvidia chucked the developer some money to bribe them to specifically code AA in a vendor-specific way.
Any way you slice it the ATI-owning consumer loses out for no other reason than because Nvidia chucked the developer some money to bribe them to specifically code AA in a vendor-specific way.
They both out to make money yes, but to me nvidia have crossed the line 3 or 4 times in the last few years and shown us some dirty tactics but i do think the developer is a lot more to blame than nvidia with the batman saga,which is kind of crazy as why would you alienate a section of your consumers who buy your product.
I do feel if they both get away with this it will happen again and maybe amd will do the same and it turn into a right mess.
edit :- don't get me wrong if amd did this i would say the same
Last edited:
Yes of course MS has worked with the gpu market leader at times but Google: “Microsoft and AMD”. They even have their own website together, called “Microsoft and AMD”. It’s a little more than collaborating on Tesla.
This is supposedly a statement from the developers Rocksteady:
Better late than never.
The Unreal Engine 3 doesn't support FSAA, the bottom line is NVidia worked with them to add "vendor-specific AA implementation" and AMD didn't, yes you can trick ATI cards into using this NVidia implementation but it wasn't intended for ATI cards.
If NVidia had been as lazy as AMD then NEITHER vendor would have got AA implementation, AMD wouldn't have even been able to use their "device trick" and benefit from NVidia's work in adding it because it simply wouldn't exist.
Better late than never.
The Unreal Engine 3 doesn't support FSAA, the bottom line is NVidia worked with them to add "vendor-specific AA implementation" and AMD didn't, yes you can trick ATI cards into using this NVidia implementation but it wasn't intended for ATI cards.
If NVidia had been as lazy as AMD then NEITHER vendor would have got AA implementation, AMD wouldn't have even been able to use their "device trick" and benefit from NVidia's work in adding it because it simply wouldn't exist.
Last edited:
This is supposedly a statement from the developers Rocksteady:
Better late than never.
The Unreal Engine 3 doesn't support FSAA, the bottom line is NVidia worked with them to add "vendor-specific AA implementation" and AMD didn't, yes you can trick ATI cards into using this NVidia implementation but it wasn't intended for ATI cards.
If NVidia had been as lazy as AMD then NEITHER vendor would have got AA implementation, AMD wouldn't have even been able to use their "device trick" and benefit from NVidia's work in adding it because it simply wouldn't exist.
If AMD did not pay Codemasters to implement DX11 in Dirt2 then DX11 in Dirt2 would not exist but AMD does not mind NV benefiting from it with there DX11 cards & the same goes for other DX11 titles that AMD are involved in.
One is clearly being more fare than the other.
2 kids, one gives some of his Mars-Bar to the other & asks for some of the Getsomenuts-Bar but the other kid gives nothing back. We all know this scenario & that's right NV is child's play.
If you had viewed the interview that i have posted you will see that AMD have tried to work with developers who are already involved with NV on titles & AMD have been given the middle finger, so why shouldn't it be the case this time.
Associate
Finally, a comment from the developers that shows how fair this entire situation has been all along. Nvidia helped the devs create an anti-aliasing solution because there had been no AA solution for Unreal Engine 3. Albeit, they used an Nvidia specific implementation, but that isn't surprising seeing as Nvidia offered to help them with it. Also, an Nvidia specific solution would have been advantageous to the devs because it would have been quicker to implement with Nvidia's superior knowledge of their own hardware.
So, The devs created a vendor specific AA solution with Nvidia's help, perhaps because it isn't possible via D3D due to the way UE3's rendering engine works. They decided not to implement a solution for ATI because that may have also required an ATI specific implementation - and without ATI's assistance, it would have taken too long or been too difficult.
Only now have ATI decided to approach the devs to help them implement an AA solution for their own cards. Is this another sign of their developer relations incompetence?
But the thing is & the points which you all seem to over look & not for reasons of comprehension is that the so called Nvidia specific implementation does work on ATI cards but has been deliberately disabled so no ATI specific implementation needed which they said nothing of.
Last edited: